Both Gulfstream and Santa Anita for last Saturday were very interesting days to do, with moisture issues having both tracks changing speed during the day, and pace issues affecting the times of some of the grass races. Lots of opportunity to get some figures wrong here-- Beyer definitely got the relationship between some races wrong, and given Ragozin\'s dogmatic approach he almost certainly will do the days \"differently\".
This is one time Beyer does not have California too fast.
TGJB,
>This is one time Beyer does not have California too fast.<
LOL!
Yes, he has this batch of stakes horses running slower than crippled goats relative to what is normal for top horses. He usually has the best CA horses running like the overweight mules they are. :-)
Post Edited (03-09-05 12:57)
Look, you have to stop with the par stuff. The only one who cares about it is you-- what the rest of us care about is how the horses stack up against each other, and against their earlier figures.
As a guy who spends all his time doing this stuff at a very high level, who carefully watches the relation of figures at circuits, and who buys horses for clients based on their being worth more at another circuit, I know what I\'m doing. And I\'m not the only pro who has noticed about his California figures. That doesn\'t mean all of them, all the time-- but in general they come up too fast RELATIVE TO WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED.
Not this time. And from what you already posted, I assume you agree he got the relationship between the Strub and the Big Cap wrong.
I\'m not a big Kalifornia wagerer, but to my eye Santa Anita is playing quite differently of late than it does at other times. I\'m assumming its related to all the rain they had. JoeB. added another track related insight that may have merit. I\'ll grant the Kali horses seem to be a bit light on figs and they very well may be, but despite Papi Chullo\'s Hallandale race I still think that for the most part they are going to hold their own when the jurisdictions merge, distance issues excepted. With each win I\'m a bit more impressed with DeClan\'s but I still think that currently he\'s only fourth or fifth best.
Hallandale was interesting Saturday. I did sense the track changed on the last three dirt races. (I think it may have gotten faster) Still, I\'d be very hesitant to say Foggy didn\'t run an exceptional race. He\'s starting to get my respect. The FOY lacked depth. It could be proof that the Kalifornia\'s are lengths slower, but I can\'t reach that conclusion. Papi did not run his race. I know TFigs had him significantly slower and he may be, but the ship and jockey change didn\'t fill me with optimism we\'d see his best.
I\'ll stop budding in when you state what the problem is accurately. Simply state that you believe that Beyer has a relationship problem between some tracks that is tending to make CA horses look better than they are relative to horses at track \"X\". The problem is not CA though (except for some specific races from time to time). Take my word for it. I would not question your figure scale, but I\'ve been working with Beyers since the 70s and there is a zero percent chance that CA is too fast.
The reason this is important is that horseman and handicappers judge the relative merits of horses and crops vs. how fast the horses run relative to average or past crops.
If you lower the CA Beyer figures, you unfairly turn a bunch of mules into goats.
If you tell me you are selling a horse than ran a +1, I need to know both the price and caliber of horse so I know if that +1 is equal, faster or slower than normal compared to the price I am paying.
Post Edited (03-09-05 14:15)
One of the problems at SA this year is that the track they start the races with (usually fast and sealed for the workouts) changes dramatically when they send the tractors out to dig it up midway through the day.
One of the clockers told me that Steve Wood will open up the track after a couple of hours of sunshine thinking that the inside will have dried out...but that\'s not been the case ever since all that water got into the base.
It used to be hard enough to figure out the track on a daily basis...now it\'s almost hourly.
At Gulfstream, they supposedly sent out the water trucks repeatedly during the hour before the Fountain of Youth with enough water to alter the surface from earlier races...I don\'t envy your job in figuring out these races!
By the way Jerry, that same clocker has been adding 10 points to Beyer\'s figures at SA this meet (based on his own figs), but said Beyer came out OK for Saturday (the clocker had DM at 95) - so maybe Andy corrected his SA database?
>By the way Jerry, that same clocker has been adding 10 points to Beyer\'s figures at SA this meet (based on his own figs), <
So in other words, this guy thinks the Beyer figures for CA are TOO SLOW?
As I said in a prior note, virtually every dirt stake in CA this year has been assigned a Beyer figure that is below average for the class.
CH-- Look. As I have said before, Beyer has several circuits out of whack. Of those, the one that has been out of whack the most in the direction of giving out figures that are too good over the last few years has been Southern California. I ain\'t guessing. He also has Turfway/Ellis too slow, as well as the Delaware Valley, not just relative to California, but the other tracks as well, with maybe one or two exceptions.
>Of those, the one that has been out of whack the most in the direction of giving out figures that are too good over the last few years has been Southern California.<
That certainly isn\'t the case for 2005. I haven\'t researched prior to 2005, but I didn\'t notice anything out of the ordinary among major stakes horses.
I see suspect figures all the time from every figure maker. I think some of that has to do with different views on the impact of pace and how to handle the speed figure.
