JC / Railbird - Blinkers On

Blinkers On

Mike Watchmaker, post-Derby (DRF+ sub req):

Finally, nothing I saw in this Derby made me want to change my mind that horses who have raced exclusively on synthetic tracks aren’t at a disadvantage when they race on dirt for the first time in the Derby.

This is being close-minded to the point of ridiculousness. Only one horse started in this year’s Kentucky Derby having raced exclusively over synthetic surfaces — Sidney’s Candy — and his 17th place finish had everything to do with pace, post position, and preferred running style.

Posted by JC in Racing on 05/04/2010 @ 11:41 am / Tagged Fixed Thinking, Handicapping, Kentucky Derby, Persistent Beliefs, Synthetic Surfaces / Follow @railbird on Twitter

6 Comments

Since California went synthetic, not a single horse based in that region has won a classic race, and they haven’t come within 6 lengths of a Derby winner.

Considering they won nine of 15 classic races from 1997-’01, that’s saying something.

Yet, I still keep picking them (Pioneerof the Nile, Lookin At Lucky)!

Posted by EJXD2 on May 5, 2010 @ 9:42 am

So what happened 2002-2007? The first California Derby prep season wasn’t until 2008.

Pioneerof the Nile ran a creditable race last year finishing second; Make Music for Me finished fourth this year after making a strong mid-race move.

And as we’ve seen this year, California horses have had little problem shipping to run over dirt for the first time and winning.

A horse prepped over synthetics will win the Kentucky Derby. That one hasn’t yet seems due more to other factors and individual limitations.

Posted by Jessica on May 5, 2010 @ 9:57 am

Well, Street Sense already prepped on synthetic and won the Derby.

Make Music For Me shipped east to prep and ended up with the best finish of any West Coast horse.

Good turf horses can perform well in the Derby (Paddy O’Prado, Big Brown, Barbaro, etc.), so I have no problem thinking good synthetic horses can perform well in the Derby as well.

But, it’s hard to ignore that West Coast horses haven’t done well in classic races recently, but as you said, it’d be tough to find a consensus as to why that is.

Posted by EJXD2 on May 5, 2010 @ 10:05 am

You’re right! I should have qualified that phrase with “exclusively.”

No, you can’t ignore how California horses have done in classics lately, but I believe it’s important not to generalize and dismiss all the results as surface related. That just unnecessarily limits a horseplayer’s thinking and handicapping.

Posted by Jessica on May 5, 2010 @ 10:37 am

Is the Travers a classic? Didn’t Colonel John win it?

Posted by dana on May 5, 2010 @ 3:37 pm

The Travers is not a classic race. It’s at the classic distance, and it’s called the Midsummer Classic, but it’s technically not a classic.

There are only three U.S. classics: Derby, Preakness, Belmont

Posted by EJXD2 on May 5, 2010 @ 3:58 pm

← Links for 2010-05-03 Media Notes →