So, I dont expect it to be brought up, but there was some serious assertions on how bad they got the wood. How bad exxagerator last number was, etc. Looks like to me the wood was slow. Also, they had nyquist off a pair of tops, 2 points faster than last year. Just saying
There\'s nothing you can do with the Wood to make those figures correlate with what they ran in the Derby. And those figures are solid. They did have Nyquist faster relative to the fiel, but apparently didn\'t like him. Ex looked good on both for different reasons, but if you believe that sprint effort was better than his SA Derby you\'ll believe anything.
Then there\'s the Oaks...
no doubt ex looked strong on both. Nyquist only knock for me was price.
When you finish with your Derby analysis, I hope you comment on the \"Holy Crap\" thread you started.
http://www.thorograph.com/phorum/read.php?1,101207,101209#msg-101209
On the surface, the results tell a different story.
They had Wood horses slower and they finished slow in 14th, 16th, and DNF.
They had FG horses faster and one finished in a respectable 3rd. The others in 8th (w/ trouble), and 12th.
Not sure how or why you made any comparison to Lani, who finished in the middle of the pack.
I did, on this string.
Declaring your Wood figures as unassailable does not address your pre-Derby comparisons to the FG and Meydan races (esp, Tom\'s Ready and Lani). Will wait for a look at the post-Derby numbers before I comment further.
I\'ve taken a first pass at the Derby, it\'s obvious how to do it, but we\'re waiting for a review of the ground before we put both days up. Yes, you would have been better off waiting. But I want to clear up a bunch of stuff before this place turns into Roswell.
If you ever heard me say I was sure that Dubai figure was spot on, point me to where. It was a small field of 3yos, the only race on the card at that distance, with exactly one horse in it that we had hard figures for (Frank Conversation, who we gave 3/4 point off his synth/grass top, on dirt). My opinion on Lani in the Derby (aside from all the equine histrionics) was that he was slow, and off a big top. If you make that race 3/4 faster he\'s a little less slow, and off an even bigger top. He did go forward a couple of points in the Derby.
By the way, the question is not whether the Dubai figure is right. The question is whether his previous one is right, whether all us figure makers have been undervaluing the Japanese form by a point or two.
The Wood, FG, etc. One of the problems with discussions with the Raggies (and some here) is that unlike many others here, they\'ve never made figures, haven\'t followed the discussions here, or looked closely at the days we post and the RBR. They seem to think we scratch our chins, and go hmmm... I think I\'ll give this race a 5. No, a 7. No, I like 5 better. So instead of asking questions over there or getting involved in any serious discussion of how the figures were arrived at (by anybody), they just call people names.
The way FG does things, the big days are stacked with dirt route stakes. That, combined with how solid the 3yos were, made it a breeze to do those races. And nothing those horses did in the Derby in any way casts doubt on that. We said going in that Gun Runner \"is one of the leading candidates in the field for a new top\". He ran one. And it got him to about the same figure that the 7th and 9th finishers ran-- the difference is he saved ground, and so won a 3 horse photo for third, running the fifth best figure in the race, roughly tied with 3 others.
Mo Tom roughly paired his top, Tom\'s Ready went back. The FG figures are dead on.
Of the three Wood horses that ran in the Derby, two we didn\'t like, and they ran much worse than any figure anyone gave them for the Wood. Outwork did run worse than we thought he would... as did Mor Spirit, who was not out of the Wood. But here\'s the thing-- we put everything out there for everyone to see in the RBR, post sheets after the big days so everyone can look, and answer all questions-- there have been hundreds of posts and questions concerning figure making and individual figures over the years. Every once in a while Friedman will post a race after the fact to show what a great bet there was, meaning they have the ability to do what we do. So why don\'t you ask them to post the Wood, with the figures they ran that day. I would be willing to bet not a single Raggie who handicapped that race said, you know what, I think EVERY horse will go back today at the same time. 3yos, in a GI, they\'ll all go back. So see if you can get them to post the race, like we do, and to explain how they got to those figures. I think you\'ll find his answer illuminating-- if you can get one.
I by no means have any idea what formula you use to come up with your figures.
I do have faith in them though as I do purchase your product.
My question or thought is this.
Coming in to the Derby Nyquist ran the fastest 7f and the fastest 9f races but yet received a 2 and a 3 and was considered slow.
I understand ground loss,weight difference as well as track variance which was tough this year considering half of the 100 pt preps were run on the slop.
But when I compare Exagger trip and Nyquist trip In there final preps Ex received the lower number even though they ran very comparable in ground loss and weight.
Coming out of the Derby Nyquist ran a faster time then AP yet went 3W coming for home as AP was 7W so I can see the variance their.
