The other thing people miss out on when they compile a list of things kids aren't taught is that the school year is awfully short for 300 years of American history. I feel like kids learn a shallow version of history that doesn't have the carrots that would tempt them to dig deeper into the subject. I remember my sister talking about an awesome class at the University of Wisconsin called "Representative Americans" that really stuck with her. The basic premise of the class was to look periods of American history through individuals. When I looked up information on the class today, I found out that it's what inspired Stephen Ambrose to become an historian. That's the kind of history and reaction I think kids should have.

History is awesome when it's not used as political propaganda. I mean, it's got everything: passion, adventure, war, inspiring struggles and devastating tragedies. It's the ultimate reality show. And even better than that, it's not simply "this is what happened and here's how you should feel about it". It's "here's what happened, what do you think of that?"

So anyone, let me get off my high horse and actually answer my own question. I'd spend a lot of time on the Constitutional Convention, using a book like The Genius of the People as a guide. I'd teach about westward expansion using stories like those in Blood And Thunder. I devote time to slavery with a book like Lest We Forget. I don't have a go to Civil War book, but obviously that'd be a part of it. We'd have a unit on immigration and industrialization, with the immigration section tailored to the community (i.e. in Wisconsin we'd probably learn more about Polish, German and Scandinavian immigrants than the Irish). Finally, we'd study WWII with a great book like Ambrose's D-Day, which isn't really just about military history, it's really about how the history of America prepared her to win WWII.

I'd actually stop at WWII. I'm not sure you can teach kids history more recent than 50-years old. It's too soon to not be politicized. Maybe rather than having a formal book-centric section, we'd explore more recent history through the eyes of parents and volunteers. That'd be fun, right?

I don't think it's particularly important for kids to know the names of certain famous people or the dates of certain famous events. It's memorizing stuff like that that makes history boring. But maybe that's the whole point of the ideologues, make it boring so that kids never question your version of it.

• W. looked so much younger then. I mean, way more than 10 years younger. He looked like a baby. Now he's suddenly kind of an old man. I know that happens to Presidents, but it's still shocking.
• Not being about the immediately fly to DC was a huge deal to Bush. He talked about how obviously he felt that he needed to be there, and you can tell how even now he's uncomfortable with this notion that his own safety was so important. I mean, to the world he was President of the United States of America, but I don't think he had come to terms with that yet. He was just himself still. That must be very weird. When you're that important and powerful, it isn't you that changes, it's how everyone else changes toward you.
• For all of the subsequent talk about what a cowboy W was, he really does deserve some credit for not flying off all half-cocked on 9/11. He was right to understand that we needed calm leadership, nothing more, that day. And, days later at Ground Zero, he got that what the rescue workers needed to hear wasn't that people were praying for them, but rather that we we're going to go after who did this. It occurs to me that a big part of leadership is simply the ability to read a crowd.
• One thing that really did bother me about the show, though, is that when Bush talks about his thoughts at day's end and how he wanted to know why we didn't know about this, the producers choose to shift the camera away from W's face and focus on the infamous pre 9/11 memo that talks about al Qaeda's desire to attack the U.S. (duh). I guess what made me mad about it was that it was so unfair. The whole show is supposed to be about Bush's recollections of 9/11. It's his story, not history, and by showing that memo they're trying to take the narrative from him and say something else, without giving him a chance to respond to it.

One thing I've been trying to do lately is find original source material from 9/11. I'm more interested in reading what people said then now than reading what people say now about what they thought then. I haven't found too much - it's amazing how much of the internet of 2001 is already gone, but I did find bits & pieces of a Yahoo! message board from that morning. The one odd post just said:

This is incredible!! Highlight of the year!!

That's kind of incredibly tasteless, but it's real and I kind of get it. It was exciting, at least from a safe distance away. That's what I what to read, what people really thought, rather than what they think they thought or think they should thought with 10 years' distance behind them.

I wondered how anyone could be so oblivious to the fashion of the last 30 odd years. It's not that she wasn't trendy, it's that she was so dated. It was as if she was a...time traveler! With that thought I realized I had made a huge discovery. Maybe unfashionable people are really time travelers from the past or future. Rather than being the targets of our bitchy comments, they should be the targets of our jealousy!

Think about it, if you were traveling here from 1985, would you care about your clothes? Of course not, you'd just unthinkingly wear the most normal thing you could think of - in this case jorts & a t-shirt, thinking that of course you'd fit in. I mean, you wouldn't even imagine an America sans feathered hair and denim shorts, right?

