Justify/Restoring Hope...quite the duo

Somnambulist
Posts: 7382
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 5:59 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:10 am

I think Repole was being harsh too but I wonder if he was just mad. Stark can't imagine why anyone would from Queens would want to win the Belmont but I get it.
"Life's no piece of cake, mind you, but the recipe's my own to fool with."
User avatar
Kurenai
Site Admin
Posts: 961
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:18 am

I honestly don't get that whole hoopla. How exactly did Restoring Hope make the race for Justify easier? Noble Indy could have gotten to the front any time he wanted (cause Restoring Hope was so wide). Granted Restoring Hope would have probably go on with him. The way it was the only horse that was near Justify was Restoring Hope, otherwise the pace would have been even slower.

Yes, he wasn't in this race to win it by the looks of it, which sucks for the gamblers! But it's not like he made any horse lose the race. If Noble Indy really, really wanted to have the lead, he could have gotten in there between Justify and Restoring Hope around the first turn. Not that it would have helped him, cause Justify can rate/stalk just fine if asked to.

Also it's not like Restoring Hope sits usually at the back of the pack. It was race riding tactics. Look what Jerry Bailey did to Smarty Jones on Eddington and then rewatch this years Belmont again. :P
User avatar
Treve
Posts: 4394
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 5:12 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:00 am

Kurenai wrote:I honestly don't get that whole hoopla. How exactly did Restoring Hope make the race for Justify easier? Noble Indy could have gotten to the front any time he wanted (cause Restoring Hope was so wide). Granted Restoring Hope would have probably go on with him. The way it was the only horse that was near Justify was Restoring Hope, otherwise the pace would have been even slower.

Yes, he wasn't in this race to win it by the looks of it, which sucks for the gamblers! But it's not like he made any horse lose the race. If Noble Indy really, really wanted to have the lead, he could have gotten in there between Justify and Restoring Hope around the first turn. Not that it would have helped him, cause Justify can rate/stalk just fine if asked to.

Also it's not like Restoring Hope sits usually at the back of the pack. It was race riding tactics. Look what Jerry Bailey did to Smarty Jones on Eddington and then rewatch this years Belmont again. :P
I have to disagree about Noble Indy having been able to get to the front whenever he wanted. He wasn't hustled and pressured to make the front after breaking slow, you do see him trying to creep up, but then there's no way he'd be quick enough to get to the front without causing serious interference or an accident. And then, even if he were quick enough, Castellano would've had to use him early. It also doesn't explain why RH suddenly shuts down the hole Bravazo is creeping up towards right after Florent looks behind him.

And as others pointed out... why else would Mike be yelling at him "THANK YOU, YOU'RE THE MAN" post-race if none of it was intentional ;)
A filly named Ruffian...

Eine Stute namens Danedream...

Une pouliche se nommant Trêve...

Kincsem nevű kanca...


And a Queen named Beholder
User avatar
Ballerina
Posts: 3055
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:22 pm
Location: Chesapeake, VA & Saratoga, NY

Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:35 am

Treve wrote: And as others pointed out... why else would Mike be yelling at him "THANK YOU, YOU'RE THE MAN" post-race if none of it was intentional ;)
I don't see where that statement proves intent.
User avatar
Kurenai
Site Admin
Posts: 961
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:10 am

Treve wrote: I have to disagree about Noble Indy having been able to get to the front whenever he wanted. He wasn't hustled and pressured to make the front after breaking slow, you do see him trying to creep up, but then there's no way he'd be quick enough to get to the front without causing serious interference or an accident. And then, even if he were quick enough, Castellano would've had to use him early. It also doesn't explain why RH suddenly shuts down the hole Bravazo is creeping up towards right after Florent looks behind him.

