Jerry,
Question for you about something discussed on this board before. You are on record here a few times in the past talking about a bias in the Beyer figures in that he has the california races a little too fast, although I think you recently said you are seeing some correction there.
Granted that one day of races is a small sample, but yesterday was a day where it looked like the \"bias\" is more towards T-Graph having the California horses a little too slow. If you sit down and look at the Beyer, TGraph and Rags figures for the 1st race, Juvy fillies and Juvy Colts, the California horses really outran their TG numbers.
In that first race, Captain Squire looked like an absolute bet against on TG. Similarly Ghostofachance was also a bet against. Weight adjusted, CS was maybe 5 points slower than the east coast horses. That is a big difference. The California horses ran 1-2.
In the Juvenile fillies ran, the outside horse from the Mullins barn looked too slow to contend and figured to lose ground from the outside post. The horse lost ground and ran 2nd.
In the Juvenile Colts race, Stevie Wonderboy was slow again on TG, albeit with a healthy running line and good possibility to move forward. Considering that race was 2 seconds faster than the filly race, that probably means Henny Hughes ran his number, which means Stevie must have had a 5 point move up on TG. Tough to swallow, even for an improving 2 year old. His move up on the other figures is not as much.
There were some high profile cases the last year or so as well, like the Kentucky Derby and also the Pimlico Special from last year, which was a ROTW where Southern Image was a real bet against and ran well to win.
Granted, this isn not a scientific analysis of the day to day figs, but just a few examples.
Anyway, don\'t mean to be critical, because I used Tgraph all day yesterday and never before have I been to the IRS window three times in one racing card, so obviously most of the figs held up real well, especially a very hittable super in the Classic and a real juicy exacta in the distaff. So, thanks for the product!
Jim
Jimbo,
I\'m sure Jerry can weigh in on this later but Wild Fit and Stevie Wonderboy were both usable, and figured as possible winners with some improvement. Both of them were in the six range. The best horses in either race ran 1\'s (First Sam) and 2\'s (Folklore). In my opinion, if Wild Fit and Stevie Wonderboy move up (two points, a definite possibility) and the faves back up a little (two points, also possible), they are right there (running threes or fours) without too dramatic a \"move up\" for either one. Even if Henny Hughes ran his three, Stevie Wonderboy could easily move up three points off the pair of sixes and win. I think your evaluation of Wild Fit and Stevie Wonderboy as \"too slow\" is just a little simplistic, no offense intended.
I thought the California horses might have a problem handling the track, but some of them were obviously okay!
HP
jimbo,
Beyer had some races at Golden Gate too fast early in the year that I know of. He then went back and corrected them. Buzzard\'s Bay was one high profile example. Since I don\'t follow GG closely, I\'m not sure if the whole circuit was too fast at that time or just some isoloted races.
I see no evidence that he has the major CA circuit too fast. I compare his figures to two other sets of Beyer scale figures and they are all pretty much in line.
It\'s even more difficult to compare the TG and RAG scales to Beyer than is commonly thought. Beyer partially builds ground loss and weight into his variant to a small degree. I don\'t want to go into here because I will certainly get tarred and feadthered for going off topic. If you want me to elaborate privately, let me know.
TG figs for California have always been a tad slow vs Beyer and to a lesser extent Rags. The examples cited by Jimbo are fairly consistent on just about any day you compare TG,BEYER,RAGS.
In watching California for the last few years,I think the Beyers look a bit too fast. Seems like too many maidens(especially) run 90\'s and the usually glib surfaces in So Cal are not \"adjusted\" for variant too well by Beyer.
The most interesting fig of the day has to be Stevie Wonder Boy who carried 5 lbs more than the older Magna Graduate and ran within 2/5ths raw time.Looks like Stevie will get a 1-ish, imo.
Ok HP,
So you think my view that two horses that are at least 4 points slower than the figure horses in the Juvenile races, plus two california horses in the 1st race being 4 or 5 points too slow, all moving up together is too much of a coincidence.
Too much coincidence for me, so coming to your conclusion seems too simplistic to me, no offense to you.
YOu can always justify any result in any race. We can all do that. But when you have what could be a trend, I think you have to question it.
Henny Hughes did not back up 2 points in the Juvy. Not unless there was some big track variant change between teh Folklore race and his race. The colts ran 2 seconds faster. Folklore ran in the \"2\" range last time. Stevie Wonderboy had run in the \"6\" range. I am betting Henny Hughes ran close to his \"0\", not his \"3\". Since SW seemed to lose ground, he had to run even better than that.
Not sure you have the same benefit as I do in having all the figs in front of you, but Rags gave SW the equivalent of a 2.75 TG figure in his last race. The jump up from that fig to yesterday\'s race seems more plausible to me.
The bigger evidence to me was the result of the 1st race, which were not young 2 year olds, they were grizzled veterans with established figure levels. You cannot come up with Ghostofachance and Captain Squire on TG.
Hey, there are 15 figs yesterday from Rags that look like crap in hindsight. I could name them, but it is a waste of time. If the three races I just pointed out had nothing in common, I wouldn\'t even ask Jerry, but the fact that they are all races where the horses came from California and JErry has previously said that he thinks that Beyers has that circuit too fast, that is too much coincidence for me. I have to ask the question.
