Ask the Experts

I have been a long time user of Thorograph for over two decades.   Over the past few years I have focused on only Graded Stakes races on the turf as they seem to be more consistent and easier to predict.

On Sunday at Woodbine in the Grade I Pattison Canadian International Stakes Bullards Alley won by 10 3/4 lengths and paid $87.90 to win.   I could see (a small stretch) that Bullards Alley could win the race given the numbers he had in previous races, but to win over this field by over 10 lenghts is a complete joke.

What is happening to this game?   It seems to be quickly becoming a game of who can cheat the most and not get caught....

Thoughts?

This comment is idiotic on so many levels. You should do some research, have some evidence before you disparage someone. I would delete this before someone finds out about your life accomplishments and publicly calls you out on them. Cheating is not the answer to everytime you can\'t figure out a race.

All 10 horses in the race had run career best of 1 to a 4 on Thorograph numbers (within 3 lengths).   Bullards Alley had a prior best of a 3 1/2.   You are going to tell me that suddenly Bullards Alley is 10 lengths better then the other 9 horses.

Just doesn\'t add up to me.

Let me rephrase the question.  With 10 older turf horses, all of which had at least 13 previous starts with a top of within 3 lengths and last race numbers of 3 3/4 lengths of each other, how does a horse with 34 previous starts win a Grade I race by over 10 lengths?

Oscar Nominated:  top 2 3/4, last race 3
Flamboyant:  top 2, last race 4
Enterprising:  top 4, last race 6 1/4
Idaho:  top 1 3/4, last race 2 1/2
Johnny Bear:  top 3, last race 3
Postulation:  top 4, last race 4
Bullards Alley:  top 3 1/2, last race 4
Messi:  top 1 1/4, last race 2 1/2
Erupt:  top 1, last race 3 1/4
Chemical Charge:  top 3 1/4, last race 3 1/4

Your first problem is 3 lengths does not equal 3 points at that distance.

helmetcity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let me rephrase the question.  With 10 older turf
> horses, all of which had at least 13 previous
> starts with a top of within 3 lengths and last
> race numbers of 3 3/4 lengths of each other, how
> does a horse with 34 previous starts win a Grade I
> race by over 10 lengths?
>
> Oscar Nominated:  top 2 3/4, last race 3
> Flamboyant:  top 2, last race 4
> Enterprising:  top 4, last race 6 1/4
> Idaho:  top 1 3/4, last race 2 1/2
> Johnny Bear:  top 3, last race 3
> Postulation:  top 4, last race 4
> Bullards Alley:  top 3 1/2, last race 4
> Messi:  top 1 1/4, last race 2 1/2
> Erupt:  top 1, last race 3 1/4
> Chemical Charge:  top 3 1/4, last race 3 1/4

It seems to me that every once and a while a race will breakdown where one horse runs away from the rest of them.  There was once a season at Keeneland where this was happening all the time, and there was consternation on this board about how to handle so many illogical run away margins.  

Also in the Belmont Stakes large margins seem to happen more than they should -- Conquistador Cielo, Risen Star, Bet Twice, Go and Go, Point Given -- are examples.

While the 10 lengths may seem dramatic, from the speed figure perspective, the distance of the race needs to be taken into consideration.  For example, I think (but am happy to be corrected) that 10 lengths in a 12 furlong race is equivalent to 5 lengths in a 6 furlong race.  Would a person get so worked up by a horse winning what appears to be an evenly matched 6 furlong race by 5 lengths?

Also, the proprietor, when asked here about cheating allegations usually responds by saying that the relevant thing to look at is the horses\' sheets from the whole barn.  Just having a lot of horses winning or winning one race by a big margin is hard to draw conclusions from, but if you look at the sheets and every horse is consistently making unprecedented new jump up tops, then that is the thing to look for.

If the sheet of the 2yo sister of this trainer\'s G2 winner from last week can be trusted, that G2 winner merely paired up his prior figure in winning the G2.

SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> helmetcity Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Let me rephrase the question.  With 10 older
> turf
> > horses, all of which had at least 13 previous
> > starts with a top of within 3 lengths and last
> > race numbers of 3 3/4 lengths of each other,
> how
> > does a horse with 34 previous starts win a Grade
> I
> > race by over 10 lengths?
> >
> > Oscar Nominated:  top 2 3/4, last race 3
> > Flamboyant:  top 2, last race 4
> > Enterprising:  top 4, last race 6 1/4
> > Idaho:  top 1 3/4, last race 2 1/2
> > Johnny Bear:  top 3, last race 3
> > Postulation:  top 4, last race 4
> > Bullards Alley:  top 3 1/2, last race 4
> > Messi:  top 1 1/4, last race 2 1/2
> > Erupt:  top 1, last race 3 1/4
> > Chemical Charge:  top 3 1/4, last race 3 1/4
>
> It seems to me that every once and a while a race
> will breakdown where one horse runs away from the
> rest of them.  There was once a season at
> Keeneland where this was happening all the time,
> and there was consternation on this board about
> how to handle so many illogical run away margins.
>
>
> Also in the Belmont Stakes large margins seem to
> happen more than they should -- Conquistador
> Cielo, Risen Star, Bet Twice, Go and Go, Point
> Given -- are examples.
>
> While the 10 lengths may seem dramatic, from the
> speed figure perspective, the distance of the race
> needs to be taken into consideration.  For
> example, I think (but am happy to be corrected)
> that 10 lengths in a 12 furlong race is equivalent
> to 5 lengths in a 6 furlong race.  Would a person
> get so worked up by a horse winning what appears
> to be an evenly matched 6 furlong race by 5
> lengths?
>
> Also, the proprietor, when asked here about
> cheating allegations usually responds by saying
> that the relevant thing to look at is the horses\'
> sheets from the whole barn.  Just having a lot of
> horses winning or winning one race by a big margin
> is hard to draw conclusions from, but if you look
> at the sheets and every horse is consistently
> making unprecedented new jump up tops, then that
> is the thing to look for.
>
> If the sheet of the 2yo sister of this trainer\'s
> G2 winner from last week can be trusted, that G2
> winner merely paired up his prior figure in
> winning the G2.


On my point about a race every once in a while breaking down like this -- I would also note that the Woodbine surface was supposed to be very wet and there was also a strong wind, so the race was run under trying conditions that do not normally apply...it seems to me that in conditions like that, I feel like I see run away margins more than one would expect and the reason can be the trying conditions are likely to appeal to a small amount of horses, but turn off the much larger group.

Also, I would say that math needs to apply here.  if you always race evenly matched horses....even though they are evenly matched, every once in a while one of the horses will thrash them.  It is enough monkeys and enough typewriters.  The sample size you are using is a sample size of one and an outcome like that is supposed to happen occasionally anyway.

I was on a similar page a couple of years back, 2013 to be exact. Mike Maker took an apparently ouchy horse who had been running (when he did) in allowance company. Off a layoff of months, he was entered in the Elkhorn Stakes a Grade 2 @ Keeneland also a turf race @ 1+1/2 miles.

The horse was owned by the Ramseys who were playing musical trainers at the time or the trainers were abandoning the owner. So Maker put Dark Cove over for a eye popping win. TGJB was also somewhat incredulous of the performance. Mr. Maker earned position on accu track radar and immediately became the target of scrutiny.

Many who knew MM personally came to his defense and vouched for both his character and training methods. Mr. Maker rode a hot streak for a month or two could have just been the Keeneland meet and the subject faded from the spotlight. I believe Mr. Maker still does a lot of business with the Ramseys.

Dark Cove was a six year old. He ran three more times winning two stakes races @ 1+1/2 miles before running 4th to a stablemate as the 2/1 favorite @ 1+1/16 (not his favorite distance) to close out his career. He set the AP course record of 2:27.39 for the mile and one half distance during his streak.

IMO, It is naive to think an industry doesn\'t have dishonest players, but not all VW employees are criminals any more than Wells Fargo, Enron, etc.

It is curious why we find it so hard to believe a mature horse which appears to be in good form can jump way up. Sure it is uncommon but impossible? It is also interesting to note how slow the race was. 2:34 :26 and nearly :53 for early pace fractions.

The story here might be the ride of jockey Da Silva and of course the proven stamina of the winner.

Lock em up?  Not yet please. as for trolling, best used in fishing.

