\"Perfect\" definetly got a patented Mike Smith ride, but to give Smith a break, you just couldn\'t really expect Perfect to run well the first race after his duel in the desert, no matter how impressive his works were -- I\'m amazed that he even came back so soon -- that Dubai trip usually wrecks them for life. Still, that race was awfully cheap for a Graded Stakes, so I don\'t know what to expect for the Pacific classic and beyond. Nation ran tremendous -- to rally from that far back on the Del Mar main track which has been very kind to speed so far -- it just blows my mind. Not unlike Summer Wind Dancer\'s win at Delaware -- Mullins\' runners do amazing things -- anything you ask them to do. I\'ve never seen anything like it.

The Belmont is the true test of the champion, and we\'ve seen enough examples in recent years of just how hard it is to win the thrid jewel in the crown, but that being said, I have a very hard time seeing anyone come up with a logical reason why Smarty won\'t win it all, or, more accurately, which other three year old is going to beat him.

His performance in the Preakness was truly amazing, mostly because he\'s not just good, but so much better, more mature, more professional than all his peers.

That horse does anything you ask him to do -- period. Eight different distances, all kinds of tracks, sloppy, fast, winter, summer -- nothing bothers him.

He\'s an absolute freak and enough breeding experts of which I most certainly am not one
have looked deep into his pedigree and he has super breeding for the classic races including the mile and a quarter derby (look for Frank Mitchell\'s recent column in the DRF for a closer look at his pedigree)
and mile and half Belmont, so get those illusions about his pedigree out of your minds. That\'s absolute nonsense.

What is going to change in the next three weeks? Some three-year old is going to come out of nowhere and rise up and assert his dominance in the mile and half Belmont Stakes? How is that going to happen? If it\'s any of the horses we\'ve already seen, they\'re going to have to show something they haven\'t shown yet -- maybe the Cliff\'s Edge\'s Blue Grass would be legit, but other than that race -- who could you possibly come up???

Did you see the way he galloped out in the Preakness??? Unbelieveable.

Servis just has to keep him together for three more weeks, and he seems like the kind of horse who\'s so well-balanced and takes care of himself, that he should be OK -- that\'s the only thing that could go wrong -- him getting hurt or not getting there.


Let\'s start looking at the exacta in the Belmont -- which colt might wind up in the distant rear view mirror view of Stewie Elliot??? That, my friends, is the question.

to jim,
what the heck is andy beyers\' claim to fame anyway? he had one good year about twenty or so years ago, and he wrote a book on speed figures (half the people on this site could write a book about speed figures) -- not much he says these days is very relevant or meaningful, or even particularly useful --when is the last time he picked a derby winner?

Jerry doesn\'t need my help, but I\'ll tell you, what he and the rest of the t-g crew has created here (this web site) is quite impressive and quite generous in all the freebies they give out. the availability of data, the speed at which you can get it, and the ease and relatively low cost are all very valuable aspects what they do here; they helped revolutionize the entire sport and the way people play it; i\'d try it out a little longer before you make a final decision.


just my 2 cents worth.

Does it matter that Tapit\'s 2 year old wins were (h?) handy wins? Watching replays of those races indicates that he won them very very easily, so how does one then interpret those numbers?

If Asmussen or Baffert or even Lukas in his day had that horse as a 2 year old, what would he have run -- negative numbers?

Trainer stats notwithstanding, a new top would certainly seem likely, given the fact that on the Thorograph Sire Profiles Puplit\'s offspring could be expected to move forward around three points from their 2 to 3 year old seasons -- so with that rough guide, Tapit running a 1 in the derby seems in the realm of possibility.

I agree with \"Chuckels\" previous post that the real question is will his move forward be enough?

Here\'s a link to a funny story for all you Tapit fans.

http://drf.com/tc/trail/2004/news.html

I also read today in the Thoroughbred Times supplement that Tapit\'s diet includes \"a pint of beer and three raw eggs daily\". Additionally, Dickinson is bringing his own sod to Churchill from Tapeta farms because he believes in organic grass! Reminds me of that fellow O\'Brien from Ireland who brings Irish spring water whenever he ships horses into America.