And as others pointed out... why else would Mike be yelling at him "THANK YOU, YOU'RE THE MAN" post-race if none of it was intentional ;)
The tactics were to send Noble Indy after Justify to soften him up. And he would have gotten there if Castellano would have used him and send him hard early. He didn't. If Castellano would have followed his orders we wouldn't have this discussion now. He would have been next to Justify and Bravazo in a perfect stalking position. Probably we would discuss how unfair it was to pressure Justify so early with a rabbit (I don't believe it would have worked, he would have rated). :lol:

I don't doubt that Restoring Hope was sent in that race to help Justify. But so was Noble Indy for Vino Rosso. The most interesting thing for me is that Castellano didn't follow orders and it's easy to guess if you're into conspiracy theories. :lol:
User avatar
Squeaky
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 12:29 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:40 pm

Has anyone asked Mike about his comment “You the man” to Florent after the race? I have not seen anything posted about that and it seems that would be a key question to ask.
peeptoad
Posts: 2713
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:53 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:41 pm

Kurenai wrote:I honestly don't get that whole hoopla. How exactly did Restoring Hope make the race for Justify easier? Noble Indy could have gotten to the front any time he wanted (cause Restoring Hope was so wide). Granted Restoring Hope would have probably go on with him. The way it was the only horse that was near Justify was Restoring Hope, otherwise the pace would have been even slower.

Yes, he wasn't in this race to win it by the looks of it, which sucks for the gamblers! But it's not like he made any horse lose the race. If Noble Indy really, really wanted to have the lead, he could have gotten in there between Justify and Restoring Hope around the first turn. Not that it would have helped him, cause Justify can rate/stalk just fine if asked to.

Also it's not like Restoring Hope sits usually at the back of the pack. It was race riding tactics. Look what Jerry Bailey did to Smarty Jones on Eddington and then rewatch this years Belmont again. :P
I don't get it either, although I am in support of dissecting and discussing these things as they occur just because it gets us all thinking and conversing (well mostly for me it has been interesting reading peoples' comments and thoughts). But, hoopla? No, I don't get that. Both Repole horses were in stalking/tracking positions in range of the pace at different times during the race (and in the clear with RH nowhere near them). They just weren't good enough to catch and pass Justify.

Whatever the intent was by the connections of either horse (NI and RH) prior to the race is almost irrelevant to me since we hardly ever hear the straight talk from anyone prior to any race. That's part of the strategy and tactics I think. Both sides had a strategy they were planning ... I guess Baffert won that battle too.
User avatar
Kurenai
Site Admin
Posts: 961
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:52 pm

Squeaky wrote:Has anyone asked Mike about his comment “You the man” to Florent after the race? I have not seen anything posted about that and it seems that would be a key question to ask.
I don't get the outrage about Restoring Hope! Rabbits are nothing new in racing, Justify didn't need the help anyway.

I still think the key question is to ask Castellano why he ignored the tactics given from Repole given he was on the "other winstar horse". :lol: The Noble Indy thing is more questionable. Trained by another trainer, given instructions that were ignored. Moral of the story: if you want to stay in control of your horse, don't share an interest before the races are run. I think that's what pisses Repole off, Justify was a clear winner and he also said as much. He doesn't think Vino Rosso could have won it.
Tessablue
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:29 am
Location: Boston

Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:53 pm

Katewerk wrote:
Tessablue wrote:It's not libelous and it's not going to get anyone in trouble, are you kidding me? [snip]
Then defame people under your own name, and on your own dime. Walk the walk.
It's appropriate that you cut off the last part of my post.
Somnambulist
Posts: 7382
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 5:59 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:54 pm

Why would he hussle NI up just go to 10 wide? That would cost the horse the race right there.
"Life's no piece of cake, mind you, but the recipe's my own to fool with."
User avatar
Kurenai
Site Admin
Posts: 961
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:57 pm

Guys, can you please take that argument elsewhere? Stick to PMs or something. This is not about the seven horses that died. Concentrate on the thread topic.
peeptoad
Posts: 2713
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:53 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 12:59 pm

Tessablue wrote:It's not libelous and it's not going to get anyone in trouble, are you kidding me? Anyone with an understanding of biology knows what happened there, and it was ugly. He'll never face consequences for it, so the least we can do is try to keep it in the light.
Well, I don't really have a dog in this fight (since I am not a Baffert "fanatic"), but just my 2 cents: I agree with keeping things "in the light" so to speak so that actions of the past are not recurring (inasmuch as "we" have any control over them at all), but there are a load of other trainers out there that have done similar or worse that also were not handed punishment for their actions. One of them had a horse entered in a prominent stakes race last Saturday. Sometimes keeping the activity in your brain for all eternity because justice wasn't served can cause unnecessary grief for the worrier. I'd agree if there was an indication that the activities are continuing, but I see no indication that Baffert is continuing down this path, so maybe he learned from the past or maybe the past wasn't entirely clear to the racing public to begin with.