Thoughts? What’s happening to this game?

The one who’s “idiotic” here is Leviathan. Please don’t give us this “Ooooh… where’s your proof” malarkey! Ugh. You haven’t a clue! YOU do research! Go off and look at all sheets from this trainer. YOU do the work and report back to us! I guarantee you’ll see similar explosive forward moves. I hate those that diss horseplayers like this, concluding “Oohhh, you’re just a bad gambler that couldn’t figure things out!” No! YOU can’t figure it out!

In the evolution of most horseplayers, we come to the sad realization that pharmacology drives this game. Veterinary injections provoke how a horse runs. And I suspect that’s what’s happened here. THAT HORSE WAS INJECTED WITH SOMETHING STRONG in the void before his last race! Is the answer in the vet bills? Can we examine them, please? Hahaha, I have friends with horses in the barns of certain power trainers. They tell me you’ll be whacked if you dare to ask veterinary questions.

I suspect the trainer of the Woodbine long shot winner is a hard working honest human being that cares about his animals yadda yadda yadda and I suspect there’s nothing intentionally devious going on in his barn. Many nice stories are being written about him now in the racing press. Fine. However, if you examine all the sheets from this barn over the years, I’m sure you’ll see many preposterous, head-scratching STUNNING ZOOM-FORWARD MOVES! Anti-theory. Ridiculous moves! I wish I had the ThoroGraph data base at my finger tips to show you with nice red arrows showing the head-scratchers. Only the naive accept these forward moves as “development.” Wrong! It’s “anti-theory.” Doesn’t mean the trainer’s a bad guy that doesn’t go to church. Doesn’t mean he doesn’t stand for the anthem. IT’S THE VET, STUPID! The performance in question was provoked by an aggressive vet. [I played Oaklawn almost every single day this/last year. That trainer’s horses reacted a certain “blah” way in Arkansas. The trainer was a toss - bet against in Arkansas. But at other venues, did his horses react differently?

Last week, someone commented on the same trainer’s BUCCHERO, who upset the Woodford Stakes at 26-1. What figure did BUCCHERO get there? We\'ll see when we get the BC sheets. I remember the trainer had an impressive horse named TAPTOWNE at the Meadowlands. five years ago. Again, if you examine a broad sampling from this trainer over the years, you will find similar eye-poppers.

What kills me is… ARROGATE wins the Travers going from a 4 to a -4 in an instant and nobody doubts the performance! Are people really that stupid?

JohnTChance Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thoughts? What’s happening to this game?
>
> The one who’s “idiotic” here is Leviathan.
> Please don’t give us this “Ooooh… where’s
> your proof” malarkey! Ugh. You haven’t a clue!
> YOU do research! Go off and look at all sheets
> from this trainer. YOU do the work and report back
> to us! I guarantee you’ll see similar explosive
> forward moves. I hate those that diss horseplayers
> like this, concluding “Oohhh, you’re just a
> bad gambler that couldn’t figure things out!”
> No! YOU can’t figure it out!
>
> In the evolution of most horseplayers, we come to
> the sad realization that pharmacology drives this
> game. Veterinary injections provoke how a horse
> runs. And I suspect that’s what’s happened
> here. THAT HORSE WAS INJECTED WITH SOMETHING
> STRONG in the void before his last race! Is the
> answer in the vet bills? Can we examine them,
> please? Hahaha, I have friends with horses in the
> barns of certain power trainers. They tell me
> you’ll be whacked if you dare to ask veterinary
> questions.
>
> I suspect the trainer of the Woodbine long shot
> winner is a hard working honest human being that
> cares about his animals yadda yadda yadda and I
> suspect there’s nothing intentionally devious
> going on in his barn. Many nice stories are being
> written about him now in the racing press. Fine.
> However, if you examine all the sheets from this
> barn over the years, I’m sure you’ll see many
> preposterous, head-scratching STUNNING
> ZOOM-FORWARD MOVES! Anti-theory. Ridiculous moves!
> I wish I had the ThoroGraph data base at my finger
> tips to show you with nice red arrows showing the
> head-scratchers. Only the naive accept these
> forward moves as “development.” Wrong! It’s
> “anti-theory.” Doesn’t mean the trainer’s
> a bad guy that doesn’t go to church. Doesn’t
> mean he doesn’t stand for the anthem. IT’S THE
> VET, STUPID! The performance in question was
> provoked by an aggressive vet. [I played Oaklawn
> almost every single day this/last year. That
> trainer’s horses reacted a certain “blah”
> way in Arkansas. The trainer was a toss - bet
> against in Arkansas. But at other venues, did his
> horses react differently?
>
> Last week, someone commented on the same
> trainer’s BUCCHERO, who upset the Woodford
> Stakes at 26-1. What figure did BUCCHERO get
> there? We\'ll see when we get the BC sheets. I
> remember the trainer had an impressive horse named
> TAPTOWNE at the Meadowlands. five years ago.
> Again, if you examine a broad sampling from this
> trainer over the years, you will find similar
> eye-poppers.
>
> What kills me is… ARROGATE wins the Travers
> going from a 4 to a -4 in an instant and nobody
> doubts the performance! Are people really that
> stupid?

