why was there no inq. in this race? the winner clearly smacked the 3rd place horse in the strecth. simple, the stewards had the 5.
Cubfan:
By your reasoning, Dominguez (rider of the 3rd place finisher) and Contessa (trainer of the 3rd place finisher) also \"had\" the winner, because neither one of them claimed foul.
If you really think the stewards are betting on the races, you shouldn\'t be betting on the races.
that should not matter genius, when horses swerve in the stretch and horses check, isnt that a automatic inq.? mabe you should watch a couple of races.
Cubfan:
I have watched enough races to know that the NY stewards are on record as saying that they will not take a horse down if that horse\'s actions did not affect the order of finish.
In this particular case, the stewards obviously felt that Liquor Cabinet\'s brush with Lieutenant Danz did not cost Lt Danz first or second place, and took no action.
The truth is that if you watched the race, you watched Liquor Cabinet go by Lt Danz and Manchurian (the Pletcher trained favorite who I can safely assume that you bet) like a freight train goes by a hobo. If anything, his bearing in and brushing made LC\'s margin of victory smaller than it should have been.
In NY, the only time where there is the kind of \"automatic\" inquiry you describe is when a horse unseats its rider, or when a horse refuses to leave the gate, or breaks from the gate far behind his field.
Richiebee -
I didn\'t play the race and only saw the replay once. You may be right that the ultimate outcome was correct, but this is an area where I think racing/stewards can do a better job of customer relations. Where it\'s obvious that something happened in the stretch (didn\'t the announcer even comment on it during his call?), the stewards should have a way of letting the bettors know that they\'re paying attention, even if it\'s not a full-blown (time-consuming) inquiry. Maybe they should have the announcer say, for example, that an outrider has talked to Ramon Dominguez and he told them he wasn\'t significantly impeded, so no further inquiry will be conducted.
As an aside, I\'ve been looking in the Redboard room to try to get a handle on ThoroPattern patterns. The Pair/Pair/Pair thing you brought up last year seems quite powerful. I\'m thinking maybe even two Pairs is enough. I\'ll post when I\'ve collected more data and had a chance to look it over.
clearly wasnt the winner, but second place? definetly poss.
pletchers horse was retreating badly
Bit:
Before \"quick official\", there seemed to be a lot more rider claims of foul.
Rather than focus on the non- inquiry, I would rather observe the following: Lt Danz, second race long, second race Contessa, ran a very good race. LD broke from the far outside post, raced wide the entire trip, accelerated wide into the far turn, and was tiring at about the time he brushed with Liquor Cabinet.Winless in 05/06, I would bet LD right back if he gets another Inner try-short or long.
Liquor Cabinet now has been visually impressive in 2 tries over the inner and looks to be sound for the first time in his career. LC now qualifies as an animal with \"Inner fortitude\", likes distance, and could win back at a price if thrown back into a limited stake on the Inner Course.
Achilles of Troy beat nothing and proved nothing yesterday. His handlers obviously agree with TGJB\'s belief that it is difficult to ship from cold clime to warm to race because Paragallo said that A of T will be shipped to Classic Mile Farm to be pointed towards Fla prep races. Always a tough call for an owner/trainer, because the horse is obviously thriving in Ozone Park. Fans of Ancient mythology should have done well in the late Pick 4 at Big A, which featured both Hercules and Achilles.
You could get in a lot of trouble discussing the pair/pair/pair pattern, as certain factions have made it clear that racehorses are not machines, are not that consistent, that patterns such as that evidence a self fulfilling prophecy, etc. Its actually a fascinating debate, especially when it does not dissolve into childish (though at times admittedly hillarious) name calling.
With regards to the Thoro Patterns (TPs), I think there is debate even within the TG camp as to the efficacy of the TPs. I do not have time to undertake a study of the strike rate of these patterns, and wish you luck in your endeavors. I have spoken to TGJB about releasing statistics which would reveal which TPs are the most potent, the most predictive of a winning effort.
TGAB once revealed to me that there are over 24,000 possible TPs. Due to duplication, the number of TPs which go into the gate each year is a smaller number. It would be informative to see a list of all TPs, most potent to least potent. If the price was right, some might be willing to pay for it.
Richiebee -
Thanks for the heads-up. I\'ve been called names on this board before without lasting emotional scars, so I\'ll probably risk it. I\'m also aware that the way the pattern data was compiled may limit its utility in situations (e.g., layoffs, stretching out) that were excluded from the data set.
