nice analysis TG...
sun king - simply put, this guy is distance challenged. unless he faces weak field, he invariably flattens out in the stretch. the cutback to 8.5f can only help. looks like zito has him cranked. looking for a return to the \"0\" lvl.
high limit - perfect trip \"1\" in the la derby. faces a bit more pressure here, but i\'m guessing another \"1\" is coming.
sort it out - no #\'s fast enough
scrappy t - nice horse. ran two nice races in the \"2\" range this spring, finishing well in both, then ran his best while running second in the preakness. i think this is a legit \"0\" horse, and i expect a run in that range.
golden man - mystery to me. ran very well at GP, then flattened out like a pancake in the peter pan. TG says he bounced, but why? they spotted him perfectly for the peter pan, cranking him up after seven weeks rest. since he gets in light, and gets my favorite jock, i\'m going to take a positive view.
letterman\'s humor - \"5\" i guess? ground will turn it into a \"7\" at best.
.......................
scrappy\'s scratched.
..........
not sure how i will play this one, but from post 1 with bejarano up, i am leaning towards SK. GM also looks interesting.
Michael,
With Scrappy out (who showed he could stay close to Bellamy Road\'s blaze) who is going to run with High Limit?
I think that scratch complicates the race a little.
class,
blinkers on SK. he hit the half in :47.1 in the champagne as a two year old. HL might get an easy trip, but bejarano will know where that animal is every second of the race. point well taken though, with the scratch of scrappy, the pace scenario here is critical.
well, i got off GM after the start yesterday, but with blinkers from post one SK was the play. good start or bad start, i don\'t think HL is going to get past the \"1\" he ran earlier in the year. just not enough heart there. SK is the real deal going 1m to 1 1/16m.
..............
$7 was fair for SK. i would have been all over this damn exacta if GM didn\'t run yesterday (but then it wouldn\'t have paid $46).
I agree on HL.
The start obviously changed things because he lost some lengths and instead of controlling the slow pace, his main competitor was controlling the slow pace, but he didn\'t look too sharp to me anyway. There\'s no way he\'s supposed to lose the place spot there just because he didn\'t shake loose. That start was a good example of why you shouldn\'t take 3-5. :)
Michael D. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> well, i got off GM after the start yesterday, but
> with blinkers from post one SK was the play. good
> start or bad start, i don\'t think HL is going to
> get past the \"1\" he ran earlier in the year. just
> not enough heart there. SK is the real deal going
> 1m to 1 1/16m.
> ..............
>
> $7 was fair for SK. i would have been all over
> this damn exacta if GM didn\'t run yesterday (but
> then it wouldn\'t have paid $46).
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 07/17/05 05:23PM by
> Michael D..
Those were the three that figured. They run this race again in four weeks and those three fill out the top three spots but in a different order. The little extra advantage has been has been working very well at Delaware for allconcerned. Pisgah!!! Pisgah!!! Pisgah!!!
ctc,
well you are consistent. your post race posts are as bad as your pre race posts. take a negative view on SK, the come back after he wins easy and pays $7 and say he will lose if they were to run again. do you enjoy making an ass out of yourself every day of the week?
hey i didnt bet....i looked at that race and passed. I saw the blinkers and post position and figured he had a shot. At 5-2 he\'s yours. If High Limit was 7-2 i would have bet and lost. Michael..I hope you\'re insights are as on target in the Delaware Cap if they are I have a good shot.
:)
Like I said earlier: High Limit is a vastly over-rated creature. Slow start or not, he proved his non mettle yet again when he lost the place to a horse that ran YESTERDAY. His TG \"1\"\'s are phony - he\'s nowhere near that good, and he\'s proved that in every race he\'s run as a 3 year old. Didn\'t I read here that TG used his LA Derby \"1\" as the basis for calculating the Bluegrass Stakes figs? If that\'s true, you can trash those too.
Michael,
Chuckles doesn\'t make an ass of himself every day of the week, he usually takes Tuesdays off.
\"If High Limit would have been 7-2 I would have bet on him and lost\".
