Brooklyn Hcp

[richiebee]

The Brooklyn, a 12 furlong race to be run on Friday, is the race all figure makers
wish was run on Belmont Day for obvious reasons.

I never like to bet the low weighted horse in a handicap race, but Eye on Jacob is an
intriguing entrant in Friday\'s feature. Most of the intrigue comes from the bloodline:
EOJ is by 92 Belmont Stakes winner AP Indy out of Escena, who was an Eclipse Award
winning older mare for Bill Mott in 1998.

EOJ is a 6 year old who will be making only his 9th lifetime start. After breaking
his maiden at Belmont first out in May of 2009, he was unseen for two years, ending
up in California with Bob Baffert, where he was winless in five tries at Polywood and
Del Mar. Returned to the East Coast, and now residing in the TAP barn, EOJ has turned
in two decent efforts at GP and AQ. His preference for dirt racing is reflected in
his Beyer #s and will be interested to see how TG rates him.

Dont know why EOJ was laid up for nearly two years, but he is a Zayat horse and a
cynic might say that he spent two years grazing in a field outside of a bankruptcy
court.

I mentioned he was low weight in this race (114) but I would imagine he goes to the
gate carrying 118 (Johnny V.).

Birdrun and Redeemed are the logical favorites in here, Mott v Dutrow, a match up of
Hay, Oats and Water v. the Mystery Elixir, but I will be looking for a daily (double)
dose of chaos at Belmont on Friday and Saturday afternoons.

[Rick B.]

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mott v Dutrow, a match up of Hay, Oats and Water
> v. the Mystery Elixir

Please.

There is no quibble that Mott is closer to God than Dutrow, but the only guy left using JUST Hay, Oats and Water is Jack Van Berg...and he wins 3 races a year, whether he needs to or not.

[miff]

Mott v Dutrow, a match up of Hay, Oats and Water
> v. the Mystery Elixir


....guess who\'s vets bills are larger...nope wrong!

[Rick B.]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ....guess who\'s vets bills are larger...nope
> wrong!

That\'s certainly ironic, but...the cynics will fire back that Dutrow\'s vet bills ought to be smaller, because he apparently does his own needle work.

(BTW...is there any real backstretch security at all at Aqueduct or Belmont? Never been to either, but I\'m just wondering, after 3 consecutive Saratoga visits where I went just about wherever I wanted, unchallenged.)

[miff]

Rick B,

Right now, with the disingenuous phonies putting on a dog and pony integrity show, it\'s like Fort Knox getting in.


Mike

[Rick B.]

Mike,

No doubt. The whole world will be watching, can\'t have another episode like with Jeff \"Air (Power) Head\" Mullins.

I was asking about everyday security at Big A and Belmont; it\'s got to be tighter than laid-back Saratoga...right?

Rick

[miff]

Rick,

Usually downstate, if you nod and smile and have a familiar face you pass. At Saratoga, public enemy number 1 could go anywhere he wished.


Mike

[jimbo66]

Richiebee,

I think Eye on Jacob is a very interesting horse in the race, but I suspect you are WAY OFF on your assessment of the odds in the race.  I would say EOJ will be half the price of Birdrun.  No way Birdrun is a favorite in the race.  

EOJ will vie with Redeemed for favoritism.

I am a little intersted in Arthur\'s Tale, with the additional of Castellano and what I would expect to be a relatively strong pace for the 1 1/2, with Redeemed, EOJ and Birdrun all having solid early foot.

Good luck.

Jim

[richiebee]

Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> richiebee Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Mott v Dutrow, a match up of Hay, Oats and
> Water
> > v. the Mystery Elixir
>
> Please.
>
> There is no quibble that Mott is closer to God
> than Dutrow, but the only guy left using JUST Hay,
> Oats and Water is Jack Van Berg...and he wins 3
> races a year, whether he needs to or not.

Number of times Dutrow has been sanctioned for medication overages? 70 plus and
counting?

Number of times Mott has been sanctioned? A nice round number, if you catch my
drift.

Of course there are the loons who believe that Mott\'s dastardly training regimen
(steroids?) rendered Cigar impotent. Is it true they called in the \"Herd
Whisperer\", who concluded that Cigar was not impotent, but rather a bit \"light in
the loafers\"?

And speaking of which, how come we only hear about the Herd Whisperer for the
Derby, and not the other Triple Crown events?

[Rick B.]

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Number of times Dutrow has been sanctioned for
> medication overages? 70 plus and
> counting?

Common mistake. Dutrow has 70 plus \"rulings\", yes; not all medication related, as the press would like the casual reader to believe.

It\'s really about 12 to 15 for medications (depending on interpretation), mostly for Bute overages from years ago.