I have no idea what number Nyquist received but from reading a couple of posts around a 0 to a -1/2.
Why so much slower than AP who received a -3?
Thank you
John
The answer to I think all of that is that different tracks are not the same speed, and the same track can be different speeds on different days, and even on the same day. Check out \"Changing Track Speeds\" in the Archive section
I feel like we\'re not in Kansas anymore.
I\'m really in a non posting mood, still pretty pissed off about the Oaks/Derby days and needed a re supply of vodka.
We all know we get a few of the loonie tunes out during triple crown season and I\'m sure many question my mental health several times a year!
I kind of have to jump into the deep end of the pool on this string.I used rags back in the 80\'s. I had a NY friend that I got acquainted with during the Spa and he introduced me to the sheets in 85 or 86. I used to wait with him in the car at the Spa City Diner for the Trailways bus to come up around 1100 with the sheets from the city. I did ok with the product, I never heard of Jerry Brown or T-graph at the time. In the late winter/spring of 87 I met a couple of rags chart guys as they tried to make some sort of figures at the Sportsmans Park bull ring a 5/8 mile track back then in futility. They waited until Arlington opened.
I spent 3 straight days with Julian on his last Spa trip basically with he Laura and myself on the Carolina BBQ deck talking figures history from the Jules Fink Speed Boy\'s to Harry Ragozin putting figures on a graph to the evolvement of Jerry and Thoro-Graph whom Julian has worked for the last 25 years or so. Many of our Cali guys know Julian as he spent several years out there introducing the product. For those that never have met him you are missing one of the pearls of life. He was one of the original handful of rags guys and made his living at the race track betting.
I\'ve been on the rags web site maybe 8-10 times for a few minutes each time, basically there is nothing there. No figure discussion, no questions, nothing explaining why a certain person likes a horse etc... Vito and a few others have wandered over here from time to time to spout out about a lot of nothing. The figure is the figure without question.
How long do you think Miff (who also has an old tie in learning his pace figs from one of the speed boys) or our dear friend Jimbo who many of us miss would have lasted on that site? Those 2 among many others over the last 8 or so years that I have been active here have questioned a lot of figures. Sometimes nicely, sometimes not so nicely. Has anyone ever received an answer to a question on how a figure was derived on brand R\'s site? Does anyone there ever question a figure?
I consider Jerry Brown a friend, we exchange a few emails and personal messages throughout the year and spend 10-12 Spa days together in the back yard and at the weekend seminars. Those that have ever been to either know that I\'m certainly not afraid to question his opinion and or an occasional figure. Sometimes I\'m even right, more times he is and there are times when we are both off the charts. Same thing with TGAB on his weekends and Uncle Bill and I sit in the back yard most days debating everything:)
My point in responding to this string is that T-graph and its owner are accessible, will answer any question with a valid explanation per his point of view. Where do you get that in life anywhere anymore? You get put on hold, you get someone will get back to you or a big FU and you\'re totally ignored.
TGJB is arrogant and he loves a good argument and hates to be wrong. He said it once best, unless your of Jewish or Italian descent and from the north east you can\'t understand it. We love to debate, hate to be wrong and nothing is taken personal as long as the other persons point is valid it can be respected but FU I\'m still right! My ex wife of 26 years never got it, she was from Kentucky and would tell me to stop yelling when I would get a bit animated. For 26 years I explained to her that it was merely Italian self expression and that she would know when and if I was really angry about something.
The bottom line is I\'ve always thought of myself or been considered by many a sharp guy in gambling circles on 2 different sides of the business. I\'ve been playing horses since 1973 and the past 25 or so with some degree of success. I never realized how much I didn\'t know until I got here. You never know who you are discussing a point with on this site. An owner, breeder, trainer, some of the biggest punters in the country are here.
The bottom line is its a mostly open forum for handicapping, figure making, bet structuring etc... Where you can can get an answer from the owner of the site and if you think you have valid argument?
Bring your F\'in A GAME,
Frank D.
Arrogant? Moi?
Great post. And we know how long Pdub would last on their site, it was measured in minutes.
You can\'t break through to a fundamentalist. With them it\'s about faith, not reason. The key to doing well in a debate is to make sure you have a defensible position, think it through and have your ducks in a row BEFORE you stick your neck out. Winging it doesn\'t work out well (except evidently in Republican debates).
By the way, \"when I\'m mad you\'ll know it\" is close to verbatim TGJB.
Nice story. Well written and believable. Thanks. The last line\'s what your ex was trying to get at about yelling.
They all complain about the yelling but it\'s never about WHY you\'re yelling. Everything will be great if you just stop yelling. Shoot me.