Interestingly, I looked into Tapit\'s extended pedigree and some of the influences in his lines are AP Indy, Unbridled, Seattle Slew, Mr. Prospector, Fappiano, Nijinsky II, Secretariat, Honest Pleasure, and Northern Dancer -- pretty darn scary by any estimation.

Good luck to all!

TCE could be legit, but in my opinion, it\'s hard to put too much stock in the Blue Grass; Lion Heart is clearly in deep water when he ventures past a mile, mile sixteenth, and furthermore, Lion Heart doesn\'t use Lasix, so I\'m not sure he can breathe that well either (it\'s a mystery to me why Biancone doesn\'t use lasix), factor that in with the rare closers/outside bias at keenland that day, and the race loses it\'s appeal to me in terns of gauging the performance of TCE. Those who like him probably have enough to go on with his other races and breeding, but I don\'t see how you look at a horse passing a gasping, tired animal and think he\'s a superstar -- believe me I learned the hard way, those races in California this year are WEAK and Lion Heart may well be the best California horse so that\'s not saying much.

Well, I thought Rock Hard Ten put in a great performance; interestingly, he\'s way down on the list of horses with graded earnings, so that DQ likely cost him a spot in the derby; but like I said, that may turn out to be blessing in disguise -- he could really turn out to be a nice horse (he\'s a nice horse now), like a Medalgia D\'Oro type of colt -- that\'s who he reminds me of a little. The Derby ruins so many promising horses, so maybe he\'s better off.

Re: Castledale, I think (of course this is COMPLETE hindsight!) when you look back over his thorograph lines, he\'s not that bad and probably shouldn\'t have been so long in that field -- especially if you were smart enough to see the bounces coming for Wimbledon and St Averil (which I sure wasn\'t). I\'m just saying I don\'t think he was an impossible longshot; I certainly could have thrown in him in my pick 5 if I were using a bunch of horses; I mean sometimes if there\'s one horse in a short field I don\'t like, in the SA Derby it would have been the #2 horse, his name escapes me in the moment, that left me with five out of seven \'contenders\' and sometimes I\'ll just go ahead and wheel the race not wanting to get beat by the two I left out (I realize that\'s not a ringing endorsement of Castledale), but my mistake was I thought St. Averil a single, so I had no shot, but hey you gotta take a stand -- we\'re all wrong enough times, but when you\'re right, it will pay off. At least that\'s my hope.

Racing\'s such a great game because it is so humbling! Seldom have I ever felt stronger about a race (on paper) and been more wrong about almost everything!

The only saving grace (if there is one) is that I actually didn\'t bet the race because I was alive in the glorious Magna Pick Five. The only problem is the horse I was alive with, and very felt confidently about, St. Averil, disappeared after about a quarter mile. Maybe he really did run as big a number as I thought he did in his previous race, and it knocked him into oblivion -- he even looked flat in the post parade. The real puzzler was how bad Wimbledon ran -- he was fried by the far turn, and I\'m not sure he\'s really any good.

For you Rock Hard Ten fans, I\'ll say he\'s the real deal now. Too bad he might not make it into the Derby on earnings, but if he misses the derby it might be a blessing in disguise in terms of all the great races later on in the year.

What to make of Castledale? So Jeff Mullins said afterwards, his horse was clearly and always better on dirt (I missed that for sure, and I don\'t miss many Mullins\' winners, believe me). I wish I looked a bit closer at his pattern (on t-graphs anyway) because it wasn\'t that bad -- he\'s a durable little horse for sure and apparently he\'s got some heart!

I wonder what his odds will be in the derby? Knowing how Mullins horses usually pair up -- if the number was fast enough in the Santa Anita Derby, he might be a legit threat on May 1st. So how fast was the race???

The best thing about all this confusion and wide open nature of the derby is we\'ll get some serious value in the derby -- can you all imagine what the super will pay? So, let\'s see how much does it cost to wheel a horse in the superfecta in a 20 horse field?
Oh, right, forgot I have to pick the winner first before I can wheel him.

Did anyone cash in that race? Who the hell used Castledale in the pick 5? At least a few people right? I thought there\'d be a carry-over for sure. Any thoughts???

