Belmont Blathering -- Somewhere between Trivia and Science

[TGJB]

I\'m starting to think (hope?) your stuff is satire.

[jimbo66]

Satire?

I would categorize his posts more in the \"greek tragedy\" bucket........

[Tavasco]

Some Facts and some derivations. Of course its late night and I made the mistake of stopping on Fox news for a couple of minutes(my max) after watching some really good basketball and now I\'m Drain Bamaged.

I have not doubled checked this consequently I may have some mistakes.

12 of the last 17 (70%) Belmont winners ran in the Kentucky Derby

3 of the 12 (.25*.7=17.5%) Belmont winners who ran in the Kentucky Derby and also ran in the Preakness
2001 - Point Given, 2005 - Afleet Alex, 2015 -American Pharoah
2017 - Classic Empire (9%), Lookin At Lee (9%)

9 of the 12 (.75*.7= 52.5% Belmont winners who ran in the Kentucky Derby but did not race again until the Belmont

2000 - COMMENDABLE, 2003- EMPIRE MAKER, 2004 - BIRDSTONE, 2006 - JAZIL, 2007 - Rags To Riches*, 2009 - SUMMER BIRD, 2012 - UNION RAGS, 2013 - PALACE MALICE, 2016 -CREATOR
2017 - Irish War Cry(10.5%), J Boys Echo(10.5%), Patch(10.5%), Tapwrit(10.5%), Gormley(10.5%)


5 of the last 17 (30%) Belmont winners did not run in the Kentucky Derby

2 of the 5 came from lesser stakes along the same spacing as Derby - Preakness - Belmont.
2002 - SARAVA, 2008 - DA\' TARA,
2017 - ?

3 of the 5 (.6*.3=18%) came from timing close to KD - Belmont
2010 - DROSSELMEYER, 2012 - RULER ON ICE, 2014 - TONALIST
2017 - Meantime(18%)

2017 New Path(12%) - True Timber)2.5%), Twisted Tom(2.5%), Multiplier(2.5%), Senior Investment(2.5%), Epicharis(2.5%)

Note - Some horses that I have been placed in the new path group (if stretching c/b considered near the Derby Preakness spacing ala Dross, ROI, Tonalist?

*Rags To Riches ran in the Ky Oaks and then to the Belmont.


Generally - The batch of horses moving from the Derby, skipping the Preakness to the Belmont has had, as a group noticeable success (surely because it is the largest group typically). Some in this category have jumped up considerably in a race that really doesn\'t have many significant jump up tops. i.e., Birdstone, Palace Malice.

[Furious Pete]

Looks like he\'s in.

From BH-reporter Alicia Wincze Hughes on Twitter:

\"Graham Motion on Irish War Cry:\"I haven\'t spoken to (the owner) yet this morning but right now my inclination would be to go (to Belmont)\"

\"Added Motion on Irish War Cry\'s work this AM \"If he\'s going to run in the Belmont, he\'s got to have a proper work. And I think he did.\"

\"Motion said they would likely train Irish War Cry at Fair Hill Wed. morning and ship to Belmont later that AM.\"

https://twitter.com/BH_AHughes/with_replies

EDIT: Here\'s the full story: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/221900/irish-war-cry-likely-belmont-bound-after-fair-hill-move?utm_source=BHTW&utm_medium=social

[jerry]

Interesting data. Thanks. From my recollection, the Belmont does yield quite a few jump ups, maybe not in the top spot but filling out the verticals, ergo some of the juicy exotics. The key for me has always been fresh legs and forward moving patterns.

[sekrah]

Usually a smaller field, plus because it\'s so big you get horses spread out with different tactics.  Less likely to run into trouble = More jump ups.

[Rich Curtis]

Three-year-olds are too lightly raced to have forward-moving patterns.