This is an idiotic statement. In a five horse field, as one of the two graded stakes winners, you were looking for 7-2?
Second thing Michael. Chuckles never loses a race. He either wins or after making a statement that was wrong in writing on this board, he tells us he passed the race........
On another thread completely, I am curious to see the redboard room for the Hollywood analysis tomorrow. The T-Graph figures pointed out several decent priced winners today at Hollywood. A copule of \"top fig\" horses paid square prices.
Millennium,
Sun King ran a T-Graph top of \"0\", off a freshening, in other words similar circumstances as today.
The figure in the LA Derby that you are questioning, was a \"1\" for High Limit, which was his top.
So, T-Graph had Sun King faster and he drew the rail.
The rail was offset by the pre-race expectation that High Limit was probably going to make the lead and save ground.
But with Sun King at 5-2 and High Limit at 3-5, if you are using T-Graph, you probably pick the winner.
I am sorry that sounds like redboarding and I guess it is, my only point is that whether the \"1\" was achieved under perfect circumstances and/or legit, if you used T-Graph for the race today, you had a good chance to cash.
no need for my previous post. i\'ll just use TG and ignore the bulletin board.
Jimbo:
High Limit\'s \"1\" in Lousiana is what I say is bogus, if a \"1\" has any meaning at all. The LA Derby doesn\'t stand up to scrutiny today, 4 months later, no matter which way you look at it. Vicarage & Wall Street Scandal were both dusted in their next starts; Storm Surge yet to win out of that race. It was a garbage race, over rated, and High Limit himself has done nothing to flatter the Lousiana Derby form with 4 straight losses since. If that race is a \"1\" for him than a \"1\" is pretty much meaningless.
If memory serves, TG gave High Limit \"1\"\'s as a 2YO, which is why I have questions about TG\'s evaluation of him. He hasn\'t run like a horse with three or four \"1\"\'s; he runs like a horse that\'s never broken 4. And as for today? Forget what \"pre-race expectations\" were. He started slow, that\'s it - it wasn\'t a calamity. He had plenty of time and opportunities to win it. That he failed that is bad enough. When he got outfinished by a horse that ran YESTERDAY AND SHIPPED IN for second, that proves to me he\'s WAY overrated by Thorograph.
but thanks a bunch for getting the Dmr card up tonight. you know the real racing has begun when you see first Dmr #. one week till the spa!!
I stated in other posts I was passing. It didn\'t pan out today but High Limit is the marginally better horse. You probably dont know that Jimbo but thats ok.
If you scored on Sun King at the phenomenal price of 5-2 congrats or did you lose big again today Jim? Is that why you\'re surly? :)
High Limit is not a world beater. He did have trouble with the break and its a quick run to the turn. Maybe he broke poorly because he wasn\'t ready for his best race. Who got back to form off the layoff was the major issue in the race and Sun King scored on that variable is all. Circumstances shake things up. Personally, I believe if they run the same animals in four weeks you\'ll still have the top three in the trifecta but in different order. That time was not stellar in my estimation even for the winner. The runner ups ran slow. Those horses are second cut and relatively close in ability, thats why the race opened up to being close to unbettable when Scrappy passed. The two that figured were 1-2 and 5-2. For many catching the 5-2 was simply a matter of taking the better odds, though maybe that price was even fair. It would be very surprising to see any of the Trifecta horses being a factor in the Haskell. But at least Sun King has found his form.
It was a boring race and essentially unbettable, not unlike Jimbo\'s Turf analysis...lol
M3,
i haved posted against HL in his last three starts. the horse has no heart, and i don\'t think i will ever bet him, but: 1:42.3 on la derby day was not slow. we could nitpick over the #, and one could argue it\'s off by a point or two, but it was still a fast race. as for the blue grass - i didn\'t like the race, but the two best figure makers on the planet said it was fast. not sure how you can trash this guys #\'s. jerry made sun king \"0\" going a flat mile, and given that he had post 1 today cutting back, i think we should be thanking TG for giving us an easy $7 winner.
ctc,
you stated in other posts that you were big time negative on SK. in fact, you could probably find over a thousand words of ctc analysis that was wrong before you found one decent winner. why? that\'s the only question i have. we are all wrong most of the time, but why make such a fool out of yourself?
