After a review of the Thorograph selections for the Derby it would appear the TGJB strategy for the Derby distilled to this:
\"The four negative number horses lay over the field. Its likely that they will all regress, but unlikely that all will bounce to oblivion, so utilize all of them in your bets with the Frankel key so that you catch whichever of them regresses least\"
Decent strategy, but for the Frankel Factor.
Bobby Frankel: \"My horses ALMOST never bounce\".
In the very end I factored Bobby\'s horse as dangerous too. That wasn\'t lack of juice that stopped him. He just wasn\'t ready to pick up a foot.
What happened to High Limit is what happens to most horses that have their races picked out by their owners. Again I reiterate, Frankel probably would have not run HL in the Derby after his Bluegrass; the Wests told him to.
I ignored the TG# given to HL in the BG. Visually, he looked to be staggering home.
If you knew that HL regressed in the BG (as I felt), he was a toss. I actually had him sitting dead on 0 2 X .I tossed the entire BG field and still didn\'t come close.
My intial impression of High Limit was O-2-X also.
It evolved to more than that for me, but it may have been O-2. Closing Arguments effort in the Derby would be hard to explain however on adding 2 more points to his Bluegrass.
High Limit was dreadful. He was the one horse in the race with decent figures that was an easy toss out. It was a struggle for me to even imagine a way for him to win this race.
His LA Derby was a decent performance at best. He couldn\'t cope with a 2nd string speed horse at 9F without staggering the last 1/8 of a mile. He\'s a decent horse. But how in God\'s name was this horse going to win with 2 second string horses setting a fast pace, a potential nightmare like Bellamy Road pressing him, and then a bunch of other Grade one pressers like Bandini, High Fly, etc... taking shots at him later -ALL AT 10F. This was the one horse I never even considered. Crist and Beyer had this one pegged.
CtC said
\"It evolved to more than that for me, but it may have been O-2. Closing Arguments effort in the Derby would be hard to explain however on adding 2 more points to his Bluegrass\"
Adding two points in the BG would be meaningless the way the Derby ended up. Don\'t forget Giacomo, the 2nd slowest out of 20, got the money.
classhandicapper wrote:
>Crist and Beyer had
> this one pegged.
High Limit did not lose that race on being outfooted by two faster horses and not handling 10 or even 9 marks. He was never in that race. (He was bumped early, perhaps like TenMostWanted he don\'tlike contact) Crist and Beyer were just as convinced Bellamania was the second coming and overlooked everything that said proceed with caution.
Its likely that before this season is out High Limit will prove to be as close to a 1st class animal as Bellamania.
Post Edited (05-08-05 12:52)
CH -
you are exactly right. It was hard to imagine a scenario where HL wins. But somehow he was the figure horse for Thorograph?
bloodline bob wrote:
> CH -
>
> you are exactly right. It was hard to imagine a scenario where
> HL wins. But somehow he was the figure horse for Thorograph?
What about this as a proposition:
TGraph got it right on the Four Mega Threats and the horse best positioned on figure to take advantage if they faltered was High Limit?
That doesn\'t address pace issues of course, but TGraph discounts pace and scores often doing so.
He may not have handled the pace scenario Derby Day, but High Limit bumped for the first time in the Derby, don\'t lose track of that.
CtC said,
\"TGraph got it right on the Four Mega Threats and the horse best positioned on figure to take advantage if they faltered was High Limit?\"
In this race, TG, like 99.9% of us, got ZERO right.
miff i lost a lot of money on that race.
I dont like to do that, but rather than get mad i like to try and find out why so i dont do it again.
This is a tough race to figure. but to me bounce and pace tell the majority of the story. TGJB just posted again re: testing changing the results. I wish we could all count on that...but i\'m highly skeptical thats it.
CtC,
I am not mad,(if you think that) but discussions on this board are sometimes too slanted to the home team(TG).There are MANY reasons why horses do or do not perform well besides those espoused by TG and I feel that such reasons deserve equal time.
The proliferation of negative figs is alarming to me since I make big bets and rely heavily on the TG product in my overall selection process.
If Jerry does not want opposing viewpoints, it\'s his call to make.I have never put forward an unreasonble discusion point,imo.
CTC,
High Limit was either outrun a bit, got bumped or the intention was to rate a bit (I\'ll have to review the replay).
Watch a 1,000 races and tell my how often front runners that tire at shorter distances finish well beaten when they are outrun or asked to rate against higher quality stock. It happens all the time. High Limit was the easiest toss in the race PERIOD. It didn\'t matter if he got into a 4 way duel and then took pot shots in the middle of the race or whether he wound up behind horses for whatever reason, it was extremely difficult to imagine a scenario in which he could win this race (and many people felt the same way).
