Jerry,
You mention in your analysis since 2000 31 horses regressed after achieving a top of -1 in the first six months of their 3 yo year. Can you tell me how many of those were at a mile or less? How many at 6F?How many were one turn races?how many bounced going two turns for the first time? How many on turf sprints?
I can name 4 (I think).All were in same race Afleet Alex, Bandini, Bellamy Road, Greeley\'s Galaxy. Would you consider that an anomoly or specific racing circumstances that may have caused all 4 in the same race to run poorly?
Can you also tell me how many horses since (2000 lets say) achieved their top in of a -1 or better in a 10F race and how they performed in their next start?
My point being here is that the sample chosen here tells a story but the data may be skewed, and the sample size no where near large enough to draw an absolute conclusion. The story sounds compelling however.
I also recently heard that no horse can win the Kentucky derby off of 5 week layoff. You get my point.
NC Tony
NC Tony,
I agree and how many in that analysis:
1.Raced on the much more forgiving grass surface in their critical first few races during physical development.You know, knees closing, bones and muscles strengthening et al.
2.Were undefeated in beating 71 runners at 5 different tracks, on turf, wet dirt, dry dirt and all routes.
3.Ran their last quarter in 24.1 in their neg fig ROUTE performance, on their own courage.
4.Had equal type breeding.
I\'ll save you the time. The answer to all is NONE.The.I think the analysis is painting all neg 1\'s with the same brush and not comparing apples to apples.
They all get beat sooner or later and if Barbaro does, his last big fig may be one of MANY posssible reasons.This horse does not fit anywhere near the usual profile of a TC participant (started routing, exclusive early grass,unusual spacing)
I would love to take a shot against 3/5 but the analysis is a weak comparison and the value on the other runners is not enticing to me.
Mike
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NC Tony,
>
>
> I agree and how many in that analysis:
>
> 1.Raced on the much more forgiving grass surface
> in their critical first few races during physical
> development.You know, knees closing, bones and
> muscles strengthening et al.
Well, he ran 8.5f in 140 flat as a November 2 yo. The three DRF variants for the turf courses were 05, 04, and 09. That\'s a fast time and those are hard turf courses.
>
> 2.Were undefeated in beating 71 runners at 5
> different tracks, on turf, wet dirt, dry dirt and
> all routes.
Irrelevant.
>
> 3.Ran their last quarter in 24.1 in their neg fig
> ROUTE performance, on their own courage.
I have a major issue with this and the whole thing is overblown. Here\'s his approx. internal fractions: 23.23, 23.64, 24.41, 25.74, 24.34. The fourth quarter is extremely bizarre and I can\'t explain what was going on (wind, track condition, whatever) because MANY horses ran a monster final quarter mile:
Bluegrass Cat 24.84
Steppenwolfer 24.14
Jazil 23.54!!!!
Bro Derek 24.04
One of the strangest 10f dirt races I can remember... this Derby was really 8f.
> 4.Had equal type breeding.
Irrelevant
>
> I\'ll save you the time. The answer to all is
> NONE.The.I think the analysis is painting all neg
> 1\'s with the same brush and not comparing apples
> to apples.
>
>
> They all get beat sooner or later and if Barbaro
> does, his last big fig may be one of MANY
> posssible reasons.This horse does not fit anywhere
> near the usual profile of a TC participant
> (started routing, exclusive early grass,unusual
> spacing)
>
>
> I would love to take a shot against 3/5 but the
> analysis is a weak comparison and the value on the
> other runners is not enticing to me.
When a huge majority of the P3 and P4 tickets will be dead because Barbaro will be singled, there will be value.
>
> Mike
EZ,
I doubt your knowledge of racing allows you to fully comprehend what is and is not relevant. Your entire analysis is irrelevant. You are assuming all horses are equal.Quess what,they are not.
Mike
Here\'s the table of the horses that have run -1 or better before July in their 3yo year. Knock yourself out.
Forgot to add the sheets here they are.