\"
Michael:
Guess I\'m not being clear. I don\'t care about Sun King, or his figures today, or yesterday. I don\'t care about today\'s race result. I don\'t care what the price was on either Sun King or High Limit. My point of the posts I made today is that High Limit is a vastly over-rated animal by TG figures. He lost because he\'s a much slower horse than TG figures say he is. This is all about dubious figures.
High Limit was the horse that TG talked up all spring due solely to the figures they gave him at 2, and his LA Derby at 3. The 2005 Lousiana Derby is a garbage race: the first four home that day have yet to find a significant winners circle anywhere in 4 months since, and maybe not ANY winner\'s circle. If High Limit earns a \"1\" for that, then I say a \"1\" is worthless. Badge of Silver ran the same type of race the same day: speed on the Fair Grounds rail and he won too. Maybe that was the place to be that day.
High Limit has three \"1\"\'s on his sheet, and he runs on the race track like he\'s never broken 4 in his life. Go back and look at Cigar\'s TG sheet: last one I saw was full of 1\'s and zeroes. According to TG, a 1 is a 1 is a 1. High Limit equal to Cigar? Go ahead - build that case for me.
The horse is over-rated and has lost four in a row, which makes all his \"1\"\'s highly questionable at best.
It\'s possible that the \"ones\" High Limit ran have taken something out of him. Horses that run that fast that young often burn out. I would say this might CONFIRM the accuracy of the earlier numbers (the fast early races burned him out) rather than cast doubt on them (since he can\'t reproduce them now the earlier numbers must be wrong).
The whole idea that you can use later races to confirm or disprove the accuracy of earlier numbers is a little shaky...there\'s not always a direct relationship... If you look through the archives or the red board room, you will find LOTS of horses that run ONE amazing race and never get back to it...
HP
Michael D. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ctc,
> you stated in other posts that you were big time
> negative on SK. in fact, you could probably find
> over a thousand words of ctc analysis that was
> wrong before you found one decent winner. why?
> that\'s the only question i have. we are all wrong
> most of the time, but why make such a fool out of
> yourself?
>
> \"
Michael, I said that I wasn\'t fond of Sun King cutting back especially in consideration of his Classic penchant for giving ground. Additionally, that was a track High Limit had been very comfortable with in the past and he is the better horse at that distance on his best day. I saw the post position and blinkers though and still wouldn\'t bet that race knowing Sun King was reverting to his earlier running style. If you think you scored a biggy more power to you. There is foolishness in this thread and its not related to my questioning Sun King or Passing. I\'ve questioned Sun King all along and been successful in doing so and I passed 90% of the races I handicapped over the weekend. In the Leonard Richards I both questioned Sun King and passed. He\'ll be beaten next time because his main competition won\'t be off form and he\'s not a horse a prudent handicapper is gonna bet.
This is the tough thing when making figures...did the horse run a monster, or was the figure wrong in the first place? It seems too convenient to say when a horse runs back to the number that it was right, but on the other hand saying if horses don\'t run back to those numbers the big fig ruined the horse.
I think most of the figures like this are when horses run into highly favorable conditions that they aren\'t lucky enough to see again. If High Limit sets a leisurely pace without pressure with Vicarage being the next best horse in the race, he\'ll probably run a 1 again. This type of figure happens every day at all levels of racing, which is why it can pay to have additional info to supplement figures.
>
> The whole idea that you can use later races to
> confirm or disprove the accuracy of earlier
> numbers is a little shaky...there\'s not always a
> direct relationship... If you look through the
> archives or the red board room, you will find LOTS
> of horses that run ONE amazing race and never get
> back to it...
>
> HP
>
>
I think you guys are arguing past each other.
It wasn\'t the speed of the LA Derby that was ever an issue for anyone. It was the quality of the performance that was an issue. Most handicappers slowly started understanding that as horses failed out of that race.
