I\'m not sure what to make of I\'ll Have Another\'s current cycle, so I would be curious to hear what others on this board think. To me he\'s a very interesting colt, but a difficult read. Do you read his sheet as the start of an 0 - 2 - X, or do you feel he\'s had enough time since the new top to recover and cycle back?
Thanks in advance!
Meanwhile-- there\'s a Q and A on the \"Ragozin\" board which, if accurate, qualifies as a) Holy S--T, and b) something that will have them looking at the Derby contenders a lot different than those using our data.
They have Union Rags going back 4 points in his last.
I have been struggling with the same question.
I am inclined to take the approach that he has had a lot of time since his big figure and the bounce in the last wasnt that bad so i am currently planning on playing him to come back to the big number.
I am more inclined to play a big number ruining a horse if the horse runs back very quickly post the big number. More time a horse is given post the big figure, less likely it knocks them out for an extended period.
That\'s the way I have always approached it. Of course this isn\'t always right since there\'s unfortunately no one size fits all approach to this game
I love the tactical speed this horse has and I don\'t think he will have a problem with the distance. I wish he had a different jock but I think I will be getting compensated for that risk with his odds
Pending the post draw, I think he\'s on my ticket.
Would love everyone\'s perspective
I\'m not good at predicting performances based on patterns consisting of two numbers, but the backwards move first try 9f tells me he\'s probably not a star, and it might take a star this year. but with the nice timing from both the top and the last race, the strong cruising speed that could result in a very valuable trip, and the solid pedigree, this guy could be a decent trip play at long odds, even if he runs something inbetween. I\'ll probably use him underneath.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Meanwhile-- there\'s a Q and A on the \"Ragozin\"
> board which, if accurate, qualifies as a) Holy
> S--T, and b) something that will have them looking
> at the Derby contenders a lot different than those
> using our data.
>
> They have Union Rags going back 4 points in his
> last.
http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/racing-news/2012/04/06/ragozin-kentucky-derby-doesnt-look-too-good-for-union-rags.aspx
Jerry,
I would assume you will save most of your comments about the horses for the seminar. But if Rags has UR backing up almost 4 points, that also means they should have TCI and El Padrino backing up because they have the FL Derby too slow and the ALW race at Gulfstream on 1/29 too fast. This is an inevitable result of the way they do their figs over there by refusing to split out a varient on a wet, drying out, goofy day like that ALW race at Gulfstream, and by not going off of the horses instead of the varient when the early pace is slow early in a race like the FL Derby.
I understand, in a purist sense, wanting to stay just with the timer and one varient with no subjectivity thrown into making a fig. But I can\'t understand sticking with that approach through hell and high water when the numbers AND the track conditions clearly defy that logic. A sticky, drying out track on a breezy day that is first sealed for the first couple of races and then harrowed is probably as good of an example as I can think of where the conditions are going to play hell with a varient. And if you don\'t adjust for that IMO you are going to wind up with bad figs. That\'s exactly the case with TCI/EP ALW at GP on 1/29. I defy anyone to make a set of figs for that day that make sense just by working off the teletimer. Especially at the new 1 1/16 distance at Gulfstream this year.
Another example of this, although it may not be as obvious, are individual races with slow early race shapes. I\'ve said it before on this board, but when the leader goes 112 for the first 3/4 and everyone else lays back according to running style, even the best presser with a perfect 1w trip around the turn can\'t close their last 3/8ths in 33 and change to make up for the slow early fractions on the teletimer. So again, you wind up with bad figs if you just stick to the time and the varient. The FL Derby and the Oaklawn Handicap are two very recent examples of exactly this. I bet dollars to donuts that rags has all those figures slow by 3-4 points because of their dogmatic approach, and IMO they may have the SA Derby wrong as well.
Even more importantly, there\'s not only going to be a big difference in how TG data users play the KY Derby compared to Rags, there\'s going to be another big difference on how some these overall patterns look for the individual horses after the KY Derby when they run back. For example, if UR were to cycle back and run a new 1 pt top in the Derby, on TG his form cycle will look like pair, pair, small top. On Rags he is going to look like pair, bounce, new top (assuming you guys have the Fountain of Youth about the same). That\'s a big difference on two weeks rest headed into the Preakness.