It kind of explains why fashion is so ultimately cyclical. Looks like this aren't the work of visionary designers, they're the work of time travelers from the late 80s and early 90s who walked the streets of New York in pinch rolled jeans.

One of the disturbing things about these time travelers is that it's not as easy to spot time travelers from the future. Maybe it's because when you travel into the past you know how to look to fit in or maybe it's because there is no future. Maybe bums are future time travelers riding out the last days of civilization the best way they know how: drunk.

My take on time travel might seem a little shallow, but if shows like Star Trek and the Twilight Zone have taught me anything it's that you can't change anything major via time travel. You can't go kill baby Hitler, but maybe, just maybe, you could kill acid-washed jeans.

Up until last September, I never owned a player's jersey, or even a t-shirt with a the player's name & number on the back. Oh sure, I was tempted by Favre (but everybody had one) and I'd still be proud to wear a C.C. Sabathia shirt, but I never pledged my allegiance to a player like that until I succumbed to cool charm of Aaron Rodgers. My Aaron Rodgers jersey served me well in Minneapolis' Skyway, at playoff parties and all of the way to the Super Bowl. But I still have this nagging feeling around it. What if Rodgers turns into a jackass? What if he starts to suck? What if goes to the Vikings in 15 years?

And you can't even play it safe and only get retired player's jerseys. Do you think anyone in Buffalo is rocking a Simpson #32?

I've often said that horse racing is the hardest sport to love. That's still true. The horses will break your heart, but the horses won't let you down because they turn into jerks or they hold out for more money or start sexting that sexy filly down the shedrow.

I love this whole Tony Plush thing that's sweeping Wisconsin, but I can't help but envision a day in the near future when I'm pulling a "Plushdamentals" t-shirt out of the bottom of the drawer and putting it in my purge pile.

But maybe that's okay. Maybe the key to sports loyalty is that it's temporary. I think that's how players think, so why shouldn't we fans adopt that same attitude? I don't know. I don't want to be as cavalier to the next Brett Favre as the last Brett Favre was to us, and I take pride in things like how Packer fans stepped up to help Reggie White's Tennessee church back in the day.

For now I compromise with a Brewers jersey with no name on the back (and seriously people, getting your own name on the back is just lame). But I'm tempted, even though I know how it will turn out.

10. If I Had A Boat, by James Vincent McMorrow: McMorrow is pretty accurately described as the Irish Bon Iver. I think he's more atmospheric and romantic than Bon Iver. It must be the Irish in him. It's hard to imagine an Irishman being out-romanticized by a guy from Eau Claire.

9. 20 Years, by The Civil Wars: Beautiful, harmonic folky goodness.

8. No Simple Machine, by Old 97's: From the first note, this song is instantly recognizable as the Old 97's. There's something to be said for a band that's so confident in their own skin. They should be, because they're awesome.

7. Montezuma, by Fleet Foxes: What's interesting to me about Fleet Foxes is how formal their music sounds. It's so tightly structured yet their space in the music for your mind to breathe when you listen to it.

6. Shell Games, by Bright Eyes: There will always be a place on my list for a pure, hooky pop song like this.

5. Lost In My Mind, by The Head & The Heart: This is the most 2010 of the 2011 songs. This song is large in scope and, of all things, kind of reminds me of Seven Bridges Road by The Eagles.

4. A Little Bit Of Everything, by Dawes: I love this band. They have an amazing way of connecting with their audience, whether it's in person or just through such "true" lyrics like in this song.

3. Rolling In The Deep, by Adele: This is near the top of the list of songs that are still good, even if they did get really popular. Sometimes mass taste intersects with good taste. Really!

2. Holocene, by Bon Iver: I first listened to the new Bon Iver record on free streaming and I knew I loved song #3, Holocene. I love the song even more after hearing this description:

Holocene is a bar in Portland, Ore., but it's also the name of a geologic era, an epoch if you will. It's a good example of how all the songs are all meant to come together as this idea that places are times and people are places and times are... people? They can all be different and the same at the same time. Most of our lives feel like these epochs. That's kind of what that song's about. "Once I knew I was not magnificent." Our lives feel like these epochs, but really we are dust in the wind. But I think there's a significance in that insignificance that I was trying to look at in that song.

I love the concept of personal epochs. Oh Justin Vernon, you're so wonderful, even if you do apparently wear the same pair of brown cords every day.

