Jerry,
I bought the K-Derby special and was amazed at some of the figures I saw. You mentioned earlier this week on this board, you might post the Ark Derby and/or Blugrass figures here, so I assume you are OK with me discussing them here. If not, delete my post. I will try not to be too specific on quoting the numbers, as you are selling a product to others.
I just don\'t get the figure you gave Bandini. I submit I have never made my own figures, have never studied the process, and have no legitimate grounds to attack anybody\'s figures, and I don\'t want to do that here. I just want to try and understand how you can come up with some of these. When I looked at the charts after the BlueGrass, the track looked a little slow to me that day, but not terribly so. I thought Bandini ran a nice race but my suspicion was that the race fell apart a little bit. Consolidator didn\'t pick up his feet, Sun King looked like he ran back to the Tampa race and High Limit was finished on the turn, hitting the inner rail in the stretch and still holding second. 1:50 on that track on that day, looked pretty average to me, based on my review of the charts. I guess the Beyer boys agreed, giving the horse a 103, one of the slowest Bluegrass races in years. I knew your figure would be a little better because BAndini was wide on both turns, but you have him as fast as SMarty Jones\' fastest race last year!! High Limit pairing up? Didn\'t look like it. Sun King improved off the Tampa Race? Didn\'t look like it.
The Bluegrass was more disturbing to me, but if you look at all of the \"last round\" of preps, the Illinois Derby, Wood, BlueGrass and Arkansas Derby, you have HUGE jump ups for all the winners. Obviously they all ran big races but did all of these horses get 6 + points better at the same time?
Somebody on this board commented a while back that the figures in \"blowout\" races get distorted. I believe it was in criticism of High Limit before the LA Derby. I didn\'t understand or agree with the comment, but I guess I can see that argument now. Jerry, if the \"science\" part of the figure making doesn\'t lead you to what you feel is a logical conclusion, do you assume some kind of variant change to make the figures fit? For example, did you not buy into High Limit regressing, Consolidator regressing and Sun King running back to his Tampa Race, so you gave Bandini a huge figure, so you could \"pair up\" High Limit and make it look more logical? I know you expected big races out of Consolidator and High Limit based on the ROTW, so you were inclined to not give them both X\'s?
Without giving away any trade secrets, can you shed some light on the process? I will be honest, I don\'t feel comfortable with any of the T-Graph figures for these last round of Triple Crown preps, with the possible exception of Bellamy Road, since that race figured to come back with a huge figure. (and it did!)
Thanks,
Jim
When I heard TCE and Lion Heart got Neg. 1\'s last year I was stunned. I discounted it but in reviewing the days I evenually accepted it hesitantly.
A negative 3.3 for Bandini is at first Blush unacceptable for me. I\'ve already done a year to year comparison between 2004 and 2005 for Bluegrass Day. The races were significantly slower on Bluegrass Day 2004 yet TCE ran faster. Another item i\'m convinced existed this year was a tricky outside bias, as well as, the traditional speed bias.
Keeneland is always quirky, theres a history of open margin wins there and of horses coming in off the Bluegrass with very competitive numbers and running up the track in the Derby and disappearing for life. Caveat the Lexington goes the other way.
At this time, I need to review more, but I\'m currently inclined to discount a huge number for Bandini or even a pair for High Limit. Frankels do sometimes bounce. High Limit wants little part of real ground in my opinion.
To summarize, we certainly have 2 big win races on very quirky and questionable surfaces with the Wood and Bluegrass. Two results in the terms of numbers that can be questioned upon their face in some repects. However, even if you discount both of them to Zeds its still quite feasible the Wood and Bluegrass winners could fill out the perfecta. I\'ll have it for the minimum. Pace and Post position is gonna play its role of course. Bandini apparently jumped to about 7.2 points to a new top. I just can\'t currently see anyway to corroborrate that.
Post Edited (04-23-05 12:08)
I agree, using a projection system, that blowout wins make it tough... as fast as smarty jones best race last year, no way.
This certainly means Bandini will be the sheets play and grossly overbet in the derby.
JIM & CtC,
I couldn\'t agree more with your observations on the figs awarded in the Bluegrass.There will be the usual explanations which make make perfect sense to the fig maker.
Racing reality is that Bandini didn\'t come close to Smarty\'s best. Sun King X\'d(never raised a hoof) according to Zito and Prado but both claim a brutal trip contributed to the poor performance.
High Limit did not come close to his previous performance regardless of what any fig says.Three fig makers including Beyer have it the way we saw it also.
Why do you think Bandini will be the sheets play??
Au contraire, I pray he takes alot of $$$ \'cause he\'ll be up the track if you buy the fig.
it appears that Rag and Thorograph agree on this one....
the biggest difference between the two is on Greeley\'s Galaxy...Rag has him much slower...
Jimbo,
I hinted several times right after the Blue Grass that it wasn\'t nearly as bad as some people thought. The 6F call of the race was actually quite fast relative to the final time of the race and the other two routes that day. I believe that the pace impacted the final time for several competitors. Other pace figure makers also have that pace fast.
My thinking is that Bandini ran quite well that day and High Limit more or less ran even better than he had in the Lousiana Derby (which makes perfect sense given his lightly raced career and 2nd race off a layoff pattern). (Of course you know I think he had an easy trip LA Derby day and didn\'t run nearly as well as some people thought).
I\'m not going to get into a complicated anaysis of each horse\'s performance prior to and in the BG, but assuming TG broke that race out, IMHO they are building the effect of pace into the figure for the race. So it is representing the performance \"for some of the horses\" more accurately than a pure speed figure alone (like the Beyer figure which requires that you incorporate subjective opinions about the impact of pace on your own).
I guess we could discuss this endlessly, but I hope you and JB will just let my opinion stand and take it no further. My own opinion of the BG is that it was a very good prep for a few of those horses.
I was hoping that no one would catch that because it might have created some value for me based on the slow final time.
Post Edited (04-23-05 13:33)
CH,
Whatever the reason is that JB gave Bandini the figure he did, I would bet dollars to donuts it is NOT because of your \"pace\" reason. Sorry, but he argued with you on this board for the better part of two weeks about pace. So you really think you convinced him he was wrong about pace and he factored that into the Bluegrass?
Not!
I also dont think that the number they gave had anything to do with the pace, though it was very fast.
why will he take money cause of the sheets? They always do, sheets high fig horses are always hammered.
Jimbo,
I am expressing my own view only.
The final time of the race was not particlularly fast (a Beyer of 103 seems quite reasonable to me), but the performance of several of the horses was better than the final time indicates because the pace was fast. That\'s how I am viewing the race.
What other people are doing with their figures and why is up to them.
Jimbo-- Here are the BG, Ill. Derby, and Ark Derby. I did not break out the BG, the track was within a half point either way of being the same for all 3 routes (which is the only reason why Ragozin got it right), and as you will see only the winner ran a new top, with two horses pairing and the others running well off their tops. This is what I meant about stake races where the winner runs 4 or more points better than anyone else producing some big numbers.
For both the Arkansas Derby and Ill Derby I ADDED at least 3 points compared to all other routes on the day (Haw was complicated, as the track as a whole was changing speed, but if I had done the race with the other routes, GG would have gotten a better figure than BR). I have no idea how Ragozin came up with that slow a figure for GG-- it is way, way wrong. He also has some other problems in his Derby numbers-- I might get to that later.
On the other hand, Beyer blew the BG big time, and it\'s not the first time he has been afraid to give out a big number. Some might recall that he robbed SJ last year when he won the Rebel (neg 3 3/4), and I suspect that is what happened with BR\'s GP win this year.