As I suggested in my earlier message, one of my issues is whether having so many ThoroPatterns is really useful. For example, are 5yo and up really any different in Jan-Mar than they are in Feb-Apr?
In any event, to keep things simple, I\'m starting with the limited universe of Jan-Mar 3yos running on dirt (tis the season), for which there are only 64 possible patterns. I\'ve found 48 of them.
These early returns reveal that, in that group, Pair/Pair/Pair has the highest percentage of top or pair races, and X/X/X (think Greeley\'s Galaxy) has the worst percentage. More importantly (to me), however, all 4 of the combinations ending in Pair/Pair are in the top 7 and the three X/X patterns that I have found (I\'m missing Pair/X/X) are the bottom three. This suggests to me that the first race in the sequence may not be that important, which would allow combining patterns to get better sample sizes. It also raises the issue of whether there really are \"patterns\" or just more and less reliable indicators of ability/fitness level, but that\'s for another day.
Very interesting post on TP , I\'m not exactly sure what bit was saying in his last sentence but I get most the rest of it . I\'m guessing that 3 yo\'s running a pair at this time of year , in the early season cycle of development , has got to have good implications for the future of that horse .
I\'d like to see additional TP applications that may offer value , for instance . ie , having TP break it down by Sire , Age , Fillies & Mares , particular track etc + .
I look forward to hearing more about these nuances and issues with regard to TP that are being addressed by you guy\'s and JB/TG becouse I\'m sure alot of folks are thinking about this stuff .
Also , and this just in ... Thanks Jerry for the win and exacta in the ROTW , it seems I\'ll be looking at GPX tomorrow after all ...
Bit:
I understand your approach to evaluating patterns, in this case using developing 3YOs as the focus of the study.
What I would be interested in investigating with regards to the T-Patterns is not how effective they are in pointing out horses who are likely to \"top\", but rather horses who are likely to WIN. Basically this would involve taking the day\'s winners from any track or any number of tracks, visiting the RB room, and noting, in retrospect, what the winner\'s pattern was. I\'m sure that over time, and with a large enough sample, certain TG patterns would prove to be very potent in terms of predicting a winning effort; as an extension, hopefully one would be able to identify patterns which are predictive of winners paying decent mutuels.
In any given race, it is possible that 2 or 3 or 4 animals will match or exceed their best effort; only one of these animals will visit the winner\'s circle, and it is the winner which we are all trying to identify.
Marcus:
If you play GPX Monday, watch out for \"sneaky\" Eibar Coa. Last Monday Coa \"snuck\" down to Hallandale, had one mount, and rode a $17 winner for Mike Hushion.
Tomorrow, \"sneaky\" Eibar is named on both halves of a Violette entry in Race 6, and has mounts in races 8- 10.
Glad all the TG gang feasted on the ROTW while I was shoveling snow.
Did anyone catch the entire head-on relpay???
On the track signal I was watching (OTB channel on cable in NYC) when they came to the top of the stretch during the head-on replay, the screen switched to the show photo for a bit and then switched back to the head-on after the (non?) incident. I checked the replay on youbet, and sure enough, the footage in question is missing, clearly edited out.
Ramon not claiming foul was also puzzling, but maybe after you win a BC race there aint much difference between 2nd & 3rd in an AQI alw. Either that or somtimes you just have to play along for the good of the game and the good of you career.
Are you saying that Rosemary Wood has been reincarnated, and now works in NYRA\'s Audio- Visual Department?
Thanks for the heads up - I\'m going look at the card after coffee ...
I hope you where shoveling in Maryland or Virginia rather than up here in the North Country .
In my opinion it looked worse on the pan than it did head on. The winner shifted in as he went by and tightened things up for Ramon momentarily. The Pletcher horse ran on after looking like a dead piece mid stretch. It\'s not clear it cost Ramon anything. It speaks volumes that Dominguez did not claim foul. Also,just because they didn\'t post an inquiry does not mean they didn\'t look at it. But I agree with those who have said that perhaps something so visually obvious on the pan merits the Stewards posting an inquiry, even if it\'s a short duration and perhaps without blinking numbers just to let the customers know it was reviewed.
From DRF Chart
LIQUOR CABINET (IRE) raced close up along the inside while in hand, came wide for the drive, lugged in in the stretch and drew clear under a drive. MANCHURIAN contested the pace along the inside and dug in gamely on the rail in the stretch. LIEUTENANT DANZ raced with the pace while three wide, was steadied while between rivals in the stretch and weakened in the final furlong.