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> EZ,
>
> I doubt your knowledge of racing allows you to
> fully comprehend what is and is not relevant. Your
> entire analysis is irrelevant. You are assuming
> all horses are equal.Quess what,they are not.
>
> Mike
Well, Mike, we just disagree. But under your definition of equal/not equal we could take everthing to the nth degree...
Horse A 3 yo pattern: 3, 2, 1, 0
Horse B 3 yo pattern: 3, 2, 1, 0
Both horses earned those figures on the same days, on dirt, at identical distances with each having one race as a 2 yo on the same date with a figure of 7. However, Horse As figures were at Philly Park and the temperature at post time for each race was 45 degrees. Horse Bs figures were at Santa Anita and the temperature at post time for each race was 75 degrees. Can you compare the two horses?
The study is great. The next step [short of putting those particular sheets online] would be to include:
- the days between races off the negative top (the \"recovery time\")
- the figure prior to the top
John-- the sheets are now up. As Alan said, knock yourself out.
Thanks...I\'m dizzy already!!!
NC Tony
The table makes a pervasive case against a horse\'s chances of running well after the neg # prior to july ... even if your getting a big price , it doesn\'t look good in the short or long run .
EZ,
Just check the data posted by Alan and show me ONE runner that has a remotely similar pattern/profile to Barbaro leading up to his neg 2.2. I won\'t go into the group of \"no count runners\" and \"one fig\" runners on the list.
The spacing following some of these neg figs by several on the list tells me quite a bit about their next out regression.I think the analysis must be looked into more deeply to get a better picture. In any event I can\'t see anything which makes me believe that Barbaro will regress other than the obvious poor spacing from the derby.
Mike
Miff-- I\'ve been trying to stay out of this, but I would like to see someone hand time those fractions off a replay before I would believe them. One horse running that slow for that quarter and then faster for the last, maybe-- but several, very very unlikely.
Jerry,
The reason I did not question it is because I heard that ESPN did and I assumed your people would catch this anomaly with the hand timing, no?
Mike
All we would catch would be the final time, and since there is no other race run at a similar distance or configuration, a year between races, and 20 horses to work with, I don\'t even even pay much attention to that. (Having said that, it did fit with the only other 2 turn race, a 1 1/16th run 4 mint juleps earlier on the card).
Timing error? How could 7 horses run the final quarter faster then the previous quarter? Dead rail on the turn? Really wasn\'t present earlier in the day. The mile time might be wrong.
EQUIBASE CHART
--------------
Barbaro 23.28 23.62 46.90 24.61 71.51 25.52 97.02 24.34 121.36
Bluegrass Cat 23.51 23.69 47.20 24.51 71.71 25.94 97.65 25.02 122.66
Steppenwolfer 25.01 23.24 48.25 23.91 72.16 25.92 98.07 24.99 123.06
Jazil 25.61 23.89 49.50 23.69 73.18 25.64 98.82 24.44 123.26
Brother Derek 23.61 24.12 47.72 24.66 72.38 26.04 98.42 24.84 123.26
Showing Up 23.26 23.62 46.87 24.61 71.48 26.14 97.62 25.74 123.36
Sweetnorthernsaint 24.11 23.74 47.85 23.76 71.61 26.24 97.85 26.12 123.96
Deputy Glitters 24.31 24.17 48.47 24.31 72.78 25.44 98.22 25.94 124.16
Point Determined 24.01 23.82 47.82 23.99 71.81 26.29 98.10 26.32 124.41
