First off, you got to be dying to Red Board some of those races.
Taste of Paradise in the Vosburgh? How did that stone off pace horse get up when it looked like speed was doing so well til then? (Uncle Camie) helped. That looks like a really fast final time. 1.08.4 on that track was smokin. Taste probably new topped big. Like I said, Im waking up to Red Board.
Then speed held well in the Beldame. That was the chance to cash Happy Ticket on top. The Distaff is gonna be tuff, but the cat is outta the bag now.
Then the Jockey Club Gold Cup front runners cave on 46.73 and 1.11.30 fractions. Lava Man missed the break on a tough turn hole. (You had to anticipate that to a certain extent) and Flower Alley went berzerker. The Pletcher entry figured to chuck it at 3-2. Rumor has it that Flower Alley had a neg. 2.2 TFig for the Travers. Man, thats hard to accept. Same old, Same old recently though: \"Flower wasn\'t as fast as they said or he bounced off a real fast number.\" Regardless, he regressed. He was the top 3YO by default, enough of this Champion 3YO b.s. Beating up on a restricted race Bellamania at 10 marks doesn\'t amount to a hill of beans.
Borrego was on top big at a mile and cruised on them. The others in THIS race better pass on the Classic. Suave has a money chance. That was another game effort by a horse coming out of the Saratoga Breeders Cup Handicap.
Sun King proved hes a tryer. He\'s just out of his league at the distance.
In the Goodwood Roman Ruler stayed close to Rock Hard Ten getting big weight at 9 marks. If Baffert sends him back to run in New York hes loopy. Ruler is a Zed horse with 120lbs at 10 marks. That aint gonna get it.
Not sure how you can look at the placing in the JCGC and explain it on the past numbers. It\'s gonna be another interesting figure it looks like, especially if you wanna give Suave a Zero. In that event Borrego is very likely to be a Classic bounce candidate.
Don\'t think Flower Alley, Bellamania and Roman Ruler ran quite as fast as the Travers figures suggest. That didn\'t get Alley beat in the JCGC though. He had a meltdown and didn\'t run his stalking race. (He was gonna lose regardless) Still, its very hard to project those horses running as good at 10 as they had 9. Didn\'t see it pre race and certainly don\'t see it post race.
Scrappy got beat I see. Time looked good. It may be Don\'t Get Mad ran a good one, but Scrappy may have needed a start too. At least he tried and finished.
Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> First off, you got to be dying to Red Board some
> of those races.
>
> Taste of Paradise in the Vosburgh? How did that
> stone off pace horse get up when it looked like
> speed was doing so well til then? (Uncle Camie)
> helped. That looks like a really fast final time.
> 1.08.4 on that track was smokin. Taste probably
> new topped big. Like I said, Im waking up to Red
> Board.
>
> Then speed held well in the Beldame. That was the
> chance to cash Happy Ticket on top. The Distaff is
> gonna be tuff, but the cat is outta the bag now.
>
> Then the Jockey Club Gold Cup front runners cave
> on 46.73 and 1.11.30 fractions. Lava Man missed
> the break on a tough turn hole. (You had to
> anticipate that to a certain extent) and Flower
> Alley went berzerker. The Pletcher entry figured
> to chuck it at 3-2. Rumor has it that Flower Alley
> had a neg. 2.2 TFig for the Travers. Man, thats
> hard to accept. Same old, Same old recently
> though: \"Flower wasn\'t as fast as they said or he
> bounced off a real fast number.\" Regardless, he
> regressed. He was the top 3YO by default, enough
> of this Champion 3YO b.s. Beating up on a
> restricted race Bellamania at 10 marks doesn\'t
> amount to a hill of beans.
>
> Borrego was on top big at a mile and cruised on
> them. The others in THIS race better pass on the
> Classic. Suave has a money chance. That was
> another game effort by a horse coming out of the
> Saratoga Breeders Cup Handicap.
>
> Sun King proved hes a tryer. He\'s just out of his
> league at the distance.
>
> In the Goodwood Roman Ruler stayed close to Rock
> Hard Ten getting big weight at 9 marks. If Baffert
> sends him back to run in New York hes loopy. Ruler
> is a Zed horse with 120lbs at 10 marks. That aint
> gonna get it.
I think a lot of people were scratching their heads a little when Pletcher entered a rabbit in the Gold Cup considering Flower Alley\'s stalking style, but when he was between horses in a 46.3 (which is quite fast for a Belmont 10F race that starts on the turn) the guys I was with mostly had dropped jaws. I guess he was a little too wound up or something, but that was preposterous.
Unless something significant happens in any remaining sprints, I have to think yesterday\'s Voshburg result makes LITF the heavy favorite.
Happy Ticket is one nice filly.
Rock Hard Ten has yet to run a super fast race, but he keeps winning and he looked pretty good yesterday chasing down Romer Ruler at 9F off that slow pace. That was a perfect prep considering the division fell apart even further yesterday.
I think The Daddy\'s \"10F\" win against the 2nd/3rd string 3YO routers compliments the quality of LITF\'s opposition a little.
Shakespeare and English Channel were both very game. Shakespeare looked brilliant when he moved up on the turn, but I was a little disappointed he couldn\'t draw off from those horses after making that kind of move. If the Europeans send someone from the top string, I think they can beat him unless he moves forward some more in his second try at 12F. Hard to criticize him though.
Theres been horses carve out 46.3 or 46.4 halfs in the JCGC since they made it a 3YO\'s race, obviously depends on the track race day. Albert the Great for instance. I know Funny Cide was on that fraction in the JCGC he missed. But on that track 46.73 was probably a mistake. Still, it was no reason to collapse. A combination of factors did Flower Alley in. The key was waiting for a race where these world beaters moved up to face their elders and the Jockey Club Gold Cup was that opportunity.
The backfire rabbit cinched it...lol
Theres only 1 3YO that belongs in the B.C.Classic, but Scrappy had some trouble yesterday and may have needed a race. Its also possible Don\'t Get Mad fired a real good one. I\'ll look at the day carefully. Still Scrappy\'s best to this point was only Zero.
I\'ve noticed another issue, looking at Red Boarding and ROTW\'s lately. Has anyone else noticed Tgraph is assigning career top figures to 3YO\'s and its taking them until age 4 maturation to duplicate or exceed them? Borrego\'s sheet rang the bell on that. Take a look. Look at Suave as well, though Suave was off for months. In other words did anyone really believe Flower Alley\'s Travers was 2 full points (4 lengths) faster than Borrego\'s Pacific Classic? Anyone? That was incredulous. He beat Bellamy Road, what is that worth an automatic negative 2.2? The one bad apple spoiling the whole bunch effect? Did that Negative 5 from the Wood impact the Travers figure? I Haven\'t reviewed the Jim Dandy number yet, but I think its time.
