TwinSpires.com Blog

Jon Siegel leads the latest edition of Triple Crown Insider acknowledging that I'll Have Another is the fastest horse in the race, and that is the case no matter what numbers you use to gauge these horses' performances.

But handicapping a horse race isn't only about figuring out who has run fastest, it's about figuring out who will run fastest in this race.

One of the best handicappers I know, Scott Carson, is great at projecting performances. I don't get quite as specific as he does when plotting a race, but I do use the rudimentary approach of figuring the chances a horse A) improves, B) maintains, or C) goes backward. A+ would be an explosive move, and a C- would be a huge step back.

I'll Have Another is the easiest of Belmont winners with either an "A+" or "A" performance as defined above. Even a "B" performance means someone would have to improve, and only Dullahan or Paynter could win with their "A" if I'll Have Another fires a "B". Horses like Union Rags and Street Life, meanwhile, would need an "A+".

The best chance for anyone other than I'll Have Another winning is if the dual classic winner runs a "C". His "off" race from either the Derby or Preakness probably still hits the board and might even win, but that would likely mean some others didn't fire as well.

One reason I like Optimizer a little bit is he seems to always fire a "B", i.e. maintains his form rather consistently. That's not nearly fast enough normally, and as a top choice I wouldn't like him, but there's enough of a chance that he moves forward with the added distance to prefer him underneath at 20-to-1 than Union Rags, Paynter, or Street Life at lower prices.

Still, I expect my main strategy (as a personal player, not for the TwinSpires.com Player's Pool) to be to single I'll Have Another in multi-race wagers, bet Dullahan to win, and play a straight I'll Have Another-Dullahan exacta with Optimizer thrown in to some of the gimmicks.

There were no surprises among who the Triple Crown Insider cognoscenti selected in the Preakness Stakes. Joel and I selected Creative Cause, Ray picked I'll Have Another, and Jon tabbed Bodemeister.

 

That trio will certainly make up three of the top four betting choices in the race with Went the Day Well rounding out the favored quartet, and there's good reason for that.

As Ray (in the video above) and Steve Crist (on his blog) discuss, those who run well in the Derby typically do well in the Preakness. Derby winners are 11 for their past 30 in the Preakness, and while the Preakness win percentage for Derby runner-ups is not nearly as gaudy, the also rans typically run well.

The "new shooter" mantle had a bit of a renaissance in the late 20th and early 21st centuries thanks to wins by Red Bullet, Bernardini, and Rachel Alexandra and "gusty" performances in defeat by Magic Weisner (second to War Emblem in 2002) and Scrappy T (second to Afleet Alex in 2005), but Red Bullet and Rachel Alexandra were both Grade 1 winners going into the Preakness, and Bernardini was coming off a graded stakes win en route to championship honors that year.

There are no such horses with close to those kinds of resumes among the new shooters in this year's Preakness, and I am playing the race for one of Creative Cause, I'll Have Another, or Went the Day Well to win. Bodemeister would obviously be no surprise, but as the favorite against two horses who have already beaten him in a race (Creative Cause & I'll Have Another) I'll try to beat him.

 

As the race summary from the Brisnet.com Ultimate PPs illustrate, the Derby starters are clearly the class of this bunch. Even the lowly Optimizer has an on-paper edge over the best of the new shooters.

I'll return later this week with a closer look at the field as well as Toga Tout!

I've spent the past week discussing this year's Kentucky Derby with anyone who will listen, and although I've stuck my neck out to make Hansen my to pick, the most common thing I've said in these discussions is, "I don't like the horse, but he could win."

It's a tough Derby because so many horses can win, but you can't use them all, and some you shouldn't use at all. Horses like Gemologist and Bodemeister fall in the former category for me. Yeah, they can win, and are even more likely winners than some of the horses I'll bet, but I'm willing to take my stand against them. After $100 horses Giacomo and Mine That Bird won two of five Derbys, I got out of the business of saying "so and so" can't win , but that doesn't mean I need to spend money on certain horses.

Other than instanity-insurance "ALL" plays with horses I really like (e.g., Turallure in the Woodford Reserve), I won't have any money on Daddy Long Legs, Optimizer, Trinniberg, Prospective, Done Talking, or Liaison, and if I had to pick the least likely winner of the race it would Trinniberg.

I think the Derby is generally more kind to horses who race near the front of the pack than closers, but it's tough to ignore that the two aforementioned bombs were both closers. It's just impossible to think Trinniberg can go all the way with Hansen and Bodemeister in the second tier tracking him.

Optimizer is my second least likely winner. He's slow and his running style is a handicap. If the winner is a horse running late, I don't see how it's him.

The least likely winner doesn't mean that horse is most likely to finish last, of course, though 19 horses passing Trinniberg as he backs gamely through the field probably is the most likely last-place scenario.