The number that is in question is AA\'s first start this year, toughest stake figure I have had to do in a long time. I did cut it loose (added, as I said at the time), and I reviewed it a week ago. Still not enough info-- hopefully some more out of the race will run back in the next week, before the final Derby sheets.
http://www.thorograph.com/hold/d2005.pdf
TGJB,
I haven\'t verified it yet, but I don\'t think Beyer broke out the BG. Based on what I have seen so far, I think his figures for that day are consistent with the BG being about a 103 because at least one other figure maker that uses the same scale gave it a 101.
Interesting that you didn\'t break the race out and have it much faster than him.
Post Edited (04-23-05 15:05)
classhandicapper wrote:
> Jimbo,
>
> I hinted several times right after the Blue Grass that it
> wasn\'t nearly as bad as some people thought. The 6F call of the
> race was actually quite fast relative to the final time of the
> race and the other two routes that day.
The problem was there were lightly raced horses in the other races. I called the pace Hot. It was legitmate. They came home slow, but so did Peace Rules two years ago. This race is gonna be grist for debate post Derby and the problem is gonna be explaining away the changing results on bounce and distance. Bandini is probably gonna show nicely in the Derby. He\'s improving and he\'s Pletcher trained. High Limit is gonna be prominent for as long as the mojo and the track takes him. The horses behind Bandini all ran poorly even giving him a Neg 3.3 with the exception of High Limit and Closing Argument. Why should those two have run well in the circumstances? Because they are maturing 3 yr olds?
I think theres other ways to view the Bluegrass. From my perspective its very difficult to give Bandini a negative 3.3 unless you\'re locking in on the previous efforts. On a variant and raw time analysis a fast Bluegrass time does not hold up well in my opinion. If you applied the final times in this years Bluegrass to last years bluegrass you\'d have to give TCE and Lion Heart about a negative 4.3 and I just can\'t accept that projection.
At any rate, my prime play will be to beat BR but i will box Jerry\'s high number earners so I don\'t look a complete fool when they come in.
lol
CtC
Post Edited (04-23-05 15:14)
Re hot pace in the middle of the BG.The first part of the race was average and the last 3/8ths in 40+(even adjusted for the day) was pedestrian.
High limit ran as well as his prior start? Bandini ran as fast as Smartys best fig? Sun King moved forward?
I guess it\'s a late April\'s Fool joke.
Yeah, much better to have every horse but one run way off their top, in a GI for 3yos. Because that happens a lot.
I just took a look, and I actually have the track a lot FASTER than the day before or after.
Look at it this way-- if Bandini wasn\'t in the race, what would it have looked like? Would you really think HL beat the others in that field by 3 lengths while going backward?
they way that closing argument and sun king were laboring the answer is \"yes\".
TGJB wrote:
>
>
> Look at it this way-- if Bandini wasn\'t in the race, what would
> it have looked like? Would you really think HL beat the others
> in that field by 3 lengths while going backward?
>
>
No JB,
Much better not to make assumptions.If every horse ran way off their top, so be it!! It happens. You are absolutely changing your methods from the past 20 yrs which may account for why anything with 4 legs running 3w, 3w runs negative figs.
I absolutely believe Sun King did not move forward(maybe paired because of ground) And really, to suggest that HL paired is not a debate I want to have.
Bandini definitely moved forward but minus 3.3 seems a couple of points too much.
No argument, please, why is it not possible that 3yr grade 1\'s threw a clunker(I note your condesending comment, I\'m as aware as YOU that doesn\'t happen often)
No argument? Not likely.
It has ALWAYS been true that the only way to measure track speed is by how fast the horses run over it. And the question is not whether a GI 3yo ran a clunker-- it\'s whether a GROUP of them did. Those kind of horses run a paired or new top at least half the time at this time in their life-- work out the percentage chance of 6 of 7 not doing so at the same time. When you make those figures 2 or more points off their tops the percentages get prohibitive, and that\'s not even taking into account the other races. Yes, you can cut it loose if there is a reason to do so-- but all logic says otherwise. Big negatives are a distraction, but that race is right.
\"Big negatives are a distraction, but that race is right.\"
TGJB
In your opinion, others differ, big time.
miff,
I view Bandini, High Limit, and Closing Argument as all having running quite well in the BG (especially Bandini). No matter how you get to that view, I am hoping everyone else thinks it was a slow mediocre race. I don\'t like HL in the Derby because of Bellamy Road, but I won\'t have any problem betting Bandini off this race if the price is reasonable.
They came home quite slow and visually weren\'t too impressive, but the middle part of that race was quite fast. After a slow opening quarter, they reached 6F in a quick time. It\'s not surprising to me that they slowed down late.
>In your opinion, others differ, big time.
Miff could you please mention some names so we can look at their qualifications.
So far I have heard one contarian argument. The figures for Bellamy Road and Bandini were too fast and almost the entire fields in both races collapsed and backed up. Afleet Alex may also be incleded in that discussion, not really sure.
Regardless, this means two or three spring 3YO\'s held form or slightly moved forward and the other 12-15 went backwards.
Is that correct? Seems a little odd doesn\'t it.
Class,
No argument on Bandini, a strong performance and nice forward move.
I thought HL had a perfect stalking trip(never hooked or engaged) took over from a stopping SC and immediately got run over by Bandini while beaing in thru the lane and brushing the rail while showing no resistence to Bandini. The pace stalked by HL was NOT that hot to excuse his horrific last 3/8ths.We\'re supposed to be talking about a top 3yr old, trained by Frankel, rested and fast going in.Very common performance IMO,given his trip.
CL clunked up to me.Consolidator and Sun King appeared to never grab the bit the entire race.
The Wood was entirely off form even under the current Tgraph theory the only horse to improve was Bellamy Road. If you hold a contrarian view there its really a matter of how much the others regressed because they certainly regressed.
The other race is a 7 entry race. Toss the last place finisher on bounce. Consolidator obviously was as off as Going Wild (Though I can see some reasons why consolidator may have slipped) Closing Argument was entered on a layoff and foot issue and had some positioning issues. High Limit had to look a superior pace horse in the rump for the first time in his life. Keeneland is notorious for odd results. Even Jerry struggles with wagers there. Sun King had not run an exceptional race at two turns. He\'d been a one turn wonder. What is so hard to accept about those observations?
miff,
I don\'t like High Limit going 10F with a horse like BR in the race (and perhaps a few other quality speeds). I guess I didn\'t think his LA Derby was that great to begin with. So this performance was more or less in line with my expectations for a lightly raced 3YO horse from Frankel.
Post Edited (04-23-05 16:47)
It is a contrarian argument to the contrarian argument. I have heard for two weeks now that Bellamy Road did not run as fast as the Top Figure guys said he did and the entire field collapsed and regressed.
Lots of those were inner dirt types, plausible argument.
Now the Blue Grass, which on paper before the race was run was considered the best prep, we are hearing pretty much the same argument put forth. Bandini moved forward, Closing Argument maybe a little, and all the others collpased.
Herds of threes year olds are collapsing off form, trained by Lukas, Frankel, Zito, Biancone, and Shug as they prep towards the most important race of their lives.
Brown, Beyer and Friedman seem to be in pretty tight agreement (Beyer doesn\'t figure in ground loss in the BG) on these races.
Curious who the others are who disagree big-time and how their credentials stack up against those three. Doesn\'t mean the others are wrong.
\"Brown, Beyer and Friedman seem to be in pretty tight agreement (Beyer doesn\'t figure in ground loss in the BG) on these races\"
Would Beyer\'s 103 for Bandini equal the TG figure if ground loss was added in?