If Baffert comes east with Roman Ruler weighted up he\'s wacked. Don\'t worry, he won\'t unless its a mle race.
classhandicapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think a lot of people were scratching their
> heads a little when Pletcher entered a rabbit in
> the Gold Cup considering Flower Alley\'s stalking
> style, but when he was between horses in a 46.3
> (which is quite fast for a Belmont 10F race that
> starts on the turn) the guys I was with mostly had
> dropped jaws. I guess he was a little too wound up
> or something, but that was preposterous.
>
> Unless something significant happens in any
> remaining sprints, I have to think yesterday\'s
> Voshburg result makes LITF the heavy favorite.
> Happy Ticket is one nice filly.
>
> Rock Hard Ten has yet to run a super fast race,
> but he keeps winning and he looked pretty good
> yesterday chasing down Romer Ruler at 9F off that
> slow pace. That was a perfect prep considering the
> division fell apart even further yesterday.
>
> I think The Daddy\'s \"10F\" win against the 2nd/3rd
> string 3YO routers compliments the quality of
> LITF\'s opposition a little.
>
> Shakespeare and English Channel were both very
> game. Shakespeare looked brilliant when he moved
> up on the turn, but I was a little disappointed he
> couldn\'t draw off from those horses after making
> that kind of move. If the Europeans send someone
> from the top string, I think they can beat him
> unless he moves forward some more in his second
> try at 12F. Hard to criticize him though.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 10/02/05 10:46AM by
> classhandicapper.
Chuckles, are you ruling out Alex?????? Did you see what happened when Rose shook the reins at him. It looked to me that he almost jumped out of his skin surging forward........
I typed poorly. The one 3YO with a chance is Alex. He is clearly the best horse of this crop. (Still have to review Indiana Derby Day)
Its a dayum shame a gutless sprinter like Lost in the Fog could steal 3YO honors from him. Alex can sprint. Any horse can sprint. Still, Fog has been ducking the horses that are going to challenge him on the lead B.C. Day. Hes a good sprinter but if he comes to New York hes in a whole new environment. The B.C. sprint is a tough race to win, especially as favorite. I\'ll be taking a stand against him.
spa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuckles, are you ruling out Alex?????? Did you
> see what happened when Rose shook the reins at
> him. It looked to me that he almost jumped out of
> his skin surging forward........
CTC,
\"Its a dayum shame a gutless sprinter like Lost in the Fog\"
I was reviewing the DRF book \"Champions\" last night and I\'d be hard pressed to find a better overall sprint campaign than LITF\'s. We all know that he\'s been beating 3YOs etc... but Housebuster pretty much did the same for most of his dominant year.
IMHO, if LITF wins the BC sprint, this would have to go down as one of/if not the best sprint campaign of the last 30 years or more.
Yes, \"gutless sprinter\" is another dumb comment from the Clown, class. And you know how I hate to agree with you......
LITF is nothing, even if he wins the BC Sprint this year, wins 10 straight next year as well. Until he wins at 12 marks, he is a gutless sprinter......
Seriously though, I just can\'t get past the feeling that LITF is not as good as his record indicates. The best horse he has beaten so far is Egghead. But he won\'t have to beat much next time either. Who exactly will be 2nd choice in the BC Sprint?
I am very very late to the Afleet Alex bandwagon, but kudos to Ritchey and the owners for pushing forward with this horse when they very easily could have retired him and \"cashed in\". They have done everything right so far, I just hope they don\'t make a mistake that hurts the horse in the next few weeks and run him 1 1/4, when is isn\'t ready yet. Would love to see him run down Dutrow\'s Saint Liam inside the eighth pole and then have the camera span to smug Dutrow as Alex wins the Classic. I don\'t think he will win the Classic and can\'t bet him to do it, but it would be good for racing if he did. The problem is exactly what kind of prep two weeks off this long layoff would get him ready for the BC Classic? if he runs a soft race, he won\'t be tight enough, if he runs a big effort, it will be tough to come back in two weeks. I guess the former will be teh strategy.
As for Horse of the Year, it should be Alex. I would give Alex a decent shot to beat LITF at 7 furlongs, when he is right.
Typing isn\'t the only thing you do poorly.
Gutless sprinter?? A gutless sprinter gives up the lead down the stretch. When has LITF done that??
Ducking horses?? Gilchrist has let everyone know well in advance where he will be running. He\'s run for big purses and in Graded company, its not like these races are not worth running in. Running in the Riva Ridge and King\'s Bishop is ducking competition?? Several different horses took their shots at him in the RR, I thought he showed a lot of heart in that 7F race. He\'s run more than 1 negative 2 so he\'s certainly talented enough. Its not like he\'s running 3s and every one else is running 4s. When are some of you going to give this horse some credit?? If he wins the BC Sprint it will be because the field was depleted, or some other reason besides he\'s a damn good horse. Did you cry this much when Favorite Trick beat nothing but a bunch of 2 YOs when he was HOY?? LITF has raced all over the country, racing over multiple tracks with many cross country trips. Name me another horse that has logged more miles than him??
Its OK to raise questions and compare different campaigns. To belittle LITF\'s accomplishments is juvenile at best. You must have been a piece of work on the playgrounds when you got whipped over and over.
I breathlessly await your next post entitled \" Why Easy Goer is better than Sunday Silence despite being beaten 3 out of 4 times\".
Looking forward to LITF silencing the doubters in 4 weeks.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Typing isn\'t the only thing you do poorly.
Another is being patient with ninnies that don\'t have a clue.
> Gutless sprinter?? A gutless sprinter gives up the
> lead down the stretch. When has LITF done that??
Gutless in that he never even attempted to prove he was a real horse. Never gave the most remote thought to it. Totally gutless.
> Ducking horses?? Gilchrist has let everyone know
> well in advance where he will be running. He\'s run
> for big purses and in Graded company, its not like
> these races are not worth running in.
What are you talking about? He\'s got one significant win against one horse that is now dead. The 3YO sprinters are even weaker than the Classic level horses. Oh wait he did win the Bay Meadow Speed Handicap!!
> When are some of you going to give
> this horse some credit??
When he wins at a mile against Graded Stakes olders, like good horses do. Ta Wee, Dr Fager, Precisionist, Smile...etc.
> If he wins the BC Sprint
> it will be because the field was depleted, or some
> other reason besides he\'s a damn good horse.