1. Up Up Up, by The Givers: Pure joy in the form of song.

I think it's time for accuracy and descriptiveness in tourism, so I'd like to propose the following slogans:

Alabama: There's A Band Named After Us!
Arizona: The Immigrants Did It
Delaware: Who Knew?
Hawaii Want A Birth Certificate?
Indiana: It Takes Way Longer To Drive Through Than You Thought, Huh?
Minnesota: Passive Aggressive Since 1858
New Jersey: America's Dumpster
North Dakota: No, The Other One
Oregon: That's Not Skunk You Smell
Vermont: We've Got Ice Cream

So that's just a few off of the top of my head. Hopefully we can think of more, because the rest of the states sure need some help.

I have a horrible bat phobia. Yet even so, I understand the value of bats. They eat mosquitoes. But what is the value of mosquitoes? Do they contribute anything to the world besides disease, pain, misery and annoyance? If it ever became possible, would it be okay for mankind to wipe them off the face of the earth?

While I had a hearty knee jerk "YES!" to that question, is that the right answer? Don't most religions and philosophies believe that everything has a value and a purpose? Even mosquitoes. I mean, sure, we kill and eat other plants and animals, but so many cultures are taught to truly value that animal or plant for what it gives us. If we made mosquitoes extinct, it would just be out of spite.

Or maybe it's not even our right to decide that another species has no value. Who are we to judge? That might be just the kind of hubris that actually would speed up The Rapture.

Hmmm, or maybe The Rapture happened years and years ago, mosquitoes are part of the whole "hell on earth" thing and the Second Coming is just in the form of my personal savior, DEET.

I completely understand the outrage over someone getting a ticket and a day in jail for killing someone with a car. But I also understand the "it could happen to anyone" feeling. If someone spills their coffee and as a result starts a car accident, that's a tragedy, but is it also a crime? If the exact same action could have merely resulted in a fender bender, should we take that into consideration?

Likewise, the kid at Rutgers is clearly an asshole and his actions were despicable, but is it fair to punish him for the extent of someone else's reaction to what he did?

The car accident question seems easier to answer, because I think we generally accept that some things really are just accidents or small mistakes.

The suicide question is harder. Where do you draw the line? If, for example, a woman videotaped herself cheating on her boyfriend and sent him the tape and he viewed and then killed himself is she guilty of anything more than being a heinous bitch? Or what about someone that swindles someone out of their life savings and they then commit suicide? Or even just kids that cruelly make fun of someone on the playground. It's not easy to defend these people because they all basically suck, but what kind of punishment actually does fit their crime?

That last point is important as here's the list and accomplishments of the last ten Preakness winners:

1. Lookin at Lucky: 2010 Champion 3-Year Old Colt
2. Rachel Alexandra: 2009 Horse of the Year and Champion 3-Year Old Filly
3. Big Brown: 2008 Champion 3-Year Old Colt
4. Curlin: 2007 Horse of the Year and Champion 3-Year Old Colt
5. Bernardini: 2006 Champion 3-Year Old Colt
6. Afleet Alex: 2005 Champion 3-Year Old Colt
7. Smarty Jones: 2004 Champion 3-Year Old Colt
8. Funny Cide: 2003 Champion 3-Year Old Colt
9. War Emblem: 2002 Champion 3-Year Old Colt
10. Point Given: 2001 Horse of the Year and Champion 3-Year Old Colt

That's one hell of a run. The point is that while the Preakness is clearly the red-headed step child of the Triple Crown, in the scheme of things it typically produces both the best race and the best winner. So what you have to really ask yourself is who is the best horse rather than who may have had the best strategy to get to this race.

Of the newcomers to the field, only Concealed Identity won his last race. And while it was over the Pimlico course, it was a minor stakes race won in a relatively slow time. At this point, he's no Bernardini. From the non-Derby runners, I'm mostly interested in Astrology (because I think he's classy) and Mr. Commons (because I think John Shirreffs is a smart trainer), but neither has won a significant race this year and I just don't see the Preakness being their breakout.

Looking at the field, I actually expect the Preakness to have a significantly faster pace than the Kentucky Derby because Dance City and Flashpoint should be up front along with Shackleford. With a faster pace, I think a deep closer like Dialed In has more of a chance. I'm a little afraid of Dialed In winning, but honestly, I think he's a nice horse, but I don't think he's a future champion. To me, the race comes down to Mucho Macho Man and Animal Kingdom. I think they're both flexible enough to lay off of a super fast pace or be closer to a moderate pace. They've both shown good acceleration when asked. Of the two, I just like Animal Kingdom a little bit more as I think he's better at a longer distance and I think he'll be better placed in the field. So, it's Animal Kingdom for the win.

