Foreign Numbers for BC 2002???

[Billy Whizz]

So do you still use Ezboard or you been banned, thought Weight Doesn\'t Matter was your defining moment.

[HP]

\"Bull Market was pressured every step of the way...\"

Great analysis. Everybody\'s a moron. I guess there won\'t be any pressure on Bull Market Saturday, huh? Bull Market will probably be able to go nice and easy with these and won\'t be pressed at all. Looks like your average no-pressure 14 horse field to me.

So which will it be Saturday, he improves because he faces no pressure or he improves because he faces a lot of pressure?

Maybe you should publish your figures. Instead of single digits you could say 7-but-better-than-Sky-Mesa\'s-4. Looks like easy money. HP

[Alydar in California]

Dana wrote: \"numbers are infallable. Right?\"

He really did.
 
\"Yes, weight matters tremendously -- it\'s one of the biggest factors in stakes races in my opinion -- at least in calculating the number I think a horse will run today.\"

Yeah. Today\'s weight is important. Yesterday\'s weight is meaningless.

 And then Dana was run over by a turtle who had a good pattern.

[Phil Mandl]

A possible contender in a tough race-A potential improving 3 year old who has paired up tops in his previous 4 races before the QEII.  A number for his last would have been very useful.  Did he regress or take a move forward? I waited to get the data til today so I could have all the euro numbers. If you have the number for the race can you post-it please.
Good Luck to all.
phil

[Dana]

phil,
that race is a real question mark. the ragozin folks feel he regressed in that race; you can see their euro numbers for free on their web site. when i originally looked at the race i too thought he regressed. i had his best number coming in the race before that (9/7 Irish Champion Stakes) at a 2+, previously he had also worked down to a 2+ at Epsom on June 8th. anyway i rated his race about a 5\" -- which is a regression from my point of view as well. then i viewed the video (Santa Anita\'s site has breeder\'s cup videos you can view for free) and I thought that race might not be such a regression after all, maybe another 2+ or a 3- at the worst. the horse that beat him has a much quicker turn of foot and he just got the jump on him in a race shorter than Hawk Wing really wants to run anyway, the race was over before hawk Wing got going -- he\'s a real stayer, solid late running type, but not too quick -- that race might even set him up better for the classic building some more speed into him and he has 1st lasix too. my biggest concern with him is that the track might come up sloppy and he\'s not quite as fast as the top american horses, and certainly thusfar lacking in the early speed department -- i think he\'s a contender, but there are a lot of variables at this point. my numbers on him are as follows 2 year old 13+ 9\" 6+ 4\" three year old 3+ 2+ 4\"h? 2+ 5\" (the race in question). i\'m sure he\'ll run his best race and he loves 1 1/4 yet the questions remain -- hope this helps

[TGAB]

Philip Mandl wrote:
>
> A possible contender in a tough race-A potential improving 3
> year old who has paired up tops in his previous 4 races
> before the QEII.  A number for his last would have been very
> useful.  Did he regress or take a move forward? I waited to
> get the data til today so I could have all the euro numbers.
> If you have the number for the race can you post-it please.
> Good Luck to all.
> phil

JB is out of town attending the BC but he tells me that he made figures only for those horses he felt more certain about. His educated guess is that Hawk Wing\'s last is about at the same level as he has been running preceding that--3\'s and change.

[Catalin]

My methodology for making Euro #s is very similar to JBs.

I\'ve got Hawk Wing going back about 1/2 point in the QEII.  He hasn\'t developed very much since his race in the 2000 Guineas.