At least we probably don\'t have to worry about both sets of sheet users being on the same horses this year.
Thanks Jim. I\'m leaning on looking at it that way myself. If we go that way that makes IHA a pretty good play at double digit odds. I would think he would go off at 15 or 20-1. That\'s kind of unusual for the SA Derby and Lewis winner anyway. For whatever reason this horse just isn\'t getting much respect.
Think O\'neill skipping the San Felipe looks like a pretty good move so far. But it\'s tough to see much of a forward move given what this guy did at 2 unless you figure a move up from synth to dirt. The Hopeful is an absolute throw out for this horse.
Originally posted this by accident before it was done, should be okay now.
MJ-- I\'ll leave the pace thing to those who specialize in it, but agree 100% on the rest.
The GP allowance was a tough one to figure, which was why I put it down for review, and added a point to it later. They got the Fla Derby pretty close on the relative scale. But they have the FOY way fast-- on a day with only one 2 turn race and high, gusty winds. In a situation like that, you can\'t make any assumptions about tying anything to anything else.
For all the reasons I go into in \"Changing Track Speeds\" (Archives this site) it\'s a bad mistake to make assumptions even on days where you DON\'T know of obvious reasons the track could be changing speed, or the relationship between distances could be affected. But when there\'s an obvious possible reason-- such as you cite for 1/29 GP-- it\'s completely amatuerish to do so. And that\'s not the worst one.
I\'m going to bring this up again, because it\'s a clear example of the differences between the two services, and between rationality and the dogmatic fundamentalism of a rigid set of assumptions and rules. The Breeders Cup Juvenile Fillies was run over a track that started the day muddy/sealed and was opened up after the fourth race. There is no logic whatsover to the assumption that the track was staying the same speed or changing in a predictable manner-- every serious figure maker would know you have to go by the horses. In that situation, \"Ragozin\" (but given recent events almost certainly not Len) gave the first three finishers 3 points off their tops, and the rest of the field at least 6 points off their tops. 2yos run at least their previous tops something like 2/3 of the time, and here they decided none of them came close-- in a GI stake. I can\'t even imagine what the true odds on something like that would be.
Completely nuts. As I said at the time, figure making malpractice.
So if Rags has the FOY too fast, does that mean they also have the BC Juv too fast in your opinion?
Reason I ask is I think on both Rags and TG Union Rags FOY is shown as a pair of his BC Juv. Or at least I think I read that in the link from Michael D\'s post.
Yes. That\'s another day with a drying out track, by the way-- good first two, drying, and with the added factor of darkness late. The track got significantly faster as the day went on until darkness when it slowed down again (which was probably not a coincidence, but who knows). They presumably got to the Juvy figure by using an average variant for the card-- I would have to take a good look to figure that out.
When I looked at their BC figures-- still posted on their board-- I was so blown away with what they did with Friday I didn\'t look closely at Saturday. Seriously, I\'ve never seen anything like that.
Scan the Derby sheets in the archives. My review tells me not too many do well off a regression.
JR,
I agree, most don\'t do well of a regression. That\'s why I\'m not interested in using Hansen, creative cause and alpha (other obvious reasons for alpha as well).
The reason I am leaning more toward giving IHA a break on this is that he would have had alot more time to recover from the top than is usual for a horse in the derby. I believe that\'s what MJ was referring to when he talks about it being a very good thing the horse skipped the one prep.
MJ,
It seems like he\'s not getting alot of respect because of O\'Neil outside of Cali but I seemed to remember that Thor\'s Echo ran pretty dam well at CD in the BC a few years back.
Was Hansen\'s Blue Grass really a regression? On the surface of it, yes, but it was the fastest poly number he earned...significantly faster. What if Hansen is a dirt horse that is compromised on poly? Does he have the opportunity here to move forward pretty significantly from the slower BG number...perhaps closer to his best dirt number, which would make him very dangerous in here? If they run the sprinter at Churchill, Hansen may get first move on him in the turn.