Again, no judgement at all from me; maybe you all know more than I do though I keep up with the sport pretty well and as best I can...
User avatar
Kurenai
Site Admin
Posts: 961
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:00 pm

Somnambulist wrote:Why would he hussle NI up just go to 10 wide? That would cost the horse the race right there.
Why should he have gone wide? Use him hard to get in between Justify and Restoring Hope (who was floating wide around the turn anyway). If your main goal is to get to the lead no matter what, according to tactics to soften Justify up. Yes, then you are in between Justify and the other rabbit, getting cooked on the lead. But doesn't matter anyway, you did what you were told to do.
katmandu
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:16 am

Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:00 pm

"Rabbits are nothing new in racing"

Restoring Hope was not a "rabbit" in this race.


Restoring Hope cut in front of NI, that maneuver is what sent him wide in to the turn. . .
Last edited by katmandu on Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Kurenai
Site Admin
Posts: 961
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:05 pm

katmandu wrote:"Rabbits are nothing new in racing"

Restoring Hope was not a "rabbit" in this race.
Bodyguard? :lol: I don't think Baffert did anything wrong with using the horse as a tactical advantage. As I said, the only questionable thing IMO is maybe the ride Castellano gave Noble Indy.
katmandu
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:16 am

Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:07 pm

Kurenai wrote:
katmandu wrote:"Rabbits are nothing new in racing"

Restoring Hope was not a "rabbit" in this race.
Bodyguard? :lol:
That's one term that's being thrown around. He clearly wasn't a rabbit.


The problem is the bigger picture (including Audible and the bonuses for winning the TC) and on US racing's biggest stage. There is a "sub thread" going on about this, but the focus keeps getting shifted.


I don't think anyone is saying this (interference by another "associated" horse) hasn't happened before. "That move going into the first turn is one we’ve seen before, and also with an uncoupled entry mate— against a Hollendorfer horse a few years ago." (Jerry Brown)



https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=sh ... ORM=VDRVRV
User avatar
Kurenai
Site Admin
Posts: 961
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:01 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:54 pm

Ok, enough. I told you to stick to PM. I will delete the postings now.

You might not see it that way, but in that case I am also protecting you, cause you open yourself up to a lawsuit. (No, there is no anonymity on the internet) You can of course point out that you find it troublesome that horses died and you wish there would have been done more to look into it. But you can NOT accuse someone of killing them.

I agree that the method to point out what you said or how you worded it wasn't the nicest way. They still are correct though.
Apollo
Posts: 294
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:05 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2018 3:00 pm

This topic is actually picking up steam several days later. I'm seeing it all over the place:

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/0 ... /23457057/
Tessablue
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:29 am
Location: Boston

Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:34 pm

peeptoad wrote: Well, I don't really have a dog in this fight (since I am not a Baffert "fanatic"), but just my 2 cents: I agree with keeping things "in the light" so to speak so that actions of the past are not recurring (inasmuch as "we" have any control over them at all), but there are a load of other trainers out there that have done similar or worse that also were not handed punishment for their actions. One of them had a horse entered in a prominent stakes race last Saturday. Sometimes keeping the activity in your brain for all eternity because justice wasn't served can cause unnecessary grief for the worrier. I'd agree if there was an indication that the activities are continuing, but I see no indication that Baffert is continuing down this path, so maybe he learned from the past or maybe the past wasn't entirely clear to the racing public to begin with.

Again, no judgement at all from me; maybe you all know more than I do though I keep up with the sport pretty well and as best I can...
I hear you peep, and I hope you're right. It's just hard to stomach when people rush to defend him while casting aspersions on an owner who has done measurable good for a lot of horses.

Anyways, back to Restoring Hope, I still think that if you take everything else he did in the race out of consideration, the way he was eased without being urged turning for home was deeply concerning.
BigDonOKC
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:11 am

Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:50 pm

Kurenai wrote:Guys, can you please take that argument elsewhere? Stick to PMs or something. This is not about the seven horses that died. Concentrate on the thread topic.
You are 100% right time to stop beating a dead horse. :? the race is over there are no redo time to move on so you lost should have play as I did the only way it would run 1/6 with 1/6 and he won the race at the 1/2 mile when they slow down only to good horse in the race and I had them.

let go and move on



:roll:
Post Reply