The following list of Dutrow\'s rulings is short by a few entries, but close enough for this discussion:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B265yMMHh7KJMWJjYTFhOGQtYzlkNC00MjM1LWFmMWUtYTAwMzE1ZTI1NWEz/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1

Dutrow is (was?) more sloppy than sinister, IMO; he, like most \"supertrainers\" these days, seems to have learned how to \"fill \'em up to the brim\" without going over.

And, the \"nice round number\" for the other fellow only means to me that he\'s smart enough to not get caught. \"Not guilty\" is just not the same as \"innocent\". My sheets aren\'t as clean as my preacher\'s, but the only way you\'d find that out is if they were criminally filthy.

[miff]

Not trying to compare Mott and Dutrows positive record.Guess about 5% of todays trainers are pure hay,oats and water and they rarely win. Mott is not one of them.

[richiebee]

Rick:

OK, I\'ll play along.

Tricky:

1) Found with syringes in a desk in his barn.
2) Suspended in Maryland last December for unauthorized administration of Lasix.

Are these 2 of the 15? If I knew nothing else about Tricky, these 2 would be
enough for me to form an opinion.And that opinion would be that the 10 year ban
was just about right, if not a little lenient. Is it worse that Tricky doesn\'t
know the rules, or thinks that they do not apply to him?

Lets go to one of our host\'s pet peeves, that most PED\'s are undetectable by
current testing regimens. Who is the more likely suspect to be lurking in the
grey areas, Richard or William?

For me its also guilt by association. One of Tricky\'s primary clients has been in
the game since at least the mid 80s. Since then, this owner has exclusively
employed the usual suspects -- Oscar, The Gas Man, the Pistol, Juan Serey,
Frankie LaBo Jr, Tricky and Tricky\'s Mini Me, Rudy Rod.

[Rick B.]

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rick:
>
> OK, I\'ll play along.
>
> Tricky: guilty, Guilty, GUILTY! Guillotine!

So, having been completely wrong about Dutrow\'s \"70 plus medication violations\",
you are just going to keep chipping away to justify your earlier \"Saint Mott vs.
Evil Dutrow\" strawman? Now it\'s for a couple of needle violations.

Play that game all you want. A trainer giving his horse an injection of muscle
relaxant or some such is no surprise to me: legal or not, it happens. Vets can\'t
be everywhere at once. Again, to me it\'s just Dutrow being sloppy and getting
caught. You think Mott has never, ever given one of his horses an injection of
some sort?

I think it\'s a comedy routine -- as if racing will somehow magically be \"that
much better\" if Dutrow were gone. It\'s window dressing, at best.

And, FWIW: I don\'t think our host\'s pet peeve has anything to do
with \"undetectable\" PEDs (which is nonsense, anyway, with the current level of
expertise with mass spectrometry: there could be \"unidentified\" PEDs at any
given moment, but these are isolated and identified rapidly now...when testing
is actually performed, I suppose. Read on.)

If I understand TGJB correctly, his beef is that we can\'t even be sure
that the established testing protocols and procedures that are supposed
to be in place for the stuff we know about are being followed. If Jerry
is right about that (and I have no reason to doubt him), hell -- we bettors
might be more \"barefoot and pregnant\" than we could ever imagine!

And you are worried about \"magic elixir\"? Why would anyone spend money on
top-shelf exotica if you hardly have to worry about getting busted for anything at all?

[Rich Curtis]

Rick B wrote:

\"And, FWIW: I don\'t think our host\'s pet peeve has anything to do
with \"undetectable\" PEDs (which is nonsense, anyway, with the current level of
expertise with mass spectrometry: there could be \"unidentified\" PEDs at any
given moment, but these are isolated and identified rapidly now...when testing
is actually performed, I suppose. Read on.)
If I understand TGJB correctly, his beef is that we can\'t even be sure
that the established testing protocols and procedures that are supposed
to be in place for the stuff we know about are being followed.\"

   JB has written countless times that the cheaters are ahead of the testers and that the beginning of a solution is to freeze samples. He has even written this in the DRF more than once.

[Rick B.]

Rich Curtis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>    JB has written countless times that the
> cheaters are ahead of the testers and that the
> beginning of a solution is to freeze samples. He
> has even written this in the DRF more than once.

You are right. I remember this now.

But I also remember him posting something -- wasn\'t it just a week ago? --
that we can\'t assume ANY kind of testing is being performed on a regular basis.

So in light of his most recent warning, it makes me doubt even further that
there are so-called \"undetectable\" substances (how? all matter has mass, etc.);
what is more likely is that the testing labs are buried, understaffed and
underfunded...a total mess.

Seems to me that the more TGJB digs, the more bad news he finds...like owning
a 100 year old house in which you try to replace a simple length of pipe. Most
every homeowner can finish *that* analogy.