Can anyone comment on the whole blue dye thing with Hansen at the BG. I watched the CNBC (yes, CNBC) coverage and they were talking about it a lot pre race. As I understand it, the handlers dyed Hansen\'s tail blue at the direction of Dr. Hansen. The stewards then told them to get rid of the dye and then owner and trainer had a spirited argument about who was at fault . Seems like an enormous distraction and something that would take the horse out of his routine. It\'s not like Hansen went crazy in the paddock, but I wonder if he got worked up a bit with all those people playing with his tail.
I know I would.
Jim: I'm inclined to go in the other direction. Here's why:
1) Statistically, the top-off pattern generally has not produced what I consider a good effort (either a pair or a top) in the Derby. I'll give the details to you by PM if you want them, but going back to 1997, 21 horses have come into the Derby with the same general pattern (all with both preps on traditional dirt) and their results in the Derby are not good: no tops, 3 pairs, 7 offs and 11 X's. More generally, if you want your horse to run a P or T in the Derby, you want to see them coming in with only P's and/or T's (or some combination) in their prior two starts.
2) IHA's specific pattern (a big new top off a layoff, generous rest and then a backward move) concerns me. By comparison, consider the three horses with the same pattern who were able to pair in the Derby. They are Imperialism (2004), Monarchos (2001) and Prime Timber (1999). The pattern of each of them is different from IHA's in two important ways. A) The new tops of those horses averaged 2 points. Those are more incremental moves than the almost 7-point new top IHA ran in February. B) It may seem counterintuitive, but based on the data you would rather that the new top was run sometime in March, in the midst of a campaign, rather than in February off a long layoff. Each of the three horses who paired in the Derby off the TO pattern ran the T in the midst of a campaign (not off a long layoff), and ran it in March. If IHA is able to run a P or a T in the Derby, he will be a pioneer.
3) As Jerry has noted, IHA was one of many runners from the O'Neill horses that moved forward suddenly early this year. Without getting into all of the controversies, it is certainly an open question whether that form can be maintained over a longer period, and whether it can be reproduced under Derby Day scrutiny.
4) From another point of view, the backward move in the S.A. Derby is a bad sign, and suggests something may be wrong. He had nine weeks of rest into that, which should have been enough for most healthy, developing 3yos to assimilate the layoff effort. The way I look at it, he's a horse with ability who pops a huge top off a long layoff, has plenty of rest but still goes back, all of which implies to me the horse may have some problems. Now, he worked at the end of last week but I understand that since the S.A. Derby he has been placed on the Vet's List. Why? Not sure about the specific reason why but obviously it\'s not a good sign.
I\'m going to have to leave him out.
terrific analysis and argument, thanks so much, really appreciate it.
According to the CHRB site, I\'ll Have Another went on the Vet\'s List on 4/20 for 10 days due to \"Vet treatment\". I confess to not knowing what this means or what the ramifications may be.
According to the CHRB site, I\'ll Have Another went on the Vet\'s List on 4/20 for 10 days due to \"Vet treatment\". I confess to not knowing what this means or what the ramifications may be.
Six,
Players should not have to go digging for this type of readily available info. Clueless Clowns dont get it.
IHA and Alpha have issues/treatments that you have to guess at somewhat,should never be the case.In NY, the issue of publishing the vets list with reasons was raised with NYRA and they are looking at it.This is one thing which should be fully disclosed at every race track in the country.
Mike
sixmoreouts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> According to the CHRB site, I\'ll Have Another went
> on the Vet\'s List on 4/20 for 10 days due to \"Vet
> treatment\". I confess to not knowing what this
> means or what the ramifications may be.
I checked the CHRB vet list by name and by date, did not see IHA. I must be looking in the wrong section. Where did you see it?