I will try not to be so simple minded in the future HP. I ask that you do the same.
Miff,
I think that Stevie Wonderboy ran faster than a \"1\". We will see what Jerry give him, but he ran over 2 seconds faster than Folklore, with ground loss. It won\'t go into the figure, but the horse also stumbled or clipped heels. That horse ran huge. Henny Hughes didn\'t run a clunker, he ran very well too.
Jimbo,
I too had access to rags and took a financial bath early on. The disparity in leftcoast #s was evident w/all other methods being used at my table.
Any in depth analysis on this topic may have to be done privately(for I am labeled an antagonist)....and correctly so...
PARTYpokerON!
Jim,
Maybe so, but in any event a hugh forward move which brings to question his previous 6.50.I felt that going in and made my biggest bet of the day only to get split by HH who arguably ran the best race of all of them,figs aside.I was wrong on HH and it cost me big time.
Alright Miff, I guess I misread your earlier post. I thought you were disagreeing with me on the 6.5 fig for Stevie Wonderboy. Sounds like you are in agreement.
I loved HH and was lucky enough to hit the exacta, as I used SW only because I knew TG was alone on that 6.5.
ON an unrelated note the killer for me was Dutrow winning the Sprint, nipping Taste of Paradise. I have that pick 4 for $5 if Taste of Paradise gets up. TOP was a similar price to the winner and the pick 4 paid 5 figures.... Oh well. Next year....
Jim,
Of great concern to me is the now useless \"scale of comparison\" between TG and RAGS which had relevance and a 3 or 4 point scale difference for many years that I compared notes with my RAGGIE friends.
Looking at yesterdays Rags and TG(which I did all day) left me very conflicted on both sets regarding certain races and many runners. It seems like Jerry and Len have taken a different fork in the road.
I\'m with you Jimbo. I usually only play Southern Cal unless there is a big day at Belmont or Churchill. If I\'m wagering, I\'m using TG so did get me wrong, but there are countless examples of horses shipping in with surperior #\'s against slower so cal horses only to get the snot kicked out of them...Your examples of CA horses shipping to Churhill, Pimlico, and Belmont are good examples...Taste of Paradise will get drilled the next time he steps into a graded CA sprint... As was said, anybody can finish forth but Brother Derek shipping in with so slow #s and picking up check irks me. argh!
Jim maybe you should ask Class for his thoughts. Perhaps its the faster splits So. Cal horses are use to running. j/k lol
The pace of the Folklore race was pretty savage. Compare the fractions of that race to the other 3 routes while keeping in mind that these were 2YO fillies and the rest of them were either older horses, colts, or both. The filly race collapsed final time wise because of the pace.
Speaking of Beyers and TGs, an interesting study is Pleasant Home, whose Beyer\'s were kind of ordinary IMO. Hell, I\'ll say it-- her Beyers were much slower than the rest of the field. Her TGs seemed to give her a much better chance in this race.
Not to mention that elusive, enigmatic (to me) Pair/Pair/Pair pattern.
Rich,
I agree and it was obvious that closers were dominating the winners circle on the dirt(exc Folklore)
Pleasant Home made my day \'OK\' yesterday. I had a small win and place bet on her, but I really needed Happy Ticket first or second to hit a grand slam. She didn\'t have much of a Beyer figure, but she was \"wide\" in her last trying to \"close\" off a somewhat \"slow pace\". I thought she ran well there. The TG figure has the wide baked in. She seemed like she was improving slowly. THis was only her 4th race off a layoff. She was coming back to Belmont where she would probably do better and the pace looked like it might be lively this time around. Granted this is all redboarding. However, I made a similar case for several other horses I bet yesterday that didn\'t do much running (like Wend). PH, was the only one that broke through, but sometimes you only need one.
I\'m glad the other guys took a whack at this Jimbo. If Folklore paired his \"2\", you think it\'s impossible that Wild Fit could move up TWO points to a \"4\" to finish second? As for Stevie Wonderboy, good 2yo horses move up! Other horses in both juvenile races had jumped up before the BC (some of them have TEN POINT jumps!) why is it so beyond the realm of possibility that the horse jumped up five or six points off the pair (an excellent pattern going in)?
There are lots of explanations and I don\'t think this indicates the Cali numbers are wrong. I guess Jerry chose to skip this line for whatever reason...
I only tried to say I wasn\'t meaning to offend you since I figured you were still pissed about my negative comments about Sensation...
Judging by my reading here it would seem you did well so congratulations...
HP
Richie,
She closed into Pampered Princess (who\'s previous TG Fig was neg 1) at Keenland against a strong rail/speed bias in her last race. You\'d have to figure/project she would jump up at Belmont. She was certainly sitting on a race. Thank God I boxed that exacta. Nothing like a signer exacta.
NC Tony
See my post on Happy Ticket a few weeks ago, She\'s a sprinter who stretched out in her last and ran a huge figure. I thought that effort taxed her. You\'d have to think she might be a \"bounce\" candidate in her second consecutive 9F race. I wasted money on her \"just in case\".
