REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

Tying your and Coach Miguel's comments together, Tanlic, would you still feel the same if COT had found the gaps closing on him from the turn and he'd ended up an unlucky loser?

I saw the Kevin Blake stuff and liked it all because that kind of stuff fascinates me even if I think there have to be flaws and exceptions to these data-driven approaches. But it did surprise me when he said Moore would ride COT for luck. For luck? In the Derby? Piggott, Cauthen, Dettori... I don't they ever rode 'for luck' in any Derby.

KB did say the stablemates would 'decompress' the field with the pace tactics and it obviously worked (and didn't put me off backing it) but I can't say I liked hearing the term 'ride him for luck'. Is it possible 'the lads' wouldn't have minded if he'd been an unlucky loser with later season targets in mind?

Then again, maybe they knew it wouldn't have mattered since, COT apart, it really was the worst Derby in my memory. (I'd have AF better than Oath but they were more closely grouped behind Oath than they were behind AF on Saturday.)

<blockquote data-quote="Desert Orchid" data-source="post: 2679564" data-attributes="member: 65242">Tying your and Coach Miguel&#039;s comments together, Tanlic, would you still feel the same if COT had found the gaps closing on him from the turn and he&#039;d ended up an unlucky loser?I saw the Kevin Blake stuff and liked it all because that kind of stuff fascinates me even if I think there have to be flaws and exceptions to these data-driven approaches. But it did surprise me when he said Moore would ride COT for luck. For luck? In the Derby? Piggott, Cauthen, Dettori... I don&#039;t they ever rode &#039;for luck&#039; in any Derby.KB did say the stablemates would &#039;decompress&#039; the field with the pace tactics and it obviously worked (and didn&#039;t put me off backing it) but I can&#039;t say I liked hearing the term &#039;ride him for luck&#039;. Is it possible &#039;the lads&#039; wouldn&#039;t have minded if he&#039;d been an unlucky loser with later season targets in mind?Then again, maybe they knew it wouldn&#039;t have mattered since, COT apart, it really was the worst Derby in my memory. (I&#039;d have AF better than Oath but they were more closely grouped behind Oath than they were behind AF on Saturday.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Desert Orchid, post: 2679564, member: 65242"] Tying your and Coach Miguel's comments together, Tanlic, would you still feel the same if COT had found the gaps closing on him from the turn and he'd ended up an unlucky loser? I saw the Kevin Blake stuff and liked it all because that kind of stuff fascinates me even if I think there have to be flaws and exceptions to these data-driven approaches. But it did surprise me when he said Moore would ride COT for luck. For luck? In the Derby? Piggott, Cauthen, Dettori... I don't they ever rode 'for luck' in any Derby. KB did say the stablemates would 'decompress' the field with the pace tactics and it obviously worked (and didn't put me off backing it) but I can't say I liked hearing the term 'ride him for luck'. Is it possible 'the lads' wouldn't have minded if he'd been an unlucky loser with later season targets in mind? Then again, maybe they knew it wouldn't have mattered since, COT apart, it really was the worst Derby in my memory. (I'd have AF better than Oath but they were more closely grouped behind Oath than they were behind AF on Saturday.) [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?