Michael: Here is an alternative source. The link below is for the workouts at Hollywood, published by the track itself. Click on April 19. Note the designation next to I\'ll Have Another. If in fact he went on the CHRB list on April 20, it is odd that Hollywood already has him listed as of the day before, although there may be a reasonable explanation, such as a delay in transmitting the information. Who knows?
http://www.betfairhollywoodpark.com/racing-workouts
Same analysis I saw when I was putting the numbers together for the horses that backed up in the race prior to the derby. IHA is my first toss based on the sheets. Isn\'t this a classic 0-2-x pattern.
Caradoc-- See, the problem is I don\'t get to say all that in the seminar, or have to say it in 1/4 the words...
This entire string-- hell, this entire board recently-- is why this site and the people on it are in a different league from everyone else.
Miff, I would really like to know what that vet\'s list thing means.
Also interesting to note that that is the only work marked \"breezing\" on the entire day, does he normally work this way (unlike almost every other Cali horse?)
Caradoc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael: Here is an alternative source. The link
> below is for the workouts at Hollywood, published
> by the track itself. Click on April 19. Note the
> designation next to I\'ll Have Another. If in fact
> he went on the CHRB list on April 20, it is odd
> that Hollywood already has him listed as of the
> day before, although there may be a reasonable
> explanation, such as a delay in transmitting the
> information. Who knows?
>
> http://www.betfairhollywoodpark.com/racing-workout
> s
Are we sure \"denotes horse on list\" means vet list?
The CHRB site vet list appears to be updated through 04/22.
Michael: Unfortunately a couple of horses I have owned were on the vet\'s list and when they worked that is how the worksheet would read. You will note that the designation is not there in any of IHA\'s works leading up to the S. A. Derby (3/30, 3/21 and 3/12, for example).
What the CHRB can add to all this I don\'t know but someone in a position to get answers should ask, as they should ask O\'Neill.
Caradoc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael: Unfortunately a couple of horses I have
> owned were on the vet\'s list and when they worked
> that is how the worksheet would read. You will
> note that the designation is not there in any of
> IHA\'s works leading up to the S. A. Derby (3/30,
> 3/21 and 3/12, for example).
>
> What the CHRB can add to all this I don\'t know but
> someone in a position to get answers should ask.
ok, thanks for all the info.
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Players should not have to go digging for this
> type of readily available info. Clueless Clowns
> dont get it.
> This is one thing which should be fully
> disclosed at every race track in the country.
It sure wouldn\'t hurt if our industry had it\'s own DAILY newspaper -- you know, with REPORTERS who were assigned to watch such things as vet lists...then maybe do some of that reporting stuff and go ask a trainer or someone why a horse went on the list...
Yes, I dare to dream.
JB,
Basically, a request was made for more transparency at NYRA in several areas, one was the publishing of a vets list.PJ Campo, NYRA Director Of Racing,kindly replied that NYRA understood the request/concerns of players and would look at it. Unfortunately, have learned that the newly ordered commission by Gov Cuomo, lead by Jerry Bailey,Dr.Mary Scollay et al, will independently review and report it\'s findings re certain NY racing issues to Albany.
Know there is concern at NYRA that if players \"know\" the vets list, stuck horses, hustled horses etc handle may go down. Do not know if that would be the case. Also disappointing that NY Horseman\'s/owners group against letting the players know anything more than now in this regard.
Now that the politicians are involved,expect inertia.
Mike
I left Doug O\'Neil a message on his cell phone. If anyone knows or can confirm it would be him. Never talked with him before so don\'t know what to expect.
After 20 minutes, I got Sandy King on the phone over at Hollywood. She told me there are 3 \"lists\" that the asterisk could potentially denote: (1) Starter\'s List, (2) Gelding List and (3) Vet\'s List. Unless info is REALLY shrouded, I don\'t think he\'s on the Gelding list. She couldn\'t tell me what the \"Starter\'s List\" was or why they don\'t just write which list a horse may be on in the key at the bottom of the page. Ms. King informed me that they are finalizing an office move and that the woman who can give a definitive answer doesn\'t have access to her computer at the moment (I\'m not making this up). She did give me the other woman\'s direct dial # and told me her computer would be up and running tomorrow. I\'ll post whatever I hear from Hollywood tomorrow. Good grief...