NC Tony
Jimbo,
I was in contact thoughout the day, with a few guys (Who everyone on this board would say are pretty sharp handicappers) who also said the same thing. They estimate the socal figs to be about 2 to 3 points to slow compared to the NY east coast dirt figs and actually handicapped that way. The scales seem to be off. The Derby and Derby day races would be another day that you might use as an example of the disparity.
Race 1 and the two Juvy\'s are perfect examples. Your email was exactly my take away from BC day.
This is meant to be contructive not antagonistic.
NC Tony
NCT,
\"See my post on Happy Ticket a few weeks ago, She\'s a sprinter who stretched out in her last and ran a huge figure. I thought that effort taxed her. You\'d have to think she might be a \"bounce\" candidate in her second consecutive 9F race. I wasted money on her \"just in case\". \"
That could be the case. In hindsight, I really didn\'t like her other route performances as much. So maybe I was just putting too much weight on her last effort to begin with. I should have hit that exacta either way, but it\'s hard to complain too much when you cash a $60 horse.
Re: Cali figs
For those of you who think the Cali Figs are too slow because the juvi Cali horses ran so well, these six had previously (before the BC) jumped five or more points, and there are others who jumped three or so...
Folklore
KTemplar
SStone
FSam
HHughes
PVow
So it\'s not unusual for 2yos to move up five or so points...especially since both of them had decent patterns going in (NO BOUNCES and a pair for SWonder and very little backup for Wild Fit).
HP
HP,
Fair point, but you are not reading all of what I wrote. To repeat, the STRONGEST example of the california figs not holding us was the first race on the card. At the weights, Captain Squire was about the slowest horse in the race, and Ghostofachance was right there with him. They ran 1-2. They were in the \"3\" range, while the NYers were running 0 and negative.
I want to wait for Jerry to do the card and give his comments, but you are making it hard :)
There are more recent examples as well. Taste of Paradise was running much slower figs out West, then moves to negative 3 at Belmont and another presumably strong performance on Saturday.
And you can point out all you want about how 2 year olds move up, we all know that is true. But when the specific two year olds that DO move up in a sequence of races all have the same point in common (coming from California, having slow TG figures, quicker figures from other sources), then it at least begs the question to analyze it. (Which Jerry did say he would look at it in his other post and he was also not surprised it was raised).
To sweep it all under the category of \"2 year olds moving up\", is not a prudent approach at all, to me.
But we all look at things differently and maybe you are right. (I am not necessarily saying I am right that the Calif. Figs are off, I am only saying it should be looked at).
HP,
Your point regarding young horses jumping up is something we have all seen and believe in.The point regarding the Cal Figs which poses serious questions are(for ex)Gotaghostofachance(4) Captain Squire(3)Taste of Paradise(4) just from one card.It is HIGHLy unlikely that these older horse all together, and all of a sudden, decided to \"jump up\"
It is far more likely that Jerry is of the opinion that the Cal surfaces are much faster than other fig makers and handicappers. The results,however would seem to indicate that the CAl TG figs may be too slow for the runners in question.
What is also interesting is that all the comparable data I looked at has the runners patterns about the same which means the disagreement probably lies in the variant.
Jimbo,
I hear you. I didn\'t really think about the first race.
Worst ride nominee: Gary Stevens on Knight\'s Templar. With all due respect to Folklore.
HP
Miff: You wrote, \"The most interesting fig of the day has to be Stevie Wonder Boy who carried 5 lbs more than the older Magna Graduate and ran within 2/5ths raw time.Looks like Stevie will get a 1-ish, imo.\"
Don\'t know if you were at the track, but the wind was really howling those first two, non-BC races. It seemed to calm down quite a bit by the Juv Fillies and then calm even further by post time of the Juveniles. Perhaps this accounts for the raw time discrepancies.
DLF,
Agree, the exact wind measurement and direction for each race will be available on Wednesday.I think that 1.41.3(one turn Belmont) for two year olds is fast especially when the next dirt race, one hour later,with the faster sprinters in training ONLY went 1.08.4(don\'t know how much the wind factored in)
It looked and felt to me like it was blowing dead straight west to east (headwind on the backstretch, tailwind for the stretch).
Even more interesting because the 2yr olds both went 45+ and 1:10+ into a headwind by your view, faster than the older horses in the 2nd who went 46.4.Your view that the wind was more severe races one and two seems to have merit.
That ride by Steven\'s was eerie similar to his ride on Bella Bellucci in the 01 BC juve fillies at Belmont. It\'s hard to believe he had KT in the right spot.
dlf,
\"It looked and felt to me like it was blowing dead straight west to east (headwind on the backstretch, tailwind for the stretch).\"
I agree. It was still pretty stiff against them in the backstretch for the Juvenile filly race, but I think it eased a little later. I wasn\'t keeping notes. I just especially noticed it for the Juvenile filly race because the fractions were so fast despite it being into the wind early. That pace was VERY fast and IMO it accounts for the collapse later in the race. The winner was pretty darn good despite the slowish final time.
HP,
I was sitting with a Rags player as I usually do on \'big\' days. I had the TG\'s with me.
First instance, I had printed Len\'s picks from the his seminar posted on this site.