Who's your pick?

In the series, typical authority figures like parents or the government (the Ministry of Magic) are either absent or so ineffectual as to not deserve respect. The heroes constantly break the rules and rebels like the Weasley twins are completely glorified. I didn't even have to look at her Wikipedia page to know that J.K. Rowling was a member of Generation X - that viewpoint is just so obvious throughout the series.

Once I thought about Harry Potter in terms of generations, it was so fun & easy to analyze. I'm fascinated by the Generations series by Neil Howe and William Strauss. The gist of their books is that:

American generations follow a cycle that produces four generational archetypes: artists, prophets, nomads and heroes. The "Silent Generation" of my parents (born between 1925-1942) as well as today's toddlers (2001-present) are the artist archetype. The Baby Boomers (1943-1960) are prophets. Generation X (1961-1981) are nomads and the G.I. "greatest generation" (1901-1924) and Millennials (1982-2000) are heroes. According to Strauss & Howe, each archetype has a persona and endowments:

• Artists are about pluralism, expertise and due process
• Prophets bring vision, values and religion
• Nomads most value liberty, survival and honor
• Heroes are all about community, affluence and technology

According to Howe & Strauss, times of great crisis tend to happen when Prophets are the rulers and Heroes are the foot soldiers. Knowing that, isn't it easy to break down the Harry Potter characters into their respective generations?

Dumbledore & Voldemort are clearly Prophets, representing opposite ends of good and evil.

There aren't too many artists in the series, but I think Molly & Arthur Weasley fit the bill. They're not rash like the Nomads. They're going to get things done, but would, frankly, prefer to work through the system to do so.

Harry's parents and their friends like Sirius Black and Remus Lupin are our Nomads. Rule breakers as kids, now as adults they're quick to join up to defeat Voldemort.

And obviously, Harry, Hermione, Ron and friends are the Heroes. What's interesting is that since the book was written by a Nomad we have this conflict between Harry wanting to just get things done on his own like a Nomad would and his need to involve others in his quest like a Hero should.

It's funny how many "hero journey" tales like this follow this same generational pattern. In Star Wars, for example, it's easy to see that Luke is the Hero, Han Solo is a Nomad, Obi Wan is the Artist and the Emperor is the Prophet. It must be literary satisfying because it literally makes sense, huh?

1. A Town Called Malice, by The Jam: You know what can make any list of songs a little better? A little Paul Weller.
2. Beach Baby, by Bon Iver: I know Bon Iver is usually all winter and stuff, but this song feels like the glimmer of the sun on the water.
3. Born This Way, by Lady Gaga: The most obvious candidate for the summer song of 2011.
4. Dancing In The Street, by Martha and the Vandellas: A classic.
5. Dog Days, by Florence & The Machine: I know the song says "The dog days are over", but from the moment she sings "Happiness hit her like a train on a track" this song is pure summer exhilaration.
6. Drunk Girls, by LCD Soundsystem: It's the anthem of summer stupidity.
7. Freebird, by Lynyrd Skynyrd: This is a song only meant to be played while swaying barefoot in the grass.
8. Friday, by Rebecca Black: I've always said that a great summer song is pretty mindless, and this one sure fits the bill.
9. F*ck You, by Cee Lo Green: Cussing someone out never sounded so happy and fun before.
10. Heavy Metal Drummer, by Wilco: To me, this song perfectly evokes a summer in the 90s and the guilty pleasures of classic rock in the grunge era.
11. Holiday, by Vampire Weekend: Just a sweet & happy little song.
12. I Don't Feel Like Dancing, by Scissor Sisters: A silly dance song that's perfect for summer nights.
13. I-35, by Max Stalling: This is like the theme song for going up to the cabin:
    

    Barreling down I-35 with one thought on my mind
    Forget the race find an open space, leave that city far behind