High Limit made a clear early lead on the rail in a moderate pace on the same track that produced many wire to wire/close up winners. That includes Badge of Silver dueling in insane fractions and still going on to record his usual speed figure at a distance that\'s at his outer limit under normal circumstances and Summerly who hasn\'t recorded a figure that high since then despite being a developing 3YO. (there were others)
I argued immediately after the LA Derby that the race was suspect because of its non-competitive development and generally weak field.
The \"1\" is legit. However, a \"1\" earned under optimal conditions is not equal to a \"1\" earned under typical or rough conditions. No horse even made a move in that race. Even HL\'s figures at 2 were earned under favorable conditions.
The debatable \"1\" is the Blue Grass because there was a wide range of opinions about how fast that race really was. We never got a lot of evidence out of it because Bandini got hurt in the Derby, Consolidator got hurt in the race, and Closing Argument was generally considered to be a short horse going into that race that improved in the Derby. High Limit and SK (until yseterday) have been floundering since.
CTC,
I think Sun King will probably be a great bet against in his next start if he runs against higher quality horses. He\'s never going to get it any easier than breaking from the rail, making an easy lead in a soft pace, in a race where his only major competitor lost lengths at the start, was wide, and was forced out of his typical style which should have put him on the lead.
I think we would have learned a lot more about how good Sun King was yesterday if High Limit broke well, made the lead, and Sun King was working to stay with him or if HL had at least broken well and the pace had been contentious right from the start. From all appearances, SK would have won anyway (HL was pretty bad), but I doubt he would have looked NEARLY as impressive. I\'m probably going to try to beat him next time because IMO he\'s earning back his reputation off what was only a decent performance.
I almost didn\'t post because I knew if I wrote that it would get Class to regurgitate his LA Derby/Blue Grass points since it featured High Limit...even though High Limit is really incidental to what I was trying to say.
That\'s 2,000 times Class. It\'s nothing personal and I\'m not trying to offend you, but I wouldn\'t want to read CRIME AND PUNISHMENT 2,000 times and I think it\'s a great book. Why do you need to repeat yourself 2,000 times? I hate to agree with Jerry, but he\'s right about you. You really need help. It\'s LITERALLY 2,000 times that you\'ve said the same thing.
I am rooting for High Limit and the rest of this crop to be retired as soon as possible because EVERY time they run from now until doomsday we will have to read this LA Derby/Blue Grass blah blah blah all over again. I hope none of them are injured but I just want these horses to stop running. HP
HP:
Your response basically underscores my subtextual argument, that Figures are a \"Chicken or The Egg\" proposition. Your assertion that a \"1\" early on burns ability later is a defacto bolstering that the \"1\" is legitimate. This is pure Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.
As for going back and seeing how others ran in the race in question, how else would you know whether a figure is accurate, or stands up to scrutiny? Let\'s say I grant you that a single other animal out of the 2005 LA Derby has floundered to regain a figure he got that day (and it\'s my understanding TG asseses figures for all in a race based on what they think was reproduced by another entrant in the race). OK. But all of the first four home running poorly subsequently? In 4 months NONE of them ever ran anything to confirm that \"1\" of High Limit\'s is legitimate? In fact, have ANY of them won a race of any kind? Anywhere? If subsequent races reveal the LA Derby was chock full of those headed for the claim box, am I supposed to conclude that High Limit\'s \"1\" that day against those kind, or even in his maiden race debut sprint, is the equivalent of Cigar getting a \"1\" for any of the stakes he won?
Figures (TG, Rags, Beyer) are subjective assessments, period. No matter what their inventors or adherents claim. To say once a \"1\" is granted it\'s immutable, (in fact as you claim bolstered by whatever scrutiny is applied to it), is the equivalent of proud & openly admitted membership in The Flat Earth Society.
Vicarage won at Belmont the other day, allowance race. To be honest, I can\'t remember another horse that ran in the La Derby off the top of my head.