High Limit was mauled by Sun King. Both rear legs were injured one bleeding fairly well. The word was this type of nick causes horses to shut down almost immediately.
High Limit might have been too close to the pace to do anything late though, so I hear your point.
Post Edited (05-09-05 09:13)
miff, i know youre serious.
The problem with that derby is more pace and bounce than figures. Tgraph certainly had the Fab Four figured right (That is being the fastest four) and High Limits race is a toss.
I was all over High Limit at 23-1 and I\'ll admit it and I\'d make that bet any day of the week including tmw. I thought he could save ground, I figured Dominguez/Frankel would know they should let the .45 half horses do their .45 half thing and wait and I thought he had less of a chance to back up than the big blowout four negative # horses.
HP
I wound up working High limit into my bets late, less on bounce, more on track. He had paired 1\'s and was logical. You never know, as slow as they went but for the trouble he may have been you\'re winner. He did seem to be rating more at the time he was injured. Tough race in a tough game. If he wins though, I\'m still beat...lol
I made High Limit 25-1 in the Derby. That was only out of respect for Frankel. If it was anyone else I would have made him 50-1. If you told me beforehand what the pace and race development was going to be, I would have made him 50-1 even with Frankel. I thought this race development was a decent probability, but it\'s never certain.
CH has a good pace point regarding HIGH LIMIT. I thought he wasn\'t fit for the BG and gave him the benefit of the (pace) doubt....WRONG AGAIN, Joe.
CH---you were right on the $ with your assessment of HL. Even with a more reasonable pace, he would have been overrun by BELLAMY,HIGH FLY, and CLOSING ARGUMENT.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
HIGH LIMIT (Maria\'s Mon) came out of his last-place finish cut up and bleeding after grabbing both hind quarters, and Bobby Frankel initially ruled out the Preakness, saying High Limit would miss two weeks of training and not run for at least a month. However, following a veterinarian exam, Frankel told reporters that the colt was doing better than he expected and High Limit\'s injuries weren\'t bad enough to rule out a shot at the Preakness.
Apparently Noble Causeway and not Sun King nipped him by the chart.
Breeders\' Cup Juvenile (G1) winner WILKO (Awesome Again) bled on Saturday, but that doesn\'t concern trainer Craig Dollase, who said a decision on the Preakness would be made later.
\"He had a little bit of bleeding yesterday and that was a disappointment, but he is in good spirits today, \" Dollase said. \"The little bleeding issue, obviously, it can be fixed, so I fell pretty good about it, especially after seeing the way he came back.
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/editorial/full_edition.cgi
Hard to say the pace issue was going to do High Limit in. He had rated in the Blugrass and was 3 lengths better than CA despite jumping shadows at a dead rail. He needed a tough race on his light seasoning and he got it in the Bluegrass. Appeared to be rating when injured, we\'ll never know for sure, but that injury sure deprived him of a chance to beat a winner that you have to be skeptical of.
Post Edited (05-09-05 10:05)
HL will have a better chance in the Preakness. The cheap rabbit speeds will probably drop out and the field will be smaller so it\'s less likely to become a hyper competitive race. Plus it will be a 1/16 shorter. I think he should have aimed for the Preakness and given the horse one more race against moderate competition to get more seasoning.
Post Edited (05-09-05 15:11)
CH-- you have no way of knowing what HL would have done AT THIS POINT if the drug testing issue didn\'t exist, or if he didn\'t get cut up-- all you have is an opinion with no evidence, like you did with Summerly. And you were wrong.
I for one am NOT HAPPY about the news that HL got banged up. Before that it was easy-- if the horses trained by the move up guys were running at Pim I would bet out on him at a big price, if not I wouldn\'t. Now it\'s more complicated. My guess is that the decision to run or not will nominally be made because of the cuts, but really made on another basis.
TGJB--
Then there is the other possibility that folks like you and I overrated this guy. I thought for sure he would run giant. I even had a $50 box using him with the winner....talk about a retirement fund.
He\'ll be a 25-1 or better shot at Pimlico, assuming he goes. What to do then???
Good Luck,
Joe B.
If I\'ve interpreted the following post correctly, you seem pretty confident that backside security and supertesting has modified Supertrainer conduct.
Is this view based soley upon the results at Churchill from May 1st onward?
TGJB wrote:
> CH-- you have no way of knowing what HL would have done AT THIS
> POINT if the drug testing issue didn\'t exist, or if he didn\'t
> get cut up-- all you have is an opinion with no evidence, like
> you did with Summerly. And you were wrong.
