Here's something i had written shortly after Da Tara's upset win in the Belmont:

Regarding Da' Tara, in my opinion the one thing that stuck out about him going into the Belmont was his final time of 1:42 on the Preakness undercard. Big Brown ran one furlong farther in the Preakness, and it took him 12 4/5 to get that extra furlong (though he was admittedly geared down). So Da' Tara's race on Preakness Day actually stacks up pretty well vs. Big Brown. Kinda makes you wonder why how Beyer group gave Big Brown a 100, while Da' Tara received only a 92. The phrase "name recognition" comes to mind. The only real problem i have with that comparison is that Big Brown won by 5 lengths, while Da' Tara actually lost by a nose (plus it was only three lengths back to the third place horse). So it's harder to argue that two horses basically matched Big Brown that day, rather than only one. The comparison sure looks legitimate in retrospect, however.

The reason this is pertinent is because Roman Emperor is the horse who beat Da Tara in that Pimilco race. Also, check out this quote from trainer Steve Klesaris (currently hitting 26% at the Delaware meet):

"He is coming into the race very well," said Klesaris. "All systems are on go, and we expect a big effort from him."

Total non-effort from Roman Emperor. He couldn't have looked any worse...