Here\'s my Santa Anita Derby rundown with my morning line:

1-Imperialism (8-1) I see him as a one-turn sprinter, maybe a Met Mile type, even, but I think he\'s a non-contender here. Not fast enough on my numbers.

2-Lucky Pulpit (15-1) Mostly a pace factor here, but I have a hard time seeing him stick around; he only ran one race fast enough to contend here, and I don\'t see him running back to it.

3-Wimbledon (8-5) Right now he\'d be my Kentucky Derby Pick -- his new found running style (being able to relax or maybe he just matured) helps him a lot. I think he\'s an underlay here though; Baffert doesn\'t care to squeeze the lemon dry as they say -- all he need do is run well and finish (against what is usually a speed biased track on Santa Anita Derby Day) to set him up for the big derby. He could win this, but I look for him the first Sat. in May, not April.

4-Castledale(30-1) Not a threat here. Not sure why Mullins is keeping him on the dirt; in my mind, he\'s clearly a grass horse.

5-Quinton\'s Gold Rush (8-1) He\'s a puzzler to me; I liked him in the San Rafeal; he just didn\'t relax and seemed uncomfortable; he really needs to mature and fast and that\'s not what usualy happens in Grade I races; I\'ll say, he could be the speed here and could go a long way; tough call for me -- usually when I jump off they win big, so maybe you all want to hammer him.

6-Rock Hard Ten (6-1) Every wise guy\'s special. He\'s way too slow on my numbers though one could argue he\'s never even run more than a quarter mile, so maybe there\'s this limitless potential for him to find; my guess would be this is a tough spot, and if he lags behind these he\'ll have no shot -- I\'m not biting, so again, upgrade his chances since I\'ve jumped off!

7-St Averil (2-1) The fastest three year old in the country on my numbers; I love him here, plus he gets to stalk the speed from a great post; anything over 2-1 would be amazing to me, though if they bet Rock Hard Ten and Wimbledon big, I might even get 3-1 (perhaps I\'m dreaming). I feel this is his day to shine; I\'m not tossing him in the Kenturcky Derby either (unless he runs poorly here), but I think this is HIS Derby. Interestingly, I said I like Wimbledon in the Ken. Derby, but if you look up breeding, this guy has way better breeding than Wimbledon.

Good Luck to all.

Actually, last year, 2003 -- it was interesting that the Santa Anita ground crew purposely made the turf course play fairly so Europens would have a shot -- they actually over-compensated in my mind, but this was a conscious, focused effort -- the turf changed dramatically from just a few weeks before the cup -- it had been a pool table like surface and then they worked to deepen it up. I just like the downhill course with the right and left turns there -- it\'s more like a European track.

Of course, I have my biases of tracks I like, but I also like your idea of spreading the wealth around -- sometime it would be fun to see smaller tracks get a chance. I\'ll have to say I didn\'t like Arlington only because of the mile turf start and the longer juvenille races, but that\'s history now I guess.

While we\'re at it, I wouldn\'t mind a cup at a European venue -- the Curragh in Ireland is probably as close to racing nirvana as anything on earth -- nothing but green everywhere -- so beautiful, though I don\'t know what the weather\'s like the end of Oct. there.

I\'m not sure what your point is.

I think the California venues are fantastic for the Breeder\'s Cup. The weather\'s usually great, their courses are very fair for Europeans, and California has a great fan base and tracks that can really handle big days. What\'s not to like?

I\'ll admit I also like Belmont Park a lot for the Breeder\'s Cup -- despite the often erratic weather one might find that time of year, Belmont really puts on a great show on Breeder\'s Cup, and it\'s another track that\'s very fair and everyone has a shot, so the weather is usually the only caveat there. If it were up to me, I\'d go back and forth between Belmont Park and Hollywood/Santa Anita every other year -- I know that\'s going to piss off some people!

No, I\'m not Alydar. The only Alydar I know is when I was a kid my dad took me to see those triple crown races, and I was always rooting  for Alydar -- the start of a life long obession! I could give you my full name if you need it.