Millennium3,
I hear you saying you don\'t believe in figs and they are subjective. That\'s fair and your opinion. Tell us what you do believe and or espouse as the better method? Is it Trip? Is it Pace? Is it Class? You seem to act as if you have the holy grail(Speaking of world being flat) so Enlighten us. We get your point. But don\'t tell us we\'re stupid and ignorant without telling us the right answer.
NC Tony
How About Rush Bay on Grass in Va Derby WHo Won G3 @ CD in prior on Grass.
\"I hear you saying you don\'t believe in figs and they are subjective. That\'s fair and your opinion. Tell us what you do believe and or espouse as the better method? Is it Trip? Is it Pace? Is it Class? \"
Is all of the above in combination with speed figures an option?
Point out to me where I said anyone was \"stupid\" or \"ignorant\". I said figure making is subjective, period. And TG is the first one to make lots of noise on this board when they claim other Figure Makers have a race \"wrong\" and they have it \"right\". Here it is in plain English: TG screwed up in assessing High Limit as a \"1\" type horse.
That\'s what I said.
Yes that also an option as well. Again I think we all get that the guy is anti Speed Figs anti TG, but he offers nothing else except to be the Anti-Speedfigure guy. Another Scud dropping bombs in my opinion.
NC Tony
Nice posting Milenium3.
These two races have been dragged over the coals more than any other regional tests leading up to the Derby.
Let us review:
1.-Nothing good has developed from these 2 races.[Is there another reason we study the past other than cashung a ticket?]
2.-The derby ends up exploding because the left coast was dissed all spring...even tho ,going in for the last 10 years Califonia has provided a majority of the good runners to the dance.
3.-Frankels\' runners come out winging and all too often maintain said level for extended period.
To all the historians on this board...put it to sleep
PARTYpokerON!
Millennium3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Figures (TG, Rags, Beyer) are subjective
> assessments, period. No matter what their
> inventors or adherents claim. To say once a \"1\" is
> granted it\'s immutable, (in fact as you claim
> bolstered by whatever scrutiny is applied to it),
> is the equivalent of proud & openly admitted
> membership in The Flat Earth Society.
>
> M3
The fig that day has been over scutinized. It was in line with the rest of the day as best as I can remember. If any race needs to be re assessed it may be the Blue Grass. So if that makes me part of the (Ignorant Stupid Flat Earth Society) than so be it.
NC Tony
Michael,
Ever notice when c.h. posts on other board his comments are limited to acouple of sentences?
He comes over here and hes\' \"The ramblin man\".
PARTYpokerON!
M3,
Ok, I get your point.
I think it is clear that the La Derby is a negative key race and I think it is also fair to say that T-Graph was wrong about several \"selections\" that were based somewhat on that race (Jerry called High Limit the \"value of the Derby\" and also liked Kansas City Boy in his next start, coming out of the La Derby - which many on this board disagreed with - before the race).
All that said M3, I don\'t think you can question the T-Graph figure on the La Derby. Unless you want to assert that all the figure makers got the race wrong. Roughly speaking, the T-Graph figure for the La Derby = the Rags fig on the race = the Beyer figure on the race.
The races you might want to question are the two-year old races, those are the ones that Jerry gave much faster figs on, relative to the other two figuremakers.
First time I can remember c.l. dissing someone on this board!
Even when ctmc /class were dancing in the past c.l. never became this pointed.
Now if only you can use this force while handicapping and/or discussion,I think the rank and file of this board would accept you more readily.
PARTYpokerON!
NC Tony wrote: \"The fig that day has been over scutinized. It was in line with the rest of the day as best as I can remember. If any race needs to be re assessed it may be the Blue Grass.\"
This is a great example of what I mean. In line with what - figures pored over from sheets prior to LA Derby Day, right? That\'s what I mean when I say they\'re subjective.
And if you make the claim that the Blue Grass needs to be re-evaluated, remember this: according to TG the Blue Grass figs were based on High Limit repeating his LA Derby Figure. So if the Blue Grass needs to be re-evaluated, you make my point conclusively: the LA Derby figure is phony.
