TGJB - Since he\'s not coming over this year and with him being the talk of racing, wondering if it\'d be possible, if it\'s not an insane amount of work, for a pro bono workup of Frankel\'s sheet? Be cool to find out just how fast he has been running and if he is, as the Brits would have us believe, the best horse in decades. If cannot be done no worries, just been wondering about his actual figs the last few days, as opposed to all the hype.
Frankel has the biggest engine you\'ll see on a horse in years. And this was only his three-year-old year, he\'s not even a mature horse yet.
Here are the five wins in 2011 (turn off the sound, please, they didn\'t use the race calls) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuwgRieXOo4
phil23 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TGJB - Since he\'s not coming over this year and
> with him being the talk of racing, wondering if
> it\'d be possible, if it\'s not an insane amount of
> work, for a pro bono workup of Frankel\'s sheet?
> Be cool to find out just how fast he has been
> running and if he is, as the Brits would have us
> believe, the best horse in decades. If cannot be
> done no worries, just been wondering about his
> actual figs the last few days, as opposed to all
> the hype.
Zenyatta and Goldikova had a lot of hype. They also had figs that made people play against them. They lived up to the hype.
I don\'t care if his figs aren\'t the greatest of all time. He\'s shown his quality on the track, just like Zenyatta and Goldikova.
Are you saying these 2 mares aren\'t amongst the greatest because they didn\'t have superior figs?? If Frankel\'s figs don\'t blow you away, he isn\'t either??
I think that in America, we tend to use figs more than horsemanship in handicapping. That\'s probably due to our tracks being dirt and rather similar - it\'s easier. Few handicappers in America bother to watch race replays, for example. They get all their information off a sheet. Not by horsemanship.
To handicap on a variety of grass tracks, different shapes, uphill and down, from a good 3 to a 10, takes knowing what a particular horse prefers, the horses\' running style, etc (you may throw out a very good horse on an 8 if he\'s only won on 5-6\'s, for example) There are a lot more variables, and you have to know a bit of horsemanship regarding equipment changes, how conformation plays into specific course requirements, etc.
That\'s why some American handicappers have so much trouble with artificial surfaces, I think - if you approach them as you\'d approach handicapping overseas, it\'s not difficult at all. If you don\'t handicap that way, it is. Just not your skill set.
That\'s why American handicappers are often lost in European and Australian racing.
Most American handicappers know how to handicap for one type of racing: American speed dirt racing, which lends it\'s to figure calculations very well. So that\'s what they depend upon to tell them how \"good\" a performance was. They don\'t use their eyes.
Anyway: Frankel is as outstanding a horse as Secretariat was. Enjoy.
http://betting.betfair.com/horse-racing/events/champions-day/frankel-a-star-who-got-the-stage-he-deserved-181011.html
http://betting.betfair.com/horse-racing/events/champions-day/handicappers-corners-frankel-closing-in-on-all-time-gre-171011.html
there is also a useful link within the second article.
Here\'s a short tape of Frankel (4) and Canford Cliffs (1) in the paddock before the Sussex Stakes at Goodwood this year, so you can try and get a look at this horse walking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiKKsTxG79w&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tizaURg-xLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n083Sj7m1e0
As I have said here a dozen times, there\'s a difference between ability and acomplishment. Which constitutes your basis for greatness determines who you think is great.
Goldikova has outstanding figures for a grass filly, among the very best ever.
If the Cards take the series they will be champions, but few will say they were the best team this year. They sure as hell weren\'t when they won a few years ago.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As I have said here a dozen times, there\'s a
> difference between ability and acomplishment.
> Which constitutes your basis for greatness
> determines who you think is great.
>
> Goldikova has outstanding figures for a grass
> filly, among the very best ever.
>
> If the Cards take the series they will be
> champions, but few will say they were the best
> team this year. They sure as hell weren\'t when
> they won a few years ago.
Lebron James has a lot of ability, but hasn\'t accomplished winning a championship. I wouldn\'t call him great, others would. He\'s a physical freak and can do many amazing things, but he is also lacking in things that I would consider before calling him great.