I don\'t think so based on the figures for High Limit and Closing Argument.
Silver wrote
\"Regardless, this means two or three spring 3YO\'s held form or slightly moved forward and the other 12-15 went backwards.\"
What seems more odd to me,is the other side of the coin in that Bellamy Road is the fastest three year old ever(from being nothing as a two year old) and Bandini is as fast as Smarty already.And yes, I think that a number of 3yr olds X\'d in the BG.
I think AA is legit based on giving him a sick excuse in his prior start and given his two year old figs.
To answer specifically on Bandini, Beyer doesn\'t agree, Fig Geeks (razor sharp bettors/fig makers) don\'t agree,Equiform don\'t agree and I don\'t agree (i\'ve only watched 100k+ races in 35-40years and make est figs using my TG sheets after taping and viewing the card.)
Lastly, the Zito barn does NOT think that SK improved in his last start.Your drift is that TG is the only solid source. I know for a fact that it is only one of several solid sources available today.
I will leave that up to others to decide.
Three wide both turns and 122 pounds might turn that 103 into about a 112. Just guessing what is a minus 3 and change, around a 115.
This isn\'t my bag and with respect to others who do their own figs state your opinion when the mutual windows open on Derby Day.
Silver Charm wrote:
> I have
> heard for two weeks now that Bellamy Road did not run as fast
> as the Top Figure guys said he did and the entire field
> collapsed and regressed.
Even under TGraph Survivalist scored a four with some wide I believe. That makes Scrappy a pretty good 5-6. The Wood did collapse it is a question of how much.
> Now the Blue Grass, which on paper before the race was run was
> considered the best prep, we are hearing pretty much the same
> argument put forth. Bandini moved forward, Closing Argument
> maybe a little, and all the others collpased.
I think the argument is similar. Consolidator obviously collapsed. Sun King I\'m less sure of, but he certainly didn\'t break well and get right into it like he would have had to in order to be a factor that day. High Limit was a mess late and there was no one to pick him up because they were staggering as badly behind him.
Does anyone really think High Limit is gonna hit the board in the Derby? You\'re calling this horse a pair off the Bluegrass. Well a pair looks like a good position to move forward. He\'s gonna face a pace issue, but if he was firing a legitimate 1 last, the pace issue is gonna be of little consequence correct? and he should finish as resolutely. Who thinks he hits the top 4 Derby day...seriously?
Haven\'t we established that the extra sixteeth didn\'t impact his figure? Who is gonna worry about another 8th. He was holding them safe right? ( I reserve the right to bet high limit if I conclude post draw he will have the lead)
Post Edited (04-23-05 17:22)
Last year SMARTY JONES was just Smarty Jones when he won the Rebel, with Purge and Holthus\' horse not that far behind him. Remember?
The rest of it I answered already.
Not sure I get what you are saying. SJ had better prior credentials/figs at two and early three than Bandini or Bellamy Road if memory serves me.
What I\'m saying is, it was only the Rebel, he didn\'t win by 17 lengths, and the horses behind him had never won a stake to that point, I believe. I gave him the best number ever run by a 3yo, Beyer gave him about what he gave Bandini, or thereabouts.
For the record-- Beyer had the La Derby too fast, but just for the winner (ground loss). He has this too slow in part for the same reason, and probably in part for the same reason he robbed SJ last year. None of us are making figures based on visual impressions-- we do it based on the figures of the horses. Ragozin gets a lot of them wrong, as I have pointed out often-- but the fact that he and I agree should tell you that a) the track stayed the same speed, and b) it\'s right.
In simplest terms-- you can pull a race out because it\'s clear another variant gives it a MORE logical result. But if you pull this race away from the day, you get LESS likely scenarios-- as I pointed out, the percentage chance of 6 out of 7 3yos in a GI not running back to their previous tops is very small.
All I can say is that I knew Smarty\'s Rebel was hot the instant I saw it. He rated. He went wide and he was moving incredibly late. As Powerful as I\'ve ever seen a horse move late. Granted it was only 8.5 marks.
I did see good late strength in BR. I did not see it in Bandini.
I also thought that Smarty\'s raw time stood out on Rebel Day. I do not feel similarly about Bandini\'s Bluegrass. BR\'s Wood is not a standout on the basis of the 7th race. Nor some of the other races in my opinion. However it certainly stands above the Bluegrass. That said, I like Bandini better.
Its gonna be a very intersting Derby. With Rockport Harbor and Going Wild apparently out its looking like a possible 1985 race. Right now theres two speedy types, unless Spanish Chestnut enters. If I was Tabor I\'d have to run him. I suppose we can expect Frankel to negotiate the pace with Zito for this one now.
last year brown scored big time w/smarty.had the owner of oaklawn not saved with large wager it would have been an even bigger coup for t/graph.
now jerry steps up again in high profile race willing to take his lumps if it doesn\'t pan out.
if your as much a gambler as a handicapper the thought of wagering on information from someone thinking outside the traditional ledge of thought is where your opportunity lies.
needless to say i will cut this guy alot of slack if only for using a seperate [and often superior] set of criteria for his figures.
is it more important to attempt breaking down races analytically or using said information to GET THE CASH?
I think the results of the Lexington yesterday validates the Wood figure.
I tend to agree. When speed figures come out and appear to be a mismatch compared with what most observers saw, that is the exact edge I am looking for when I pay my money for the figures. The more outlandish it seems the happier I get because that is the way you can really get some nice prices.
I know that sometimes I get frustrated if the number does not pan out, but dem is da brakes. On balance, these sort of numbers produce a great deal more profit than they do loss.
Also, I have been watching horseraces carefully since 1976. I believe I have better than average visual skills for a horseplayer. Nevertheless, whenever I trust my visual skills, I am far more let down by them than I ever am by speed figures.
I realize that this sounds like the confessions of a Kool Ade drinker, but
Davidrex said
\"last year brown scored big time w/smarty.had the owner of oaklawn not saved with large wager it would have been an even bigger coup for t/graph\"
Say what, TG dogma guys had SJ sitting on 0 2 X( more pure voodoo) Who nailed what??
The problem is Bandini makes sense to most of those involved in this game. There is little figure wagering edge even if you give full faith and credit to a Neg. 3.1
You have a six length win. Pletcher Training. A FOY 2nd and A Bluegrass 1st. Even with a Zed this is the best horse Pletcher has brought to the Derby. (I\'m not sure what Coin Silver\'s Number is yet).
I\'m convinced however the only way to give Bandini the figure assigned is to do so upon theory and the moveable grid. I\'ve seen far too many odd results at Keeneland to say with certainty the race can be scored as indicated. That said, I do like Bandini now, but its not on the basis of a -3.1
However, if it is a legitimate neg. 3.1 you have a 7 point top on three weeks rest. An interesting dilemma.
To my mind, if Bandini has a weakness it may be in the the closing ability. Its the last 8th in the Derby that the chinks in the armor may make themselves apparent. If he ran a legit -3.1 (and can repeat), you have less to worry about there. If he ran a little less than that it becomes an issue.
The above considerations apply similarly to Bellamy Road. Though I\'m not sure how the results of the Lexington validates the Wood figure.
Post Edited (04-24-05 11:24)
No, Chuckles, SC said the results of the LEXINGTON validated the Wood. I\'m confused.
Nobody wants wet on May 7, and wet at every track is different, but T Pletch has 2 who
loved off going recently -- Flower Alley and Coinsilver.
