Where's the outrage???

[richiebee]

Indeed Frank and I had some back and forth last Saturday morning regarding the
results from Belmont Day. Frank knows and loves the game and was honestly upset by
what he and others saw as one of the biggest days in NY racing being played on an
unlevel playing field.

I think my apathetic reaction may have surprised Frank. I told him I was much more
upset by what I perceived as a big jump up by H. Graham Motion\'s winner of the
Manhattan in the race previous to the Belmont. (Based on previous tops, and the
fact that Ascend was running against a graded stakes quality field in his first
graded stakes appearance; it was not a huge forward move TG-wise).

Why am I not upset that the game, even on its biggest days, is not played on a
level playing field? Because the field has looked this way since I first started
playing the game casually early in the 1970s; when I worked on the backstretches
of various tracks in the 1980s; when I played the races at numerous tracks daily
in the 1990s. Getting married in 2001 took some wind out of the pari-mutuel sails,
but even though I am now a weekend warrior, I feel like I am close to the game as
ever due to access to Blood Horse, Paulick, TG and other sources of information.

Big days? Remember (as if I would let anyone forget) that legendary veterinarian
Alex Harthill stood sentry while a co-conspirator treated Northern Dancer with
Lasix prior to the 1964 Kentucky Derby, an injection which, given ND\'s dominance
as a stallion and sire of sires, changed the course of the racing industry for 30
or 40 years (unless of course you believe that ND would have won without Lasix, or
alternatively, that ND, a diminutive and not entirely sound specimen, would have
gone on to a brilliant stud career without the benefit of that Kentucky Derby
victory).

The 1970s? Oscar Barrera has been mentioned a few times in this thread, how he
went from a trainer getting otherworldly results to a trainer who went 0/140
something. The story which I have been told by numerous sources is that OSB was
running his horses on Lasix (before Lasix or any other race day med was permitted
at NYRA tracks); when NYRA detected this, they apparently thought the best course
of action was to give Oscar a stern warning and let him to continue to ply his
trade.

Now to Mr. Baffert. My own observation (and I hate to do this without providing
statistics, but I think most here would agree with the observation) is that
(a) Bob Baffert is somehow able to work his stock much faster than other trainers
and (b) Bob Baffert excels at shipping and winning. To NYRA. To New Mexico and
Texas. To Illinois. To Dubai. My OPINION is that \"(a)\" gives Baffert runners an
edge for as long as said runners can withstand the taxing training regimen. My
exact comment to Frank (quoting my text message to Frank) was \"Medication figures
into both the workout and the shipping equations\". This final comment would best
be characterized as a \"SUSPICION\", and I will leave it to someone else to
determine where \"suspicions\" fit with opinions, assertions, allegations and false
news.

What can you as a horseplayer do to level the playing field? I will
repeat myself much as I do each time the drugs in racing issue is discussed. Write
a letter to NYRA, or the folks in charge of racing in Illinois, or Florida, or
California. Even better, get together with numerous others who share your feelings
and send a letter which has hundreds of signatures. Tell the addressees that the
signature(s) at the bottom of letter represent [a large dollar number] in terms of
handle. Tell the addressees that this [large dollar number] will be diverted to a
different racing circuit, a circuit which is doing more to promote drug free
racing. HANA might be doing something like this as I type (it is called a
\"Buycott\", not a \"Boycott\").

I am not saying that posting expressions of outrage here or elsewhere will not
have some impact, but change will not come until racing starts to feel the pinch
of decreased handle directly related to the end user\'s dissatisfaction with
performance enhanced racing.

[One final comment: Somewhere in this thread Baffert was annointed as \"The
Greatest of All Time.\" P-Dub wryly suggested that Charlie Whittingham was spinning
in his grave. Let me give the East coast version of this: Woodford C. Stephens is
spinning in his grave, with five skeletal fingers sticking out of his coffin.]

[Strike]

If you can\'t hear the cussing coming from Bobby Frankel\'s grave about the last comment -- you need a hearing test.

[bellsbendboy]

Richie will take a different view on ASCEND.  Some ammunition may include undefeated on Lasix,  late pace figures a pole better than his field, last half in last, on very soft ground sub 46, something this horse has done before.  Very solid bullets coming in, extremely favorable weight differential and this gelded homer always shows up for work.  bbb

[RICH]

I have baffert at 2-35 the last year .15 ROI
1-18 sprints
1-17 routes

[Tavasco]

On the surface it is easy to understand why BB doesn\'t race on the turf much. i.e. he is not successful. It is not so easy to understand why his turf results are so contrary to his dirt results.

I\'ll guess BB\'s turf runners are cast offs from stock which just didn\'t make the grade in training for and participation in dirt racing.

What is the conjecture about Cigar turf vs dirt?

[richiebee]

bellsbendboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Richie will take a different view on ASCEND.  Some
> ammunition may include undefeated on Lasix,  late
> pace figures a pole better than his field, last
> half in last, on very soft ground sub 46,
> something this horse has done before.  Very solid
> bullets coming in, extremely favorable weight
> differential and this gelded homer always shows up
> for work.  bbb

All fair Triple B, but would it be facetious (gotta love a word which contains
all the vowels in alphabetical order) of me to accuse you of a \"Chart Read\"?