14. King Of The Road, by Roger Miller: I dunno, I think of hobos as summer characters and bums as winter characters, right?
15. Lisztomania, by Phoenix: This is just a light-as-a-feather feeling dance song. It's refreshing!
16. Locked Inside, by Janelle Monae: I love the chorus and the whole song is just easy and smooth.
17. Me In Honey, by R.E.M.: You wouldn't know it now, but older R.E.M. songs are just filled with this kind of lazy, southern summer vibe.
18. Money Grabber, by Fitz & The Tantrums: A fun throwback of a tune.
19. Rock The Boat, by The Hues Corporation: Someday, someone is going to make an awesome mashup of this song and "I'm On A Boat". It will be liquid awesome.
20. Sea Of Love, by The Honeydrippers: I prefer The Honeydrippers' version to the original. Despite all of his heavy metal Led Zeppelin credentials, Robert Plant has this amazingly romantic "leading man" voice that is just perfect for this song.
21. Stand By Me, by Ben E. King: This probably has more to do with the movie (poor River Phoenix) than the song.
22. Summer In The City, by The Lovin' Spoonful: This is number one on everyone else's lists of summer songs, so I figured I should include it.
23. The Cave, by Mumford & Sons: This is all about the freedom of summer and raising your arms in the air through your moon roof.
24. The Message, by Grandmaster Flash & The Furious Five: While the classic songs talk about "summer in the city", this is actually what it sounds like.
25. When My Time Comes, by Dawes: Every summer song list needs that one song where everyone can join in on the chorus and sing along.

1. I think my questions to help narrow the field are right on. Once again, a horse with a graded stakes win and two-year old performance wins. Also, I correctly predicted the moderate pace and, once pedigree was factored in, I had narrowed the field to five horses, including the longshot winner. However, what I haven't yet figured out is how to bet the Derby. I think in the future, in addition to making one official pick, I've got to cover all of the horses I narrow it down to for the win, at least in a small way.

2. The clocker reports, particularly from Mike Welch at the Daily Racing Form, are an invaluable resource. While Animal Kingdom's pedigree screamed "turf", reports from the track were that he was handling the Churchill Downs surface beautifully. I ignored that and paid the price! Overall, Animal Kingdom, Archarcharch and Shackleford were the three horses who got the most raves in the morning.

3. The only horses screwed by outside post positions are need-the-lead types (a la Sidney's Candy last year). The rest of the horses do just fine on the outside because of the long run to the first turn. This year's superfecta was filled out by 16-19-14-13.

4. Don't get too caught up in surface differences. Animal Kingdom had never run on dirt and had a turf pedigree. but he won the Derby easily on conventional dirt. What I'm finding is that as more and more horses run on multiple surfaces, the difference between those surfaces seems to fade a bit. I'm not sure I'm even going to track what horses have never run on dirt next year.

5. Don't fall in love with a horse. They'll only break your heart. I so fell in love with Uncle Mo last summer and while I'm disappointed he didn't run in the Derby, I'm absolutely devastated thinking that there might be something seriously wrong with him. The first horse I ever loved was Landaluce and I can't shake the feeling that Uncle Mo is going to suffer a similar fate. Let's all keep our hooves crossed that they can find out what's wrong with him and help him get better.

For the Preakness, let's hope that The Factor enters and that everyone gets to run their race. It'd be a lot of fun!

I've had my say, so now tell me what you think:

Every year, I try to use a series of questions in order to narrow the field and pick my Kentucky Derby winner. While I might not get the winner right, I hope these questions will be a good guide for the rest of you and help you pick a winner.

Question 1
Is there an exceptional horse in the race? Because the Derby usually has a large field, racing luck and pace tend to make the race. A truly exceptional horse, however, tends to make its own luck. If you think there's a potential Triple Crown winner in the field, pick him and skip to the end. If not, move on to question 2.

Without Uncle Mo, this is a definite "no" this year.

Question 2
Who proved their early maturity with some good two-year old form?

Since Apollo in 1882 (that's right, 1882), no horse has won the Kentucky Derby without racing as a two year old. Since 1993, only Charismatic, War Emblem and Monarchos won the Derby without a good performance at two.

This year, horses with a good two year performance are:

• Animal Kingdom
• Archarcharch
• Comma To The Top
• Mucho Macho Man
• Santiva
• Soldat
• Stay Thirsty
• Decisive Moment
• Master Of Hounds
• Shackleford

Question 3
Of the remaining horses, who has already proven their class with stakes wins? After backing too many horses that had potential rather than performance, I want a horse that’s proven he or she can win consistently. I've broken up with Potential and am interested in entering a relationship with Reality, who, I'm told does very well for himself.

Since 1993, every Kentucky Derby winner except Giacomo had previously won a stakes race. Also, every winner except Giacomo and Funny Cide were graded stakes winners. Of the horses that passed Question 2, all but Master Of Hounds and Shackleford are also stakes winners (and Decisive Moment is the only stakes winner that isn't a graded stakes winner).