Another New Yorker.
Obviously the coming race or coming figure...is the only number that counts. But knowing where they have been is the cornerstone to projecting where they will go.
In that regard, your site has been, is and continues to be the gold standard for laying that keystone.
Opinions can be volatile. People can get their pride up and loyalties can defy logic, but the fact remains that your information is there after the race for anyone to see and that fact speaks volumes as to the issues of credibility and integrity.
But...even a blind squirrel stumbles across an acorn every now and then!
The discussion needs to be framed in methodology, not isolated outcome, no matter how significant the race. Given that this is not an exact science, the predictive ability does not come with a money back guarantee. A number is reached through application of a methodology, and to the extent that anything can be determinative in this arena, it is through a comparison of the factors that compose that methodology. Now, even if one accepts the superiority of one methodology over the other, which I do, it is certainly possible for reasonable minds to differ about the validity of certain numbers within the methodology (see Miff, etc.) It is also possible for someone to say not all numbers are created equal within that methodology, owing to extrinsic factors such as pace (also see Miff, etc.). But, if you\'re going to do an end zone dance for your numbers, you need to do it on methodology superiority, not the results of one race, for which many variables come into play.
That\'s my story, and I\'m sticking to it, unless R. Curtis says otherwise.
Yeah.
But try having a conversation about methodology with a who says I don\'t know anything about making figures, but I know the ones I use are right.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah.
>
> But try having a conversation about methodology
> with a who says I don\'t know anything about making
> figures, but I know the ones I use are right.
Nah, sounds too much like politics, these days.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great post. And we know how long Pdub would last
> on their site, it was measured in minutes.
Geezus, I can\'t stop laughing.
Best thing I\'ve seen all day, not named Steph Curry.
Moose,
Don\'t need to see the derby figs to feel that, for example,Gun Runner may get a slower figure than the 4th and 5th places horses. The figs will not credit/pace adjust his attending a very fast pace and doing way more running overall than the two behind him that will get better figs.
A clear case of ground loss being overweight in reflecting performance.
Mike
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Moose,
>
> Don\'t need to see the derby figs to feel that, for
> example,Gun Runner may get a slower figure than
> the 4th and 5th places horses. The figs will not
> credit/pace adjust his attending a very fast pace
> and doing way more running overall than the two
> behind him that will get better figs.
>
> A clear case of ground loss being overweight in
> reflecting performance.
>
> Mike
Understood, Mike, and this was my point that many, including you and I, will put an individual spin on the numbers based on factors that might not be intrinsic to sheet theory. However, in the discussion of numbers vs. numbers vs. numbers, etc., as in \"our numbers can kick your numbers ass\", it is first and foremost a methodology discussion. It\'s somewhat analogous to choosing a medical protocol for treatment. None of them will bat 1.000 in terms of outcomes, but you will choose the one that you feel most comprehensively addresses the issue. You don\'t need to be a doctor to have an opinion about this, but you will pay good money (or quite likely, have much more on the line) to go with the practitioner whose protocol incorporates as much of the prevailing wisdom as possible in order to give you the best shot at a positive outcome. And to carry the analogy back to your point, as a patient you\'d be well advised to personalize your treatment plan with other medical or healing modalities, in addition to what the doctor orders.
Moose,
It\'s all about methodology.Its outside of many years of tracking this stuff that I can accept an adjustment for traveling extra distance but not for running an extremely fast pace splits,when applicable.That defies the basics of racing.
Mike
Ala Oxbow.
Or, the premise is wrong. Both Nyquist and GR were close to the pace, they finished 1-3, and both got new tops. No opinion which is the case.
What \"premise\"? It\'s evident to any close follower that too fast early equals slower late,99% of the time.First half 45+ last half app 51.
The derby pace was rated fastest in twelve years,adjusted for track speed of course.
On speed figs Gun Runner faster than Moyhaymen and SBN after pace adjustment,not that close either.
I believe it was Aesop who first wrote about this phenomenon?
http://www.aesopfables.com/cgi/aesop1.cgi?2&TheHareandtheTortoise
I\'ve always thought all of this is built into the numbers. If a horse runs a 3 and figures to run in the 1 path all the way around (frontrunner) there\'s every chance that horse can beat a horse that loses a ton of ground and can run a 1. If you give the frontrunner extra credit or knock off a point for running a fast pace that\'s another variable that can be gotten wrong. Even if you don\'t have a racing form the TGs have the paths on there to let you see how they ran and got the number.
The premise being that going fast early means you run slower in total (as opposed to for the last part). If that\'s not true it\'s wrong to give them extra credit for going fast.
Unless they\'re running at Mountaineer
Well said as always Frank D!!!