11 pm after exaggerator hangs the first L on Nyquist and not a lot on the board regarding the race. Perhaps all of us are "decompressing" after a few days of heavy gambling.

One persons thoughts on the race:

1. Considering track condition and the amount of speed that seemed to be in the race, far from a surprising result.

2. As a guy who bet exaggerator in both the derby and preakness and has been anti-Nyquist for a long time, I have to say Nyquist ran pretty well, considering the pace of the race.

3. Speaking of pace, a pretty dumb ride by Mario Gutierrez. Jockey critiquing happens every single race, every single day, but it see,s deserved here. Nyquist left hard, so as not to get trapped down inside, a good move, but once the 4 backed off out of the first turn, did Mario really have to go after uncle Lino at the 22 quarter? He was more afraid of uncle Lino getting away than he was of confirmed quality closer, top challenger and possible mud lover, exaggerator. Yikes. Awful ride IMO. Hard to say what happens if he rates a bit, but Nyquist wasn't packing it in until late.certainly would have been closer.

4. Kent D. Gave the winner a helluva ride. He won by 3 and was never in doubt late, but if it had been closer, the ground he saved and the inside out move would have been crucial

5. I still don't have a handle on exaggerator. Hard to say that about a horse I bet in both legs of the triple crown so far, but in the derby I had to use him what appeared to me to be the "perfect" derby sheet, and in the preakness he figured to benefit from the pace and surface, while running very well in defeat in the derby. I say tough to have a handle because the detractors will point to another wet track and fast pace, like the santa Anita derby. But this horse fires hard every time.

6. Stradivari ran ok with a wide trip. Suspect his TG figure may overstate his performance, but he ran at least ok. Could/should be heard from later in the year.

7. Haven't ready any comments from the connections yet, but am guessing we may not see either Nyquist or exaggerator In the belmont. But we will see.

Rob