First of all, thanks for such a detailed response. I appreciate the time you took to write that. One thing I\'ve always found about thorograph folks is that you all are EXTREMELY generous in so many ways.

On point 1: Every super should be as professional and dilligent as Porcelli. The track Biases in So. Cal. regularly give me fits though that\'s the main circuit I play --they could take a lesson from Porcelli. I\'m not saying their job is easy b/c they have their own unique problems to deal with, but the 2003 Del Mar season was an absolute nightmare regarding the ARBITRARY changes in the track condition, and anyone who played it seriously knows that. So I\'m in total agreement with you on your main point.

On point 2: I\'m concerned only with Southern California racing, and I again agree with you -- my formula that I\'ve come up with after many years of tweaking is designed with Hollywood, Del Mar, and Santa Anita in mind & I know it doesn\'t work combining supposedly similar races from different tracks. Interestingly, my numbers with maiden races are highly accurate -- those and European races are my specialties. On many days, I\'ll use my figs. in maiden races and use t-graphs for the other races on the card, and I\'ve hit many pick sixes that way. I\'m smart enough to know where I\'m good and where I need  help.

On point 3: Well, of course, you guys do this for a living. For Del Mar I watch every race, but during the rest of the year, I\'m lucky to go two or three times a week, and there\'s no substitute for one\'s own perception.  Even in the examples you mention, the human element always comes into play. What if the guy you\'ve got observing water trucks or whatever has a few too many beers one afternoon or has to go to bathroom and the truck goes by when he\'s inside -- I\'m not trying to be funny but I\'m always surprised that people can watch the same race or the same day\'s racing and come up with so many different conclusions. Again, this isn\'t a knock but t-g\'s and rags, for example, always discriminate against horses who run on the rail and inflate figs for horses that run wide -- well in So. Cal. the rail is more than likely never the place to be -- there are far more biases than you guys seem to notice -- maybe there\'ll be an X next to a horse a couple times a meet, but I could tell you many many more days than that when the rail is not the place to be --I factor biases into my variants -- I\'m not aware that anyone else does that. As far as all those other factors, like wind for example, are you out there measuring the wind for that minute or so the race is going off or are you relying on weather forcasts or some guy in the grandstand saying it was really windy against runners in the backstretch -- I think you are trying to make it more scientific than it actually is. I think I have as much information as anyone.

on point 4: well, I guess I would love to know how you use past figure histories because I don\'t -- certainly I will wind up questioning a number or not even making a number for a race or two here and there if the number I come up with seems very unlikely given the past history (you all can\'t really do that - I suppose people would go crazy, but I\'m not selling these to anyone), that I understand, but all I go by is the data for each race, and I view each race as unique with a thousand or more variables that will never be repeated.

a few questions came to my mind regarding the presentation; on a few slides the frequency of watering was mentioned (i\'m referring specifically to Gulfstream, Hollywood and Santa Anita), but no data regarding the weather on those days was mentioned; i\'d have been interested to know the weather on those specific days, temp., precipitation, wind, humidity, etc; was jerry brown implying that there are arbitrary changes of the watering schedule or were those differences in frequency due to changes in the weather (as the ny track super\'s words would imply)? without knowing the weather on those days that information is meaningless.

my next question is regarding the differences in sprint/route variants -- when they compute a speed figure, do they take account the fact that there are many more races run at 6 furlongs, for example, than any other distance in america, and does that frequency mean that numbers for 6 furlong races are automatically more accurate than say route races? how do they adjust for this variable? i know from making my own numbers that the amount of races run at a particular distance has a great effect on the overall accuracy of the speed figure when comparing different distances -- this question is a bit more involved than just the idea of sprint/route variants and maybe not appropriate for this topic, but i know this is a huge problem -- if i\'m doing mile and a half turf faces or less than five furlong dirt races, i automatically put a lot less meaning on the figure, as opposed to a six furlong race --