Why would the Cardinals not be considered the best team if they win the World Series??
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why would the Cardinals not be considered the best
> team if they win the World Series??
For the same reason a t-bred shouldn\'t be named HOY after a weak year-long campaign, followed by one quick burst of significant effort.
(Full Disclosure: Big LaRussa fan, much respect for the Cards organization, but can\'t stand their overly self-entitled fans, who piss and moan like a bunch of babies any year they don\'t win the WS.)
Respectfully disagree Rick B.
Cardinal fans MUCH MUCH better than Yankee fans, Met fans, and the lowest form of all fans, Phillies fans.
And I am a NJ/NYer who was born a die-hard Yankee fan. Yankee fans are all about self-entitlement. Much much more so than Cardinal fans.
Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why would the Cardinals not be considered the
> best
> > team if they win the World Series??
>
> For the same reason a t-bred shouldn\'t be named
> HOY after a weak year-long campaign, followed by
> one quick burst of significant effort.
>
> (Full Disclosure: Big LaRussa fan, much respect
> for the Cards organization, but can\'t stand their
> overly self-entitled fans, who piss and moan like
> a bunch of babies any year they don\'t win the WS.)
Quick burst of significant effort??
They won 90 games.
They led the NL in runs scored.
They went 6-3 during the regular season over the \"best team\" in the NL.
They beat the same \"best team\" in a playoff series, making them 9-5 overall against the perceived \"best team\".
Thats hardly a quick burst of significant effort.
Agree with Jimbo, you sure you weren\'t describing Yankees fans??
Jimbo-- you beat me to it about Yankee fans. As a Met fan, I don\'t hate the Yanks, but I root against them because of the fans. Met fans can be annoying, but there ain\'t no way we have a sense of entitlement.
Pdub-- that\'s my point. If you use as the definition that accomplishment equals ability, there\'s no discussion. The point of having figures is that the two are not always the same.
1960 World Series is the gold standard of the best team not winning, but there have been plenty of others.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jimbo-- you beat me to it about Yankee fans. As a
> Met fan, I don\'t hate the Yanks, but I root
> against them because of the fans. Met fans can be
> annoying, but there ain\'t no way we have a sense
> of entitlement.
>
> Pdub-- that\'s my point. If you use as the
> definition that accomplishment equals ability,
> there\'s no discussion. The point of having figures
> is that the two are not always the same.
>
> 1960 World Series is the gold standard of the best
> team not winning, but there have been plenty of
> others.
JB,
I wasn\'t saying accomplishment equals ability, I was referring to the meaning of the word great.
For me, greatness is a combination of ability and accomplishment. For horses, I don\'t think you need the absolute fastest figs to be deemed great. If you\'re in the ballpark, and have the accomplishments to back them up, then I think that qualifies.
There are still some people that think a certain Z horse isn\'t great. I find that ridiculous. They cite her figs. I refer to what she did on the track, her accomplishments in addition to her figs. Just my opinion.
I beg of everyone, lets not start that debate all over again. It was just an example.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quick burst of significant effort??
>
> They won 90 games.
> They led the NL in runs scored.
> They went 6-3 during the regular season over the
> \"best team\" in the NL.
>
> Thats hardly a quick burst of significant effort.
You are correct. Those are merely highlights from a season which even LaRussa described as \"maddeningly inconsistent\".
The Cards got hot late and carried it into playoffs -- that\'s the \"quick burst\" -- and it\'s all for naught if Atlanta doesn\'t soil their shorts the last 3 weeks of the season. Your \"best team\" backed into the wild card spot when Atlanta couldn\'t even salvage a win to force a one-game playoff! Sorry -- that might be incredible luck...but it ain\'t what I call \"best\".
>
> Agree with Jimbo, you sure you weren\'t describing
> Yankees fans??
Not exposed to Yanks fans, nor Mets, Phils, other east coast teams. Here in the Midwest, Cardinal fans arrogance far exceeds that of any other regional team.
Pdub,
Barry Sanders doesn\'t own a ring.Is he not great then?
flighted iron
So its 1974, and I\'m working as a dishwasher at a restaurant/bar in Clayton,
Missouri called Walter Mitty\'s.