You\'re exactly correct. The B.C.Sprint is becoming as much a survivor race as the Travers. It\'ll be fun, but they won\'t be the best. Still don\'t think he\'ll handle the pressure there, but if he does certainly not gonna jump up and down claiming we\'ve seen greatness...lol
> Its OK to raise questions and compare different
> campaigns. To belittle LITF\'s accomplishments is
> juvenile at best.
Oh yeah? Who has he beat...lol Are you aware that one of the best ways to score handicapping horses is to understand how they stake up against each other? Ok...hes king of the 3YO spinters..Whoopeee.
> You must have been a piece of
> work on the playgrounds when you got whipped over
> and over.
Hey, you\'re the one that brought playground sensitivity into this, not I. Freudian?
> I breathlessly await your next post entitled \" Why
> Easy Goer is better than Sunday Silence despite
> being beaten 3 out of 4 times\".
Ok, one sentence. Trade Trainers and Easy Goer beats Sunday Silence 3-1, though he was never gonna win that Derby despite going quickly past him by the wire.
> Looking forward to LITF silencing the doubters in
> 4 weeks.
Send it in. Bet with both hands....LMAO
CTC wrote:
>Gutless in that he never even attempted to prove he was a real horse. Never gave the most remote thought to it. Totally gutless.>
Again, Gilchrist announced his schedule well in advance. BTW, \"he\" doesn\'t schedule his races, Gilchrist does. This comment is so ridiculous I should just stop here.
>What are you talking about? He\'s got one significant win against one horse that is now dead. The 3YO sprinters are even weaker than the Classic level horses. Oh wait he did win the Bay Meadow Speed Handicap!!>
This was your response to ducking competition. How many 3 YOs race against older until later in the year?? Afleet Alex has raced against how many older horses?? Flower Alley sure looked good against older, didn\'t he?? Its called managing your horse. He also won the Riva Ridge and King\'s Bishop. Nobody told Bellamy Road not to run in the King\'s Bishop. I suppose thats LITF\'s fault??
>When he wins at a mile against Graded Stakes olders, like good horses do. Ta Wee, Dr Fager, Precisionist, Smile...etc.>
His career isn\'t over yet. Plenty of time to do that. BTW, not just any horse can sprint.
>You\'re exactly correct. The B.C.Sprint is becoming as much a survivor race as the Travers. It\'ll be fun, but they won\'t be the best. Still don\'t think he\'ll handle the pressure there, but if he does certainly not gonna jump up and down claiming we\'ve seen greatness...lol>
Nice cop-out. You don\'t think he\'ll do it, but just in case he does........ Show me the quote where I decree LITF as great if he wins the BC??
>Oh yeah? Who has he beat...lol Are you aware that one of the best ways to score handicapping horses is to understand how they stake up against each other? Ok...hes king of the 3YO spinters..Whoopeee.>
You then say.......
>Ok, one sentence. Trade Trainers and Easy Goer beats Sunday Silence 3-1, though he was never gonna win that Derby despite going quickly past him by the wire.>
Do I even need to responsd to this one?? Dude, you are really something else. A complete contradiction. I guess we can stack them up against each other unless you say otherwise.
Jerry, I promise I won\'t respond to this guy on this subject again. I know you don\'t like your board getting cluttered but this guy is amazing.
Class said
\"IMHO if LITF wins the BC Sprint, this would have to go down as one of/if not the best sprint campaigns of the last 30 years or more\"
Its hard to knock an undefeated horse, but four of his victories came at what we used to call \"leaky roof\" tracks: 2 at Golden Gate, one at Turf Paradise, and Saturday\'s win at Bay Meadows.
In his other victories, going backwards in time from his victory in the King\'s Bishop at the Spa, he has gone off at the following odds: 30 cents on the dollar, 5 cents on the dollar (Calder), 40 cents on the dollar (Belmont), 15 cents on the dollar (Aq), 50 cents on the dollar (GP Swale) and 70 cents on the dollar(GP Stronach Sunshine Million). Those low odds reflect domination of weak competition.
LITF, if anything, is one of the best managed horses we have seen recently. His connections were never tempted to stretch their colt out and are now rewarded with an animal who has earned over $900,000 and will seemingly arrive for the BC Sprint in sound physical condition.
All that being said, I think he will arrive at the BC overhyped and overrated, thus overbet, and will be a \"bet against\" for me.
When fans talk of great sprinters, I always feel compelled to bring up a personal favorite, the great filly Gold Beauty, champion sprinter of 1982. This was a small filly with a huge heart, defeating males in the True North and the Fall Highweight and winning the Test Stakes versus her own gender as a 3YO. She retired with 8 wins from 12 starts.
After her retirement, this daughter of Mr. P became a great producer. Her son, Dayjur, was champion sprinter in Europe and an unlucky second to Safely Kept in the BC Sprint. Her daughter, Maplejinsky, won the Monmouth Oaks and the Alabama, and Maplejinsky produced Sky Beauty, who won 9 Grade 1 stakes under the supervision of Allen Jerkens.
LITF showed up for the biggest and best 3yo sprints, what else can he do. The fields are weak because other than Egg Head, any other decent horse has ducked him. Those who haven\'t have pretty much been demolished. Any horse that goes near him early is way back at the finish, while LITF keeps right on running.
Anyone know what SIR GREELEY\'s # was last week?....nothing to read in between here...just wondering what this improving 3 yo sprinter\'s (wasn\'t CAJUN BEAT an improving 3yo sprinter?) number was when he blew the doors off of VALUE PLUS.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
P-Dub,
It was my lock of the week prediction last week that Ctc will try to dominate this board with BC stuff. CH has been rather patient lately..
CtC and Easy Goer.What a pair.
NC Tony
Well, I dont want to dominate this board, but I do want to discuss B.C. Stuff in a figure related way. It\'s that time of year. Horse racing has two seasons. The Triple Crown and the B.C.
But as a concession to not being domineering I\'ve promised to only discuss two B.C. events, The Mile and Classic. Now, isn\'t anyone else the least bit inquisitive regarding figuring out who the true contenders are in those races or is everyone\'s mind already made up? Which is not to imply I have the answer. I don\'t, which is why I want to talk about them.
I want to go back to the Pacific Classic again and discuss it in Beyer terms, not because Beyer is the standard, but as a foil for comparison. In that race you had a blanket finish with Borrego, Perfect Drift, Choctaw Nation and Lava Man with Super Frolic a short 4 lengths back with a very good effort. Borrego was obviously moving best late in that race and despite the wide, Beyer scored him a 113. Beyer gave Flower Alley a 110 for the Travers with a much better trip. Essentially, Beyer had Borrego 1+ lengths faster covering MORE ground.