I saw he felt SWB was a big time key. So, I grabbed the Rags and, lo and behold, Stevie was every bit as fast as FS and had a super looking line.
I remember remarking that SWB was way overbet based on TG\'s.
I passed.
Second Instance:
I felt going in the 1st race that the 9 was going to be my key at a generous price (was 20-1).
The 8 was a toss based on tg\'s.
Another friend, (and probaably the best pure hadicapper I hang with).
He doesn\'t use either TG\'s or Rags. He loved the 6 in the first race.
So, I went with the 1-6-9 only to be nipped by the 8.
Both these races had Cal shippers outrunning their TG numbers.
I play California most of the time and the numbers work fine out there but there is a notorious lack of ship ins for their average daily race cards.
I think Jimbo poses a very fair question.
Brokerstip,
Did not play the first race.
I used TG and I thought Stevie Wonderboy was an obvious contender. I can\'t really address your other points because I didn\'t see the Rags for comparison...
The one thing I\'m noticing in this debate is the differences in how handicappers view a race. For me, big numbers for a 2yo are a NEGATIVE. I would assume a 2yo would bounce off a number approaching zero, and when they do it twice in a row I think they are throwouts, so FSamauri was always off my tickets. They are not three year olds or older horses who are going to improve off those huge numbers... They\'re babies!
If, as you say, StevieWonderboy looked close on Rags, I might have thrown him out too! On TG, StevieWonderboy looked like a horse that could really move up; I love them off pairs, and the only downside was his slight layoff before the BC. I also didn\'t see him as being taxed by the reasonable figs he had already run, unlike FSamauri.
Given that he won, I can\'t say he was \"overbet,\" but I think we can agree that neither of us were happy looking at the tote...
I don\'t think it\'s a case of SBoy \"outrunning\" his Cali #\'s, I think he looked like a horse that could improve, and did.
I find it hard to believe that Jerry will weigh in on this and say anything but that he thinks the Cali numbers are right...but it\'s his board!
HP
I often look at 3-4 sets of speed figures and 2-3 sets of pace figures. There are often differences. Even when they are similar, the smaller differences will cause you to come to different conclusions about the patterns. I think you need a pretty large sample of horses (shippers) to determine if an individual figure or two are off, an unexpected result was just a random move, or whether an entire circuit is off.
TG and RAGs should be pretty easy to compare, but there is no exact formula for comparison with other sets of figures because those other guys occasionally partially build ground loss, weight and other things into the track variant (too long to discuss and unwelcomed here) perhaps without realizing it and certainly without the knowledge of 99.9% of the people that use the figures.
Class,
You must bet a million dollars a day! If I looked at that much stuff to make a bet my head would explode at the window.
In fact, I think I spend (this year too, despite my resolution to the contrary) WAY too much time looking at BCup stuff. I think I\'d get better results just looking at the sheets the day of the races. Wait till next year!
HP
HP,
Have you taken into consideration that the way you play the 2 year old races might not be the way everybody else does? (I really don\'t mean that sarcastically, even though it might sound like that)
I really don\'t know how you could have looked at Stevie Wonderboy\'s sheet and saw his top was 5 points slower than First Samurai and 6 points slower than Henny Hughes, and come to the conclusion that 4-1 was a good price.
I congratulate you for coming up with him and I agree he was \"usable\". I believe the quote in the seminar was something like \"very likely or most likely to move forward but will it be enough in a very fast group of 2 year olds\". If this was the quote for a horse that was 8-1 or 10-1, then I think you can make a case to key him. At 4-1, that is very tough to do for me and I would guess for most.
To be honest, I find it absolutely amazing that you bet Stevie Wonderboy. Not because you used TGraph to come up with him, but because of your own specific betting style, which you have often espoused on this board. You are the same poster who discussed Sensation with me last week and said you would bet against her at a short price (2-1 or 5-2 was what you quoted). I came back and said she would be 5-1 or more, which I thought was value. You said you wouldn\'t \"quibble over the price\". There are other examples on the board of you pointing to 5-1 as too short a price to bet. I am not criticizing that strategy at all, as a matter of fact it is probably damn prudent. But to take 4-1 on a horse who was 5 or 6 points too slow to start with, when you normally don\'t even bet horses in that range, that is quite a leap of faith in your expectation of his forward move.
We probably killed this California figs thing in the absence of the figs for the day. I did see some Beyer figs for the card. Folklore bounced to an 87 (Class perhaps you can do a writeup on how the pace influenced that seemingly slow figure). Stevie Wonderboy got a 105 or so. They gave Saint Liam a 112. I didn\'t see the Distaff, which could be an interesting figure.
jimbo,
\"Class perhaps you can do a writeup on how the pace influenced that seemingly slow figure\"
An invitation? Holy cow!
I do think Folklore and Knights Templar were used up by that pace and ran better than their low Beyer figures suggest. IMO, Folklore was much the best.
Several other horses that raced just off the pace were also probably close enough to it to be impacted, but to lesser degrees. It depends on how close they were, for how long, and how much ability they have.
