If that becomes the field, a pretty ugly race from a handicapping perspective.

1. Nyquist would have a huge edge from a pace perspective.

2. Offsetting point 1 for some of us is that if you believe that TGJB posted about 10 days ago, a big X is coming for Nyquist. He can always change his mind, but TGJB and others have been saying they expect a regression then an X for Nyquist. The Preakness was a bit of a regression and a rough race for him. He could bounce big in the Belmont, but if he does, he will do so with a huge tactical edge.

3. Not a fan of any of the grinders - Suddenbreakingnews, cherry wine, brody's cause.

4. Exaggerator a tough call. The horse has a turn of foot. A very nice one in fact (on wet or dry). Unfortunately, the "turn of foot" capability has the smallest impact in the Belmont IMO. The race is usually won by gallopers who can sustain that high cruising speed for a long period of time. Not by a dynamic quarter mile burst that Exaggerator has shown.

5. Destin would be interesting if he wasn't trained by the worst big name trainer in the last 30 years or so. (at least as far as these triple crown races go) and Yes that is an opinion, not a fact, but the guy has gone a long way in proving that with results on the track

Aren't there any other sneaky horses laying out there that want to take their shot?

Rob