Seaside Retreat 23.48 23.84 47.32 24.74 72.06 26.64 98.70 25.74 124.44
Storm Treasure 25.11 23.59 48.70 23.66 72.36 26.19 98.55 26.79 125.34
Lawyer Ron 23.38 24.24 47.62 24.41 72.03 26.09 98.12 27.57 125.69
Cause to Believe 24.61 24.49 49.10 24.19 73.28 25.94 99.22 26.48 125.70
Flashy Bull 24.71 23.97 48.67 24.21 72.88 25.72 98.60 27.70 126.30
Private Vow 24.91 23.67 48.57 23.69 72.26 26.19 98.45 28.35 126.80
Sinister Minister 22.66 23.82 46.47 24.71 71.18 26.69 97.87 29.48 127.35
Bob and John 24.51 23.54 48.05 23.96 72.01 26.72 98.72 28.93 127.65
A. P. Warrior 23.91 24.37 48.27 24.81 73.08 26.94 100.02 27.68 127.70
Sharp Humor 22.96 24.34 47.30 25.19 72.48 28.54 101.02 26.98 128.00
Keyed Entry 22.63 23.44 46.07 24.81 70.88 27.69 98.57 30.93 129.50
BRISNET CHART
-------------
Barbaro 23.28 23.62 46.90 24.61 71.51 25.52 97.02 24.34 121.36
Bluegrass Cat 23.51 23.69 47.20 24.51 71.71 26.07 97.77 24.89 122.66
Steppenwolfer 25.01 23.24 48.25 23.91 72.16 26.72 98.87 24.19 123.06
Jazil 25.61 23.89 49.50 23.69 73.18 26.42 99.60 23.67 123.26
Brother Derek 23.61 24.12 47.72 24.66 72.38 26.82 99.20 24.07 123.26
Showing Up 23.26 23.62 46.87 24.61 71.48 26.19 97.67 25.69 123.36
Sweetnorthernsaint 24.11 23.74 47.85 23.76 71.61 26.04 97.65 26.32 123.96
Deputy Glitters 24.31 24.17 48.47 24.31 72.78 26.22 99.00 25.17 124.16
Point Determined 24.01 23.82 47.82 23.99 71.81 26.97 98.77 25.64 124.41
Seaside Retreat 23.48 23.84 47.32 24.74 72.06 27.42 99.47 24.97 124.44
Storm Treasure 25.11 23.59 48.70 23.66 72.36 26.97 99.32 26.02 125.34
Lawyer Ron 23.38 24.24 47.62 24.41 72.03 26.87 98.90 26.79 125.69
Cause to Believe 24.61 24.49 49.10 24.19 73.28 26.72 100.00 25.70 125.70
Flashy Bull 24.71 23.97 48.67 24.21 72.88 26.49 99.37 26.93 126.30
Private Vow 24.91 23.67 48.57 23.69 72.26 26.97 99.22 27.58 126.80
Sinister Minister 22.66 23.82 46.47 24.71 71.18 26.44 97.62 29.73 127.35
Bob and John 24.51 23.54 48.05 23.96 72.01 27.49 99.50 28.15 127.65
A. P. Warrior 23.91 24.37 48.27 24.81 73.08 27.72 100.80 26.90 127.70
Sharp Humor 22.96 24.34 47.30 25.19 72.48 29.32 101.80 26.20 128.00
Keyed Entry 22.63 23.44 46.07 24.81 70.88 28.47 99.35 30.15 129.50
i like the way you think ezgoer89. My guess it that nickname adds smarts to an already smart guy.
The Key of Course is that Barbaro will be about 3-5 judging by all the hype. That Derby does on its Face look impressive, however scrutiny reveals some holes in it. My personal view is that he did not run quite as fast as many are saying, so in that regard a bounce is less likely. However, he will not get the benefit of pace and path he received last by all appearances and to my eye he is a horse to consider as a target upon Regression. I\'m confident he will regress. Its merely a question of the others firing and if they do any regression is likely to be sufficient to mar that Perfect Record.
If he doesnt go down Saturday, we\'ll get him in three weeks. We just have to be sure to come up with the correct vanquisher. To me that is the challenge.
ezgoer89 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> miff Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NC Tony,
> >
> >
> > I agree and how many in that analysis:
> >
> > 1.Raced on the much more forgiving grass
> surface
> > in their critical first few races during
> physical
> > development.You know, knees closing, bones
> and
> > muscles strengthening et al.
>
> Well, he ran 8.5f in 140 flat as a November 2 yo.
> The three DRF variants for the turf courses were
> 05, 04, and 09. That\'s a fast time and those are
> hard turf courses.
