This year there are some differences between TG and some other figures involving Derby probables.
We have the Sunland Derby slower than Beyer. I broke the race out (the only one at that distance), and will review it, but it\'s unlikely enough will run back before the Derby to form a strong opinion.
We have the SA Derby slower than Beyer. First of all our timing had it about 4/5 slower (two different clockers), but regardless the race fits very tight on figures the way I did it. CC went back slightly, but it\'s clearly \"h?\", and essentially a pair.
I haven\'t seen Ragozin (Jake? Ken Sherman?) yet, but can tell you without looking that their pattern on CC will be much different because of their SoCal sprint/route issues. This is really quite something, and they only get away with it because their clientele knows so little about figures. Any basic distance analysis-- the kind done by every single figure maker-- would tell them they are 3-4 points out of whack. Since I\'ve been talking about this here for a decade they must have done one, and their refusal to fix the problem can only be because they don\'t want to admit a mistake, rationalized somehow.
There are undoubtedly other differences as well. It\'s an interesting year.
\"We have the SA Derby slower than Beyer. First of all our timing had it about 4/5 slower (two different clockers), but regardless the race fits very tight on figures the way I did it. CC went back slightly, but it\'s clearly \"h?\", and essentially a pair\"
JB,
Beyer had CC app TG neg -1.5 for the San Filipe and TG neg -1.5 for the SA Derby,did not hear about time discreapancy, Randy Moss usually all over that stuff.
The usual differences between the TC preps figs are there amongst TG/Rags/Beyer. Makes those who are pure pattern readers going in opposite directions on certain runners, depending on which data one uses.
Mike
interesting stuff JB, thanks for this, it\'s very helpful
that said, you didn\'t answer the key question that Jimbo is waiting on
is Arod as fast on everyone else\'s stuff?
I mean, Jimbo is chomping at the bit to play this horse and he\'s just hoping it\'s concealed on the other guys like it is for TGs!!!!!!
this is all in good fun in case that\'s not apparent to everyone.
JB\'s figures are the best
I care about class and distance limitations alot more than JB does but whatever he says the number is, that\'s what I use as the number
I just don\'t assume that horses that run 0s against NY breds can necessarily run them in open company (some can) and I certainly don\'t assume that just because a horse ran a good number at a 1 1/16 that they can do it going a 1 1/4 and this is our biggest area of disagreement.
Jim,
I can actually answer that one.
TGJB stands alone with A-Rod as a contender.
He is a can of ____ on everybody else\'s figures....
But good luck with your futures bet on him! I also told a friend 10 years ago that had a futures ticket on Giacomo that I would eat his plaid sports jacket if Giacomo won the Derby.......
This game makes you wrong more than any other one, by far. I never feel dumber than when playing horses. (with the possible exception of when under a verbal attack from my wife about all my faults.....)
Jim
For reasons I have discussed here before (use of pars, confirmed, despite Beyer saying they don\'t use them any more) they have California about 2 of our points too fast. You should have picked up on that already.
Which means big discrepancies between Beyer and Rags on Cali routes... one has them too fast, one too slow...
I don\'t have any idea what he looks like on anyone else\'s figures, and I\'ll save all my own opinions until the seminar.
I will say this-- there are a bunch of horses in a tight figure range, and the rest not fast enough, given how few new tops are usually run in the Derby. But of the roughly 6 or so contenders on number power, pattern reading and all the other stuff discussed here will be where handicapping this race comes down.
That and ground loss, huge factor with a big, evenly matched field.
JB, just wait till Commisssioner runs a big one this weekend, you will have to add him into the mix of contenders....lol
For the record, I much prefer General A-Rod over commissioner.
At least General A-Rod can run for a mile or so. commissioner has almost no run at all....
Probably that will be the Derby exacta now....
hah, I know he hasn\'t run fast yet but I am very bullish he will do so this weekend
He hasn\'t got a chance to do what he really wants to do yet. I think it\'s coming
he may wind up being more of a belmont horse like his daddy but I am anxious to see him run this weekend.