[Tavasco]

Jerry,

The term \"jump up\" top was undefined previously. I was thinking in terms of 3 points or more. An improvement of 2+ points is significant in many cases. Especially when moving into negative numbers from a nice consistent pattern. In any event it is arbitrary and every one has their own opinion.

2000
Commendable +4² 1st

2001
Point Given +3 1st

2002
Sarava +3² 1st

2003

2004
Birdstone +4³ 1st

2005
Andromeda\'s Hero +3 2nd, Nolan\'s Cat +3 3rd

2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Palace Malice +4¹ 1st

2014
Commissioner +3 2nd

2015
Keen Ice +3 3rd

2016

[jerry]

Actually, it is most often 3 yos. who do have forward moving patterns because they\'re mature so much at 3.

[Rich Curtis]

My comment was irony aimed at Richiebee.

[richiebee]

Rich Curtis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My comment was irony aimed at Richiebee.


Rich great to hear from you as always, although I think the shot you fired
across my bow was more \"sarcasm\" than \"irony\".

The Belmont stakes winners since 2000 have had an average of somewhere around 4
starts as a 3YO, still a little light for this handicapper to focus on patterns
though the numbers are of course a major consideration.

As to forward moving, only Commendable, Afleet Alex and American Pharaoh did
not make a forward move in the Belmont off their previous race. Some of the
dramatic forward moves resulted in nice mutuels. (Sarava, Birdstone, Summer
Bird, Palace Malice and Creator).

[Rich Curtis]

Well, my comment was textbook irony. The question is whether it was bitter or harsh enough to qualify as sarcasm too. Do you see the problem I had? If I call the post sarcasm, I violate the Richiebee rule (as presented on the Rags board), which states that insults should always be as subtle as possible.

Anyway, I always look forward to your posts, Richiebee, but I have a question for you: Why do you so often chastise the commoners while sparing the royalty?

If you dislike the way \"pattern\" is used by everyone (well, with one exception) who uses sheets, why not attack the source of the problem? Go into the archives here and listen to the seminars in which JB says of a third-time starter that \"There is no better two-number pattern than his.\" Or read Len Ragozin\'s book, in which he says that \"decades of pattern analysis\" taught him that \"lightly raced horses who make small jumps are big threats to make big jumps in the near future.\" These are the people who wrote the dictionary that you take exception to.

And finally, it would take Ludwig Wittgenstein to clear up all the confusion here: something like your picture of one TGAB-touted pattern becoming indelible and interfering with your ability to process the larger language-game properly. But the following trick may help:

If you have it in your head that a pattern requires repetition, then consider that the repetition need not come from the horse on the sheet. In other words, if a horse has a two-number pattern of 14 followed by 13, look at \"pattern\" as representing the combined results we have seen from other horses with this pattern. That will give you your repetition and permit you to say that the horse has a good pattern for his third start.

[hellersorr]

And BOOM! goes the dynamite.

[richiebee]

Rich Curtis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, my comment was textbook irony. The question
> is whether it was bitter or harsh enough to
> qualify as sarcasm too. Do you see the problem I
> had? If I call the post sarcasm, I violate the
> Richiebee rule (as presented on the Rags board),
> which states that insults should always be as
> subtle as possible.

Rich, I do not believe I am a major or even minor offender in terms of insults.
Yes, I confess I called some of the Raggies \"lovestruck teenagers\" when they rose,
i]en banc[/i], to come to the defense of Breeders Cup winning trainer scorned
Maria Borell. Yes, I confess to wanting to lambaste those who redboard, because
they do not have the understanding of the pari-mutuel system to realize why
redboarding is unsavory.