>
> I for one am NOT HAPPY about the news that HL got banged up.
> Before that it was easy-- if the horses trained by the move up
> guys were running at Pim I would bet out on him at a big price,
> if not I wouldn\'t. Now it\'s more complicated. My guess is that
> the decision to run or not will nominally be made because of
> the cuts, but really made on another basis.
>
>
Joe B:
The media will insure him going off under 10-1 because of the cuts, and the Frankel factor, and the smaller field. Giacomo is the surest toss-out for the Preakness since Sea Hero; if Bellamy runs, will the public forgive and make him the fav....this may be the best betting Preakness in YEARS!!!
CTC-- Basically, it comes from talking to a lot of people who are seriously concerned about the problem (Waterman in KY., Ron Charles in Ca., Andy Schweigardt at TOBA, others), and seeing what Hayward and Karches are doing in NY. This is the beginning of the problem being taken seriously, and yes, the evidence (as opposed to proof) to me was the performances of the horses. This is something that has to be watched closely, and it would be a mistake to draw blanket conclusions ONE WAY OR THE OTHER based on one result, because we don\'t know everything that was going on. If it was the plain clothes guys and not the tests that scared people, some horses may be got to and others not-- there was a huge difference, by all accounts, from the level of backstretch security at the 03 and 04 Breedres Cups, for example.
TGJB,
\"CH-- you have no way of knowing what HL would have done AT THIS POINT if the drug testing issue didn\'t exist, or if he didn\'t get cut up-- all you have is an opinion with no evidence, like you did with Summerly. And you were wrong.\"
I doubt I\'m wrong about either.
Beyer, Crist, the general public (who sent him off at over 20-1) and everyone else sensitive to the pace issue either tossed the horse out totally or said beforehand he would be in trouble if the pace was fast. The pace is fast and the race collapses. He finishes last and it was probably all due to drugs or cuts? It couldn\'t be that he was exposed in the BG as a horse that couldn\'t finish well at 9F after trying to rate behind one 3rd string rabbit - let alone battling or getting outrun by a field full of top horses at 10F in a very fast pace.
Whatever you say.
Regarding Summerly:
I\'m not even sure what the correct figure for Sis City\'s big race actually was. No one else had that race as fast as you did.
I can\'t totally account for Summerly\'s terrible race that day assuming it wasn\'t a particulary fast race for Sis City. I admitted that on a competitor\'s board when the point was raised. All I said was she wasn\'t as good as she looked going into that race and she would lose because Sis City would put her away. She did. I didn\'t expect Sis City to win by 10 or her to lose by 19.
Her win Friday does not mean that I was wrong about her prior races with loose leads in easy paces not being as good as they looked.
I haven\'t seen Summerly\'s figure for this recent win, but I\'d guess it wasn\'t much faster than she had run in her prior fast races (maybe even slower) My own estimate of the race is low to mid 90s on the Beyer scale - which is slower. (keep in mind that Sis City was so dreadful Summerly was even loose for 1/2 mile in this one)
She also didn\'t win nearly as easily or all wrapped up the way she did when she was loose and loafing on the lead earning those mid 90s figures in the past.
So IMHO, her performance Friday did nothing to dispell my opinion that her races earlier in the year where she was winning fast totally under wraps weren\'t as good as they looked. If she was really so good, she would have beaten this field just as easily given that Runway Model and Sis City were so dreadful. IMO, she ran OK at best and won by default. That\'s pretty much the way I would have expected to run the day I criticized her and expected Sis City to put her away. At this point, she\'s a decent filly, nothing better. Like many speed horses she can look terrific with an easy loose lead.
Drug testing or not, I\'ll go on record here saying that Bellamy Road\'s Wood fried him and you won\'t see him in the winner\'s circle again.
CH-- As usual, you totally ignore the points, which include that you posted here right after the Ashland that her loss was predictable due to her not being as good as she looked at FG. Now she came back and beat the same fillies she lost to-- is your analysis of the ashland still valid?
Horses run to different levels of ability in different races. That\'s why we put them on graphs, that\'s why we create Thoro-Patterns-- we know it\'s a game of percentages. We know better than to assign hard and fast cause and effect relationship relationships, like you do.
You had several opinions going into the Derby, which included some horses you liked (some of whom were closers behind a fast pace) that did not run well. Does that mean your reasoning on them was wrong? Or is the only test of your reasoning HL?
