Silver,

I don't think the paces in the derby and preakness were comparable, at all.

My first view on the derby pace was that it was way above par and I gave Nyquist credit for attending it and still having plenty left in the tank. Saw figures from 3 pace figure makers and it was just above average. Not super fast, which I found surprising. But then I saw the mike smith interview after the derby and he said that it wasn't the pace that best Danzig candy, he just didn't run well. Smith said 45 and change on that track was really 46 and change. Then andy Beyer said that the track variant for derby day was easily the fastest in the last 20 years for a derby and he also concluded the pace was just above average.

Yesterday though, the pace was brutal, contested and draining. It wasn't just s fast first quarter like AP ran in the slop last year, it was fast and more importantly keenly contested through 3 quarters with jockeys pushing their horses throughout (almos foolishly IMO)

If both these horses run back, it would SEEM that Nyquist had more of a gut wrenched yesterda. But we will see.

I normally hate trainer speak. But I found it interesting that Keith desormeaux gave his horse little chance to beat Nyquist the last 3 times they met, multiple times saying that Nyquist would have to stub his toe. But before yesterday he was extremely confident, based on the fact that his horse recovers quickly from big efforts in his opinion and he felt that was an equalizer. Now, who knows if he is right, and I don't think it is why he won yesterday, but it could come into play in 3 weeks, if he is right. (Or it could be useless trainer speak - my favorite is Kiaran McLaughlin, as nothing is a worse kiss of death thsn. Kiarsn feeling good about his horse. I know people that speak to him regularly and for years I lost a small fortune on horses he "felt good about". And watched many of his horses that he never talked about win at bigger odds..... Trainer speak... Sort of like political promises...



Rob