If Galloping Grocer dominates NYBs in the Stallion Series/ Times Square dash today, do they try to wheel him right back in the Derby in 13 days, 1 hour and 43 minutes?
Post Edited (04-24-05 11:39)
>No, Chuckles, SC said the results of the LEXINGTON validated the Wood. I\'m confused
Confused by Chuckles or me. I\'m confused
Actually, I said Bluegrass, noted my typo and corrected it, even before seeing Richibees post.
But, the issue is, how does the Lexington Result validate the Wood?
I\'ve been perusing TGraphs Wood and Bluegrass numbers for the past several years and they\'ve held up nicely. Especially in 2003 with Peace Rules. However, Peace had established a foundation of 0\'s so going back to them was logical. I did see a figure for Brancusi that was never seen again. TGraph looks to have nailed Harlans Holiday as well and horses like Conagree and Monarchos.
The millineum wind/songandaprayer figures though give me pause and to my mind both Bellamy and Bandini are similarly positioned. I\'m going to refer to them as \"The Killer B\'s\"
I\'m very skeptical about the Killer B\'s. Both earned high figs without a foundation of high figs and without standout races on the card in my opinion, that is troublesome. I\'ll continue my research. In the end I may conclude TGraph has to be deferred to. I\'m not sure where this is goin.
Post Edited (04-24-05 11:56)
What is the Wood/ Lex connection?
Going Wild and Sort it Out.
I suppose Going Wild validated his Wood form. Beyond that, I\'m at a loss.
TGraph was really solid on the Bluegrass. Especially in 99.
The questionable year was the Millineum wind year. Really hard to say they got Brancusi wrong when all the evidence says they got peace rules right that year.
Tough stuff
Chuckles_the_Clown2 wrote:
>
> Its gonna be a very intersting Derby. With Rockport Harbor and
> Going Wild apparently out its looking like a possible 1985
> race. Right now theres two speedy types, unless Spanish
> Chestnut enters. If I was Tabor I\'d have to run him.
How quickly the complexion of the race has apparently changed. Tabor\'s potential decision to run a rabbit without any other pretence but to soften up the speed would add quite the interesting wrinkle. And I do agree with you, he should do so, why not, the strategy has worked once already.
>I suppose Going Wild validated his Wood form
Validated his Wood non-form. You think he ran better yesterday.
Sort it Out spent all winter with these types.
http://www.drf.com/row/charts/05whirlaway_chart.pdf
Bellamy Road beat this crew 20+. Doubt Sort it Out ran better yesterday than his previous top of 3, in the Whirlaway.
Or that Coin Silver moved up much, he just beat a rotten group.
Davidrex,
As for Smarty Jones last year, congrats if you used the T-Graph figures to nail the winner. I was just starting to use the figures then and I bought the seminar to try and understand the figures and methodology. Jerry did NOT select Smarty Jones, he called Lion Heart/The Cliff\'s Edge 50% to win the race and also liked Read the Footnotes. In hindsight, this was really ironic. Jerry and T-Graph were well ahead of the curve in realizing Smarty Jones was an incredibly fast horse. However, they thought he was too fast and would bounce in the Derby. So, having the information that he was so fast, did NOT help most sheets players, as he was a bet against in the Derby on T-Graph and Rags.
I suspect you have a similar situation this year. Bellamy Road at -5 on T-Graph is now 10 points of development off his 2 year old top, even with 4 weeks of rest, he probably is a bet against. Len has already said so on his board. Bandini ran a new top by over 6 points, 3 weeks before the derby, which probably makes him a bet against as well, for sheets players.
I find this ironinc again, especially in the case of BAndini. Sheets players who believe teh figures, KNOW that Bandini is much faster than the rest of the public who see thke 103 beyer. Yet, methodology prevents most of them from betting on him off the new huge top, 3 weeks before the derby.
This is less true for Bellamy Road though, because he got a huge Beyer figure also (120). The \"edge\" in using Sheets for Bellamy Road, is that the race before the Wood is also very fast on the Sheets, a slightly negative number. So, although it was nowhere near the Wood number, it was very fast adn shows that he has run 2 very fast races. If you look at the DRF on Bellamy Road, the wood really looks like an abberation, going from a 96 beyer to a 120, so many people might dismiss him as freaking in the Wood, and not necessarily that fast. Sheets players know Beyer missed the Gulfstream race by 8-10 points and so he really should have a line of 105 beyer to 120, which looks more consistent and fast.
How the results of the Lexington validate anything about the Wood (or BlueGrass) or any race, is beyond me.
Going Wild ran up the track in the Wood and also up the track in the Lexington. How does that validiate anything?
Sort it Out didn\'t run in the Wood or the BlueGrass, so how does his race validate anything?
???????
Jimbo as you stated you are new to TG so you are still learning.
Read and study more. Post less. You will catch on.
Look for me at the Heat game. Gotta go.
SC,
Stupid post.
There is no correlation between the races. You are dead wrong.
Stick to basketball.
Jimbo-- as I recall, I said it was extremely likely that one of 4 horses would win last year, and two ran 1-2. I did think SJ was shaky off the 0-2 huge efforts.
As for Bellamy Road, if \"Sheets\" means Ragozin, he has his second back as a 4, not a zero-- we have it neg 1/4. I\'m not ready to offer opinions on this horse or the race yet (especially until I find out more about the new testing and security program), but three things-- first, a backward move and 3 weeks rest after a series of efforts is not a forward move, 4 weeks rest, 2 starts for the year. Second, it\'s all percentages-- I was all over horses with very similar figures and patterns two years in a row-- the first was the Pletcher front runner who ended up being a grass horse (forget his name, I blocked it out because I think I\'ve lost on him 10 times). The one the next year was War Emblem.
Third-- we make decisions by analyzing past events. And now we have the additional information of how SJ ran.
SC-- it\'s not the Heat game, it\'s the Net game. I took 8-1 on this series.
That would be Balto Star, who I worked into several bets as well. I think I bet him in the Belmont that year...lol
So Bellamy is a Negative 5. Well, why not. Sounds like there may be an implication that Nicky may be onto the new mojo.
To me the issue is how the super juiced horses bounce or don\'t bounce. We have to look only at the modern era, 2002 on, and only the Super juicers. Thats the \"sample on speed\" and it is the only sample that matters. For Frankel at least, the conclusion is his dont move much. Personally I think thats got something to do with giving High Limit credit for a 1 last.
Strange days indeed.
Jerry,
Yes, you did say one of four horses was likely to win, but I didn\'t make up the part about \"50% chance either Lion Heart or Cliff\'s Edge wins the race\". You know if you cashed or not on the Derby (or any of last year\'s Triple Crown races). Seems to me that you and Len were both in print before the Preakness and Belmont with anti-Smarty predictions. I could be wrong about that, but I don\'t think so.
When I said \"sheets\" I meant your figures, not Len\'s. Poor choice of words. i still call both figures \"sheets\". Haven\'t bought his product yet, only hear the figures from another poster on this board who uses both yours and his.
Can you explain what you mean by \"first, a backward move and 3 weeks rest after a series of efforts is not a forward move, 4 weeks rest, 2 starts for the year\".
Whose backward move and three weeks rest? Don\'t follow you.
CTC,
\"The questionable year was the Millineum wind year.\"
I had Millenium Wind in that race.
He earned that figure with a loose lead on an easy pace on a track where speed was certainly more than OK. His chances of duplicating that figure in the Derby were somewhere between zero and none. He was the first horse I tossed out.
Jimbo-- did not cash the Derby, almost shot myself after the Preakness when I saw what the pick 4 paid.