Chart reads are great. With modern technology you can get a hold of a DRF chart
or an Equibase chart almost immediately after the race. The chart of a race
makes it very easy to identify the winner.

To put it another way, give me the most unlikely winner on any given day of
racing, and after the race, I will be able to find something in the TGs or the
past performances that pointed towards a win, even if it means I have to go back
a few generations in the pedigree or look for an isolated TG# from three years
ago.


While I do not rely wholly on TG figures to handicap, it appears that in your
blurb you mentioned them not at all, which is fine. It might also mean that you
are not aware of the following: Time Test (7/5): OFF; Beach Patrol (6.8/1):
PAIR; World Approval (3.9/1): OFF; Divisidero (7.8/1): OFF; Potemkin (8/1):
PAIR; Applicator (69/1): PAIR; and Wake Forest (17): OFF. Third place finisher
Sadler\'s Joy established a 3 point new top, but since he did not win, and was
not trained by Baffert, it was hardly worthy of mention.

SO, not only did the \"gelded homer\" with the significant weight differential and
the pace figures which were a pole better than his competition need to run a new
top, many of the contenders in the race had to tank, which they did. And, kind
of like the \"Chart Read\", the post race review of the TGs brings everything into
focus.

I do not want to belabor this, but the original reason I even mentioned Ascend
is to bring up the point that while many posters were outraged about (for lack
of a better word) juicing, there are many things going on on the backside that
95% of the horseplayers are not aware of, and that might lead to improved
performances. Subtle equipment changes (bit changes, blinker type changes) which
are not (but could be) reported. A horse reacting positively to a new groom, to
a new feed regimen, to different bedding. Change in exercise rider, moving to a
new stall in the barn, moving from the track to a Fair Hill type environment,
etc, etc, etc. Most of us will never know how much we do not know.  

My own personal opinion is that subjecting equines to numerous invasive
procedures such as intravenous and intramuscular injections, tapping and
injecting joints etc is harmful to the equine in the long run. If it were not
for that opinion, I might say lets go to the modified \"Amsterdam\" approach, ie
make everything legal, and may the best vet win, which might be where we are at
today, anyway.

[jbelfior]

And then there are horses that come home in :22 3/5 in their last and peak as 5 year olds while working every 6-7 days and while getting 4-10 lbs from the rest.

All kinds of numbers in play .....ever day.


Good Luck,
Joe B.

[Rich Curtis]

Richiebee,

This is not a race that I particularly enjoy reliving, but your calculations here are mucked up something awful by today\'s weight and groundloss, among other things. Please try this: Forget the top/pair/off bit. It is not built for this. Instead, being very conservative, simply plug in a projected figure, today\'s weight, and today\'s odds for each horse:

Like this:

Ascend: 3.25 (114) 27-1

Beach Patrol...

World Approval...

Then go back and adjust the projected figures for today\'s weight and see where you end up.

[richiebee]

Understood Rich. I just wanted to dig at BBB a bit.
Also trying to point out that not only must one identify live runners who are value priced, one must also try to identify those runners who are not going to fire.
I\'ve always been averse to betting low weighted runners in handicap races, which, in this nabe, is a bit contrarian.

[TGJB]

I feel compelled to point out that the guy sitting next to you, who has some experience using TG, liked that horse. And that the guy managing the horse, who buys 5 figures worth of our data a year, picked the spot based on TG.

[Rich Curtis]

\"I just wanted to dig at BBB a bit.\"

I am all for that, Richiebee. But given that BBB has shown that he has a pro-class, anti-sheet agenda, I would not pass up an opportunity to dig at him Thorographically in a race that is so ripe for doing so by the book. No need to read any break on this putt.

[Tavasco]

Regarding the BBB point about the horse\'s late pace # being a pole faster. He failed to mention he was also a pole slower early.

While others pat themselves on the back, I would also pat J. Ortiz on the back. From the perspective of pace and racing dynamics. imo, the trip was a big factor in the win. Not much ground loss and up near the dawdling pace.

I think that Beach Patrol was taken out of the race by his trip.

@27/1 I love the straight put analogy. Learning to roll it straight would be the other half of that program.

[bellsbendboy]

Richie understand the adversity towards the low weighted types, yet Belmont in the spring/summer offers, unlike most tracks, cappers an opportunity to critique imposts. Thought both preps for Antonoe and Ascend went drawing board. Both were pointed here and came in as well as could be expected.  To be honest I did not bet either.  Played a pair of tix, 4\'s, singling a couple of winners, the exacta pair in the stake and Time Test, not the best of somethimg to five horses. Can report several of Ascend\'s \"connections\" have shiny new trucks.

Rich:  No agenda.  Class has dominated the sport for centuries, yet completely grasp the horse to beat is not necessarily the horse to bet; a mantra/mission this site.

Tav, Agree, yet at ten panels, green, early speed is often mitigated, severely so when on the hedge. Yet have issue with the further a horse runs the less weight matters as some performance makers suggest.  

bbb

[Furious Pete]

Which figure makers suggest that?

[Boscar Obarra]

Wasn\'t going to say anything, as its redboarding, but unless you discount the races due to age (I wouldn\'t) Ascend\'s last two races at NYRA  were BOTH difficult no shot trips, that understated his ability.

 Those kind routinely win on turf when they finally get clean/perfect trips.

 Was way too high at 25-1 , even off the raw dope.