Richie,
Now you know why I moved and stayed south in North Carolina. That level of intelligence came from that fine Jesuit Education in the bronx!!
Good luck with the snow. Don\'t hurt your back (in all seriousness).
NC Tony
Tony,
As a fellow Bronx boy who grew in your old neighborhood (Belmont Ave), I can tell you that this snow is murderous. To bad I didn\'t get the advice you gave to Rich in time. I ended up hurting my back shoveling today.
Bob
I hope you guys didn\'t watch the golf this weekend, what terrible weather we\'re getting here in No Cal.
Richiebee -
The difference between our approaches is basically the difference between the runs-based stats and the TG-figure-based stats that TG presents for trainers. Since my handicapping approach is to try to figure out the range in which each horse will run, use that to establish an odds line building in some level of profit for me, and then compare that with the odds offered by the tote, the TG-figure-based approach seems to fit my needs better.
One issue with the runs-based approach is that the data you compile reflects field sizes and (if you are looking at ROI) betting patterns. If either of those has changed between the time your data was collected and the time you are using the data to handicap a race, you\'ll be misled. On the other hand, if form cycles have changed (possibly due to use of steroids or other medications), we\'ll both be misled.
A further issue with the data-gathering approach you propose (other than it being a lot of work) is that the pattern the winner has is not necessarily the pattern noted on its TG sheet. Many horses fail to fall into one of TG\'s narrowly-defined patterns becaue of layoffs or distance or surface changes (in which case I think TG gives you the stats that would apply absent these changes). If you want to include those winners in your data set, you have to define even more patterns.
Bit:
I am sure that the Thoro Patterns are troubling and distracting to the long term TG users who have grown accustomed to identifying lucrative patterns over the years. Certainly there are TG purists out there who probably ignore the TPs altogether. Others probably are offended that TG would try to put what they have taken years to recognize into a simple, short linear formula.
One of my fascinations with the TG product is that an experienced horseplayer or an owner or trainer should be able to pick up the product, and within hours be able to determine who the fastest animals in a given race are, but the identification of winning or favorable patterns is a skill which would appear to evolve over years of experience.
Interesting that you mention TG based v \"Run based\" trainer stats. In certain instances one will provide a favorable outlook for a horse or its trainer while the other will not be so positive.
TG can not be blamed for putting as much information on the page as space will allow. Of all of what TGJB calls the \"ancillary\" data, I think the info presented on a trainer\'s experience with first and second time starters is most informative and unique. However, I am certain there are those long term TG users who are ignoring all of the ancillary matter and focusing strictly on the numerical grid which is at the core of the product.
I find that the actual horses in a race with an identifiable pattern is quite low reading the TG info...but then again, I only use TQ, not the full sheets. Comments?
Shanahan:
I guess a real wise guy would say that the \"lack of an identifiable pattern\" is, in itself, a pattern.
Shanahan-- I have problems seeing patterns using TQ myself, and I know several other very good handicappers who were weaned on full sheets and say the same thing-- you can\'t see the timing as well. But it was the only way to save space.
In looking for patterns, the \"expression, \"in the eye of the beholder\" comes to mind. The ancients thought they saw the gods and other astrological figures in the random patterns of the stary sky. If you\'l recall the matematician in \"A Beautiful Mind\", he could detect secret messages in newspaper articles. at first he was correct but then starting seeing all kinds of patterns and messages that existed only in his own mind.
Not to say there aren\'t real patterns, but given the multitude of events, one can often see just what one is expecting to see.
As Hamlet said, \"a man can smile and smile and stll be a villian\". Something can occur several times and still not be a pattern.
Bob
I hear ya Bob and TGJB...the things I spot easily are horses that pair up - they run 2 good ones and move forward (young horses) or they run good/bad/good/bad - those are easy. What I look for and CAN spot with TQ are the slow, steady ones who progress just a point or two and keep doing it...kind of what we are all looking for right now!
This is why I applaud not only the ROTW, but also the \"create a card\" concept...nothing worse than a full field of 12 horses running between 13-15 pts between them (Oaklawn early races).
Have you guys wondered what the hell is going on running Round Pond on Thursday? And Brilliant/Jostled on the same Thursday card? Whoever scheduled this and ignored weekend racing needs a calendar.