Jimbo,
\"Have you taken into consideration that the way you play the 2 year old races might not be the way everybody else does? (I really don\'t mean that sarcastically, even though it might sound like that)\"
Yes, that\'s what my post is about. I could be wrong, but if you and I look at First Samauri, you see a horse that is going to run close to another ONE or so, and I see a horse that will be out of the money, or close to it, because that ONE is a HUGE number for a 2yo. I think a 2yo that has run in the five-six range is more likely to pop a big number next time out than a horse like FSam is to repeat it.
\"I really don\'t know how you could have looked at Stevie Wonderboy\'s sheet and saw his top was 5 points slower than First Samurai and 6 points slower than Henny Hughes, and come to the conclusion that 4-1 was a good price.\"
I didn\'t say it was a good price. Did you read my post? I said I was sure brokerstip and I weren\'t happy looking at the tote and seeing he was as short as he was.
\"You are the same poster who discussed Sensation with me last week and said you would bet against her at a short price (2-1 or 5-2 was what you quoted). I came back and said she would be 5-1 or more, which I thought was value. You said you wouldn\'t \"quibble over the price\".\"
I said this meaning that Sensation was my first throwout in the race and it wouldn\'t matter if she was 100-1 (that\'s what I meant by \"quibble over price\"...the price didn\'t matter to me, that\'s how sure I was throwing her out)...she bounced before and figured to bounce again, and did.
I used Stevie Wonderboy in P3\'s and exactas and tris. I didn\'t play him to win at 4-1.
I will also admit that I am not the greatest oddsplayer/moneymanager!
Hope this clears things up...
HP
HP,
Ok. I guess we are not that far off and I do hear you.
I don\'t disagree with you that SW was usable. I keyed Henny Hughes in the race and cashed the exacta.
I also agree with you that betting against lightly raced horses that have run big numbers is a good strategy.
I guess my point is that the reason this is a good strategy is because there is VALUE in doing so. Stevie Wonderboy was not 4-1 because his Tgraph figure was a \"6\" and people thought he could move forward 6 points and win. He was 4-1 because he looked better on other figures. So, he was tough to take at that price as a key horse, although his win was also no surprise. (sounds like a contradiction, but it isn\'t)
I see you didn\'t bet him at 4-1, so we don\'t disagree. I did the same as you, I used him on pick-4\'s as well. The pick-4 that \"almost was\". Went 6 deep against LITF and couldn\'t come up with Silver Train. I don\'t know how deep I would have had to have gone to use him. Maybe 9.....
Jimbo--
I always respect MOST of your posts on here. However, i am getting a bit tired of all the shots people take at CH. He probably has forgotten more about this game than most of us on this board (certainly including myself) have learned.
Perhaps you can justify that PLEASANT HOME\'s 9 lenghth win had nothing to do with the contentious pace or that FLOWER ALLY\'s improved effort had nothing to do with the easier pace in the Classic as opposed to the JCGC or that BORREGO\'s sub-par effort had nothing to do with the fact that the pace in the Classic was slower than in the Gold Cup or Pacific Classic.
Good luck,
Joe B.
Jimbo-- I should be doing the BC later today and will post, will make further comments when I can.
I used Stevie in tris and supers, got busted in the third spot-- my exotic play was against FS, as opposed to on anyone, although I made a win bet on HH as well.
Stevie was the 5th fastest horse on Beyer, who usually has Cal faster than we do.
He was faster on Ragozin. The other California horse-- Brother Derek-- was much slower on Ragozin.
Jimbo,
I did the early pick three on the cheap and missed and then gave up the multi-racers... Saved me money.
I got a little fixated on Lion Tamer in the sprint. Silver Wagon was about my fifth choice. I decided that I liked Attila\'s Storm as my \"move up\" 3yo. I thought those detention barns would be effective (kidding!)...
HP
I can\'t resist one more point HP. Just to clarify, I am bringing this point up not to be argumentative, but to discuss different viewpoints. I guess there is a risk of overdoing this Breeders Cup post mortem. But I like to convince myself that I eventually learn from my mistakes.
Interesting that you would not have played the co-fastest horse in the race (sensation) at any price (100-1), because you thought she would bounce.
It turns out if she ran her number, she would have won (assuming that Jerry\'s figures are somewhat comparable to the 87 that Beyer gave folklore).
What percentage chance did you give her to bounce? 99% chance? Not realistic.
She bounced the first time, so she MUST bounce the second time? Also not realistic. Your own post earlier pointed out how unpredictable that 2 year olds are. And as Jerry pointed out in the seminar, the horse is less likely to bounce the 2nd time, than the first time.
There were three figures from Juveline Fillies at the \"2\" level. One by Folklore and two by Sensation. You could argue that Sensation was less likely to like the stretchout to 1 1/16, but that still left her as the filly with 2 of the 3 fastest figures in the race, a decent post position, 2 wins over the Belmont surface and 10-1 odds.
Tough for me to see that she was a toss at any price.
Although she ran 5th, so you were right....
Joe,
Most of us can read a Racing Form and do look at pace, to varying degrees. The question is how much should that influence final figs? I think Jerry\'s point is very simple...he makes numbers based on final times, beaten lengths, etc., and NOT pace. There\'s nothing stopping you from looking into pace on your own, or giving more weight to one number than another... In fact, Jerry always takes pain to note potential ground loss in his seminars/handicapping, and that is to some degree a function of pace... I\'m sure Class understands all this, and his intentions are good, but he gets pissed that Jerry won\'t go into this \"what if?\" world of pace-influenced figures...and maybe he should just accept that Jerry does what he does and that\'s...it!