Now there was a six pound weight swing in Flower Alley\'s favor, which essentially made the race a tossup on Beyers, but for lengths lost or gained on path, though you had to suspect Borrego would appreciate the sweeping final turn even if he didn\'t save additional ground off the prior.
Borrego was clearly the bet on Beyer, but heres the penultimate piece of the puzzle at least between these two. If you truly believed that Borrego was 2 full points slower than Flower Alley off their last races (thats 4 lengths) and the weight shift was going to add another 6 pounds (2 more lengths) to the differential (6 full lengths in Flower Alley\'s favor), Borrego would have had to win the Pacific Classic in 1.59.2 to be Flower Alley\'s equal on JCGC day or win it in 1.59.4 to be Flower Alley\'s equal on Travers day and beat the horses he edged by four to six lengths). Did anyone think that was remotely close to reality? The form had the two turn track variants for those respective days relatively equal.
Today, I\'m not sure how fast Borrego\'s Pacific Classic was, but I\'m postive Flower Alley\'s Travers was slower than negative 2.2.
Borrego 1, Flower Alley 0
C.Hill 9.0 %
Beyer, Borrego scored 1
NoCarolinaTony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub,
>
> It was my lock of the week prediction last week
> that Ctc will try to dominate this board with BC
> stuff. CH has been rather patient lately..
>
> CtC and Easy Goer.What a pair.
>
> NC Tony
>
>
Chuckles:
I\'ve always appreciated some of your insights and enjoy the role you play.
I take issue with your comment \"Horse racing has 2 seasons. The Triple Crown and the Breeder\'s Cup\". I would say without much pride that I have played the races, mostly NYRA, for the last 20 years, week in, week out, 12 months a year, 3 or 4 days a week. For the 7 years before that my position in life was such that I was on the racetrack about 350 days a year.
Maybe thats the difference in perspective between you and me (and a lot of the posters on this board and the host of this board). To you, its play, and it gives you the chance to exercise your sometimes enjoyable argumentative skills; the rest of us may be taking it a little more seriously than you are, for better
or worse.
EDIT: Chuckles, by the way, I thought that your postulate that an inaccurate
number assigned in the Wood could have resulted in a chain reaction or ripple effect creating inaccurate numbers later in the year was thought provoking. It
may have been buried in dicta so I don\'t know if everyone caught it.
CTC,
The Pacific Classic is the controversial figure (not the Travers).
I\'ve seen 4 sets of figures and made my own for that day and I\'m still looking
for two people that agree on the pace and/or final final. There were only two routes that day (both late in the card) and obviously 10F is not run very frequently. So it\'s harder to get a grip on the pace on that track, it\'s impact (if any) and the overall performance of the horses.
It looks like Beyer made the race faster than the other figures I\'ve seen.
Another person made the race slower, but with a blazing pace that gave the pace setters good overall ratings.
Another person made the race in between the above two, but with a \"moderately fast pace\" that primarily impacted the second tier horses and to a lesser degree Lava Man.
One could come to very different conclusions about several horses in that race depending whose final time figures and whose pace figures (if anyones) you are looking at.
I know what I think.
Since when did the figure a horse ran in the next race make a prior figure right or wrong? Along the same line, horses beat each other all the time. You think Flower Alley was cranked for his best at Saratoga and may have regressed a bunch off two huge races? His running poorly doesn\'t change his figures from Saratoga one iota in my opinion. The horse didn\'t run his best yesterday. He did in the Travers, and it probably would be good enough to beat Borrego in my opinion.
Isn\'t that what handicapping is all about? You judge the ability of the horses, then decide which ones are likely to run to the best of its ability TODAY, then equate those opinions to the tote board.
No, FA ran the same figure Saturday getting beat a hundred lengths as he did winning the Travers. I\'m going to pair him up and give Borrego minus 50, with an \"H?\".
beyer,
I don\'t disagree with you in this case (Travers and Flower Alley), but this line of reasoning can be used to defend almost any figure. I\'m sure we agree on this.
I think to conclude that a figure was probably correct it has to be supported by the horses figures coming in plus a reasonable interpretation of how they might have run that day and their subsequent performances accompanied by a reasonable interpretation of how they might have run next.
If all the evidence (in and out) suggests a race or rating was either too fast or too slow.....
The problem is that \"reasonable\" is in the eye of the figure maker who will generally tend towards intepreting the results of all races in support of his own figures and any other handicapping biases he has.
That\'s one reason why these debates rarely solve anything.
Well,
At least you will make Miffy happy.......
As long as you are in the mood to \"not give\" pairups, can you back and review the Louisiana Derby one more time.............. :)
Beyerguy,
Have to disagree with you one point. I have no idea what the figure from Saturday will be, but I would guess that Borrego\'s race on Saturday beats Flower Alley\'s Travers. We\'ll see when the figures come out.
We have debated on this board about \"H\" and I know jerry has said before that generally speaking he doesn\'t think that just because a horse seems within himself, it doesn\'t mean he can go much faster. And I agree most of the time.
But I have to think that Borrego\'s race on Saturday and Saint Liam in the Woodward are two exceptions to that rule. Don\'t know what SL got in the Woodward, but he really was just galloping in the stretch. Borrego was not quite the same level of \"H\", but he was really shut down early by Garrett Gomez. Have to see if that smart move by Gomez manifests itself in the horse being able to avoid a bounce in the BC Classic, as I am quite sure that his Saturday race had to beat his previous top of around \"0\".
Those were good horses and it was a good race. Lava Man prefers to hear his hooves rattle and his fade was probably related to several factors. Bounce or Off race among them. Clearly in the Hollywood Gold Cup he caught a very fast surface. Obviously the Pacific Classic fractional battles played a role in the outcome, as did the increasing weight Lava was asked to carry.
If I was pressed, I\'d say the Pacific Classic was faster than Tgraph says it was. I wasn\'t in stern opposition to your comment that Super Frolic\'s race there was his best. Though, I think he\'s got more in him and more than he showed at Hawthorne.
classhandicapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CTC,
>
> The Pacific Classic is the controversial figure
> (not the Travers).
>
> I\'ve seen 4 sets of figures and made my own for
> that day and I\'m still looking
> for two people that agree on the pace and/or final
> final. There were only two routes that day (both
> late in the card) and obviously 10F is not run
> very frequently. So it\'s harder to get a grip on
> the pace on that track, it\'s impact (if any) and
> the overall performance of the horses.
>
> It looks like Beyer made the race faster than the
> other figures I\'ve seen.
>
> Another person made the race slower, but with a
> blazing pace that gave the pace setters good
> overall ratings.