Focus on my point-- we DON\'T KNOW at this point whether the drug testing stopped HL, although there is some EVIDENCE (not proof) that it was a factor over the two days. IF it was, there is no way to evaluate his performance, since he may have been a different horse than he would otherwise have been-- and a reply of \"I didn\'t like him anyway\" is besides the point.
TGJB,
I understand what you are saying.
Of course it\'s possible that drugs and cuts played a part. Heck, I liked Bandini\'s chances and he\'s still running - without any excuse from me.
I think there is a difference between liking a horse that most agreed would probably run well and watching him run poorly and one that some sharp people totally hated and watching him run poorly - especially if one of the reasons they hated him comes to pass.
In my estimation, it is way more likely that HL didn\'t want 10F in a race loaded with speed than it is that he would have run a big race had it not been for cuts and the \"possibility\" that he ran drug free for the first time this year.
I didn\'t expect him to run that poorly, but I expected him to be up the track.
I think he will run much better at Pimilico because the rabbits will be gone, the field will be smaller, and the distance will be shorter. He will get decent position early and last for as long as he lasts (depending on pace and track conditions).
CH
I am with you on High Limit. I posted before the race, as you did, that I thought he had no shot. I was surprised to see he was JB\'s play, but I do understand the reasoning, his pattern did look good and he looked likely to fire a good race in the Derby, based on his pattern. JB has been pretty clear that pace is not often factored into his selections, except as to the associated ground loss. After listening to the seminar, I wrote off High limit as one of those \"methodology plays\" that a sheets player might like, but I couldn\'t play becaus of pace concerns.
So, I see your point in the Derby that High Limit was pace hindered and it was very foreseeable BEFORE the race, regardless of injuries and drugs. However, that doesn\'t mean injuries and drugs were not a factor. We just don\'t know.
But I really think you are out in left field on Summerly and the Oaks. What race were you watching where Summerly got a soft pace and no pressure and that was the driving force behind her win? Sis City pushed her into the first turn, sat on her shoulder the entire race, drew even on the far turn, and then Summerly kicked away. I thought that Summerly was a play based on T-Graph figures BEFORE the race, and posted as such. She was AS FAST as Sis City before the Ashland. Sis City freaked in the Ashland, Summerly didn\'t run at all. That race was at Keenland. Almost anybody would agree that at times keenland races have to be looked carefully and sometimes discounted as many horses LOVE that track and others don\'t run a lick on it. Before the Ashland both horses were around the \"3\" level on T=Graph. So, Sis City at 3-5 was an underlay relative to 9-2 on Summerly.
Pace didn\'t make the race at Keenland and didn\'t make the race at Churchill Downs.
You can\'t fit every race under the \"pace\" category.
Derby this year, maybe.
Oaks this year, probably not.
CH,
don\'t count on High Limit running any better at Pimlico, at least not substantially better.
If Bellamy Road runs, I throw out High Limit again, regardless of the drug issues.
If you are Zito and watched the Derby, you have to come away with the conclusion that your horse is not rateable. He will put Bellamy on the lead in the Preakness if he runs. Did you hear Zito after the Derby, unlike yourself and Chuckles, he didn\'t think the pace was the deciding factor. He said Bellamy was in perfect position, as was High Fly, but they just didn\'t fire. \"No excuses\".
He might conclude High Fly is distance challenged since he and Bailey both were concerned about that to begin with, and he probably concludes that Bellamy belongs on the lead.
I don\'t want High Limit on my tickets if he is chasing Bellamy or if he tries to rate off him and run him down.
Jimbo,
I didn\'t say Summerly\'s win on Friday wasn\'t OK. I said that her figure for the win looks no faster (and was probably slower) than her figures for the races she won earlier in the year under complete wraps (in other words where she probably could have run faster).
So my view from several weeks ago that her early season wins weren\'t as impressive as they looked because she was loose in soft paces was not disproved by her performance on Friday.
I think Sis City ran very subpar on Friday and Runway Model was obviously terrible. If I am correct about that, then their poor races make Summerly look better than she actually was.
jimbo,
>Did you hear Zito after the Derby, unlike yourself and Chuckles, he didn\'t think the pace was the deciding factor. He said Bellamy was in perfect position, as was High Fly, but they just didn\'t fire. \"No excuses\".<
He also thinks Sun King is his best horse.
:-)
Someone ask Edgar Prado who he would rather ride next...HI FLY/BELLAMY or SUN KING?
Good Luck,
Joe B.
CH-- knock it off. The issue wasn\'t whether Summerly\'s races \"were as impressive as they looked\", it was whether the figures she earned in those races were accurate and representative. Right after the Ashland you posted saying the reason she got pasted was that those figures were NOT indicative-- that she only got them because the FG track last time out was speed and inside biased (never mind that she wasn\'t even on the rail).