According to the sheet of Bucchero\'s 2yo sister (who ran at Laurel on Saturday), it would appear Bucchero paired up his prior race figure in winning the Woodford. How does that sit with your comments here? For what it is worth, that prior figure, although a smidgen new top, was not an outlier.

Also, I bought the sheets for tomorrow\'s 3rd at Keeneland where Dark Arden is running in a 6 horse field. The last 90 days top% figure of this trainer is consistent with two other trainers in the race (Albert Stall and William Fires) and another trainer in the race (D. Wayne Lukas) is not that far off of the top group of 3.  That is 67% of the trainers in the race sporting similar stats on new tops in the last 90 days.

I hope I have not revealed too much proprietary information here (and apologize if I did), but it doesn\'t take much effort to find information to contradict your flaying of somebody here.

I think Leviathan\'s point (among others) is that just because one race figures to be a closely run race and one of the horses blows away the field -- that is not a fair basis to besmirch a person\'s reputation.  Enough monkeys and enough typewriters will produce Shakespeare. That doesn\'t mean the monkey that typed Shakespeare cheated -- it means that math means something.

Given the strong reaction to the post and the fact he registered on the board today so he could respond, I\'d be willing to bet he\'s closely connected to the trainer, if not the man himself.

I\'m a long time sheet user and successful contest player. I am not the trainer but most likely more connected to the industry then most on here.

Here is the deal. Why do you guys like horseracing? Have the numbers and analysis so drained you of the ability to enjoy horseracing for the athletes and the connections that the slight deviation from the analysis you have concocted makes you immediately cry foul?


What was your reaction when the US hockey team beat Russia? I\'m assuming none of you have watched Miracle on Ice because, god dammit the numbers just did not add up.

I am the first to call out cheaters as they have DIRECTLY impacted me far more than a win bet. However, ALL OF YOU have zero compelling evidence to indicate that Tim Glyshaw is a cheater. The first comment was idiotic and those that backed it up show their true colors. If you no longer can enjoy the true joys of horse racing, the hair on the back of your neck standing up when Bullards Alley pulled away from the field, you are truly wasting your time with horse racing.

I use TG on big days. BC, Ky Derby, Belmont Day, etc..

For my daily use, which is extremely rare these days, I use a product that I do pretty well with.

Bullard\'s Alley and the aforementioned Bucchero were very logical winners. Bullard\'s Alley was a horse I would have played with confidence if I had chosen to play on Sunday, per my data.

I spent it instead watching the Raiders lose. Which is fine, I bet the Chargers.

Just because something doesn\'t make sense to you, doesn\'t mean it doersn\'t make sense.

Does that make sense?

JB, I need that seminar.

The race was run relatively slowly.  I am guessing it is going to get a slow pace designation as it is.  My question is the following -- we already know that 10 lengths at 12 furlongs is different than 10 lengths at 6 furlongs.  But here is my question -- is 10 lengths the same amount of points at 1.5 miles run in 2:25 as it is in 1.5 miles run at 2:35?  If a race is run relatively slowly.....do the lengths get less valuable than they would be if the race is run swiftly?  Does this question even make any sense?