I have him pegged as a top Belmont contender, I agree totally. If he stays healthy and such. To me he\'s a one gear type, a grinder, that would relish the Belmont Stakes.
we are on the same page on this one
the fact that his connections didn\'t just skip the Ark Derby and point right for the Belmont after the Sunland Derby intuigues me
these are some of the smartest people in the game between the owners and trainer and they aren\'t wrong that often
they also don\'t need to run in the horse in derby just for the sake of having the experience (like some people...lol).
the fact that they are giving him another shot to make the derby and the fact that he broke last by a bunch in the Sunland Derby and still ran an ok race makes me want to give him a chance this weekend
now, JB will tell you that I am seeing what I want to see about this horse beacause I have liked him since January but he can\'t deny how smart the connections are (or he would get in trouble since he\'s good friends with them so I have that going for my argument!)
Only friends with one of \"them\".
Had a question about the ground loss. You\'d think in a 20 horse field, there would be a lot of buried (!) numbers. But looking through the archives, it seems like the horse with the best figure almost always wins. The only recent counter-example I saw was Empire Maker.
Doesn\'t this suggest that, for the win at least, we should ignore potential ground loss for handicapping purposes - and just focus on the fastest horse?
Alternatively, It may suggest a horse can not recover from ground loss in this situation. The large field (traffic) exaggerates the effects of ground loss and inhibits a good figure.
Consequently ground loss is all important!
Last year Normandy Invasion finished fourth, running a better figure than the second and third finishers. Same for Brother Derek in 2006-- those are two examples of Derby ground loss that occurred to me without even going fishing.
Mylute 5th last year with the second best #
Needed Borel.
its not always that simple
horses need to be very athletic and very courageous (obviously along with the jockey) to save ground in the derby
Normandy Invasion is a great horse but last year he was the size of a shetland pony and there\'s no way he could have gone inside and gotten bounced around. Javier rode him how he had to be ridden (i.e. wide). We can debate the timing of the move but there\'s no way that horse could have been put down on the rail and run as well as he did
My Lute was the other way, big. long striding strong thing that needed to be in the clear (like Rosalind in the Ashland as per McPeek comments pre race)
also, physical size and athleticism aside, mentally, some horses hate being down inside, others don\'t mind
many times the horse dictates how/where the jockey has to ride them, especially in a race with 20 horses
that\'s why we either need a horse with tactical speed that can make their own good trip by allowing the jock to put them whereever they want (Barbaro, Big Brown, I\'ll Have Another, Super Saver, Funny Cide, Smarty, etc) or horses that have shown they can overcome adversity heading into the race so we have confidence that they can make their way through the big field (Animal Kingdom, Orb, Barbaro (again), Big Brown (again))
this year I think we have one horse that has shown the tactical speed to create a great trip for themselves (Obviously CC) but I don\'t feel like we seen a horse that has overcome any kind of bias or bad post or real adveristy in a race.
I think it\'s a stretch to say Constituion overcame adversity because he had some dirt kicked in his face before a golden rail trip opened up for him
Maybe someone in Arkkansas will do something special this weekend
New York learned nothing from PETA video
The New York Racing Association and the state's Gaming Commission make a big deal of what they call "enhanced security protocols" for four stakes during the year, including Saturday's Wood Memorial. The protocols require horses entered in the race to be on the grounds three days before and subject to 24-hour surveillance cameras, as well as other provisions.
One of the requirements is a treatment log to be completed by the veterinarian, which the Gaming Commission then posts on its web site in advance of the race. The protocols require a "full daily veterinarian's record of all medications and treatments." Both the Commission and NYRA seem content to have an incomplete form submitted unless you consider "pre-race" or "routine" to be an adequate diagnosis warranting the administration of medications.