>
> Another person made the race in between the above
> two, but with a \"moderately fast pace\" that
> primarily impacted the second tier horses and to a
> lesser degree Lava Man.
>
> One could come to very different conclusions about
> several horses in that race depending whose final
> time figures and whose pace figures (if anyones)
> you are looking at.
>
> I know what I think.
>
Actually Richie, I think Tgraph is far too professional to allow a known contestable figure to \"ripple\" effect for long. I\'m quite sure they factored the Hallandale one turn mile trying to figure the Travers. But, theres no doubt with the \"extrapolation method\" that a difficult figure can impact latter figures. Especially so when the difficult figure hasn\'t receieved the kind of scrutiny the Wood number has received. Though theres a human trait when you\'ve done your best to want to validate and that has to be overcome in the curing. And its still possible he\'s a world beater. He gets next year to settle it.
I do take this game seriously. Very seriously, but debating here is fun. You won\'t see me taking personal shots until I\'m swung at and even then I\'m laughing when I respond. Its a tough deal. You gotta figure how fast they were and which way they are going next. It ain\'t easy.
My personal bias in figure making is that numbers cannot be assumed to pair at different distances. Thats probably inconsistent with TGraph, but thats where I find debate.
You are clearly a knowledgeable race guy and I read all your posts.
Folks that made the Wood number want to believe it
richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuckles:
>
> I\'ve always appreciated some of your insights
> and enjoy the role you play.
>
> I take issue with your comment \"Horse racing
> has 2 seasons. The Triple Crown and the Breeder\'s
> Cup\". I would say without much pride that I have
> played the races, mostly NYRA, for the last 20
> years, week in, week out, 12 months a year, 3 or 4
> days a week. For the 7 years before that my
> position in life was such that I was on the
> racetrack about 350 days a year.
>
> Maybe thats the difference in perspective
> between you and me (and a lot of the posters on
> this board and the host of this board). To you,
> its play, and it gives you the chance to exercise
> your sometimes enjoyable argumentative skills; the
> rest of us may be taking it a little more
> seriously than you are, for better
> or worse.
>
> EDIT: Chuckles, by the way, I thought that your
> postulate that an inaccurate
> number assigned in the Wood could have resulted in
> a chain reaction or ripple effect creating
> inaccurate numbers later in the year was thought
> provoking. It
> may have been buried in dicta so I don\'t know if
> everyone caught it.
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 10/03/05 02:29PM by
> richiebee.
I don\'t know. Seems to me its a serious issue for the board. It involves both substance testing and impairment. Maybe they take substance testing of ALL animals in Indiana seriously. The threshold was .05, thats a very low threshold if I\'m not mistaken.
Some folks are inclined to question. Some are inclined to take things at face value. Sure doesn\'t seem unreasonable that Saturday night he may have had dinner and a beer. One beer would probably cause a 113 pound jockey to blow over .05
Guess that means he shouldn\'t have had the beer. Maybe Braulio Baeza took money too. Just seems giving the benefit of the doubt until the facts are in is not bad policy when it comes to people\'s reputations.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Class,
>
> Maybe you should apply for a job as Baze\'s
> counsel.
>
> So, you are now asking Jerry if it is possible
> that Baze went out to dinner that night and had
> wine, not knowing that they do breathalyzers.
>
> Jerry, do you have a track man at all the
> restaurants near Hoosier? Can you comment on the
> possibility that Baze had wine that night? Can
> you also notate it in the sheets for the horses he
> has ridden in the past 3 months.
>
>
> Sorry Class, but your post is a classic example of
> the inane stuff that shouldn\'t be on this board,
> especially with less than 4 weeks until the
> Breeders Cup.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Beyerguy,
>
> Have to disagree with you one point. I have no
> idea what the figure from Saturday will be, but I
> would guess that Borrego\'s race on Saturday beats
> Flower Alley\'s Travers. We\'ll see when the
> figures come out.
>
I know the figure didn\'t crack the DRF Beyer leaderboard which means below 110, and the time looked pretty ordinary. He did lose some ground, so I guess we\'ll see...
Jimbo-- to clarify, I believe that when a horse is asked most of the race, but not ridden out the last 100 yards or so (finishes \"on his own courage\") he probably could not have run much faster, if at all. When the horse is not urged at any point (St. Liam) or geared down (Borrego) it\'s a different story.
But more importantly, there is a point Ragozin made to me years ago (who says I don\'t give him credit?)-- just because they could have run faster this time doesn\'t mean they get to use that energy next time.
Having said that, after Borrego won I sent an e-mail to the owner of Even The Score saying, if Flores had done that with ETS when we won the Mervyn LeRoy, instead of hitting him everywhere but on the bottom of his feet when he won by a block, we might have won the Hollywood Gold Cup last year, instead of bouncing and running third.
I thought Borrego won totally wrapped up from about 1/8 pole, but I think it was visually more impressive than the reality because the race fell apart.
I have an \"additional\" take on this. Some horses that win with visible reserves of energy do so because of the lackluster competition, but would have folded if pressed harder all the way by better horses. Some horses that win with visible reserves of energy actually do have much deeper reserves and will run faster if pressed harder (up to a point).
This can be observed most frequently among lightly raced horses that are just starting to move through their conditions.
You can\'t always tell which is which via observation, but sometimes you can make a very educated guess by looking at the pedigree, connections, WOs in company etc....
lol...they are gonna kill you Class.
Hey, I don\'t give trainers the benefit of the doubt either. But I have empirical evidence on that.
classhandicapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have an \"additional\" take on this. Some horses
> that win with visible reserves of energy do so
> because of the lackluster competition, but would
> have folded if pressed harder all the way by
> better horses. Some horses that win with visible
> reserves of energy actually do have much deeper
> reserves and will run faster if pressed harder (up
> to a point).
>
> This can be observed most frequently among lightly
> raced horses that are just starting to move
> through their conditions.
>
> You can\'t always tell which is which via
> observation, but sometimes you can make a very
> educated guess by looking at the pedigree,
> connections, WOs in company etc....
Class,
I won\'t say anything too inflammatory about your comments, but go watch the race again.
The move he made to swoop the whole field in a few strides and blow the race apart, was more than \"visually impressive\'. You can drop the \"visually\".
I guess the overall time was not outstanding, considering the apparent track speed, but he had more than a little left in the tank at the end.
Sorry, but this is one of your dumber posts and that is saying a lot :)
Does the smiley face make it nicer?
Does anybody even know what you are saying. Some horses with \"visual\" reserves, wouldn\'t have them, if they were forced to run faster earlier. Geez, brilliant. If a horse runs faster earlier in the race, he won\'t have as much in reserve at the wire. You should patent that one.
