Opinion on who should be Champion Juvenile colt of 2011:
Unless a totally new, creative and ingenious paradigm is conceived, I feel that a 2-year-old colt (HANSEN) who wins the standard for the generation (Breeders Cup Juvenile), and in doing so remains UNBEATEN, while defeating all the other top candidates, among these, his two best reknown rivals (UNION RAGS [then undefeated], CREATIVE CAUSE) cannot be voted second best to any of those rivals who didn't beat him!
I am not saying he should be automatically voted as the best juvenile, but that he cannot be voted second best to any of his rivals. See the subtilty.
For that reason, HANSEN ought to be voted Champion Juvenile colt of 2011.
These days, we cannot predict with certainty what will happen next season with these juveniles. That's another paradigm with their unknown variables. But for today, speaking from a FACTUAL standpoint, HANSEN is number one. Expressed in other terms, he is not number two!
2011 CHAMPION JUVENILE COLT (USA)
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
wangkw
- Restricted Stakes Winner
- Posts: 969
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:48 am
- Location: Singapore -- Small, Solid Island In Dictatorship
The race for 2 yo colt title should be btw Union Rags and Creative Cause...the 2nd and 3rd finishers in BC Juvenile..both UR & Creative
Cause had 1 G1 & 1 G2 wins this year before Nov 5 but CC has an extra 2nd (after Majestic City was DSQ) in the G1 Del Mat Futurity.
Wont call it Summer at the sight of one single sparrow...Hansen's 1st 2 wins before BC Juvenile are indeed very impressive in terms of
the winning margin..but I had wished they were not in a listed status.
Cause had 1 G1 & 1 G2 wins this year before Nov 5 but CC has an extra 2nd (after Majestic City was DSQ) in the G1 Del Mat Futurity.
Wont call it Summer at the sight of one single sparrow...Hansen's 1st 2 wins before BC Juvenile are indeed very impressive in terms of
the winning margin..but I had wished they were not in a listed status.
Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Falling But In Rising Everytime We Fall
Here is a somehow similar story.
The Breeders Cup Marathon was labeled a Grade 2 race and the purse
went accordingly, so-so. For that simple reason Afleet Again is not a millionaire today. But anyway, he ran an extraordinary race against a stout field with the best available runners for that marathonic distance, among those, the unfortunate AU Miner. In synthesis, Afleet Again won the race in spite of the graded nomenclature and the cipher$. He is a champion among his peers. In this example Afleet Again was affected; but no problem, millionaire or not, he proved to be the best within that space and time. He can be voted the best at those distances.
I think the same rationale can be applied to HANSEN, but with the difference that HANSEN was blessed with the graded nomenclatures.
I think that, since in the case of Hansen it is impossible to apply on him the logic that "A" beat "B", "B" beat "C" but "C" beat "A", there is no factual weakness on his merits. Simply, because he is still undefeated and beat all the other aspirants.
Remember this is not an eternal dictum, it is simply a temporary judgement within a specific space and time. We all remember a temporary phenomenom once called ARAZI.
The Breeders Cup Marathon was labeled a Grade 2 race and the purse
went accordingly, so-so. For that simple reason Afleet Again is not a millionaire today. But anyway, he ran an extraordinary race against a stout field with the best available runners for that marathonic distance, among those, the unfortunate AU Miner. In synthesis, Afleet Again won the race in spite of the graded nomenclature and the cipher$. He is a champion among his peers. In this example Afleet Again was affected; but no problem, millionaire or not, he proved to be the best within that space and time. He can be voted the best at those distances.
I think the same rationale can be applied to HANSEN, but with the difference that HANSEN was blessed with the graded nomenclatures.
I think that, since in the case of Hansen it is impossible to apply on him the logic that "A" beat "B", "B" beat "C" but "C" beat "A", there is no factual weakness on his merits. Simply, because he is still undefeated and beat all the other aspirants.
Remember this is not an eternal dictum, it is simply a temporary judgement within a specific space and time. We all remember a temporary phenomenom once called ARAZI.
Hansen --- Champion Two-year old of 2011
http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/nation ... ansen.aspx
http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/nation ... wards.aspx
http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/nation ... ansen.aspx
http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/nation ... wards.aspx
Algorithms wins the Holy Bull S.
Good triumph by Algorithms and no question that
his pedigree was felt there but here a few impressions on the fractionals set by Hansen:
2 furlongs in :23.64 --- Perfect clicking!
4 furlongs in :45.67 --- On this second fractional Hansen
was running un-stalked. Why did
he had to click :22.03 on that second fractional?
Why the rush when he is running practically solo?
In my opinion, there he lost the race.
6 furlongs in 1:10.21 --- bravado fractional for Hansen but he is already
losing "compression" for lack of reserve.
7 furlongs in 1:23.02 --- less than auspicious fractional for the kind of
horse Hansen is.
8 furlongs in 1:36.17 --- No gold medal for this kind of time.
That doesn't mean Algorithms is not a valuable worthy winner, but today's distance was clearly favoring Hansen. If the race had been at 8-1/2 furlongs... well that's another argument in favor of Algorithms, but that was not the case. I don't expect Hansen to be a Ky. Derby horse but he is certainly a good miler.
Good triumph by Algorithms and no question that
his pedigree was felt there but here a few impressions on the fractionals set by Hansen:
2 furlongs in :23.64 --- Perfect clicking!
4 furlongs in :45.67 --- On this second fractional Hansen
was running un-stalked. Why did
he had to click :22.03 on that second fractional?
Why the rush when he is running practically solo?
In my opinion, there he lost the race.
6 furlongs in 1:10.21 --- bravado fractional for Hansen but he is already
losing "compression" for lack of reserve.
7 furlongs in 1:23.02 --- less than auspicious fractional for the kind of
horse Hansen is.
8 furlongs in 1:36.17 --- No gold medal for this kind of time.
That doesn't mean Algorithms is not a valuable worthy winner, but today's distance was clearly favoring Hansen. If the race had been at 8-1/2 furlongs... well that's another argument in favor of Algorithms, but that was not the case. I don't expect Hansen to be a Ky. Derby horse but he is certainly a good miler.
-
wilf
- Breeder's Cup Contender
- Posts: 1882
- Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 10:50 am
- Location: Ocala, Florida.
Stumbling at the start may have shook him up in the sloppy conditions and being so fresh now Jorge. I expect a more mature effort next time out as long as he returns ok after this race. Other runners may be catching up with him physically and maybe the winner is special. There are many factors to consider and only time will expose these 3 yr olds true ability.
Hansen demonstated in the Gotham Stakes that he is a legitimate Preakness Stakes aspirant, who may even perform well in the Derby. But only if he runs the first half in the vicinity of 48 and change or even slower. He demonstrated that he can be rated and relax and that he has the necessary speed to keep him within a tactical position. He makes me remember of Pistols and Roses, who won the Donn in two tries. The challenge for the owners is to try to make him go below 48 and change.
Opinions?
Opinions?
Interesting article full of optimism about HANSEN.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/viewar ... Iowa-Derby
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/viewar ... Iowa-Derby