What is particularly troubling about their lax attitude is that the issue of administering drugs to race horses because you can, and not because it is necessary to treat a condition, is a major issue confronting the sport. It came up in the now famous PETA video where one veterinarian was quoted as saying all horses in Steve Asmussen's barn were treated with Lasix because it is a performance-enhancer, and not because it was necessary to treat pulmonary bleeding. A California investigation into seven sudden deaths in Bob Baffert's barn found that Baffert had thyroxine administered to all his horses, although he did not even know what the purpose of the medication was.
In a six-part series in Thoroughbred Daily News last summer, the final segment was entitled "Race Horse is Not a Diagnosis." Yet we have NYRA and the Gaming Commission not questioning "pre-race" or "routine" as an adequate explanation for their enhanced security protocols. Even those phrases, however, are a mite more adequate than the vet who simply left the diagnosis part of the state-mandated form blank. That vet, by the way, is the one featured in PETA's video describing Lasix as a performance-enhancer.
In the press release announcing the protocols, New York's top racing officials spouted the expected pablum about their concern for safety and integrity. There was no explanation for why these steps were taken for only four of the 2,294 races NYRA ran last year. NYRA CEO Chris Kay said the Wood would be "conducted in the safest and most transparent manner."
That transparency, however, only serves to demonstrate that NYRA and the Gaming Commission are tone-deaf to the forces buffeting the industry. If you are going to boast about publicizing vet records, you should think that people may actually look at them. And if your haphazard acceptance of records that do not even meet your own standards becomes the next subject for PETA or Joe Drape, don't blame the messenger.
This is an issue about more than how vets fill out a form. For NYRA and the Gaming Commission, it is about what role they will play - if any - in bringing changes to racing. One of those changes must be adherence to a cardinal principle that drugs can only be administered to a horse to address a specific medical need, and that medical need is documented in the records of the veterinarian.
I realize that when you are trying to attract top horses to one of your signature races it is tempting to let some things slide. But don't go around boasting about your commitment to safety when you are willing to accept "pre-race" or "routine" as justification for drugs.
Yeah, I got that. My question focused on the winner. Don\'t you think it at least a little odd that, if I read the sheets right, the winner of the Derby always has the top number (except Empire Maker)? If ground loss is such an issue, you\'d think there\'d be a whole host of winners who got there from ground-saving trips, while big numbers were being run from the auxillary gate. But that\'s not the case.
All three Borel and all three Cordero Derby winners were rail/rail. In two cases, coming from last in big fields.
You can throw in Borel 3rds on Denis of Cork and Revolutionary both 1w1w
I get it. One would expect the winner to always get the best Beyer figure. But not necessarily the best TG# because ground loss is a key component. So we deduce..?
I\'m doing a real poor job of articulating myself, so I\'ll let it go after this.
I get that Borel won with rail trips. But he didn\'t need the rail trips to win, as his horse put up the best number anyway. What I find at least a very weird coincidence is the dearth of rail trips that win, despite another horse running faster (and thus getting a better number).
Where are the winning 1w/1w trips getting a 0, while the second placed horse gets a negative 1 (due to a wide trip)? Shouldn\'t we be able to point at a slew of horses and say, \"They won because they saved ground in the Derby\". Since they carry the same weight, it will show up in the loser getting the better number.
But it never happens. By the archives, only Funny Cide and Real Quiet since 1997 (both a point worse than the runner up). And this means none from 2003, which is about when the 20 horse field became the norm - and just the opposite of what I\'d expect.
It says to me to bet the fastest horse to win, regardless of expected ground loss (in the Derby).
These discussions usually get away from distinguishing ground loss from bad trips.A horse can lose ground and yet get a better overall trip than a horse that is 1w/1w.
The par based Beyer number other than reflecting the post time odds ( Miff and I circa some years ago) is a completely irrelevant number to anyone who wagers on a daily basis.
There for those of you that like the pot stirred a bit!!!
Good luck,
Frank D.