Bet Twice wrote:  \"Given the strong reaction to the post and the fact he registered on the board today so he could respond, I\'d be willing to bet he\'s closely connected to the trainer, if not the man himself.\"

While I can\'t say it is set in concrete, most likely his identity is a co-owner of both Bucchero and Bullard\'s Alley, who also won the 14th annual Del Mar Handicapping Challenge this past summer.

But I have \"zero compelling evidence to indicate\" that it is him.  :-)

Best Brisnet turf speed rating in the last 12 years (http://www.brisnet.com/content/2017/10/bullards-alleys-canadian-international-earns-120-speed-rating/)

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjavtG0mPnWAhVlxoMKHUBzBpIQFggmMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.drf.com%2Fnews%2Fglyshaw-en-route-breeders-cup-was-not-far-abyss&usg=AOvVaw0C8auiSRcd35EkjsTeiVlY


Interesting read. Trainer Glyshaw was \"at the edge of the abyss\" after his barn
was quarantined for nearly two months at FG.

Bullard\'s Alley Beyer # (114) was the highest recorded on turf in NA this year.

Trainer Glyshaw says BA loves a soft turf, giving him what chance on what will
likely be a rock hard Del Mar surface?

As I shared with a friend of mine yesterday \'bee, the article states that the trainer said he wasn\'t caught up paying his vendors until two months ago.  How would you feel if you were an owner for that trainer?  YIKES.......would be my response especially if my payments to him for my bills were current.

This discussion was in the midst of a group text deciphering if TG (the trainer) had a new vet or if enhanced testing helped an honest trainer.  I asked the question if he had a new vet to kick off the discussion.  But that is crazy talk to try to explain how a trainer wins 3 races at $35 mutuels or more in a 14 day period including a G1 and a G2.  It is much more exciting to just cheer home every horse that wins every race because they all run chills down your neck when they turn for home............

This brings to mind another discussion which has been heard here and elsewhere...
whether large margins of victory sometimes distort performance figures.

\"Phil Libin had made the decision to lay off all of his employees and shut down Evernote in 2008. Checking his email one last time at 3 a.m. before going to bed, Libin found an email from a man in Sweden who loved the product and offered to invest. A wire transfer for $500,000 helped the company avoid a complete shut down and gain enough traction for it to take off. Evernote is now valued at more than $1 billion.\"

The thorough analysis of Tim Glyshaw\'s life on this board,  with zero information, should make each of you that has questioned it proud. I\'m glad to hear that those of you who question every part of this man\'s success have gone through life with zero setbacks and every life success was logically explained through data.

To others who recognize hard work and doing the right thing day in and day out and even being honest about your failures often can lead to the greatest successes, I wish you good fortune and success in your handicapping.

Short answer is yes.

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Short answer is yes.


Apologies.  My question (if you can call it that) was ridiculously convoluted.  Is your yes, a yes -- a point represents the same amount of margin at the same distance regardless of how fast or slow the race is run OR is that yes, a yes, a point is different margins at the same distances depending on whether the race is faster or slower.

Again, apologies for the inarticulateness here.

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This brings to mind another discussion which has
> been heard here and elsewhere...
> whether large margins of victory sometimes distort
> performance figures.


Maybe this is what you already meant, but that is also true outside of horseracing.  Just look at football.  We have a line that is supposed to represent the over/under of the expected margin of victory by the better team.  However, in football, blow out wins sometimes happen.  If the spread was 14 points, but the team won by 35 points, does that mean the spread was bad or somebody cheated?  It seems to me that the 14 points is a shorthand for many different possibilities.  It would seem unreasonable to say that a 35 point margin is reason for outrage if the spread was only 14 points.  When people make football power rankings, they wrestle with the same issue.

Additionally, in the same vein as RichieBee\'s point, there seems to be at various times and places equine racing surfaces that yield larger separation between horses than one normally sees.  It is a phenomenon.....but how to fold that phenomenon into other measurements is a conundrum.  

Personally, I think the answer is that speed figures give you one view of the picture.  You cannot put blinders on and only look at the speed figures. One needs to take into consideration the context a figure was earned in as well as the context the horse will be racing on the new day.  Apologies if this is blaspheme here, but it also brings to mind designations that go with a figure and how important they are in considering a figure.  