Class should be happy that nobody has boxed up pace handicapping as neatly as TG and this way he can use his unique insights to make more money (and I\'m not being sarcastic).
How about Pleasant Home at 30-1! Jimbo, take note that this is another one this genius made a \"quick throwout!\" I bet all the heavy sheets/TG guys saw what I saw -- she looked like a prime bounce candidate off a trio of super races. How else could she be 30-1? The guys that ignored that and posted about taking her before the race sure read the tote better than me... My brain was locked.
HP
At some point you guys should at least consider the fact that both Sensation and Stevie Wonderboy were running much farther than ever before. Wouldn\'t this mean that the figures were not very likely to be indicitive of what they might do at the longer distance? Surely, Sensation looked like a huge question mark at a longer distance, while SW looked to like it. I know it doesn\'t work out all the time, but sprint figures are not the best indicator of what a horse might do at a longer distance, at least in my opinion.
Jimbo,
Our posts crossed, and I did make a note to you in there about Pleasant Home...
\"She (Sensation) bounced the first time, so she MUST bounce the second time? Also not realistic.\"
Well...she bounced sprinting. Now she\'s stretching out off the top against...these horses. As a 2yo filly, I DID think she was 99% likely to bounce, and I was confident enough to post it (I try not to do that kind of thing lightly...). If there was a window you could bet on individual horses to bounce I would\'ve emptied out on this one...
I don\'t know if this makes sense, but I think 2yos are a lot more unpredictable BEFORE they pop the big number. I think the problem is you don\'t know which one is gonna POP.
Folklore on the other hand...had not bounced yet. Tougher to throw out, but at 5/2, yeah, throw her out!
HP
Joe B,
Your post is non-sense. I am taking no shot at Class. In fact, to be honest, I collaborated with Class on several races on BC day. We both bet Flower Alley.
The \"shot\" I was taking, was at Len, not Class. Feel free to defend his honor, if you must.
I don\'t need to justify anything about the races you suggested, but I will comment, since you asked. To clarify first, I do believe that pace matters in the race and I do factor it into my own bets. In the past, when I have made comments to Class, it is because 1) Pace is not the answer for everything and sometimes he makes it sound that way and 2) Since this is the Thorograph board, I don\'t see why he wants to talk about pace all the time.
Let\'s start with Pleasant Home. You say her win was pace aided. I guess I would buy this if the horses to beat in the race, were all part of the pace. But Stellar jayne, Ashado, Happy Ticket and Society Selection all sat off the pace. Yes, the pace was had and the pacesetters collapsed, but the \"figure horses\" weren\'t part of it. I don\'t know how this horse wins by 10. He had 5 figures in a row that were a couple lengths short of competitive. You can make a case that she could win, but for her to win by 10 is tough to take.
Your other two are much easier to explain. Flower Alley bounced in the JC Gold Cup. He ran two negative 2 races at Saratoga. He was rank early in the Gold Cup, which he never had been before, and backed up before the turn. It was a classic bounce. You could bet him to run back to his Saratoga figures in the Breeders Cup. I did, so did Class, so did a few others on this board.
Borrego is an even a better example. He has never run faster than a \"0\" in his life. Then he runs a negative 3.75 in the JC Gold Cup. How many people on this board pointed to Aptitude a few years back and said that Borrego has a similar running line? Many people. He was an absolute bet against in this race, regardless of the pace scenario. You really think he ran a figure 6 to 8 oints worse this time because the pace was \"moderate\"? You are the one who should explain that, not me.
Beyerguy,
Yes, the distance matters. Jerry mentioned it for both horses in the seminar. Wonderboy had a great distance pedigree and Jerry said that Sensation\'s gave no indication either way. I had a conversation with Michael D about Sensation (before the race) and he thought that her pedigree was troublesome for the distance.
But there is a big difference between factoring in a pedigree and saying that \"the figures were not very likely to be indicitive of what they might do at the longer distance\".
Their actual figures were still the best indication of what they would run on Saturday. Pedigree supposition is a factor, but certainly not the most important.
Plus, do you really consider a 1 1/16 race at Belmont a true distance race? It is a one turn elongated sprint.
One turn or two, there is a huge difference between 6.5 and 8.5 furlongs. I actually think one turn races are tougher on sprinters trying to stretch out than two turn races.
Pedigree is one thing, how they run the sprints is another. No way did Sensation look like a horse that wanted more ground to me in her previous efforts.
As for the best indication, sometimes yes, sometimes no, but the odds should be there to guess yes as I\'m sure you practice.
I think the Pleasant Home result was the most interesting one of the day.
Going in, I expected a competitive pace that would help horses like Happy Ticket, Pleasant Home and Society Selection. Visually (at least while at the track), I got the impression that the early part of the race \"was\" competitive. Plus, two of the three horse above finished 1st and 2nd (a combination I did not have - damn it) while coming from way off the pace.