But others with reserves actually do have those reserves and you can tell the difference by pedigree and connections.
I think you should sell your picks because you are clearly much smarter than the rest of us on this board, excepting Chuckles, of course.
He was definitely being geared down. The jock looked over both shoulders. :) Given the horses in that race though, you could come away it from it saying WOW. I don\'t think it was a WOW. I think it was a case of all the other serious contenders not running as fast as had been expected. We probably agree, just communication.
CTC,
>lol...they are gonna kill you Class.
Hey, I don\'t give trainers the benefit of the doubt either. But I have empirical evidence on that. <
:)
I knew I was heading into dangerous territory making those comments on this message board. Plus, I agree that just having a good pedigree or \"name\" trainer isn\'t going to tell you how good the horse really is.
However, given two lightly raced horses with equal speed figures that both won wrapped up last time out, I think I\'d prefer the one with the better pedigree, from the better connections, that\'s been outworking better horses in the mornings and that\'s visually more impressive to me over the one out of JOE BLOW, trained by JOE WHOISHE, that looks like a battle scarred claimer.
Without the proof on the track, I\'ll go with the probabilities.
The betting value is another matter.
tough one to put a # on. how fast was the surface for the first two or three furlongs? how do you know? LM, FA, GR, and the rabbit didn\'t run. not much to go on there. sun king, well, he didn\'t want any part of 10f, but how bad was he? suave might have done his thing. then there is borrego - how fast COULD he have run. good luck with this one.
jimbo,
LOL.
I am suggesting that two horses can both run the same fractions and win with what appears to be the same amount of energy left in the tank without actually being very close in ability.
All this idea requires is an appreciation of the impact of pace and the reality that to a large extent horses use each other as prompters during the running of the race - usually waiting to cut loose until the latter stages.
If the pace is slow because of lackluster competition, it can carry a stamina weak horse to an easy win in faster time than it usually runs.
If the pace is slow because of lackluster competition, it can prevent a horse with deep reserves and more ability from achieving its best possible final time.
Same pace, but having a different impact on two different horse because of their different relative abilities.
Both would appear somewhat similar to the naked eye and run similar final times because they wouldn\'t be all out through the stretch. Even if they were all out, the difference in final times could be somewhat minor because even cheap horses can come home very fast if the pace is slow enough and not all horses have the same late brilliance. Some are more even paced.
>I think you should sell your picks because you are clearly much smarter than the rest of us on this board, excepting Chuckles, of course. <
Not smarter, but maybe a little less closed minded (except for Chuckles who may be out of his mind). (just kiddin CTC)
By the way, even on the assumption that a wide variety of my theories are correct, it doesn\'t amount to all that much in terms of winning percentage or value. Someone that doesn\'t know a darn thing can open the DRF and produce 25%+ winners in the first week just looking at DRF speed ratings and track variants. He wouldn\'t have a clue about what was going on and would often be betting horses that he thought were overlays that were actually underlays (he just wouldn\'t understand why they were making another horse the favorite).
On the assumption that you were just trying to pick the winner, almost everthing that moves you from 25% towards 30% or slightly higher is already largely reflected on the board. You keep getting better and learning more, but the value returned is similar. Even some of these pace things are already reflected to some degree. I see it all the time when no one picks a horse I like and I think I have a hidden insight but the horse opens up the favorite.
It\'s tough to seperate real value from \"you\" (me) just not understanding/knowing something.
BORREGO\'s race is starting to remind me of when APTITUDE blew out the JCGC several years ago. The BC was at Belmont that year and you couldn\'t find him with a lamp that day.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
if you want to see how slow the leaders were moving look at how grand reward cruised up to the lead just before borrego, this is grand reward we are talking about and he blew by them all before tiring. They came to a crawl.
>if you want to see how slow the leaders were moving look at how grand reward cruised up to the lead just before borrego, this is grand reward we are talking about and he blew by them all before tiring. They came to a crawl.<
Great point Saddle. I remember wondering who that was during the race and was shocked when told.
Grand Reward is a bit of an enigma. He was right there just headed by Borrego in the Santa Anita Handicap. Thought he stole the Oaklawn Park Handicap on pace, but he beat some good horses there.
The extra weight on those two back efforts hurt him Saturday, but he appears to be suited to 8 or 9 marks, which is about where he chucked it. Its very hard to guage how fast they were running and its hard to go by the Beldame for a number of reasons, but that distance appeared more tiring for them. Maybe it was because they all bounced to the moon again. Maybe theres a bounce trend this year.
That was the type of race Lukas could win in 1999 or earlier. The horsemanship Lukas does have has been eclipsed by the chemistry boys and its much harder for him and a bunch of others to win on what they do know. Which is not to imply Borrego is fixed. Tend to think he\'s clean.
We\'ll see, maybe Grand Reward will be back in the Classic and steal it for old times sake.
Saddlecloth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> if you want to see how slow the leaders were
> moving look at how grand reward cruised up to the
> lead just before borrego, this is grand reward we
> are talking about and he blew by them all before
> tiring. They came to a crawl.
Desite being under wraps Borrego ran his last quarter in 26 plus.That race completely fell apart.Aptitude ran a similarly slow last quarter in his romp prior to the Classic.
RHT had an easy prep-Mandella will have him all tuned up.Gonna be tough to beat on Oct 29th.
Michael was right about the complications in doing the Gold Cup, but as it turned out, there was relatively little doubt what was right (could have added or subtracted up to 1/2 from where it ended up, but that\'s it). Borrego got a neg 3 3/4 h?, Suave got back to his neg 1/4, everyone else 2 or worse.
What WAS tough, in fact a bitch, was RHT\'s race. The day didn\'t tie at all to the two surrounding it, either in \"speed\" or sprint/route relationship, there were only two routes, one was 2yo fillies (most trying a route for the first time), and the 4 horse Goodwood. I ended up being conservative, pairing RHT to his previous top, and giving the other 3 off races. Could have given them 1 1/2 points better, which would have paired the 3yo and Choctaw, and given RHT a new top. Since three have better numbers to run back to and RHT could easily go forward next out for Mandella (as only a 4yo), this is one where we\'ll probably never know.
I\'m praying that St. Liam draws an outside post so I have more of a reason to take a shot against him than his subpar race in CA. It\'s hard to tell how much of that was the ship to CA and how much was outside post and the 10F, but it \"could have been\" a distance thing. I love RHT over Borrego in the Classic if they are bet similarly, but you have to get past St Liam.