Starter\'s List is issued by the Starter and includes horses that have caused problems for the Starter. Usually means the horse is ineligble to start in a race until some corrective action is taken. Not likely to apply to IHA.
Michael D.: http://www.simo-central.com/CHRBPublicReport.jsp
IHA is on the vet list for 10 days with a reason of vet treatment ESWT. Anyone know what ESWT means. Is Doug playing games?
Its non invasive shockwave therapy
http://www.eswt.com/
Does anyone (Sighthound?) know what it is designed to treat? And why its use would require a 10-day stay on the vet\'s list?
Apologies. Here is a better link. One that applies to horses and not humans(!)
http://www.veterinarypracticenews.com/vet-dept/equine-large-animal-dept/update-on-eswt-treatment.aspx
ESWT been around for some time.Understand at NYRA tracks, equipment is registered and monitored with NYRA vets.Lauded by many in accelerating the healing process, used for several conditions.
Sight,
Whats your experience with this?
Mike
Great take on the pattern and thanks for the information!
Let me tell you if this horse needs this kind of therapy it doesn\'t mean anything good. There are other legal devices that can be used to promote healing by stimulating blood flow, but shock wave is intended by a trainer to allow a horse to run through pain. No matter what some pie in the sky vet has to say about its beneficial use. If the trainer can\'t administer it ahead of a race, and most of the time he can\'t, the horse will be running IN pain. Not for long. The long layoff between this colt\'s recent races probably had a lot to do with this condition. His regression from race to race is whatever you want to make of it, but if you bet him in any way be sure he doesn\'t make all your tickets go.
Al,
At NYRA tracks a horse is not permitted to race for like 10 days after ESWT.It\'s pretty common but expensive here.
Mike
Mike, I\'ve done a little looking and the rule in California is the same, 10 days out.
As far as I can tell, there is no affirmative obligation to disclose this sort of information to bettors for a runner IN THE KENTUCKY DERBY. What hope do we have of knowing anything important about a horse running in some maiden 20 somewhere tomorrow?
Car,
The players have absolute control over transparency issues like this.Simple, organize and tell the Clueless Clowns we\'re not betting until the info is published.I\'ll bet it gets published quickly.
Game is tough enough without adding variables that we don\'t even know exists.
Mike
Mike-- It\'s actually easier than that, you don\'t have to boycott all the races, or even all those at one track. Just one a day-- first or last at every track, something like that-- and announce that starting two weeks later it will be two races a day.
As for shock wave, as with antibiotics, there is no way the fact the horse got it can be a plus, especially when you consider he had two layoffs and gets less time to recover now. If a horse has been running badly it may help him, but one who has been running well... and problems get worse with racing, not better. Unsound horses run well fresh.
Kenny McPeek was just asked about I\'ll Have Another\'s issue on twitter and he replied shockwave is used for bone growth and healing. He said he does not use it, he gives them time.
Update:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/triple-crown/i-ll-have-another-on-vet-s-list-after-undergoing-shockwave-therapy-o-neill-says-it-won-t-affect-derby-training/
Beau Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kenny McPeek was just asked about I\'ll Have
> Another\'s issue on twitter and he replied
> shockwave is used for bone growth and healing. He
> said he does not use it, he gives them time.
Beau, I don\'t know you and I don\'t want this to sound like a wise guy. That statement is utter bull. Bone growth and healing? It\'s used to deaden nerves. There\'s no telling just what is wrong with this horse. It sounds like it\'s not the most serious thing, not if he can race with some success. But this isn\'t some kind hearted therapy...what surprises me is that the trainer actually lets anyone know he\'s doing it. Some trainers have their own machine and do it in secret. There are very powerful versions of this machine that mask the pain from terrible injuries. Fortunately, they can\'t bring them into receiving barns so you are protected at a race like the Derby, for the most part.
