PDub, not sure if you are suggesting that Santa Anita put the dirt from the old track into dump trucks for 3 years and then simply replaced it when the time came, and I really hope you aren't trying to dumb down the discussion to say "dirt is dirt", because either of those are obviously ridiculous.

From everything I read, SA went to great lengths to come up with a new "state-of-the-art" dirt surface for the replacement. I'm in no position to judge the significance of the difference between old and new, but it factually is different, which to me means that using horses that ran over the old surface (let alone horses that ran nearly 2 decades ago) is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion I'm trying to have.

I've made quite a few factual statements. It is factually correct that some horses win impressively over the new SA surface (and others like it) and can't duplicate it other places that are more demanding, while other horses fair well over multiple different types of dirt. I'm completely missing how anyone could even possibly dispute this.

It's factually correct to say that we don't know which of those 2 categories CC falls into yet, because the only dirt course he's run over is SA. It's factually correct that we've never had a Derby winner with an AWD on both sides below 7F (at least as long as I've been alive). The length of his stride seems to be open to interpretation, and certainly no expert in judging that, but it certainly is unfortunate we will not get to see a workout over the CD strip to see how he looks in a full-speed scenario.

Since you didn't seem to understand this logic above and incorrectly stated it, I'll help. Using my(?) (any normal person's?) logic, some horses that ran well at GP will run well at CD and others will not, it's not rocket science. The key question we are trying to get to here is trying to figure out which factors may help you predict which of those 2 categories a horse is going to fall into when they try CD for the first time.

Its factually correct that certain horses that have dominated over the new SA surface have not been able to duplicate their results at CD. This "failure" comes in many shades, from the complete falling on their face, like Goldencents, to the subtle 1 or 2 points off their best, like GoD.

Maybe it's not correct to call it a "failure", but despite TGJBs objections, GoD is exactly the kind of subtle difference that is possible, and from what I see, those subtle differences can make a difference in who wins. It can appear to be a "good" and "competitive" race, but on his sheet its a point or 2 below his best. It's not good enough to just run a "good" race or "near your best" on Derby Day, horses that win the Derby run their best.

I've made no definitive statements about CC at all. I've said I'm making guesses about what I feel he is likely to do, based on a number of different factors. I'm openly admitting it is a guess, as anyone guessing he is likely to run a new top should admit to themselves as well.

The fact of the matter is, as anyone who has used this board and seminars before knows, that very few horses run new tops in the Derby. If we end up with 7 or 8 horses in the 0 to 1 range, the odds tell us that only one or two of those is likely to move forward on derby day. Seems like many people feel CC will be one of those horses because he is a "freak" (a freak with no negative numbers? OK). When I look at CC compared to the others in his range, I see him as one of the least likely to move forward at 10F at CD.

I'm not necessarily saying CC is going to fall on his face like Goldencents did, his pace profile is much stronger than GC was, though still not as strong as I would like to see compared to other winners like even IHA (though I have not see the pace figs from the SA Derby yet). But anything from being a step off, like GoD was, to completely useless like GC was, or anything in between, spells defeat for CC in this Derby. And even if he were not the favorite, I will be betting on something in that range as the likely outcome.