SJ hit the big one 6 weeks out and moved backward in the Ark Derby, so he was coming in off a backward move. If you look at the past Derby winners you will see that only a small percentage have done this. The Derby was his 4th start in 9 weeks. Other questions aside (and there are many), BR is coming off a forward move, and making only his 3rd start of the year, and 3rd in 8 weeks.
Thanks Jerry. I realized after I posted you were referring to SJ. WHen I first read it, I thought you were referring to somebody in THIS YEAR\'s Derby.
I empathize with your Preakness pick 4. I had similar problem with Derby pick-4. I threw out Azeri and singled Pat Day on somebody in the 7 furlong Derby day race. I had $15 pick fours live to 5 horses in the Derby. Lionheart, The Cliff\'s Edge, Pollard\'s Vision, Tapit and Read the Footnotes. Paid $2000 with Smarty, the logical winner. Paid over 4 times parlay....
To make it worse, wife called me at Meadowlands 2 minutes before Derby and said \"I hope you bet this Smarty Jones, he can\'t lose. Everybody on TV says he will love the wet track\"
Had to hear for weeks how stupid I am. Redboarding on this board can be annoying, having your wife redboard you is beyond that.........
The punch line is that if I had been using your figures for a little while before the Derby, I would have had to use Smarty going 5 deep. I didn\'t believe your figures for him, having relied on Beyer figures for 20 years or so......
Oh well.
The best wife betting story belongs to HP, who posts here. A few years ago his wife took a fast look at the Belmont sheets and gave him a bet to put in on the McPeek horse that won. HP took a fast look, and booked the bet. After the horse paid $900 or whatever, I caught a ride back from the track with him, and got to hear the phone conversation where he gave her the result. \"Honey, the good news is that your horse won...\"
Sarava. That hillarious, I feel his pain.
Jimbo--good morning,
please let me reiterate my gambling experiences w/t.graph.
I\'m not aware of who picked what last year but I know brown in his combative nature refused to be swayed by outside influences and gave s. j. THE#!
humans that co-exist in a like industry tend to think and act in a like manner,NOT Brown.
As ragozin said in one of the old tapes[the missing one]Ilike to use\" a seat of the pants\" mentality for using Jerry\'s figs.
Okay, I can\'t resist bragging here. Not only did I have Sarava to win, I had the exacta ($2500+). The other horse was a Frankel horse who had disappointed in the Derby & Preakness. He was about 15-1.
From the quarter pole home these two were light years ahead of the rest of the field so the only question was whether I would cash the 70-1 win bet & get the bigger exacta.
Doesn\'t happen nearly often enough.
I do not envy anyone who has to make figures over that horsebleep track called KEENLAND. It\'s a nice looking place with a nice turf course. That\'s where the positive statements end.
Whether BANDINI ran a negative 3 or a positive 3 does not matter since the race will have no bearing on the Derby outcome except to confuse you more if you consider it as important.
Anyone remember the last impressive BG winner who wore the roses? I\'ll bet there are just as many mediocre efforts that translated into Derby wins.
As for my opinion on TGJB #\'s....in just comparing the BG to the Fla. Derby, anyone on this board think that BANDINI would have beat HIGH FLY by 6 lengths??
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Congratulations Bally Ache. That was Medaglia D\'Oro I believe.
I didn\'t really \"book the bet\", I just spaced out and forgot about my wife\'s \"$10 win\" (I was busy making my own losing bets (Perfect Drift (?!)) until after the pools closed. I admit I thought I was okay when the race started, and Sva and M D\'Oro dingdonged until the last furlong and then I knew I was screwed.
The phone call was good though.
HP
>then I knew I was screwed.
And that was the only time that happened to you on that day.
>As for my opinion on TGJB #\'s....in just comparing the BG to the Fla. Derby, anyone on this board think that BANDINI would have beat HIGH FLY by 6 lengths??
Lot of people thought if Bandini had run a little more professionally in the FOY he would have beaten him a couple of lengths that day.
If Bandini topped out on BG day like Skip Away did a few years ago the answer is....
YES
Whatever year it was, there was a group of us sitting in the Sports Palace at Laurel one Breeder\'s Cup Day. About 10 minutes before the Classic, one of the guy\'s wife calls (he was the only guy with a cell phone which were not as widespread then) and begs him to bet Arcangues because she loves Jerry Bailey. He says no way, the horse has no chance and he is not going to throw away good money. For the next 10 minutes, we are hooting and hollering about her pick and complaining to ourselves that the field looked so weak that it was hard to figure out who would be there (but we were sure it would not be Arcangues). In retrospect, it was obvious that it was it was a good race to look for an unknown. I learned a good lesson that day (which I have applied a lot regarding the relative strength of a field when evaluating an unknown), but I think my friend may have had a bit of a rougher lesson. (I just heard a lot of \"yes\'s and \'uh huh\'s when the inevitable call came in).
Silver Charm said,
\"Lot of people thought if Bandini had run a little more professionally in the FOY he would have beaten him a couple of lengths that day\"
Who are \"lot of people\" and what are their credentials? I know \"lot of people\" and they don\'t think that Bandini would have beaten High Fly by a couple of lenghts that day, no matter what. Could have been closer,maybe, if he handled the lead change better on the last turn.
Silver Charm--
BANDINI wasn\'t beating HIGH FLY that day. Whoever these \"lot\'s of people\" are, please let me know who they like in the Derby.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
The betting public sent them both off at the about the same price.
One was a Stakes winner (High Fly) the other was a 9 length allowance winner (Bandini).
\"Lots of people\" was the betting public and they were perfectly correct because they confirmed it all \"visually\".
Its a \"fool\"-proof system correct.
SC--
Don\'t know about you...but I love all of the BANDINI hype.
How many have we seen come out of Keenland (including the Breeder\'s Cup preps) that crash and burn off of peak efforts or improve dramatically off of mediocre/regressing performances?
Let\'s see:
The off race @ KEE followed by big effort elsewhere:
SWALE, UNBRIDLED, SEA HERO, WINNING COLORS (BC Distaff), INSIDE INFORMATION (ditto), UNBRIDLED ELAINE (ditto); THUNDER GULCH, GATO DEL SOL.
The crash and burns: SKIP AWAY, MILLENIUM WIND, WILD SYN, HOLY BULL, THE CLIFF\'S EDGE,
HIGH YIELD, TAKE CHARGE LADY (BC Distaff...pattern here???)
Enough...hopefully you get the point.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
What does the price the betting public sends horses off at, have to do with \"who would have won the race that day\".
No sense SC.
Bellamy Road and Going Wild both went off at 5-2 in the Wood, so I guess a lot of people think that if Going Wild had run more professionally, he would have won that race.
Those are a nice group of horses to make your point JBelfior. The winners out of the Bluegrass seem back in time a bit. I would also add the caveat we are in the modern era now and something is carrying these horses faster and further than before and some of these guys aren\'t bouncing as often. Pletcher does bounce at times (Purge for instance) but his horses run on too. With an improving 3 yr old, in this era, I\'m very leary of a bounce. Right now I see Bandini about 3rd choice. I think the public is gonna favor Afleet Alex and Bellamy Road.
Just depending, Bandini looks to be in the garden stalk spot. Whether the pace is proper for him to be advantaged from there is currently being decided. This isn\'t a plug for him to win just yet, but I\'ll be very suprised if he doesnt show marvelously in the Derby. That said, I\'m not sold on his 10 mark ability.
