My friend P Dub, says going against a favorite is a primary tenet for the Handicapper and tend to agree. Though we'd also agree that a good favorite is a good bet.
For this race maybe we should put ourselves in 'Ol Bobby's shoes. Imagine you are a top tier Trainer and you've recently had a spate of Drug Positives, including in the biggest race of the year. Imagine you are concerned about your reputation going forward. Imagine other icons of the Industry have taken positions of concern against you as that top tier trainer. Imagine that you have injected your horses with Steroids regularly and that you don't understand how the jurisdiction in Kentucky is coming up with these drug positives when other jurisdictions are not calling you upon them. Imagine you have just been subjected to rigorous pre race testing as a negotiated settlement to enter your horses in the Preakness Stakes.
Now ask yourself, can you be certain that Kentucky has not conveyed their Drug Testing Protocols to Maryland? Or in other words, is it business as usual or is it proceed with caution and a departure in regard to how you have been "treating" your stable?
Not saying bet the house. Haven't seen France Go de Ina's races yet and want to view them before deciding if Concert Tour can clear early. He is in the outer hole. Want to check the full card for any other Baffert entries prior to the Preakenss. (Don't currently know). Don't believe this is a prime opportunity, but do believe Medina just career topped, albeit upon a pretty easy pace and don't believe Medina is going to get a Steroid booster 3 days prior to race. That has been ruled out by the blood tests just "passed".
So thats about it but for which may be fast enough and in the pattern to pick up the pieces if the Old Crow drops them.