One night, the bouncer doesn\'t show up and the boss comes back to the kitchen
and tells me to go out and check IDs at the door. I reminded my boss that I
was only 19 and maybe there was someone who was of legal age who might be
better for this task.
\"Look, just get out to the door and check everyone\'s ID no matter how old
they look and everything will be fine.\"
Which it was until about 10:30 when 3 men immediately familiar to me appeared
at the door.
\"Mr. Gibson, Mr. McCarver, Mr. Shannon, er sorry, but I\'m going to need to see
some identification.\"
I will never forget that all three graciously fished out their driver\'s
licenses.
After the bar closed down and the staff was cleaning out the taps, my boss
came up to me and asked \"What the f--k were you doing checking Gibson and
McCarver\'s ID?\"
Figures.
I no sooner paint all Cardinals fans as a-holes, and one of the most reasonable and revered TG forum members outs himself as a member of Redbird Nation.
Next, someone will tell me that Mother Teresa used to have season tickets down the 3rd base line at Busch Stadium.
Wow, taking a shot at Yankees fans. Somehow a post about a great thoroughbred ends up in a jealous shot at the 27 time world champions. Look, here\'s what it boils down to.
There are true blue Yankees fans and then there are the people who wear a Yankee Hat because Jay Z talked about it in a song. No need to confuse the two.
As far as Frankel goes, its a shame he\'s not pulling an Akeem and Coming to America, i\'d love to have a \'free square\' in the pick 6.
Rick:
More a baseball fan than a Redbird fan, though the \"Birds on a Bat\" is one of
the classier emblems in all of sports.
The Old Busch Stadium was just very user friendly -- free on street parking a
couple of blocks away and a great bleacher seat for $2.
Of course while in St. Louis I had many friends from Chicago, both Cubbie and
Chisox fans. A favorite story may have been that for a while Harry Caray
interviewed Jose Cardenal every day before the game -- Caray would ask the
questions in English and Cardenal would answer in Spanish.
Flighted Iron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pdub,
>
> Barry Sanders doesn\'t own a ring.Is he not great
> then?
>
>
> flighted iron
You don\'t need a ring to be great, but you can\'t come up small when needed.
All of which led to one of the best lines ever uttered by a baseball announcer !
One day Jose dropped an easy fly ball in the outfield and Harry blurted out
\" How can a Mexican lose a ball in the sun \" PRICELESS !!!
Rick B. very fond memories of Cardinal fans at Wrigley during my Chicago days in the 80\'s. Especially large breasts being flashed as many a red \" birds on bat \" t-shirt was lifted by a drunken damsel in the Cubby Bear lounge.
2 Weeks to Breeders Cup boy\'s let\'s get back on task !!!
Good luck,
Frank D.
FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All of which led to one of the best lines ever
> uttered by a baseball announcer !
>
> One day Jose dropped an easy fly ball in the
> outfield and Harry blurted out
> \" How can a Mexican lose a ball in the sun \"
> PRICELESS !!!
Also classic Caray: When a Cub would hit a weak pop-up, Caray would
grumble \"That wouldn\'t be a home run in a phone booth.\"
> 2 Weeks to Breeders Cup boy\'s let\'s get back on
> task !!!
What, you\'re passing on New York Showcase Day?
Pdub,
Agree with you re:player in team sports can be great without being part of a championship.Btw,i also do not consider lebron a great player.potentially yeah,but
currently no.
flighted
> 1960 World Series is the gold standard of the best
> team not winning, but there have been plenty of
> others.
Hard to argue about the 1960 world series, but, I thought 1969 was supposed to be amazing, no? Ironically, if you look at the 1960 and 1969 series, you sort of have to also look at 1979 where the \"we are family\" Pirates beat a supposedly far superior Oriole team (Pirates again getting the nod as big upset a la 1960 and the Orioles once again blowing a gimme series a la 1969).