I don\'t know how fast he is for sure and I\'m not willing to concede he\'s every bit as fast at TGraph states, but he just beat a field of good horses drawing off and when TGraph said Peace Rules Keeneland number was big in 2003, he ran to it in the Derby. Granted PR\'s Bluegrass was not a 7 pt. top. Bandini\'s race was visually honest. He did not beat up on a totally overmatched field from an easy winging lead like Bellamy did in the Wood.
Post Edited (04-25-05 11:47)
CtC2--
The Thoro # may indeed end up correct.
I just think Keenland is a quircky track and more horses end up floundering on it then prospering. That being said, if HL was out for a condition race and if no one else liked it that day and if SUN KING is the dog that I\'ve always thought he was ( I liken him to AP VALENTINE). I know....a lot of if\'s.
We\'ll soon find out. Until then, we have nothing better to do then talk about it.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
I think theres benefit to talking about it. Theres considerations to be weighed. Your post I responded to was a very good one in this regard.
Sun King bothers me a great deal. His efforts say one turn horse, but I\'m convinced Zito is high on him and that Zito generally knows his stock. Its a terrible dilemma. He was the ONLY horse to close appreciably in the Bluegrass and his breeding is very, very sneaky. He\'s a half to a pretty good horse named Traitor, who died in a barn fire. How horses die in barn fires in this day and age is beyond me. Still his top is a Zed and if TGraph is right on the others a Zed is looking light right now. However if he\'s a good one, is his TGraph pattern indicative of the fact he may be sitting on a good one?
http://www.pedigreequery.com/sun+king5
Post Edited (04-25-05 12:20)
Joe B said
\"The Thoro # may indeed end up correct\".
Joe,
I thought the Bandini BG TG# was too fast but noting he was 3W 3W it probably makes sense within the TG methodology.
Just curious as to how/when you think that fig will be confirmed or disputed.
Miff-- the answer to that is to look at what everyone in a race does going forward-- it\'s not just about the winner, who in this case may or may not be ruined by the effort.
JB,
Are you suggesting that if HL and Sun King go forward or backward in their future starts,that would be confirmation/non confirmation of the figs you gave them??
I agree the wide helped Bandini\'s figure. But,I\'m absolutely convinced wide was the path that day.
He ran big and honest. They did send him to stay close. Pletcher is a smart trainer and knows that track. I lost track of its bias that day. They had to hit the top 2 spots to make the Derby. You gotta figure he was cranked to get the earnings and he ran a 7 point top on light foundation. He could bounce to the moon I suppose, as JBel initially said. Especially if it is a Neg. 3.1
The more I consider the more confused I get...lol
CtC
Post Edited (04-25-05 13:10)
CtC,
I did not check with the bias guys for the BG day at Keeneland.Was there a bad inside?
I know the surface played kinda slowish that day,pegged by the variant computer geeks at minus120(6+ lenghts slower than par)
We gave out a dead rail on BG day, those horses on the rail didn\'t run at all (take a look at the three routes we posted a couple of days ago). Bandini was actually in the 4 path, HL 3, CA 2 and 23, SK 432, 234-- only Mr Sword was on the rail in that race. He will be interesting coming back.
Miff-- I\'m saying you can look at later races for the whole field, not just the winner, since the relationships between the horses are fixed-- if you add to Bandini you have to add to the others. I look at later figures when I review a race (we all do), but I won\'t be reviewing this one-- all the routes were the same, and there is no other way to do the BG that makes any sense at all. Look at it this way-- if Bandini was not in the race, would you really want to have NO horses in a GI at least pair their top?
As an aside, this is EXACTLTY the situation I faced with War Emblem\'s race BEFORE the Ill Derby-- give him the big one, or have the race totally collapse? I gave it to him, and nobody else did-- it looked pretty good when he won the Ill Derby, and better when he won the Derby. Which is not to say Bandini will necessarily do the same-- Balto Star did not.
JB,
\"Look at it this way-- if Bandini was not in the race, would you really want to have NO horses in a GI at least pair their top?\"
No,JB, I would never want any figure(paired top or otherwise)given without the horse earning it, GR 1 or not.
Check the tapes and isolate on High Limit a few times and then watch his prior race a few times keeping in mind ALL relevant adjustments, path, ground, pace(if you like) and trip.
Thats an\"ugly\"pair, IMO, as oppposed to the normal \"pretty\"pairs I have seen on TG for a long time.
Maybe an \'ugly\' pair because High Limit could be a short runner who actually ran an improved neg 1.25 one mile quit figure in Blue Grass, but collapses thereafter to your \'ugly\' pair.
P.Eckhart,
The pace fig might be better for HL,but I was asking JB about the TG fig(whole number)
High Limit is a quick horse that wants the lead. I think hes gonna be in front in the Derby unless Spanish Chestnut is entered, but the field and posts still need to be evaluated. Patterns have their place, but they are not the only consideration.
Why do you assume a horse has to finish well to get a good figure? The theory on this stuff has always been that if they use energy early in a race they don\'t have it late, and vice versa-- if he had gone a more realistic 1:11:3 (still very fast over that track), he would have looked a lot better through the stretch to finish in the same time.
By the way, I was sitting at the same table as Kimmel watching the race. Afterward, I said \"came home slow\" He said, \"Are you kidding? They\'ve been coming home in 16 over this track\". Exaggeration, but you get the point.
My point is that it\'s not about pretty pairs or ugly pairs or about the way the races look-- it\'s about the data. You can\'t find another way to work with that race that makes more sense, even without the surrounding races tying in, which they do.
Jerry,
Not to change the general subject of this thread, but what do you think of High Limit now? (without giving away too much of what will be in your seminar).
Before the BlueGrass, I read him as a horse who was very likely to move forward in that race and as such, a likely winner. I came away from the race very disappointed in his performance visually. Now, I see the figure and he \"paired up\". He has now twice paired up his 2 year old top and I guess could be sitting on a big one, based on pattern.
I for one, don\'t see it. I can\'t see an improved race in the Derby, with a bigger field, and a potentially worse trip. Frankel is adding blinkers now? He hasn\'t moved the horse up from his 2 year old top and if you assume that a normal horse improves from 2 to 3, Frankel has actually caused the horse to regress since he took over the training. I know he went from A. Dutrow to Frankel, so he went from one move up to another, but still, no move forward is concerning to me.
Also, the fact that no horse that has come out of the LA Derby to run well cannot be a positive sign. Even if we give HL a pair up, you still have Vicarage running lousy, Kansas City Boy running lousy and Sort It Out running mediocre (don\'t know what you will give him for yesterday)
JB,
I do not assume a horse has to finish well to get a good fig.I guess you did not visually review the races.As plainly as you made the pair, I didn\'t and I\'ve watched as many Live performances as you and I completetly understand all that goes into evaluating a horses performance.
I won\'t even go into why ALL wide runners got any CREDIT in your figs that day for being in the better paths(you said dead rail)
Why do you assume that 3yr\'s GR1 in April MUST pair their tops.Agree they should, but they don\'t have to.
You have 4 big jump-up horses running neg#\'s last out. Then you have a HIGH FLY and HIGH LIMIT running 1\'s, the rest look a few points slower than those 2. Out of the big 4 (assuming GG runs), AA looks the least suscepible to the big bounce vs his 2 yr top. Figure HL to run the 1, can he get a piece? why not? Can a couple of slower horses jump up 2-3 pts to get a piece? maybe. However, to me the most likely winners are those 6, anyone else would need a freaky top, coupled with 6 horses moving back.
Jimbo-- I go by numbers, not ran well, so I wouldn\'t buy any of that La Derby stuff under any circumstance, but as it happens Sort It Out has now run better TWICE than he did that day, and HL paired the number. KCB ran a 16 next time-- I\'m assuming you don\'t think the FG number was off by 12 points.