One thing I remember from my days using Ragozin is that they used to have a wind designation (g and G, if I recall correctly).  It seems to me that some sort of designation to state if the day was a windy day could be helpful.  And, while I am at it -- how about designations like XC and XH for extreme cold and extreme heat?

Pace does not affect the value of a length at a given distance, but when a race is ran at slow pace one tend to rely more on projection which could have an effect on that relationship after all. This is how I do it anyway.

Point is the same for the distance regardless of time (4 points for 10 lengths). If you look at even ten seconds as a percentage of 2 1/2 minutes you\'ll see the difference would be relatively small regardless.

A race with an unusually slow pace will overwhelmingly favor the horse with the fastest top speed.

Often so, but ground loss is the key \"disturbance\" in these cases when making performance figures.

As a figure maker it\'s an almost unsolvable issue. As a handicapper it\'s not.

P-dub,

I totally agree. Bullards Alley actually had the top speed figure in the field by 3 points on the wagering app that I use, along with a successful Woodbine jock in Da Silva riding....and was sitting at 40/1 on the tote. I\'ll go ahead and red board because I keyed Bullard in a tiny exacta with the field and cashed (seemed worth it considering the odds). You\'re right though, it makes sense to some, and to some it makes no sense. Only 2 weeks from BC! Can\'t wait for the seminar!

Airnate012 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-dub,
>
> I totally agree. Bullards Alley actually had the
> top speed figure in the field by 3 points on the
> wagering app that I use, along with a successful
> Woodbine jock in Da Silva riding....and was
> sitting at 40/1 on the tote. I\'ll go ahead and red
> board because I keyed Bullard in a tiny exacta
> with the field and cashed (seemed worth it
> considering the odds). You\'re right though, it
> makes sense to some, and to some it makes no
> sense. Only 2 weeks from BC! Can\'t wait for the
> seminar!

The original complaining poster even said that it was not a stretch to see Bullard\'s Alley winning.  The objection was to the 10 lengths part.  The original poster basically said all the horses were in a tight range.

All I would say is that there are times you pick the wrong horse and there are times your general analysis is wrong.  I have had it happen that I thought a race was evenly matched and one horse wins by 5 and second is 5 ahead of third.  I never would have expected 10 lengths to be the margin between 1st and 3rd, but stuff like that happens.  As they say, that is why they bother running the races.

Sek, clearly you meant this as a tongue in cheek joke? bbb

sekrah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A race with an unusually slow pace will
> overwhelmingly favor the horse with the fastest
> top speed.


pardon my ignorance, but when you say fastest top speed -- are you referring to as measured by final time performance figure or are you referring to fastest fractions like may be reflected in the race shapes product or other form of intermediate time pace figure?  Put another way -- top speed can be either over the whole distance or highest attained rate of speed in the course of the race.

Top rate of speed. If two animals have barely used any energy in the first half of a race, the one who possesses the top rate of speed holds a decisive edge.

I\'ll take a Sprint champion over a BC Classic winner at 1 1/4 if the first 6f is a crawl.

sekrah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Top rate of speed. If two animals have barely used
> any energy in the first half of a race, the one
> who possesses the top rate of speed holds a
> decisive edge.
>
> I\'ll take a Sprint champion over a BC Classic
> winner at 1 1/4 if the first 6f is a crawl.


This is actually very interesting....I take it to mean that if you are expecting the race to be slow pace.....you should put much more weight into the race shapes than into the final figures.  Only issue is if horses have closing speed that can rival opening fraction speed, you need to make sure to take that into consideration. I like this -- never considered it before, but it is a good new way to look at those races.  Thanks

.

JMO and I\'ve said this before... TG speed figs are the best speed figs on the market, but one is not maximizing their potential if they don\'t know 1) The race shapes that these figures were run in and 2) Today\'s likely race shape.  The speed figs are the best, but the 1/4 mile time \"Race Shapes\" that come with TG are not as useful as some of the other products that are out there in the market.

Pete - can you clarify this a bit?  I understand the ground loaded school of thought but what are you saying relative to those on the inside?  Your view is that they can be understated (the horses performance was better than the number indicates) or the opposite?

.