I don\'t know who makes the Beyer\'s in CA, but perhaps he isn\'t as skilled as some of the other figure guys. I do believe there\'s a good chance the Strub and Sham were a little too fast. However, the Santa Catalina and SA Handicap could be slow a little too.
A fifth either way doesn\'t mean too much to me. I am looking for pace, trip, quality, and most importantly odds differences that I think override the small differences in figures. You know that I don\'t see the figures as being \"perfect reflections\" of performance. I think there\'s lot of things that impact time that can\'t be measured.
Really, if I see 108 - 105 and someone else has those 2 numbers reversed, my oddsline doesn\'t change enough to get me to the window. They are similar horses. I\'m looking to separate them on the trips that contributed to those figures, the trip I expect them to get today, or a big meaningful difference in odds.
Post Edited (03-09-05 15:15)
Looking at the Big Cap, Beyer wise, here is what I see:
Lundy\'s Liability: Same figures, east and west
Borrego: Highest two numbers at OP and LaD
Congrats: Slightly higher figures back east than in SoCal
Saint Liam: The big fig East Coaster gets trounced by the West Coast horses.
Whose figures are too fast again?
By \"whose\" I mean which circuits, not which figure maker.
Post Edited (03-09-05 15:04)
Yep, between that and the pars you guys proved it. I\'ll stop wasting my time doing all the work on these figures.
Sorry to disagree with you. Maybe if you provided some examples. To try to point this out after the Big Cap, when a lower figure horse (Beyer wise) trounced a higher figure horse from the East Coast, doesn\'t make much sense. I know one race doesn\'t mean much, but it is more than you are giving us on the other side of the coin. I\'m willing to listen, but just because you say so doesn\'t make it fact.
I\'m not saying you are not right, but most would give evidence or examples to prove a point, not just make a statement and assume it becomes gospel.
Look at ROTW, where I talked about lots of reasons St. Liam might not fire, look at my post after the Sunshine Millions where I talked about errors in the Beyers from around the country, relative to California, look at my comments on the other string about this.
Relationship to par can reflect either the level of the horses or the efforts of the figure maker (think score and course rating in golf). As I said in an earlier post, the older dirt horses in California stink, and have for a while-- that\'s why we brought out Even The Score, who hadn\'t been able to win any kind of stake in the East and Midwest, and he won two G2s, and was favored in a GI.
It\'s also why second and third line Eastern horses like Supah Blitz and Congrats (basically the same horse as ETS) have been able to do well in graded stakes in California. Take a look at the makeup of that Big Cap field, as I said before-- other than St. Liam, how had those horses done in the East?
Seperate from the cicuit-to-circuit issues, Beyer had the Goodwood and the Strub way too fast, relative to both the San Antonio and Big Cap. And independent of this small sampling, he has had California too fast relative to other circuits for a long time.
TGJB,
>Relationship to par can reflect either the level of the horses or the efforts of the figure maker <
I agree, but the thing you are not acknowledging is that VIRTUALLY EVERY SINGLE STAKES CALIBER RACE in every category including Sweet Catomine has run a dreadful Beyer relative to the Stakes PAR in 2005.
How can you argue that all these figures are inflated \"in general\".
That would mean every stakes caliber dirt category in CA is WAY below average.
It is clear that some of the horses in at least some of the categories are decent and have run similar or better figures outside of CA?
If we lower all these figures across the board then they all become total mules on the Beyer scale!
>It\'s also why second and third line Eastern horses like Supah Blitz and Congrats (basically the same horse as ETS) have been able to do well in graded stakes in California. <
Yes of course Congrats ran better. The eastern horses are better. However, he is running slower Beyers. If the CA Beyers were inflated he would be running better \"and faster\".
There is no evidence that the CA Beyer\'s are inflated \"on average\". There may be a race or day here or there that is inflated. But that is to be expected. There are some races that seem too low here or there too. Beyer has some CA races slower than you do.
Furthermore, since there are other people that make Beyer scale figures, we would notice if the CA Beyer figures were out of whack with those other figure makers. They are not.
You may have extraordinary knowledge about your own scale and the relationships between various circuits.
You may have extraordinary knowledge about certain ciruits where there are inconsistencies between the Beyer figures and your own, where the evidence indicates you are right.
I also understand that you are arguing for the superiority of your product, but I believe you are barking up the wrong tree when you say CA is inflated in general unless you are talking about a specific CA race or day.
I\'m not arguing for the superiority of my own product, although that is in the end what enables me to know what the hell I\'m talking about. And I\'m done with this, other than to say that I suspect that it is the concept of pars that has gotten Beyer off track, any claims otherwise notwithstanding.