And I\'m still waiting for you to show me where I used the words \"stupid\" or \"ignorant\" to describe anybody. All the posts I made have one common thread: TG screwed up in assessing High Limit as a horse that is a legitimate \"1\" type horse. He\'s not. They were wrong. And his efforts that followed the LA Derby prove it. They made an error in this case that\'s clear. I never said that TG doesn\'t know what it\'s doing. We all make mistakes.
TG is to be commended, in fact profusely thanked for one reason above all others: they led the charge of identifying and dealing with the \"move up\" trainers and owners. For that alone they deserve the respect from anyone that bets on horses.
M3,
I think the La derby figure was right so that makes me a member of the world is flat society. How has history characterized the people who thought the world was flat?..anyway you want to be right so I\'m dropping this discussion and concede to you your point of view.
Davidrex is right about rehashing history. You can\'t beat a dead horse or can you?
NC Tony
To answer your question: history has characterized those that THOUGHT the world WAS flat (before evidence) as mistaken. It\'s the ones today that still think it\'s flat despite satellite photos to the contrary that could have some issues.
Applied to this discussion: I offered REASONS as to WHY I think High Limit\'s \"1\"\'s are phony. You offer simply a belief that the LA Derby figure is right, by virtue of the fact you simply say it is.
And again, if you think the LA derby figure is right, you can\'t have any complaints about the Bluegrass Figures, since they\'re based on High Limit\'s LA Derby \"1\" being right.
M3,
Did you see my posting about the La Derby figure? Jerry, Len and Andy beyer were in synch on this race. That doesn\'t make them right of course, but it does make it a figure that T-Graph doesn\'t \"stand alone\" on.
The interesting thing to me is that it does appear that Jerry might have used the \"1\" for High Limit to justify the very high figure for Bandini in the Bluegrass. However, Beyer gave the Bluegrass a very slow figure. To date, it seems Andy has the edge on that race. Len also gave the Bluegrass a huge figure, actually on par with the fig given to Bellamy Road in the Wood Memorial. Can\'t say who has the edge there, as Scrappy T is the only horse to come out of either race and do well, until Sun King\'s race yesterday.
Not sure where you want this thread to go or what you are expecting. I guess Jerry is on his way back from Delaware, as I would have thought we would have gotten some kind of response from him by now.
If all three of the \"name figuremakers\" are in agreement on a race and the race fits with the day, but then all the horses coming out of the race don\'t run back to that race, what do you do? For me, I call it a \"negative key race\" and bet against those horses as often as possible.
It would seem to be more valid to question jerry on figures where he \"stands alone\" and has treated a race differently than either Beyer or Len. Those figures either get T-Graph users buried, or get us great scores. The True North fits in this category, as did High Limit\'s 2 year old races. I don\'t see the La Derby in this category.
M3,
Do you believe a \"1\" earned after dueling with a horse of similar quality, repulsing the bid of a stalker, and then holding off the charge of a few late closers is equal to a \"1\" earned loose on the lead in a moderate pace where no one behind you had enough ability to offer any challenge?
If you answer \"Y\", then there\'s no point in continuing.
If you answer \"N\", then one would expect fluctuations in a horse\'s figures that were \"totally accurate\" based on aspects of the trip that go beyond ground loss and exlude changes in form.
Class:
My understanding is that as far as TG is concerned, a \"1\" is a \"1\" is a \"1\". It\'s not conditional. Which is another reason I have a problem with High Limit\'s \"1\"\'s. Using TG\'s basis (and I have to believe other figure makers stick by their final numbers once they make them - otherwise why make them at all?), High Limit ran 3 races that were the equivalent of some of Cigar\'s best efforts. Wanna try and make the case for equivocating Cigar\'s accomplishments with a 1 vs. High Limit\'s accomplishments with a 1? Fire away. I\'m all ears and eyes.
M3,
\"My understanding is that as far as TG is concerned, a \"1\" is a \"1\" is a \"1\".\"
My understanding is that TG (and most other speed figure makers) are telling us how fast horses ran on a given day. They aren\'t making subjective judgements about other aspects of the performance that might have come into play.