I wonder how all of this discussion ties into the \"move-up\" trainer theories.
I have shockwaved horses and am very familiar with it.
There are types of shockwave therapy that can help stimulate cortical bone growth, for example with shin splints.
Yes, there are applications which can deaden nerves temporarily - which can be very helpful for horses with navicular or coffin joint pain.
And there\'s applications which are basically a glorified deep massage.
There are two different types of \"shockwave\" therapy. Radial pressure wave therapy, and extracorporeal shockwave therapy. Some uses are effective, some are not. Some have been well-researched and scientifically proven, and are very useful in both human and animal medicine, others are magic dust.
Here\'s a good short summation article on ESWT in horses intended for owners: http://www.aaep.org/health_articles_view.php?id=220
Good article. Accurate. Thorough. Thanks for the link.
alm,
This statement was not mine, I was just relaying the message. Not sure what your saying when you say the statement is utterly bull. Kenny McPeek was asked a question and he answered it.
I have no idea what shock wave is or what it is used for, but after this discussion I now know a little about it.
Beau
I appreciate Sightsound\'s insight and am not questioning it. But I suspect that trainers put this stuff into their routine primarily for ONE reason...to deaden pain in order to train and/or race. It\'s my guess that this horse had some problem, maybe it was shins, and needed the help to get through training that was significant enough to prepare him for the SA Derby.
Look, you can train on illegal drugs as long as they clear the body by race day. Why would a trainer do that? In order to get the horse\'s level of fitness up to raceworthy. With this therapy you can do the same thing as long as you take the horse off it at the allowable time.
I really question the 10 day stuff, because I know some people who have the equipment in their barn and don\'t need some vet to administer it. That way they can administer it on the day of a race if they want to. If anyone here thinks I am overstating this, fine. But I\'m not.
As Cov mentioned, you can bet that IHA is not the only horse going to the Derby that is getting some extra \"preventive maintenance\"
Bloodhorse:
I\'ll Have Another Has Shock Wave Therapy
By Steve Haskin
Paul Reddam's I\'ll Have Another, winner of the Santa Anita Derby (gr. I) and Robert Lewis Stakes (gr. II), has been automatically placed on the vet's list in California after undergoing shock wave therapy on his back, which has a tendency to tighten up a little.
"It's just a pulse that brings blood to an area," Reddam said. "The horse had absolutely nothing wrong with him. Doug (trainer Doug O'Neill) just did it because he could do it, and his owner will pay for it. He's just leaving no stone unturned. In California, you can't use it within 10 days of an upcoming race, so you have to report it and go on the vet's list.
"The horse worked six furlongs in 1:13 and change last Thursday and Doug was doing a jig afterwards. Everything is going along like clockwork and he's going to work again on Friday and then ship to Kentucky on Saturday. After the Santa Anita Derby, Doug debated with himself whether to ship in early and work the horse at Churchill. He decided he wanted to be with him the whole time, so he'll leave on Friday and stay there until the Derby."
I\'ll Have Another, who was a $35,000 purchase at the Ocala Breeders' Sales April 2-year-olds in training sale, has won three of his five career starts, including a second-place finish to Creative Cause in last year's Best Pal Stakes (gr. II).
In the Santa Anita Derby, he won by a nose in hard-fought battle with Creative Cause, who will be his traveling companion to Kentucky
What Alm says is true, some trainers do it themselves. By law (yes, law) it is a veterinary practice, and also by race track rules vets only are supposed to administer it and yes, paperwork and 10 day withdrawal.
I can only hope those trainers are doing the \"typical cheating trainer\" trick of using it wrong. Alot of them have cheap machines that really don\'t do much.
But, I love shockwave therapy on sore backs and muscles, necks, it\'s terrific, like a deep massage.
I have done it to myself, both shockwave and radial pulse, over my shins (bone), large muscle groups, wrist, etc. to try and see possible range of effects. It\'s really hard to deaden pain to any appreciable extent to my own experience on myself. You can do damage (bruising, superficial and deep) with it and cause pain if used incorrectly.