So let\'s see SUAVE could be a horse ready to run big maybe in his next start. On the other hand he\'s moved alot over his life. BORREGO could go either way, I couldnt count how many times I\'ve seen horses run that big number and then pair it up and then the 3rd race bounce, like F.ALLEY did in his last race. BORREGO is the real deal.
I looked very closely at the JCGC trying to figure out how you could make sense of the race. It doesn\'t appear you can make sense of it on final raw time. Early races were slow. The Vosburgh was fairish. The Beldame looked fast. The JCGC looked on the slow side again.
In the end, the only thing that made sense to me was the finish of Imperialism and Grand Reward. Imperialism departed slightly from his closing style and that may have marginally impacted his performance, but he reached his peak early and has remained about a 2 horse at distance. Grand Reward has run about 1.5 at the distance and with the additional weight figured to regress slightly, but all told his effort was not bad. Just head mathing have them in the 2-3 range, which obviously puts Flower Alley at a bounce. The issue is gonna be can Alley run as fast as his Tgraph Travers Figure on Classic Day? Even if he does, theres at least one horse from the JCGC faster than him now.
Everything else is the proprietary observations of Tgraph and calculating lengths, wide and weight and I can\'t comment on that. Tgraph said Suave came up a pair toting the weight this time. That was a very good effort. He reminds me of L\'Carriere.
Note that despite bouncing Flower Alley was passed by both Imperialism and Grand Reward, but ran on to wear them down. My personal feeling is that Flower Alley did indeed bounce, but there may be an issue as to how much.
For the horses coming out of the JCGC to the Classic, it was a tough race to figure, but you have to believe the figures assigned are logical and based on 10 mark race history.
best.-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael was right about the complications in doing
> the Gold Cup, but as it turned out, there was
> relatively little doubt what was right (could have
> added or subtracted up to 1/2 from where it ended
> up, but that\'s it). Borrego got a neg 3 3/4 h?,
> Suave got back to his neg 1/4, everyone else 2 or
> worse.
>
> What WAS tough, in fact a bitch, was RHT\'s race.
> The day didn\'t tie at all to the two surrounding
> it, either in \"speed\" or sprint/route
> relationship, there were only two routes, one was
> 2yo fillies (most trying a route for the first
> time), and the 4 horse Goodwood. I ended up being
> conservative, pairing RHT to his previous top, and
> giving the other 3 off races. Could have given
> them 1 1/2 points better, which would have paired
> the 3yo and Choctaw, and given RHT a new top.
> Since three have better numbers to run back to and
> RHT could easily go forward next out for Mandella
> (as only a 4yo), this is one where we\'ll probably
> never know.
>
>
>
> Edited 3 times. Last edit at 10/04/05 07:19PM by
> TGJB.
Class,
Revert back to Last year and RHT performance on the east coast particularly at Belmont. (Have to consider it was pre-Man o Mandella and as a 3 yo). RHT best races were all on the left coast .....so far. Borrego is now proven on the east coast. Other than Borrego & Suave, they all ran \"OFF\" in JCGC. RHT may be the bet, but we have to consider his past results back east.
Jerry do you have much data on Mandella running back east over the past few years? (ie KY, NY,NJ,FL)?
Very Weird Day, Very Weird Race.
NC Tony
NCT,
I understand your point. I guess it\'s a risk.
I totally dismissed the Belmont Stakes performance because I made that a hot competitive pace, he was out of his style by even being part of it, and it was 12F - which is something a lot of horses don\'t like.
There was a long gap after his next dull performance. So I assumed he came out of that race with a problem. He has had chronic physical problems.
I think the above interpretation was the key to undertanding that he was still highly likely to develop this year even though he hadn\'t shown much improvement from his early spring form through the summer of 2004. His physical problems and that trip prevented him from putting together a solid enough campaign to find out how good he really was. To me that\'s the bigger risk. Every morning when I read the DRF, I expect to see an article that says he\'s sore and will miss the Classic.
Maybe I\'m a little biased, but I\'ve been very high on this horse since I saw his second start. I think he\'s been highly overrated at times relative to his accomplishments, but I think he hasn\'t been overrated relative to his potential.
One thing I\'m fairly certain about is that if I don\'t play RHT because the price isn\'t attractive enough or St Liam draws well etc... I won\'t be playing a deep closer that was the beneficiary of back to back fast paces. I\'d prefer playing a horse that closed down a quality 3YO that was loose in a slow pace.
CH--
I never like 1 1/4 dirt races as preps for another 1 1/4 race, especially those run at Belmont.
A too slow pace will dull their speed and an overly fast pace will make a horse like BORREGO look unbeatable in his next start. Chances are the pace will be average.
The 1 1/8 races are a better prep in that it tightens their speed more. You can\'t predict what the pinheads will do, but you have to assume a fairly average pace in the Classic. In that case, give me the guy who will be up near the pace.
SAINT LIAM and RHT both have a huge tactical advantage over BORREGO.
It\'s no accident that 15 of the 21 Classic winners did not come out of a 1 1/4 prep.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
On Varick Street, what equals negative -3.75
ROUGHLY:
Quarter 25.3
Half 50.3
Three Qu.114.2
Mile 136.3
Mile&Qu. 202.4 (last quarter in 26.1 held)
Variant geeks had the surface minus 50( ie 2 and 1/2 lenghts slower than what they call par)with no other quasi two turn race to compare to.
Like I said before, carry 122 plus pounds and race wide and you\'re in TG negative territory almost regardless of what the adjusted raw time is.This classic \"phony wide\"fig, is probably correct by this \"racing\" flawed formula.
Having said that,Borrego joins the TG list of other rather nice but \"common\"performers who ran faster than Seattle Slew, Cigar, and many others with his Monsterous adjusted 2.02.2 performance at 10F.
Class,
I somewaht agree but RHT looks a bit to me like a \"bute\" baby so far. I\'m sure we have all seen many runners regress with bute \"off\"
Miff,
Good point. Could be.
Miff, those fractions are not correct Raw Fractions. Borrego was a full 2.5 seconds faster at the 6 furlong pole. The Mile and Finish are clearly correct.
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On Varick Street, what equals negative -3.75
>
> ROUGHLY:
> Quarter 25.3
>
> Half 50.3
>
> Three Qu.114.2
>
> Mile 136.3
>
> Mile&Qu. 202.4 (last quarter in 26.1 held)
>
> Variant geeks had the surface minus 50( ie 2 and
> 1/2 lenghts slower than what they call par)with no
> other quasi two turn race to compare to.
I take extreme issue with the above as well. That track was substantially slower for the JCGC than the Varick Geeks think. Tell them I\'ll sell them the true variant for a ticket and hotel for the event.