However, numerically, the pace and final time do not look especially fast to me based on the other races that day, all the high quality horses in the race, and the huge 9 length win.
Several second string horses that were on or close to the pace at various calls collapsed very badly (worse than you would expect if the pace was neutral) and a few of the good ones were reasonably close at one point or another and didn\'t finish very well. However, none of the other closers (like Society Selection and In the Gold) ran nearly as well as Pleasant Home on a relative basis.
I\'m interested to hear everyone\'s point of view on this result.
Ashado looked vulnerable, especially given the pace scenario and the way it looked the track was playing to this amateur. I liked In the Gold, and I took it as a positive sign that she was taking some money. Happy Ticket was an easy toss for me off the pair of tops. I used Stellar and Sweet Symphony (despite several negative comments during the week I decided to overlook after seeing Intercontinental win despite Bailey\'s assertion that he \"wanted no part of a mile and a quarter.\").
Pleasant Home was a toss for me off three big races...oops, she ran another!
Asides from seeing that the pace wasn\'t \"slow,\" I\'m not sure what the result means... Might not have been a pace thing...maybe some of the better ones just didn\'t have it and PHome brought her \"A\" game... HP
< However, i am getting a bit tired of all the shots people take at CH. He probably has forgotten more about this game than most of us on this board (certainly including myself) have learned. >
Agreed - the trouble is he insists on talking about it.
CH:
Yeah, I know how it is when you catch a $60 winner. You\'ll be happy to hear our thoughts on this one 8 months from now, maybe 8 years. And no, I dont know how to make a frikkin smiley face, but I\'ll indulge you with some observations:
1) As I have posted previously, if you look at PHs Beyers, even taking into account what you call \"the baked in wide\", this horse was no match for the contenders in the race. TG had a much better line on PH, a line which made her part of the mix.
2) Trainers matter always, jockeys matter always. I think they matter more in races such as the BC races where the competition is deep, where there are big fields, where 8 or 9 of the runners are qualified to win. Shug had won at least 2 previous runnings of this race (Personal Ensign, Inside Info)(is there anyone I missed?) and has always been dangerous on big NYRA days, having won four of the six BC Preview races one year in the old days when all the Preview races were run on one day. I think if you look back over the years at NYRA, the number of horses saddled by Shug for the Phipps who went off at 30/1 in a Grade 1 stake is... a very low number.
3) Self indictment, count 2. (A) I didn\'t handicap the Distaff enough, and did not have enough real time awareness of the tote to see an obvious overlay; (B) one of my many Hcapping shortcomings is that when I decide a certain bloodline is great on an off track (Pleasant Colony, Con Cielo and Relaunch are my personal favorites, as was Hagley, but his line is basically gone) I basically abandon them on a fast track, sometimes to my detriment. If the track would have been \"good\", I would have been all over this filly based on the fact that Pleasant Colony was her maternal grand sire.
I think traffic may also have played a part in some of the big names not firing. They\'re used to clear sailing in small fields, and Saturday they were running between and behind horses, and maybe having to check slightly from time to time. That was coupled with horses that are beyond or near the end of their comfort zone, distance-wise.
richiebee
I\'m not so much interested in handicapping the race after the fact as I am in trying to figure out well everyone actually ran. A 9 length win over horses like Ashado, Society Selection, etc... suggests a huge performance. But the time of the race didn\'t look especially fast to me. Often, in situations like that the pace is very fast and it\'s possible to conclude that many of the contenders were used up and that allowed some closer to win big without really running all that fast. In this case though, the pace doesn\'t look all that fast (the fractions don\'t look extreme). If the race really did collapse you would think that Society Selection and perhaps In the Gold would also have been well clear of Ashado and some others that were closer even if not as impressive as Pleasant Home (PH obviously ran well. It\'s a matter of degree). Maybe as bitplayer suggested there were some tough trips in there that weren\'t obvious or some distance issues.
I didn\'t see the Beyer figure yet and Jerry has given out the TG figures either.
Speaking as one who had two key horses for the BC in PH and Shirrocco. sp? the real question is WHY? PH race at Keenland was spectacular because of the bias (according to my eyes) that day that race at Keenland. That was major reason I bet accordingly. No differance than the path that Shirrocco ran inthe ARC vs.the horses that finished in front. 5W 5W 5W
CH:
In retrospect, maybe Society Selection moved too early. In the Gold didn\'t move at all.
Trainer angle, redux: Shug has 5 seconds in the Distaff to go along with his 3 winners.
Ashado has won 3 G1s this year, and is the likely Eclipse winner, no?
rando,
I agree on that. She was very wide and closed against against a slow pace on a track that might have been tilted against her style. Under any circumtances, it couldn\'t have been as good a set of conditions as she was likely to get at Belmont Saturday. That\'s why I threw her in.
>In retrospect, maybe Society Selection moved too early. In the Gold didn\'t move at all. <
Could be?
>Ashado has won 3 G1s this year, and is the likely Eclipse winner, no?<
Who else?
Let\'s wait for Jerry\'s figure.
