Last Saturday

TGJB,

One point of clarification only so you understand why I believe the PARS are significant to my point.

When I am referring to the PARS, I am not talking about the PARs for claimers, allowance horses, etc... that could change from year to year or be related to a figure maker\'s lack of skill.  

I am talking about the \"NATIONAL\" PARs for stakes horses.

I am talking about the average Beyer figure it takes to win a Grade 1 race for older colts, a Grade 2 race for older colts, stakes for fillies (each stakes class), stakes for 3 YOs at different times of the year (each stakes class), stakes for 2YOs at different times of the year, Breeder\'s Cup and Derby caliber races etc...

At the higher graded levels, horses are shipping from circuit to circuit for the big bucks, so these PARs tend to be reasonably stable on a national level (especially among mature older horse).

From time to time there are regional differences or crop differences, but the average is reasonably stable.    

So when I say that all CA stakes races are running below average, that is a clear cut proclamation that al these CA horses are earning slower than average Beyer figures relative to the class, relative to what is typical for CA horses of this class, and what is typical for the national average.

I think many of these horses are below average. So it\'s no big deal. But some of them are not. If I were to universally lower all the CA Beyer\'s by let\'s say 5-6 Beyer points, they would \"ALL\" become such mules on his scale relative to average it would be silly.

[Michael D.]

beyer tinkered with the variant quite a bit between the 8th and 11th at GP. difference in final fig normally would have been about 11 points, he made it 2. noble causeway is going to get all kinds of hype (maybe deservedly so).

[TGJB]

Michael-- the track was getting a lot faster throughout the day, not just late, and SA was getting slower, though changing not nearly as much. You\'ll see some interesting figure relationships in the futures package.

Miff-- we have finally found something we agree about completely. As a guy who bred them, raced them, and advises owners, this game is tough enough without taking away anti-inflammatories. There will indeed be some short fields if they do., and for no good reason-- they\'re throwing the baby out with the bath water.

A friend of mine is meeting with Mandella at the track today to discuss a few of the recent issues, and it will be interesting to see what comes of it. Mandella had an idea about calling Mullins out that would have sold a lot of papers, but in the long run wouldn\'t have solved the problem-- we\'re trying to get him to add his voice in a constructive way.

I wish the DRF would provide the track variant he uses for each race so it would be easy to tell which days/races he has tinkered with and which he has not.

In some cases I think the track changed speed and in other cases I think an extreme pace had an impact on the race (or just specific horses) and depending on his interpretation, I need to adjust certain figures.

There is no easy way to spot check them without knowing all the distance relationships he is using. The best I can do is look at all the routes and/or all the sprints and see if they are at least in sync or tinkered with. That\'s a tremendous amount of extra work. Even an asterisk would be helpful.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

beyerguy wrote:

> Looking at the Big Cap, Beyer wise, here is what I see:
>
> Lundy\'s Liability:  Same figures, east and west
> Borrego:  Highest two numbers at OP and LaD
> Congrats:  Slightly higher figures back east than in SoCal
> Saint Liam:  The big fig East Coaster gets trounced by the West
> Coast horses.
>
> Whose figures are too fast again?
>
> By \"whose\" I mean which circuits, not which figure maker.
>

Saint Liam had a history of not pairing the \"Superfigs\". What made anyone think that shipping way West and trying real ground with significant weight from the outside was gonna result in a negative 4? I\'ll give Saint Liam credit for his big numbers. I just don\'t understand what makes everyone think distance is irrelevant to pairing fast figures.

I certainly don\'t recall Lundy\'s Liability running in the East. He may not want 10 marks, but he may have run on the heavier part of the track.

[Michael D.]

ctc,
yea, i agree. stretching from 9f to 10f can have serious effects on some horses. it\'s tough to compare pre big cap 9f figs with the 10f big cap figs. i figured at least half of the field would have a problem with the 10 marks. i think it will take a few more races before we can come to any solid conclusions regarding accuracy of all of the figs involved here. i certainly wouldn\'t question SL\'s fast 9f figs, and lundy just didn\'t have any energy in the last furlong, hard to conclude yet that his previous 9f fig was wrong (especially since congrats ran well).



Post Edited (03-09-05 18:12)

[spa]

I bet the Saint over the 2nd and 3rd place finishers. I believed....jock said he didn\'t like the surface.

[fasteddie]

Could the \"drug-factor,\" ie, policing the \"supertrainers\" have anything to do with the decline in performance numbers of the west-coast horses??? If they can\'t use the juice, then perhaps the horses numbers are coming back to reality!

[NoCarolinaTony]

This Might account for St. Liam performance as Dutrow could not work his magic in SoCal