TGJB wrote:

> The question of both CA and AA running well while others didn't
> brings up the whole issue of why we need detention barns-- I'm
> still back at Donna Barton saying AA had been taken to another
> stall to be "bathed". WE DON'T KNOW-- and as tough as it is to
> deal with lots of horses being drugged, it will be even tougher
> if horses start running hot and cold.

Not sure what the preceding means. Afleet Alex may have finished close, but "running well" is something else entirely. He figured on foundation and smallish top (+1.5 points on Sprint Top) to be least likely to bounce or at least the least likely to seriously regress and that certainly was the case for the Fab Four.

CA appeared to have run his race on a good part of the track and he overcame the most pertaining to pace.

There appear to be legitimate reasons for the poor performance of the key animals.

Bellamania - Pace Challenge/Adversity/Bounce
Greeley's - Poor acclimation to track/Bounce
Bandini - Freakazoid Washout/Bounce
Afleet - Bounce/Trouble/Path?
High Limit - Injury
Wilko - Bled
High Fly - Pace/Distance
Noble Causeway - bumped/inside/distance
SunKing - Distance / inside
Coin Silver- Wet track Specialist?
Flower Alley- Distance

Reconciling the result on these factors seems reasonable.

CA was a legit 3 horse that was one of the few to sit on and fire their best race.