Do your homework, and I\'m not talking about pars, any discussion of which involves an unbelievable number of givens (like, your statement that all divisions come up slow, and that they in fact are not so, and that other circuits come up differently, and so on), and WHICH IS NOT RELEVENT. You are stuck in one very narrow way of expressing things, and there are tons of others more direct that don\'t depend on the level of the horses affecting pars, for example. Again, look at Sunshine Millions Day. And, I would note, that following some of these debacles Andy may very well have changed some numbers, or his \"pars\"-- as he should have-- so they may look different now.
This conversation is of little interest to most of those who come here, and don\'t have to deal with the issue at all. Over and out.
TGJB,
One point of clarification only so you understand why I believe the PARS are significant to my point.
When I am referring to the PARS, I am not talking about the PARs for claimers, allowance horses, etc... that could change from year to year or be related to a figure maker\'s lack of skill.
I am talking about the \"NATIONAL\" PARs for stakes horses.
I am talking about the average Beyer figure it takes to win a Grade 1 race for older colts, a Grade 2 race for older colts, stakes for fillies (each stakes class), stakes for 3 YOs at different times of the year (each stakes class), stakes for 2YOs at different times of the year, Breeder\'s Cup and Derby caliber races etc...
At the higher graded levels, horses are shipping from circuit to circuit for the big bucks, so these PARs tend to be reasonably stable on a national level (especially among mature older horse).
From time to time there are regional differences or crop differences, but the average is reasonably stable.
So when I say that all CA stakes races are running below average, that is a clear cut proclamation that al these CA horses are earning slower than average Beyer figures relative to the class, relative to what is typical for CA horses of this class, and what is typical for the national average.
I think many of these horses are below average. So it\'s no big deal. But some of them are not. If I were to universally lower all the CA Beyer\'s by let\'s say 5-6 Beyer points, they would \"ALL\" become such mules on his scale relative to average it would be silly.
beyer tinkered with the variant quite a bit between the 8th and 11th at GP. difference in final fig normally would have been about 11 points, he made it 2. noble causeway is going to get all kinds of hype (maybe deservedly so).
Michael-- the track was getting a lot faster throughout the day, not just late, and SA was getting slower, though changing not nearly as much. You\'ll see some interesting figure relationships in the futures package.
Miff-- we have finally found something we agree about completely. As a guy who bred them, raced them, and advises owners, this game is tough enough without taking away anti-inflammatories. There will indeed be some short fields if they do., and for no good reason-- they\'re throwing the baby out with the bath water.
A friend of mine is meeting with Mandella at the track today to discuss a few of the recent issues, and it will be interesting to see what comes of it. Mandella had an idea about calling Mullins out that would have sold a lot of papers, but in the long run wouldn\'t have solved the problem-- we\'re trying to get him to add his voice in a constructive way.
I wish the DRF would provide the track variant he uses for each race so it would be easy to tell which days/races he has tinkered with and which he has not.
In some cases I think the track changed speed and in other cases I think an extreme pace had an impact on the race (or just specific horses) and depending on his interpretation, I need to adjust certain figures.
There is no easy way to spot check them without knowing all the distance relationships he is using. The best I can do is look at all the routes and/or all the sprints and see if they are at least in sync or tinkered with. That\'s a tremendous amount of extra work. Even an asterisk would be helpful.
beyerguy wrote:
> Looking at the Big Cap, Beyer wise, here is what I see:
>
> Lundy\'s Liability: Same figures, east and west
> Borrego: Highest two numbers at OP and LaD
> Congrats: Slightly higher figures back east than in SoCal
> Saint Liam: The big fig East Coaster gets trounced by the West
> Coast horses.
>
> Whose figures are too fast again?
>
> By \"whose\" I mean which circuits, not which figure maker.
>
Saint Liam had a history of not pairing the \"Superfigs\". What made anyone think that shipping way West and trying real ground with significant weight from the outside was gonna result in a negative 4? I\'ll give Saint Liam credit for his big numbers. I just don\'t understand what makes everyone think distance is irrelevant to pairing fast figures.
I certainly don\'t recall Lundy\'s Liability running in the East. He may not want 10 marks, but he may have run on the heavier part of the track.
ctc,
yea, i agree. stretching from 9f to 10f can have serious effects on some horses. it\'s tough to compare pre big cap 9f figs with the 10f big cap figs. i figured at least half of the field would have a problem with the 10 marks. i think it will take a few more races before we can come to any solid conclusions regarding accuracy of all of the figs involved here. i certainly wouldn\'t question SL\'s fast 9f figs, and lundy just didn\'t have any energy in the last furlong, hard to conclude yet that his previous 9f fig was wrong (especially since congrats ran well).
Post Edited (03-09-05 18:12)
I bet the Saint over the 2nd and 3rd place finishers. I believed....jock said he didn\'t like the surface.
Could the \"drug-factor,\" ie, policing the \"supertrainers\" have anything to do with the decline in performance numbers of the west-coast horses??? If they can\'t use the juice, then perhaps the horses numbers are coming back to reality!
This Might account for St. Liam performance as Dutrow could not work his magic in SoCal