It pains me to hold my tongue sometimes, because what is better than a good
insult, or even better an insult followed by a sharp reply? (Gladstone to
Disraeli: \"I predict sir, that you will either die by hanging or some vile social
disease\". Disraeli to Gladstone: \"That all depends on whether I embrace your
principles or your mistress.\")

 
> Anyway, I always look forward to your posts,
> Richiebee, but I have a question for you: Why do
> you so often chastise the commoners while sparing
> the royalty?
>
> If you dislike the way \"pattern\" is used by
> everyone (well, with one exception) who uses
> sheets, why not attack the source of the problem?
> Go into the archives here and listen to the
> seminars in which JB says of a third-time starter
> that \"There is no better two-number pattern than
> his.\" Or read Len Ragozin\'s book, in which he says
> that \"decades of pattern analysis\" taught him that
> \"lightly raced horses who make small jumps are big
> threats to make big jumps in the near future.\"
> These are the people who wrote the dictionary that
> you take exception to.

I believe that I fairly clearly stated that I did not rely heavily on
patterns in handicapping the Triple Crown. I did not disparage those who do choose
to utilize patterns to handicap these races. While some might say that Cloud
Computing had a forward moving pattern going into the Preakness (or that he \"never
went backwards\"), to me this was a lightly raced colt who improved in each of his
starts. As Sekrah astutely pointed out, my choice not to call this trio of races a
\"pattern\" is a matter of \"semantics\".

With regards to the Belmont, I stand by my assertion that even a runner with a
good pattern heading into said race will not be an appealing win candidate if his
pedigree will not support a top effort at 12 furlongs. (This brings into the
debate another question: How many generations back in the pedigree should one go
to find the \"staying\" influence?).

As to confronting Jerry Brown or Len Ragozin, I must say that with regards to the
former (and TGAB), I have been at Saratoga seminars where the whole notion of the
Thoro-pattern (effort distribution, to borrow a phrase) has been questioned, and
both TGJB and TGAB have admitted that it is not perfect; that is it does not take
into account spacing, surface switches, trainer changes, etc.

With regards to the Lens, I have a feeling they would be very interested in back
and forth with me seeing as I have some graded stakes winning Communists in my
pedigree.

Again since it is my OPINION (sorry I\'m yelling now), I feel no need to \"attack
the source of the problem.\" It is not a \"problem\" for me.
 
> And finally, it would take Ludwig Wittgenstein to
> clear up all the confusion here: something like
> your picture of one TGAB-touted pattern becoming
> indelible and interfering with your ability to
> process the larger language-game properly. But the
> following trick may help:
>
> If you have it in your head that a pattern
> requires repetition, then consider that the
> repetition need not come from the horse on the
> sheet. In other words, if a horse has a two-number
> pattern of 14 followed by 13, look at \"pattern\" as
> representing the combined results we have seen
> from other horses with this pattern. That will
> give you your repetition and permit you to say
> that the horse has a good pattern for his third
> start.

Regarding the example above, your explanation of looking for a different sort of
repetition is quite logical. Lets assume you are talking about a 2YO or young 3YO.
Lets say the expected result is 14- 13 - 11¹, based on the repetition
you speak of. The first thing I might mention is that if the third race is a stake
race, a stretch out or a surface switch... can we still expect the forward move?
(Cue Vito chorus--\'The number is the number\").The second note is that I am cursed
(as you know from PTP exchanges between us) that I spent some time at the end of a
lead shank (hotwalker), with a hoofpick in my hand (groom), and with a six pack in
the knee tub (night watchman). My experience working with thoroughbreds has made
me a bit reluctant to \"handicap by the numbers\", feeling as I do that all
thoroughbreds and thoroughbred trainers are individuals.

I have been reduced to wagering only on \"BIG DAYS\" (thankfully there seem to be
two of these per month), but I assure you, on those days, I look at the numbers,
and to a lesser extent the patterns. I do not find the patterns that useful with
lightly raced runners, possibly to my detriment. Would love to see someone dive
into the Archives and shine a light on a pattern common to all or some Belmont
winners from this Century.

[TGJB]

Damn, Richie. You are the man. Post of the year so far.

Did Oscar Wilde write for Disraeli? If he came up with that on the spot he really did have Gears.