TGJB,
\"The issue wasn\'t whether Summerly\'s races \"were as impressive as they looked\", it was whether the figures she earned in those races were accurate and representative.\"
What are you talking about?
I completely agree with the above.
I don\'t have all your figures for her, but Beyer gave her a 95 \"ridden out\" in the Silver Bullet and a 96 \"easily best\" in the FG Oaks. I said she benefitted from a loose lead and easy pace in the FG Oaks and wouldn\'t run as fast if pressed by a quality horse (like Sis City) early.
The Ashland was a debacle and \"I CAN\'T\" account for how dreadful she was based just on pace/trip even though I thought Sis City would put her away like she did. I would have thought she would run better than that. We never got in details of what I expected of her here, but I conceded to Len that I couldn\'t account for how badly she actually ran that day. She was terrible.
My premilinary estimate for the race Friday is somewhere between 90-96 (probably on the slower side) but I havn\'t seen what Beyer gave it. A wrapped up easy win in the FG Oaks earning a 96 probably translates into something \"like a 100\" if ridden out harder????
So with the passage of almost 2 months of potential development it looks like she still didn\'t run as fast Friday as she ran when loose on the lead in the FG Oaks.
Plus, IMHO Sis City was dreadful Friday so getting loose of her in the first half Friday should have helped not hindered her speed figure Friday.
I don\'t think there\'s anything wrong with your figures. I thought Summerly was nothing special going into the Ashland and nothing I saw Friday has changed my mind.
Post Edited (05-09-05 17:24)
CH-- I give up.
JB,
CH has a skill.
If you do a search on the words \"I give up\", I think the only times you see it under a TGJB post, are in reference to a CH thread..... :)
TGJB,
How could you let Class wear you out so easily, I\'ve been debating you off and on for years and you come at me every time.Must be Post Derby syndrome.
TGJB,
If you want me to stop talking about PACE you should just say so and or send me an e-mail and I\'ll stop.
I thought the collapse of the Derby had inspired more interest in the result and preps. I can see from Jimbo\'s comments I have overstayed my welcome again.
Just don\'t misrepresent what I have said or think either intentionally, because I haven\'t communicated it all well, or because you don\'t agree with it.
jimbo,
I\'ll be happy to leave now, but please don\'t ask me to interpret results in ways I think are not correct. I\'m entitled to think the pace was a factor to whatever degree I think in any race.
class,
I recall attending a thorograph seminar back in about 1992 or 93 and pace or free winging horses were a topic in regard to being careful with the probability a better figured horse would overcome a quicker one with an \"all his own way scenario\".
Now, it wasn\'t Jerry that said it. It was a younger man and I dont remember his name. And if that was a TGraph tenet, it may have changed. However, its an angle i\'ve played for years. when I can truly isolate a front end horse that will be alone even though his numbers are inferior to stalkers, I\'m usually gonna bet that horse, especially at a price.
Class,
You give the SAME interpretation to every result though. Of course, there is free speech on this board and I shouldn\'t have asked you to stop posting about pace.
But really, there are so many things that affect outcomes, you seem to retrofit EVERY race to the pace.
I am sure many on this board do put more credence in pace than Jerry does, but pace is not the explanation for every result. And I don\'t know why you would want to post on the thorograph board that it is the reason for every race.
Look at the Oaks again. You really think Summerly walked on an easy lead. She didn\'t. She ran a nice race, under pressure and pulled away nicely. Good ride by Bailey.
But the race fits nicely with the T-Graph figures. As I said before, Sis City and Summerly both ran \"3\" tops before the AShland. Sis City freaked in the race, Summerly didn\'t seem to like Keenland, not even showing her usual speed.
Sis City maybe bounced off the big effort in the Oaks and Summerly ran back to her \"3\" (maybe, we will see when the figures come out). The point is that \"pace\" is not the explanation for that race.
Arguing pace in the Derby is a much better debate. It certainly did play a part, who knows how much. Which is what might make the Preakness a good betting opportunity.
Jimbo,
Last one and then I\'m gone.
I didn\'t say that.
I said she ran no faster Friday than she did earlier this spring (IMO she ran slower). I think the race Friday was pretty honest though. Pace was not a factor.
I don\'t think pace is a factor in every race. I only tend to talk about it when I think it was and leave it out of the conversation completely when I think it wasn\'t. So it seems like I think it always was. It just so happens that in IMO several of the preps this year (and the Derby) were impacted by the pace to varying degrees.