Question 4
How fast will the pace be? Check out the running styles of the field. If there's a ton of horses in the race that all like to be 4th or 5th throughout the race, then they all might plod around in the early part of the race, meaning that one of them will outkick the others for the win OR that a frontrunner might get loose on the lead and win. This is not a common scenario. More likely is the field with a few speedballs. They'll ensure a swift pace and cause those horses who want to be comfortable sitting off the lead to go faster than they want. This pace scenario usually results in a come-from-behind horse winning.

So, to review, fewer speed horses mean the race sets up for stalkers OR for a lone speed horse. Lots of speed horses mean that the winner will most likely come from way off the pace

As I said before, I expect the pace to be pretty normal and I'm looking for a winner out of the stalkers and closers (but not deep closers). Of our remaining contenders, these horses still fit the bill:

• Animal Kingdom
• Archarcharch
• Mucho Macho Man
• Santiva
• Stay Thirsty

Question 5
Will it rain? On some tracks, it doesn't seem to matter if it's muddy. At Churchill Downs (the home of the Derby) it does matter. It's the track comes up wet, look for horses with some history of success in the mud. Extra bonus points if his mother was a mudder. Additionally, who has dirt, rather than synthetic, form. Some horses love synthetic tracks, some only perform on real dirt.

Since it has rained in Kentucky for the last two weeks, most of the horses have trained over the sloppy Churchill Downs track. Of our final six, I'd move Animal Kingdom up on a wet track and move Santiva down and reverse it if the track is fast. Addtionally, even though he doesn't have the necessary two-year old form, Brilliant Speed should also be moved way up on a wet track.

Question 6
Can he go the distance? One common misconception is that horses who come from behind are stayers. This isn't necessarily the case. You still need to find a stretch runner with a pedigree that doesn't scream "sprinter".

Of the remaining six, I think Archarcharch and Stay Thirsty have the pedigree to go long. Animal Kingdom is bred up and down for turf and Santiva and Mucho Macho Man have distance questions.

Question 7
Horses prep all around the country and many never race against each other before the Derby. Therefore, it's useful to rank the regions. If, for example, the Florida horses are much the best this year, that gives you a reason to take a Florida stretch runner over one who stayed in California.

I'm not sure that this is too important of a question this year. My only note is that The Factor made his races in California and Arkansas look more like a typical Kentucky Derby from a pace perspective. So, you might want to look at horses like Nehro, Archarcharch and Comma To The Top with the knowledge that they've at least dealt with some Derby-like pace in the past.

Question 8
Are any of the remaining horses trained by Bob Baffert, D. Wayne Lukas or Nick Zito or riden by Calvin Borel? Savvy handicappers are known to take out "Lukas insurance". That is, they'll place a small wager on Lukas-trained horses even if they don't really believe that they have a chance. History shows that you ignore Lukas, Baffert & Zito at your own peril.

Well, Zito has Dialed In, Baffert has Midnight Interlude and Borel is riding Twice The Appeal. I'm not really considering any of those horses for the win, which means that one of them will probably win :)

Question 9
Who do the Derby gods want to win? Really. The Derby gods are a sentimental bunch. If there's some octogenarian owner who has waited his whole life to win the Derby or a small-time better looking to make the score of a lifetime, he probably will. Good stories win.

Two of our main contenders, Archarcharch and Mucho Macho Man, would make for huge human interest stories.

Question 10
What do the clockers say?

The clockers at Churchill Downs are typically pretty good at spotting horses doing well before the Derby. This year, they've really keyed in on Archarcharch & Shackleford as horses doing very well on the grounds.

The Pick
Other than the post position and my heart, Archarcharch meets every criteria I set forth for a Derby winner. Beyond that, he's another one of those Kris S. line horses that are just spectacularly beautiful.

My heart and my soul wanted Uncle Mo to win and I'll this Derby has a hole in it without him, so I will officially pick Archarcharch, but honestly, I care about 100 times less about the race without Mo in it.

As for the rest of the ticket, as I wrote last year, ponder the plodders. I don't like them for the win, but I'm interested in Dialed In and Brilliant Speed in the exotics. If I'm putting together a six horse exacta box (if I do get to the OTB, I'll post some pics of the official tickets), I'm thinking it's:
Archarcharch, Brilliant Speed, Dialed In, Nehro, Santiva & Mucho Macho Man.