The way it works with this stuff is, you have to come up with an alternate theory for the figures for the race, like \"add 3\". Since Vicarage and KCB ran much worse and Sort It Out ran better, it\'s tough to see the alternate theory, and that\'s aside from how the race hung together figure-wise, or with the day. I won\'t be more solid on a figure this year than that one. Which is not to say those behind HL are world beaters-- nobody here was saying that.
As for HL-- this is a very complicated situation, because that pattern for Frankel is not that pattern for other trainers, and it\'s complicated further by the new \"restrictions\" in place for the Derby. I\'m trying to find out whether they are in place for other races as well-- Dutrow has the odds-on favorite for the Oaks, and there are a lot of other stakes opening week at CD.
As for Vicarage, we\'re going to have to deal with him with Santana Strings in the Trial this week, and unfortunately he is now well rested. Which is when he has run his other good ones.
Rich,
Makes sense but don\'t you think Noble Causeway belongs in the group with High Fly and High Limit. His top is 1 and change. He has developed a lot this year, but off the 5 weeks rest, he could be sitting on a move forward. His race chasing High Fly in the Florida Derby reminded me a lot of Real Quiet\'s race chasing Indian Charlie in the Santa Anita Derby a few years back.
NC is bred well, is moving forward, gets 5 weeks rest, has a derby winning trainer and a derby winning jockey.
This last point is not necessarily a fact, but notice how well Bellamy Road ran when he left Florida, how well Bandini ran when he left Florida. The Florida horses have been very good this year (antithesis of the California 3 year olds). To me, it makes High Fly and Noble Causeway playable in the 8-1 and 12-1 range, respectively.
Jerry,
Wasn\'t questioning the LA Derby figure at all. I was asking what you thought of High Limit in the context of his \"1\" in the LA Derby and his \"pairup\" of \"1\" in the BlueGrass. I guess you answered that, it depends on a lot of things.
Saying the LA Derby was a \"negative key\" race for me, wasn\'t questioning the figure, it was just saying that the horses that ran there are not top calibre and haven\'t improved much since then. Fine, Sort it Out ran better twice since then. Will he be on many of your derby tickets?
I guess a number is a number for you and there is no such thing as a Key race or a negative key race. Unless you call a \"key race\" a race where Beyer and/or Ragozin got the figure wrong, in which case the horses coming out of it are either faster or slower than public perception of them!! This could be the case with Bandini this year. That 103 beyer looks slow but if he runs another -3.1, he will be tough to beat....
Jim,
In case you don\'t know.A couple of sharp bettors \"kill\"them at the windows just about every year with spot plays on GP shippers coming north, especially to AQU.
BR and Bandini certainly do fit that bill.Just about any trainer will tell you that most horses love coming to cool from hot.
TGJB said:
\"all the routes were the same, and there is no other way to do the BG that makes any sense at all.\"
I know this question was directed at TGJB, but if a certain part of the track is better than other parts thats certainly a variable. Bandini was only one path wider than High Limit most of the race. The question is was there a positive bias in that one more path wide and how many lengths did it amount to? Its very hard to answer those questions. If you\'ve ascertained a wide bias however and the figure under consideration was earned on it, then it seems logical that figure has to be discounted compared to those running inside on the deeper part of the track, especially so if a \"projection figures\" are employed, because the 1 assigned to the inside horse is against the bias while the outside horse gets scored off that bias hindered 1 and gets lengths of credit for an easier strip to move on. (Extra distance run factored of course) Tough Stuff to sift through with any accuracy, assuming a legitimate bias existed.
The NX1X horses in the other distance races Bluegrass Day came home in about 6.5
Not great, not horrible. Bandini came home in about 13.40 after running on a faster pace. An extrapolated 8.5 marks for him would have been about a 1.43.46 or approximately 6-7 lengths faster than the NW1X horses who both ran 1.44.72
Thats factoring wide of course, but on raw time it appears High Limit would have been life and death with the NW1X\'s assuming the track remained the same. Now you can\'t really do this comparison fairly because of gate and pace issues, but I do think it sheds some light on High Limits effort. I don\'t know, maybe Gold Mask and Spun Sugar earned 1\'s. (Though they may have been wider than High Limit).
Tuff Stuff.
Jimbo-- no, Sort It Out won\'t be on a lot of tickets. That was not the best 7 figure purchase in history, but if Baffert keeps him in against those west coast horses he\'ll do okay.
Miff-- come on, you know better. I DID NOT use any of the rail horses in making the variant on BG day-- the whole point of marking a dead rail is that you notice they ran bad. Why would I use them, and bring the figures to them? Go look at the BG figures I posted here-- Mr Sword gets an \"X\", rest hold with each other.
And no, I don\'t assume horses pair their tops in any races, though it sure helps make numbers when some do. I do know that in percentage terms good 3yos are somewhere around 50% in any given start to at least pair their tops, and again, look at what happens with that race if you do it any other way-- you end up with 6 of 7 GI 3yo\'s running off races at the same time. Very unlikely, independent of the convenient pairs, and the relationship to the other routes on the card.
Now, if the gap between HL and CA is different-- Houston, we have a problem. Or at least a question...
CtC,
For several years I have questioned JB about the merits of penalizing/discounting a fig when it was earned in a \"superior\"running path(return of energy etc.)The dead rail X doesn\'t really do this issue justice in my view.A \"true\" bias can distort a runners performance very dramatically either way.
Notwithstanding my problems with figs earned by bias aided runners, I agree that any type of adjustment by JB would be heading into a dangerous area.
Having said that, I feel that something beyond the X is needed but not an adjustment to the fig.Most certainly, a tough issue all around which may be best left to the handicapper to deal with.
TGJB,
\"if he (HL) had gone a more realistic 1:11:3 (still very fast over that track), he would have looked a lot better through the stretch to finish in the same time.\"
I have to call a timeout!
According to my pace figures and those of another source, the 6F time for the BG was fast enough to impact the final time for a few horses (including HL).
I agree that he would have finished better, but IMHO, \"finish in the same time\" is just your theory. :-)
I want some browny points for staying out of this debate. :-)
miff,
I agree on all points.
CH-- You get half a brownie point. You don\'t get the other half because you said \"the 6f time in the BG was enough to impact the time for a few horses (including HL)\".
Prove it. Keep in mind that the first two finishers ran close to the pace, how the figure relationships came out both within the race and relative to those coming from off the pace, and also compared to other races (at least one of which I did give an \"h pace\", and where the frontrunners did quit). I do agree the pace was strong-- there is no evidence it affected the time.
In fact, you don\'t even have to prove it. You just have to supply some evidence.
JB said
In fact, you don\'t even have to prove it. You just have to supply some evidence.
TGJB
I have no dog in this discussion, but would you consider the last 3/8ths in 40+ seconds a bit slow for 3yr GR1\'s as \"evidence\" I know the surface was dull but the winner and the second place horse \"attended\" the pace but they didn\'t \"war\" in it.
TGJB,
I was just going for the laugh. Obviously, I can\'t prove it and neither can you in the other direction.
If you want my honest opinion, I am totally baffled by the race.
Before you get angry with me, please read the whole post. I acknowledge that much of this is just \"my opinion\" etc.... and don\'t want to debate it. It\'s just an explanation for my confusion.
When I first did the day using \"Beyer speed figure inputs\", I came up with a speed figure very similar to Beyer for the race based on the other routes - 103. However, 103 did not make much sense to me because it would mean that everyone else in the BG had run like crap - which I believe is very unlikely for G1 3YOs at this time of year. I agree with you on that point.