Yeah..I know. That\'s what I said. That\'s why a \"1\" is a 1 for anyone that runs it. Using that standard, what\'s your pooint?
M3,
\"Using that standard, what\'s your point?\"
That a more comprehensive approach might explain \"ability\" a little better.
However, the starting point for most numbers oriented guys is obviously an accurate speed figure.
M3,
The written word is also subjective to the way a reader interperts what is written. \"I subjectively believe\" your point was to be more insulting or deragatory than your follow up suggests.
I promised I wouldn\'t respond but couldn\'t help taking one more jab from you. I offered that the 1 earned in La Derby fit the rest of day figs. And that perhaps the Blue Grass figure was more questionable. Jimbo subsequent post is in line with my thinking. TGJB has frequesntly revisted figs in the past.
I am not going to win your circular discusion. But still am waiting to hear what you penultimate point of this discusion. It can\'t be just High Limit\'s 1 in La Derby. It sounds to me (again subjective) is that you are questioning speed figures in concept.
When you Bring Up Cigar\'s 1\'s and now compare them to High Limit you are just challenging speed figures in general.
What is your real point? (I am sure it\'s not arguing with me).
This is my last (and final) post on this subject.
NC Tony
This exchange is hilarious. M3, you need to take a more comprehensive approach, that\'s your problem. HP
Millennium3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah..I know. That\'s what I said. That\'s why a \"1\"
> is a 1 for anyone that runs it. Using that
> standard, what\'s your pooint?
Essentially it boils down to this: \"A 1 ain\'t what it used to be.\" Certainly not amongst colts. High Limit is a second cut horse, no doubt about it. However, he did win the Louisana Derby and I do think Vicarage came back with a win in a lesser race recently. He finished second to Bandini in a good effort and he handled Sun King easily that race. The Derby was a complete toss for obvious reasons. In the Preakness he ran hard on a pace I suspect was hotter than many others do and he was just nosed for fourth by a clunk up Sun King. That race yesterday was an aberration. He\'s the better horse, he\'s just not a phenom and needs some things to go his way. I think he was off form. He\'ll be back with lesser quality.
And this is my last one on this topic...
I made clear my point from that start was High Limit\'s \"1\"\'s are bogus, especially the LA derby. That race this year was a poor group of racehorses, as evidenced by the fact that most or all of them have done little to nothing on the track in the four months since. Also, High Limit himself after the LA Derby has run pathetically, especially his last three, and has rung up four straight losses. I guess my thought was: blame the figure as erroneous, not the horse.
Moreover, like I said before, if you question the Bluegrass figs, that\'s tantamount to acknowledging the LA Derby figure is real suspect, since it was posted clearly here that the Bluegrass figs were based on High Limit repeating his \"1\" in the LA Derby. So how can you question one and not the other?
You\'re right about this: I know speed figures of any kind are determined a lot more subjectively than most admit. This discussion thread, with everybody weighing in as they have proves that beyond doubt. As such, the conclusions are fallible, i.e., any horse\'s given figure can be WRONG! Which, not so incidentally, has been my point all along. So I\'ll reiterate it, AGAIN:
High Limit is not as fast as TG sheets say he is. His fast race figures are wrong, and his efforts after Lousiana prove that: Couldn\'t find him with TWO pairs of binoculars at Churchill; off the board again at Pimlico; and that ugly and awful third place finish yesterday (passed in teh stretch by a horse that ran the day before, by the way). If this is the wotk of a horse firing figures of \"1\", then \"1\" doesn\'t mean what it used to, does it?
Then again, maybe Frankel\'s medical magic has just worn off.
Another stupid statement from the clown.
\"He\'s the better horse\"
but
\"He\'ll be back with lesser quality\".
Which one is it Clown? He is the better horse, in which case he should win against that quality or he needs to compete against slower animals, in which case he\'ll be back with lesser quality.
Just one contradiction after another, one redboard after another, and more and more crap from you.....