Figure Differences

[big18741]

Mylute 5th last year with the second best #

Needed Borel.

[covelj70]

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

[miff]

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.

[ajkreider]

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.

[TGJB]

All three Borel and all three Cordero Derby winners were rail/rail. In two cases, coming from last in big fields.

[big18741]

You can throw in Borel 3rds on Denis of Cork and Revolutionary both 1w1w

[Tavasco]

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..?

[ajkreider]

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).

[miff]

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.

[FrankD.]

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.