However, when I made the pace figure for the race it was fast. That suggested that Bandini had run better than a 103 (he was close enough to the pace to be impacted) and HL/CA had run similar races to their last efforts (according to my theory of course).
Spanish Chestnut is obviously also explained away by that pace figure. Only Consolidator\'s performance was a question mark. However, I was highly suspect of him going in because he earned his big figure on a wet rolled track. So using pace figures, the whole race made perfect sense to me.
Then you assigned the race a fast figure and said you didn\'t break the race out. That made no sense to me. I could see you giving it a big figure, but I thought you would have to break it out to get there. When you supplied your figures for the other routes to me (as per my request - thank you), your figures for the day made perfect sense to me.
So obviously there must be some huge discepancies between your inputs and Beyers for that day because you guys disagree on how fast the BG was by a lot. I am almost certain Beyer did not break out the BG and make it slower because he was afraid to give it a big figure. That\'s just the way it came up. (I haven\'t had a chance to study the issue further, but will before Derby day).
I am fairly certain the 6F call was fast and I am also highly confident in my pace theories even if I can\'t put them in an exact formula. (I often know beforehand when you are going to break a race out using my pace theories).
If you are correct that the BG was a very fast race and I am correct that the 6F pace was even faster than the final time (others have verfied my analysis), that would make some of these horses amazing according to my pace theories.
I can\'t reconcile this all.
I know you must believe that Beyer\'s figures are wrong and the pace didn\'t impact the final time, but I do not believe the 2nd part of that.
IMHO, the pace was fast enough to impact several horses. That opinion is based on many years of practical experience working with pace and final time figures and betting at the windows.
I do not know how to resolve this yet, but I will express my opinion at the windows after I get time to study the day further. :-)
Post Edited (04-25-05 20:18)
ctc:
What is sneaky about his breeding? His pop won 2/3s of the TC.
I have been reading the Form since 1975. I have been using TGs for about 4 months, trying to get comfortable with patterns, etc. I am not yet certain neurally how much faster a horse who ran \"2\" is than a horse who ran a \"3\" etc.
I am really grappling with the fact that Sun King\'s no factor BG effort earned him a TG # of 2 (Beyer 88), while High Fly\'s Fla Derby win was a TG# of 1 (Beyer 102).
I\'m going to respond to your Sun King post using numbers I\'m more familiar with. If the numbers are wrong, so be it.
Sun King\'s last race Beyer was 88. His Beyer at Tampa was 91. As we all know, Sea Hero was the last horse to win Ky Derby w/out Beyering over 100 in his last prep before the Derby. (Sea Hero Beyered 91 running 4th in the BG.)
Sea Hero gives hope to Wilko and Noble Causeway supporters, with his relatively low Beyers coming in and the fact that the Derby was his first 3YO stakes win. Sea Hero and Real Quiet are the only 2 horses since 93 not to have won a stake as a 3YO before winning the Derby. If you think anything of this angle, eliminate Wilko, Noble Cause and of course Giacomo and Wild Desert from the top spot.
This year some of the non numerical observations might be less important; I can not remember a year when some many animals are coming in off last race wins, in some cases dominant wins. Surprisingly, only 4 of the last 12 Derby winners won their final prep: Smarty, War Emblem, FuPeg and Sun King\'s pop, Charismatic.
Richie:
Funny Cide didn\'t even win a race as a 3 year old before winning the Derby!
richiebee wrote:
> ctc:
>
> What is sneaky about his breeding? His pop won 2/3s of the
> TC.
First off let me say dosage deserves the lowest position on the totem pole. Additionally though Charismatics dosage is high, I think hes got some nice breeding in his pedigree. Notably no Mr. Prospector....Now:
Charismatic has not been a boom at stud. Sun King is by far and away his best to date:
http://www.pedigreequery.com/index.php?h=charismatic2&g=5&query_type=progeny&search_bar=progeny&done=y&inbred=Standard&x2=n&username=&password=&x=0&y=0
SunKing is even sneakier on the dam side, scoring a low dosage of about 1.8 with a niceish CD and the dam has gotten far more than Charismatic:
http://www.pedigreequery.com/clever+but+costly
http://www.pedigreequery.com/index.php?h=clever+but+costly&g=5&query_type=progeny&search_bar=progeny&done=y&inbred=Standard&x2=n&username=&password=&x=0&y=0
As good a producer as the dam has been however. I think her foals have had some distance limitations (Surprise...most do) I do think Traitor was a good horse that got hurt if my memory serves. Though I don\'t think he won over a mile.
>
> I have been reading the Form since
>
> I am really grappling with the fact that Sun King\'s no
> factor BG effort earned him a TG # of 2 (Beyer 88), while High
> Fly\'s Fla Derby win was a TG# of 1 (Beyer 102).
>
> I\'m going to respond to your Sun King post using numbers I\'m
> more familiar with. If the numbers are wrong, so be it.
>
> Sun King\'s last race Beyer was 88. His Beyer at Tampa was 91.
> As we all know, Sea Hero was the last horse to win Ky Derby
> w/out Beyering over 100 in his last prep before the Derby. (Sea
> Hero Beyered 91 running 4th in the BG.)
>
> Sea Hero gives hope to Wilko and Noble Causeway supporters,
I would point out Sea Hero had won a Grade 1 as a two year old and had a back number to improve on. I think he finally did it Derby Day. Additionally, he didn\'t have to jump over so many other quality figures by others is my recollection. His Blue Grass was right there with an excuse. I had Sea Hero that year. He figured big as far as I was concerned.
>I can not remember a year when some many animals are
> coming in off last race wins,
Thats got me scratching my head.
>in some cases dominant wins.
I agree with the proceeding
> Surprisingly, only 4 of the last 12 Derby winners won their
> final prep: Smarty, War Emblem, FuPeg and Sun King\'s pop,
> Charismatic.
ok 4 of the last 12....but 4 of the last 6...remember we are in the modern age of handicapping
>
Post Edited (04-25-05 20:48)
TGJB wrote:
> My point is that it\'s not about pretty pairs or ugly pairs or
> about the way the races look-- it\'s about the data. You can\'t
> find another way to work with that race that makes more sense,
> even without the surrounding races tying in, which they do.
Out of curiosity how would you reject an alternative notion; say that Gold Mask and Spun Sugar paired up both their lasts at the 6 level, instead of moving them up to the 4 level as you decided to do.
Its crunch time and I defer to TGJB\'s crunch time numbers because no one does it better right now. Hes on it, but I do have to say I am absolutely preplexed this year.
Is it possible that these two quotes can come from the same person?
\"First off I don\'t use tgraph\"
and
\"Its crunch time and I defer to TGJB\'s crunch time numbers because no one does it better right now\"
So, Jerry\'s the best, but you don\'t use T-Graph?
\"Junior\'s\" makes the best cheesecake ever. I can attest to it, and one day I will try it.
The Junior\'s bit is pretty funny, Brooklyn.
TGJB--
Regarding SOTS and the anti-rail bias at Keenland on Bluegrass day.
How about a return appearance in the Peter Pan at Belmont for his next start? The one turn mile and an eight may be just what he needs.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
I was surprised by Beyer\'s low fig for Baldini. The pace was very fast for Kee and Frankel\'s horse still held reasonably well--it didn\'t LOOK like his knees were wobling. To the contrary, Baldini just blasted to the finish even more than expected from a closer picking up pieces. Anyhow, the race was visually impressive from the rail!