one thing that i had a problem with is the idea put forth that future numbers are based on past numbers -- so there\'s this estimation going from what we have in the past carrying over to the latest numbers; i find that to be the main \"flaw\" or problem with t-gs and rags (but much more so with t\'gs); and any professional gambler will tell you this is more of a problem with t-gs; I mean you\'ll look at lines and see 4,4,4,4,4,4 and anyone on earth knows the horse isn\'t running 4\'s six races in a row (maybe i\'m exaggerating a bit but not much) and i conclude that they are either lazy or as i heard basing current numbers on past numbers? this is really a huge error from my pov -- as i\'ve said i make my own numbers and usually compare with t-g\'s (i\'m more looking for patterns) and i see much wider variations from race to race, with my figs, i\'ll see a horse run the same number twice or sometimes three times, but the patterns are vastly different -- so i never understood that principle. what\'s the point of just standardizing the numbers so they make sense?


as far as the overall presentation it is hard for me to imagine people say the variant would stay the same for a given day; anyone who plays del mar seriously (for example) is well aware of changes throughout the day -- and that\'s a track where it almost never rains and the weather is fairly consistent; well, perhaps more consistent than any other track in america, yet the track changes drastically (often throughout the day) at that meet -- how much more changes will there be in places where the weather chnages much more drastically? the observation seems quite obvious, the real question is how much does it matter?

can\'t anybody just say what\'s on their minds and come out with it! so bobby juices his horses with some unknown substance that they don\'t test for any other day (on any other track) but breeder\'s cup day, so hence he\'s 2 for 57 -- give me a break.

\"campbreeze\" makes a lot of sense to me; here are a few more thoughts

on sightseek- how anyone could believe she ran neg 3\'s is beyond me -- she was no way better than any other filly & mare in that race -- they were all sub par -- elloluv is not a mile 1/8 horse, got koko ran against a tremendous speed bias, take charge lady was inexplicably not sent by the jockey -- maybe she was over the top, but sightseek\'s numbers were so fake -- beating up on small fields in ny in no way equals negative numbers -- what they always said about azeri last year applied to sightseek in a big way. she\'d be a good allowance horse in cali. neg. 3\'s -- yeah right.i almost believed that.

aldebaren- ran against a huge speed bias; he had no shot ever in that race -- a race that\'s too short for him in the first place.

midas eyes was in no way ready

heat haze, tates creek and megahertz are all mediocre horses -- they raced against inferior competition (mostly each other) all year long -- compare their races with islington\'s against the top males in europe -- please. dublino was the only decent filly from the west before she fell apart -- that division was so weak. i should say i think heat haze is a decent filly but she\'s not effective at longer distances

peace rules also ran against inferior competition when he ran on turf (his 2 year old season) and in no way did i expect him to run anyweher near those dirt numbers on grass

medalghia d\'oro ran a very good race -- if congaree wasn\'t in it he would have won for FUN!

some of you all need to get over it -- frankel\'s got 10,000 horses and owners who let him do anything he wants; he can pick and choose his spots and freshen his horses up -- plus he\'s sharp as hell knowing what his horses are capable of; but 20 other trainers would have his success if they were in his shoes; the starting line is in no way equal for him; hey, he worked long and hard to get to his place, so i don\'t begrudge him -- i just refuse to believe without proof that he\'s allowed to \"get away with something\" the rest of the year and not on bc day.

This is really a puzzling question because on the one hand, European horses tend to do very well on Santa Anita\'s turf course, but the heat wave they\'ve had is very hard to factor in.

My only thought is to observe the horses in the post parade and warm-ups and look for clues; I love a few Euro\'s this year and my feeling is I\'m not going to play pick six\'s or even pick fours if I can\'t see the horse; I love Islington, and I just read how she doesn\'t like the heat, same situation for Falbrav -- ok, so, it\'s 95 there today, and it will be 75 on Saturday, but 75 is still a completely different experience than where they came from; the rock hard (pool-table like) surface is a different story as well; we\'ll see how slow they are able to make it this week -- I have noticed that when they try and slow things down, speed horses don\'t fare very well, but that\'s just an observation. The surface gets more cushion to it and it tends to burn out the speed types.


Honestly, though, nothing can be worse than last year -- starting the mile on the turn so the greatest horse in the world (at the time) has absolutely no shot in the Breeder\'s Cup mile -- what a nightmare old Arlington Park was!