I wonder if your Peter Pan Stakes was graded too slow...

[JohnTChance]

I've used and relied on Jerry's numbers for 30 years or so. They're the best around. However, there are rare occasions in which his numbers raise an eyebrow with me and don't quite feel right. It's difficult to explain and I\'ll yield to his ultimate opinion about it. Nevertheless...

Going into the Belmont, I wondered whether Jerry had an important key race, the Peter Pan Stakes, too slow. I was expecting TONALIST to have earned a 0-ish in that race, and COMMISSIONER a 2/3-ish. That is, roughly a 2 point swing faster than Jerry actually graded them. And I suspect both runners pretty much paired those numbers up in the Belmont. That's my gut take on it, right or wrong.

Had a $10 tri essentially underkeying MEDAL COUNT, who I thought was sure to zig back and run well.

Looking forward to Jerry's final read.

Chance

[TGJB]

Someone else raised this as well. The top two will get better figures in the Belmont, and I\'ll look at it as the rest of the Peter Pan field comes back, but my gut feeling is it will turn out the prep figures were right. We\'ll see.

Personally, there was no figure you could make the last one for those two where I could use them here-- any better and I would figure them to go back.

[sekrah]

I think the Peter Pan grade was perfect.  Tonalist had the classic small move forward that pre-empts an explosive new top.

[Boscar Obarra]

Wet , especially sloppy tracks are hard (to make #\'s for). Period.

 No one on gods earth can make a number that can\'t be questioned on tracks like that.

As a reference, the brisnet number has that the FASTEST race run by any of them , ever. Not saying they are the gospel, but there you have it.

[TGJB]

Brisnet numbers are made by computer, and rely heavily on averages. That day featured a track that went from muddy early to sloppy for the last four dirt races. It also had a lot of wind, which was changing speed and direction all day. The race in question had a 5 furlong straight run to the turn-- gusts can affect the time a lot in situations like that.

There is no question the track got MUCH faster starting when it was designated as sloppy, the only question is whether it continued to get even faster than that by a couple of points later in the card, as I had it. A computer that relies on averages (or those that don\'t believe tracks change speed, or have rules about how much they are allowed to have them change race to race) have to have that race faster based on methodology, not judgment. Whether I got it right remains to be seen.

Additionally, by memory, the top two were in light and saved ground, which will make them come up fast on pure \"speed\" figures relative to those that factor in weight and ground.

[moosepalm]

How many Belmont\'s have there been in the past dozen or so years where the results have you going back and wondering about prior numbers?  This year is a little different because of the 1-2 finish being repeated from the prior race, but that kind of forward move in this race is hardly unprecedented.

[jerry]

Same with Rags.

[P-Dub]

sekrah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think the Peter Pan grade was perfect.  Tonalist
> had the classic small move forward that pre-empts
> an explosive new top.


\"If I could bet on any horse in the field running a fresh new significant top (ATLEAST 2 points), I\'d put the house on this one.\"

Yet Matuszak was the one you would bet the house to do it.

[sekrah]

Yeah that was a bad call. Thought he was going to run a good one.  The pace scenario didn\'t help but that\'s not a good excuse.  On another day against a speed field I\'ll look to use him again.  I did use Tonalist, but Medal Count was my key.  I left the 8 out though so didn\'t cash much in the race.   Curve and A-Rod gobbled up more room on my tickets than they deserved.  Poorly wagered by me.  If the 8 doesn\'t run big, I hit a few good tickets (Good sized exacta, small tri).  If I use him instead of one of the two others, I crush the super.  Oh well.  I\'m fairly certain I\'ll lose more races before my time on earth is done

[P-Dub]

sekrah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah that was a bad call. Thought he was going to
> run a good one.  The pace scenario didn\'t help but
> that\'s not a good excuse.  On another day against
> a speed field I\'ll look to use him again.  I did
> use Tonalist, but Medal Count was my key.  I left
> the 8 out though so didn\'t cash much in the race.
>  Curve and A-Rod gobbled up more room on my
> tickets than they deserved.  Poorly wagered by me.
>  If the 8 doesn\'t run big, I hit a few good
> tickets (Good sized exacta, small tri).  If I use
> him instead of one of the two others, I crush the
> super.  Oh well.  I\'m fairly certain I\'ll lose
> more races before my time on earth is done


Sek,

Sounds like we had a lot of similar tickets.  I had a win bet on Tonlaist, but whiffed on all the juicy exotics. My omission of the 8 also cost me. If I had only remembered Covello\'s post about Commissioner. I\'m sick just thinking about it.

Remembering the lost Belmont opportunity + A\'s lose in 14 to the $%#% Angels + my dog just did his business outside, came back inside and did the other on the floor = P-Dub isn\'t happy right about now.

Also, excellent observation on the kid at Arlington.