>
> >
> > 2.Were undefeated in beating 71 runners at 5
> > different tracks, on turf, wet dirt, dry dirt
> and
> > all routes.
>
> Irrelevant.
>
> >
> > 3.Ran their last quarter in 24.1 in their neg
> fig
> > ROUTE performance, on their own courage.
>
>
> I have a major issue with this and the whole thing
> is overblown. Here\'s his approx. internal
> fractions: 23.23, 23.64, 24.41, 25.74, 24.34.
> The fourth quarter is extremely bizarre and I
> can\'t explain what was going on (wind, track
> condition, whatever) because MANY horses ran a
> monster final quarter mile:
>
> Bluegrass Cat 24.84
> Steppenwolfer 24.14
> Jazil 23.54!!!!
> Bro Derek 24.04
>
> One of the strangest 10f dirt races I can
> remember... this Derby was really 8f.
>
>
> > 4.Had equal type breeding.
>
> Irrelevant
>
>
> >
> > I\'ll save you the time. The answer to all is
> > NONE.The.I think the analysis is painting all
> neg
> > 1\'s with the same brush and not comparing
> apples
> > to apples.
> >
>
> >
> > They all get beat sooner or later and if
> Barbaro
> > does, his last big fig may be one of MANY
> > posssible reasons.This horse does not fit
> anywhere
> > near the usual profile of a TC participant
> > (started routing, exclusive early
> grass,unusual
> > spacing)
> >
> >
> > I would love to take a shot against 3/5 but
> the
> > analysis is a weak comparison and the value
> on the
> > other runners is not enticing to me.
>
> When a huge majority of the P3 and P4 tickets will
> be dead because Barbaro will be singled, there
> will be value.
>
> >
> > Mike
>
>
>
Can you expound a bit on how the Derby \"fit\" with the other two turn race. I would guess there haven\'t been seven horses in the last seven years that ran a faster last quarter, than the previous quarter, in a two turn race. thanx. BBB
TGAB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Forgot to add the sheets here they are.
>
> TGAB
Wow,
thank you TGAB
Very impressive and much appreciated
Bell-- I\'m talking about track speed (variant) for the race, final time, not fractions.
bellsbendboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can you expound a bit on how the Derby \"fit\" with
> the other two turn race. I would guess there
> haven\'t been seven horses in the last seven years
> that ran a faster last quarter, than the previous
> quarter, in a two turn race. thanx. BBB
Certainly not attempting to steal TGraphs thunder, but its my belief that the odd closing fractions are related at least in part to path. Churchill was very fast by the Derby, provided the horse was on the right part of the track.
Chuckles_the_Clown2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i like the way you think ezgoer89. My guess it
> that nickname adds smarts to an already smart
> guy.
>
> The Key of Course is that Barbaro will be about
> 3-5 judging by all the hype. That Derby does on
> its Face look impressive, however scrutiny reveals
> some holes in it. My personal view is that he did
> not run quite as fast as many are saying, so in
> that regard a bounce is less likely. However, he
> will not get the benefit of pace and path he
> received last by all appearances and to my eye he
> is a horse to consider as a target upon
> Regression. I\'m confident he will regress. Its
> merely a question of the others firing and if they
> do any regression is likely to be sufficient to
> mar that Perfect Record.
>
> If he doesnt go down Saturday, we\'ll get him in
> three weeks. We just have to be sure to come up
> with the correct vanquisher. To me that is the
> challenge.
CTC - someone who privately posted on another forum brought up a great point - that a Triple Crown winner needs a lot of things, one of them being weak competition. Afleet Alex had it all set up last year and couldn\'t get it done, check out who finished behind him in the Preakness and Belmont and he loses the triple crown to a 50-1 and 70-1.
Barbaro, should he win the Preakness, will have Sunriver, Strong Contender, Bob and John, Point Determined, Jazil, and Steppenwolfer (and surely others) ready and loaded to take him down. And make no mistake, there will be Smarty-type riding tactics again... someone (or two) will run with him early, then the E/P types will try him on the turn and finally Birdstone-like off-the-pacers will try to grab him late.