> Like I said before, carry 122 plus pounds and race
> wide and you\'re in TG negative territory almost
> regardless of what the adjusted raw time is.This
> classic \"phony wide\"fig, is probably correct by
> this \"racing\" flawed formula.
Belmont can be kind to wide trips, but Borrego ran wide and ran on. Didn\'t see an identifiable bias and I looked for an hour hypothesizing there was one.
> Having said that,Borrego joins the TG list of
> other rather nice but \"common\"performers who ran
> faster than Seattle Slew, Cigar, and many others
> with his Monsterous adjusted 2.02.2 performance at
> 10F.
Borrego is a modern horse. If those great horses were modern horses you\'d have to think they\'d beat him. But, remember how Dare and Go swooped by Cigar?
Borrego has no Mr. Prospector or Danzig in him. He is inbred 4x4 to Raise a Native, but hes missed no time from what i can determine. They have him a break after the Preakness to mature. They gave him time going into last years B.Cup because of the same reason. He\'s got a very nice sheet for this year. As a four year old he got close enough to his top in two starts. He\'s had off races, but no bounces and he has a progressive forging pattern since and the last race was something serious horse fans should view repeatedly. I think its good. Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions.
Chuck,
You are not projecting. If Gomez \"rides\"Borrego hard to the wire in 2.02 flat, Jerry gives him negative 7 or 8.Borrego would be the fastest horse in TG history with that performance.That\'s beyond ridiculous.
I thought the track played slowish a few lengths, myself.
Chuck,
Incidentally, I meant adjusted 2.02 ie, 6+ lengths faster(3+TG points)at the distance.
Yeah, and I think I miss spoke the four furlong mark is where Borrego was faster ...i\'ll do all the fractions soon.
I thought he could have shaved a second off his close. But thats hard to gauge. Maybe he was doing the best he would have anyway. If he could shave time, a negative 5 may be in his repertoire now. What I see is a late developer who tipped his potential early.
I understand what youre saying. To me all that matters is identifying him speed wise vs. his peers.
TGJB,
Was currious how did your score \"The Daddy\" performance in the La. Derby This one was wide all the way around. Just currious.
NC Tony
Tony-- we\'re going to hold some stuff back for the BC seminar, but it\'s hard to believe WYD ran a relevant figure, given that field and the close finish.
CTC-- that\'s actually a very good call with Imperialism and Grand Reward. I could have gone a little faster to have them pair their tops,but they both run in a very tight (and similar) range. Since putting them in that range put them dead on with Suave pairing his top, and only gave one horse a new top, and didn\'t even involve anything too inventive in terms of the day as a whole, it was clear.
There was no way you could logically make the race so fast as to give Imp, GR and Suave new tops. Likewise, there is no argument to really make for doing it so that Borrego was the only horse that at least ran his previous top, especially in a GI stake. If you added more, a) everyone except him would run well off their top, and b) what would you tie it to? What would be the rationale? The whole range of possibilities went from add 1/2 (Suave pairs his most recent, not his top), to take off 3/4 (GR pairs his top). I liked the one I used the best, and it had the added advantage of being between the other two.
Miff, if you don\'t believe that 126 pounds and a wide trip matter, you are using the wrong product. And if you keep repeating the same things over and over, after I have answered them a few dozen times, I\'m going to start deleting them-- I don\'t want to have to keep answering them, and I won\'t let them stand unanswered as if they have merit. Open your own website, with the variant geeks (www.variantgeeks.com? You don\'t owe me anything for that).
Thanx again, not on my interpretation, but on providing the final figs of all the JCGC horses. When i see the adjusted numbers I\'m always amazed at the finishing position significance of wide and weight.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CTC-- that\'s actually a very good call with
> Imperialism and Grand Reward. I could have gone a
> little faster to have them pair their tops,but
> they both run in a very tight (and similar) range.
> Since putting them in that range put them dead on
> with Suave pairing his top, and only gave one
> horse a new top, and didn\'t even involve anything
> too inventive in terms of the day as a whole, it
> was clear.
>
> There was no way you could logically make the race
> so fast as to give Imp, GR and Suave new tops.
> Likewise, there is no argument to really make for
> doing it so that Borrego was the only horse that
> at least ran his previous top, especially in a GI
> stake. If you added more, a) everyone except him
> would run well off their top, and b) what would
> you tie it to? What would be the rationale? The
> whole range of possibilities went from add 1/2
> (Suave pairs his most recent, not his top), to
> take off 3/4 (GR pairs his top). I liked the one I
> used the best, and it had the added advantage of
> being between the other two.
>
> Miff, if you don\'t believe that 126 pounds and a
> wide trip matter, you are using the wrong product.
> And if you keep repeating the same things over and
> over, after I have answered them a few dozen
> times, I\'m going to start deleting them-- I don\'t
> want to have to keep answering them, and I won\'t
> let them stand unanswered as if they have merit.
> Open your own website, with the variant geeks
> (www.variantgeeks.com? You don\'t owe me anything
> for that).
>
>
>
> Edited 2 times. Last edit at 10/05/05 01:37PM by
> TGJB.
Miff,
Look, a lot of horses have run wide with heavy impost in G1 company and have lost for doing it, even though they ran the best final-time fig. And, even if they run back to their big \"wide fig\", they\'ll still lose again if they run wide again, even if they pair their big final-time fig.
The point is that the best fig does not necessarily mean the best horse AT THE WIRE. And TGJB has never preached that the top fig horse, even if likely to pair or improve, is necessarily the sure winner. Indeed, the horse could pair by running wide again and lose again to a slower final-time fig horse taht hugged the rail.
The crucial point you seem to be missing when you mocking JBs figs is that the best TG fig horse of all time is not necessarily the best horse of all time -- and JB has never pretended otherwise. In fact, we might reasonably expect that the best horse of all time won\'t be the best fig of all time, though he could be.
So, you are mocking TG for giving wide-runners big figs, but your mockery is based on the strawman that TG is saying that the best fig horse is necessarily the best real-world horse, which he is not.
Nevertheless, the TG figs are very useful because big scores are often had when one of these talented wide-running, also-ran closers manages to close into fast pace with \"Red Sea parting along the rail\" kind of trip. Then, the chronic big-fig loser suddenly becomes a big-fig W. The trick is predicting when the wide-fig horse (big TG #, weak Beyer #) is going to get a rail trip and a big score.
FORTKNOX,
Thanks for your take on interpreting the figs. I\'m aware and agree with you but that was not the issue.I would respond but having recently been \"deleted\" by Jerry, I feel that only those who mainly agree and champion Jerrys\'personal opinions/theories about figs/racing are welcome to post here.No one else knows anything about racing/figs period!!
Good Luck!!