While it doesn\'t have the cinematic or fairy-tale appeal of the \'60 Pirates walk-off victory, or \'69 Mets miraculous turnabout, I have some sentimental attachment to the \'03 Marlins victory with grizzled Jack McKeon at the helm. My father always maintained that the \'54 Giants sweep of the Indians, who had the highest winning percentage in the modern era, was the gold standard. Of course, it also had the catch by Willie Mays to bolster its case.
That 2003 Marlins team had a lot of talent.
Yes, I know how good they were, but if you had been in NY in 69 you would have known the Orioles had no shot, and I\'m not kidding about that-- I would like to know what the Mets record was the last 50 games of the season including post season (I\'m guessing they won around 40). If I recall the 03 Marlins made a similar huge run, maybe starting earlier.
I\'ve been informed that Met team won 38 of its last 50 in the regular season before going 7-1 post season.
39, not 38.
And if you have more Met questions, I\'m here.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That 2003 Marlins team had a lot of talent.
Every team that makes the World Series has a lot of talent, some considerably more than others. The Marlins started 16-22, before McKeon took over, survived injuries to key players during the regular season, and won the Series as the NL wild card over a team that was playing in its 6th series in eight years.
And now one of my very favorite people (he is probably your source, too) is private messaging me an actual count that shows your number to be right and my number wrong. But my number has so much published support that at this point I don\'t know WTF the correct number is. In other words, this game is being played under protest.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > That 2003 Marlins team had a lot of talent.
>
>
> Every team that makes the World Series has a lot
> of talent, some considerably more than others.
> The Marlins started 16-22, before McKeon took
> over, survived injuries to key players during the
> regular season, and won the Series as the NL wild
> card over a team that was playing in its 6th
> series in eight years.
That Marlins roster was loaded with talent. It was a marginal upset, but not even close to the historical upsets in other World Series.
P-Dub Wrote:
>
> That Marlins roster was loaded with talent. It was
> a marginal upset, but not even close to the
> historical upsets in other World Series.
Well, P-Dub, this is probably a little more than you say \"tomato\" and I say \"toe-mah-to.\" Since it\'s a horse racing board, we shouldn\'t prolong this, but I will use a horse racing analogy. Since we both agree that the Marlins were a talented team, the question is, how conclusive is that? In the Breeders Cup Classic there will be a solid favorite who is upset by a longer-priced horse. Was the winner talented? Of course, but it was still an upset. Talent doesn\'t preclude that. It\'s a relative proposition.
In the beginning of the season, the Marlins were the eleventh longest shot in the National League to win the World Series, per the only pre-season odds report I could find. In July, the only report I could find was an ESPN listing the odds for the top ten teams to win the Series. The Marlins were not mentioned. I could not find any odds specific to the series. As far as rankings of Series\' upsets, I only found one, by Fox Sports. The \'03 series was ranked tenth on the all time list.
But, yes we do agree they were talented.
Fair enough.
My point wasn\'t that the winning team wasn\'t good or that it was an upset, but that they won despite the other team being better. The reason I use 1960 as the classic example is because the Yanks outscored the Pirates by about 30 runs (literally), but lost 4 one run games and the series. I wouldn\'t be surprised if the Yanks set the record for runs scored.
The best team (or horse) doesn\'t always win.
\"but that\'s the way to bet them\" (ceteris paribus)
I was too young to be paying attention to betting lines in 1969, but, I thought the Mets were a big underdog in the 1969 world series from the betting standpoint, no? I thought that Oriole team was supposed to be monstrous (great pitching staff, Boog Powel, Frank and Brooks Robinson, earl weaver, etc) and the Mets had been perceived to have been fluky to beat a very strong Braves squad (I thought the Mets were big underdogs against the Braves too, no?). Am just curious, if the Mets were so dominant so late in the season, shouldn\'t the betting lines have reflected that? Anybody know what the odds were in 1969 at the all star break and the end of the season for the mets to go all the way? Am talking about lines that people could actually bet....not some sportswriter just spouting a number that is his (can\'t imagine there were any female sportswriters talking about betting lines in 1969) best guess. If the Orioles really had no chance and the Mets were a big price, some people must have made some really easy money back then. In 1979, I cashed big time on the Pirates winning the world series against a very hyped Oriole squad.