Richiebee,
I keyed Society Selection (as I always seem to do) and was watching her the entire race. She didn\'t move early. She moved just when she needed to and saved ground all the way. If the rail wasn\'t dead, it was a perfect trip. She was just not good enough. As they hit the turn, I thought I had the winner. Then a few strides later, the other horse was gone and I was praying that SS would get by Ashado for the exacta.
SORRY Can\'t spell. KEENELAND
I also think Soc Solection got hung up and banged with Ashado and Capeside Lady who was dying on the rail. Pleasant Home was running free and blew by those two on the outside (a great inside out ride by C Valasquez) while they were racing each other. Anyway Once she got the lead I was Begging for SS to get place and it seemed like forever for those two to finally get camera time at the wire.
Again Pleasant Home last Race at Kee closing into a speed bias should have told us all to be aware that she was sitting on an A race.
NC Tony
Jimbo:
Glad you cashed a couple of tickets. It takes a brave man to defend CH, and an even braver man to admit to collaborating with him, but you guys both work hard at it and I appreciate (both of) your observations and insights.
Now that BC is over and its too early to get on the Derby, where will you ply your trade? Waiting for GP, which should have full fields for Jan/ Feb/ Mar with the closing of FG?
CH On Oct. 9 I had bias at Keeneland Big Rail Med Speed and outside closers on turf. With that in mind it further increased the value of that race beyond just the pace or the fact speed was carrying. Big rail is not a designation I COME TO VERY OFTEN. PH was 1W3W5-6W3W in that race at Keeneland.
Correction I had outside on the turf at keeneland Oct. 9 not outside closers. Refer to my last post.
Brokerstip Am surprised you didn\'t mention the rags #\'s onAce,Shakespeare,and English channel and make the comparison to the TG #\'s! I had both and use only as one of many factors considered when trying to collect. But I\'m a bettor that handicaps to keep the wolves away. By the way Thanks to JB FOR HIS PASSION TOWARDS HIS WORK. Disclaimer I make no negative comments toward the work of Either Len or Jerry. I\'m trying to cash flow my habit.
HP,
I don\'t often post here because I don\'t want to get into any prolonged debate.
SWB had an excellent pattern on both sheets. He had much stronger number power on Rags. That is, either they had HH and FS slower or SWB faster than the TG\'s.
Either way,(and I have used speed figs for 30years) SWB was imho a much \'stronger\' line on RAGs than TG\'s. And, I would think that is why Len singled him out as the \'key\' to the race. I agree that the TG\'s had him looking good but their analysis tiptoed to HH (which was also a great call).
Me, I will wait for the maestro to sort out the \'apparent\' difference in the Cal. #\'s.
I\'ve wondered if the So Cal fracs were a function of the racing surface , maint etc + It\'s been said that the Cal Bread is on the upswing partially due cross breeding w/ KY breads . I know it\'s not that simple , but those are a couple things that I think about when looking at a horse coming east from So Cal.
Jimbo---
I hear you. Not everything is answered by bounces off of career tops either. I think we all try to look to final numbers, pace, trips, etc as to why a certain horse did not run the way we expected.
That\'s what makes this game so fascinating. We all have our opinions and we all tend to lean on the handicapping tools that we are most comfortable with. For you it may be final numbers, patterns, and some pace analysis.
Although CH tends to talk about pace more than the average poster here, I\'m sure he would be the first to admit that performance ratings are an invaluable tool.
That being said, although LITF was not himself on Saturday, a 3 wide, 3 abreast move at Belmont going 6f is a shortcut to defeat. Not suprised by the fact that all 4 sprint winners at Belmont have now come from inside the 4 post.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Rando,
I didn\'t look at the Rags for every race. Was afraid of Information Overload which is the Mad Cow and/or Avian Flu of horseplayers.
My curiosity was aroused when HH opened up near double digits and SWB was 7/2.
Joe B.
\"That being said, although LITF was not himself on Saturday, a 3 wide, 3 abreast move at Belmont going 6f is a shortcut to defeat. Not suprised by the fact that all 4 sprint winners at Belmont have now come from inside the 4 post.\"
I agree. That 3w or 4W duel is a very tough trip.
her last was a 3/4? move threw her top, she was well rested and to me was one of the only ones projected to move foward. I thought the last was a big tip off to another move foward.
Rich wrote:
\"her last was a 3/4? move threw her top, she was well rested and to me was one of the only ones projected to move foward. I thought the last was a big tip off to another move foward.\"
I was wondering when someone would point out that Pleasant Home had an explosive line. One never knows how big the forward move will be, but for many, its hard to bet when they look several points too slow. That\'s why they\'re 30-1, but you only need to be right once in 20-30 attempts to make it worthwhile.
bdsheets:
I\'m interested in your explosive line theory. Please explain.( I may have missed your previous post if you have already done this.)....thanks.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Joe B.
I\'m guessing he means she was forging at 1 3/4 to 1 for four or five straight races and it could be interpreted that she was due to move to the next level. She did and picked a grand time to do it. I\'ve found this to be a powerful line in the past. One example that comes to mind is Editor\'s Note in the 96? Belmont. Forging at 5\'s and blew to a new top of 2 in the Belmont. Check Pleasant Home\'s sheet and then go to the archives and check the sheet on Editor\'s Note and file the pattern away for future reference.
Good Luck,
Mark