Briefly

[TGJB]

Albany, you are right-- we don\'t hit every race, so the theory is flawed.

Pace-- as I said late yesterday, the pace was hot. While it may very well have been a factor, it was not the overriding factor-- several who were far behind it did not run well. Some were trained by Pletcher and Zito.

If Chris and I are correct, and the drug testing brought several trainers and horses back to earth (Dutrow, Frankel, Pletcher, Zito, and not just in the Derby), then there is no point in trying to draw any other conclusions from the result-- it\'s apples and oranges. The big question at the moment is, under what conditions will the Preakness be run.

Miff--

1-- As we said in the seminar, of the last 125 horses that ran in the Derby, only 30% paired (within a point either way) or ran a new top. I beat the point to death-- there was only one pattern that produced even 40%, despite spring stake 3yos usually hitting at around 50%.

2-- If I am right about the drugs (and I know you agree it\'s going on), trying to figure out whether past figures are right  based on this race is pointless.

3-- What do you want to do with the BG, add 10? If you add 2 or 3 does Bandini look more or less likely to X? It wasn\'t like BR, Bandini, HL, and the other Pletcher and Zitos only went back a point or two. We\'ll have to see what happens with an awful lot of horses down the road.

Jimbo-- the approach we have taken has held up extremely well in the Derby, as a matter of public record. There was only one approach you could have taken to get to this one, and while I didn\'t go that way myself, I made the point TWICE in the seminar to watch how the supertrainers were doing in the other graded stakes.

[miff]

If I am not mistaken, McLaughlin uses Allday.The result of this race was unimaginable going in.

Look at the drug implications,JB. If so, the entire Data Base is laden with unreliable info going forward especially for you trying to look back at prior \"juice\" performances to establish \"ranges\"

[TGJB]

Miff-- we don\'t know everything that went on. I\'m still trying to deal with Donna Brothers saying AA wasn\'t in his stall because he was in another stall being hosed off-- not outside? Not in his own stall? Was anyone in there with him? Who knows? And we don\'t know whether all the ones using are using the same thing. We\'ll see how it goes. Again, everyone should take a look at all the charts for the graded stakes run so far at CD (and some of the other races as well-- there may be horses in other stalls that guards can see).

You don\'t seriously think when I do a race I\'m going to look at horses who were fast in the past and got beat ten lengths and say hmmm, I\'ll give them their numbers, and the 5 horses who beat them all 8 point tops. Do you?

Yeah, I\'m going to do the Derby pairing BR to his neg 5...

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

TGJB wrote:

> Miff-- we don\'t know everything that went on. I\'m still trying
> to deal with Donna Brothers saying AA wasn\'t in his stall
> because he was in another stall being hosed off-- not outside?

The above pertains to Pre Race Jerry? Are you implying the Derby Entry stalls were monitored but other stalls not monitored and Alex briefly slipped into another stall? Can you elaborate?

Still if the testing is thorough won\'t the test reveal the substance or are you implying sneaking away to an unmonitored location for an injection or dosage of something that can\'t be detected by the supertest? What are you implying? Alex bounced on that Derby by all appearances, but I wont draw firm conclusions until i learn what the number folks think.

> Not in his own stall? Was anyone in there with him? Who knows?
> And we don\'t know whether all the ones using are using the same
> thing. We\'ll see how it goes. Again, everyone should take a
> look at all the charts for the graded stakes run so far at CD

Pletcher won the Three Chimneys just prior to the Derby. One race doesnt disprove certainly, i\'ll look.

> (and some of the other races as well-- there may be horses in
> other stalls that guards can see).

\"There may be horses in OTHER stalls that guards CAN see\"?

What does that mean? Typo? Horses in other stalls that guards CANT see?

[Delmar Deb]

I already put this up on a separate thread, but look at the GP charts for 2/5.  

Closing Argument and Bandini both ran 1 1/8 mile races that day (in fact there was a 3rd 3 y.o. race at the same distance that day). Compare those races and tell me which one you would want to bet?

There was definitely a reason to use Closing Argument - and his numbers agreed.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Well, maybe Deb if you could project the Fab Four Folding. The Bluegrass kinda spoke volumes about Bandini and Closing Arguement too.

[Delmar Deb]

Thunder Gulch and Unbridled did not run well in the Blue Grass (3rd and 4th I believe) after good races at GP...why do you think that CA should be penalized for a pedestrian Blue Grass?

[albany]

TGJB:

No theory or system of handicapping is perfect, they are all flawed.

The problem I have with figure handicapping is not that it is flawed. The issues that I have with speed figure handicapping are as follows: (1) the wide spread use of this approach has resulted in underlays for those winners that are identified; (2) over reliance on figures, which is an easy habit to fall into, conflicts with the basic need to adopt a more comprehensive approach to handicapping; (3) the use of nurmeric values has the effect of affording speed figures  an appearance of objectivity and scientific validity that simply does not comport with reality. This  glean of scientific veracity has the concomitant effect of making people feel  that the numbers are not influenced by subjective factors and are, therefore, beyond reproach.

Please do not misunderstand my position. I believe that figures are an important part of the puzzle. However, they are useful only if the bettor understands their impact on the mutual pools and he/she is well-versed in the other aspects of handicapping.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

albany i love vocabulary and if you were a woman i\'d kiss you

but seriously, did you factor Giacomo

[miff]

YO Albany,

You sound like you come from Brooklyn, are you?

[albany]

Chuckles:

Unfortunately, I didn\'t bet Giacomo. With the benefit of hindsight, there was a possibility of picking Giacomo if you accepted two propositions.

Proposition 1: Due to the presence of so many speed horses and pace pressers, it was likely that there would be a pace collapse in the Derby. This proposition would reduce the field of contenders to intermediate and deep closers.

Proposition 2: The California contingent wasn\'t as bad as most people thought. Following through on Proposition #1, the three California closers were Wilko, Giacomo and Don\'t Get Mad.

As my earlier posts indicate, I liked Wilko because I thought he was sitting on a big race. I preferred Wilko over Giacomo because he beat him in the SA Derby after enduring a less favorable trip. Yet, in retrospect, it should be noted that Giacomo was only a couple of lengths off Wilko in the SA Derby. As you may recall, I selected Don\'t Get Mad fourth.

My analysis wasn\'t far off the mark, but it wasn\'t right on. Close only counts in horse shoes.

As always, thanks for your insights.



Post Edited (05-08-05 21:04)

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Wilko supposedly bled. He was my all bounce horse too. (he and High limit) Though I didn\'t bet him to win. My analysis said Afleet was running through it all, but in hindsight the fact he got little out of the Rebel should have been factored in.

Amazing Race. I\'m still intrigued with it.



Post Edited (05-08-05 16:11)

[JR]

Where can I find it?

[albany]

Chuckles:

I hadn\'t heard about the bleeding. Boy, its a tough game.

[derby1592]

Pletcher did win the 2yo stake that was NOT graded. His horses flopped all weekend in GRADED stakes. Supertesting is being done ONLY ON GRADED STAKES.

Amazingly, Pletcher says he will not be starting any of his half dozen recent 3yo stakes winners in the Preakness. I am assuming that Pimlico will also be doing supertesting in the Preakness (not sure about that - if anyone knows please let us know).

I think this last point speaks volumes even if you want to make excuses for all of Pletcher\'s other horses that ran poorly at CD this weekend in GRADED stakes.

Supertesting just might be working. At least for a while...

Chris