However, I think the point is moot...
I agree easygoer89, but i think this horse is more tractable than Smarty, and he has a better jock, i don\'t think he\'s going to get suckered in. I may be a bit predjudiced, because this horse literally took my breath away when I saw his 1/1/06 race. He was my derby choice even tho TG\'s fig on him wasn\'t that outstanding ( and if BRC had run out, I would of had the tri and the super ). I don\'t think we\'ve seen the bottom of him yet. Unlike most of those other horses in the study, he\'s not a one dimensional speedball. He\'s got the right trainer and so far Prado hasn\'t made a mistake on him. I haven\'t seen the TG on the new horses, but i don\'t think BD can beat him, he hasn\'t won outside of CA and the horses he was beating outhere are nowhere to be found. I think BB has the right idea; stay away from Barbaro!
EZ
Is it just not possible that the previous quarter was run slower simply because most if not all of it was run around a turn and the final quarter was run on a straight away? Don\'t think the pyhysics there is too hard to grasp.
It\'s those horses that waste all their energy on the turn that run very slow last quarters down the stretch.
NC Tony
Alan & Jerry,
Thanks for posting the data. That kind of response that seperates you guys from the other guys. Sharing the information with your customers (openly), and being customer focused is what seperates one business from another no matter what industry you are in.
NC Tony
yes he\'s the man (second to last on this list) runs tomorrow at mth in a 60g race (why?). \'2\' TG vs an 88 beyer, and a negative \'1.5\' vs 103 beyer (with a \'tu\' in between). you have him pretty fast. did you try and get this guy?
Michael-- I inquired after the second start, they wanted too much (he was undefeated). After the last I would be concerned (see study),and since he won a stake the price would be out of this world.
I notice that no horse on this 3YO Neg Top list ran their initial negative number in the KDerby and the only horse to run a negative number (1.75neg) in the KDerby (prior to this year) was SmartyJones and he went on to win the Preakness (3.75neg).
Could this mean that winning the KDerby with a negative number indicates the presense of a Super Duper Monster horse capable of bettering their effort(TG#) in the Preakness?
I\'m thinking it does.
Asfufh
On that list if you throw out all the negs made at KEE and throw out all the negs made on wet tracks, both rules being plausibly logical, you end up with a very slightly profitable level stake system. Not bad considering the list was meant to show a car wreck. Shows how poisonous backfitted data can be.
P E.
That was point exactly when I started this string. It\'s amazing what you can do with data and draw conclusions from it. Right, Wrong, or indifferent intnetioned or un-intentioned one will draw conclusions if time after time you get a similar result, but each instance is a case study in and of itself. It takes dicipline to not get sucked into data trends and draw absolute conclusions when in the end it\'s just data, and no trend exists at all.
Same goes for Track Bias. No Bias exists if even one horse ran well on the so called biased part of the track (ie inside of the track on derby day for example) because quite a few did run well and some even won on the rail. It may not have been ideal, but it was not an absolute either.
NC Tony
P. Eck-- define \"profitable level stake system\".
TGJB
After seeing yesterdays disaster. I retract everything I said. It\'s absolutely dangerous to push horses to run so fast so early.
I had to admit I cried yesterday!!
NC Tony
The points made by P. Eckhart about the 3yo negative top study are interesting. I think you could also argue for rules throwing out the Derby when it\'s the subsequent start (because it produces an unusually high proportionate number of off and X races) and for throwing out cases where a horse is stretched out after earning the negative top.
How did you come up with the parameters for the study? Why, for example, start at -1?
We used neg 1 because it was clear that at that level horses started reacting differently, and because if we used a bigger number the sample size would be a good deal smaller. Since we did the study there have been at least 2 more 3yos that have run that fast (one being Barbaro), and the score is now 33 examples, no new tops, 3 pairs (one on 77 days rest), the rest worse, with Too Much Bling getting his chance this weekend, on 2 months rest. Compare this (10% combined new tops and pairs) to any group of 3yos hitting a new top that\'s slower-- the Thoro-Patterns give you some examples.