How Fast Was It?

[TGJB]

CH-- not only do we keep track of how much mud is on each horse and jockey, we have a guy go out, scrape it off, put it in a separate pail for each horse, and weigh it. But only at the major tracks. You\'ve never noticed that after a race?

I\'ve made both the specific point (that horses behind the frontrunners can pick up dirt/mud which weighs something) and the general one (that figures are inherently limited in accuracy because the underlying information is not perfect) before. Other examples are:

Wind (speed and direction estimated by humans, usually before and after the race, because they are doing ground loss during it),

The effects of wind (there\'s a really big building there),

The effects of weight (which would vary depending on the weights of the horses, which we can\'t get),

Weight itself (see \"Elliott Spitzer\"),

Ground loss (paths estimated by humans, and invariably rounded off-- 2-3, rather than 1.75-2-2.3-2.9), and

\"Beaten lengths\" (see, \"teletimer companies\").

Believe it or not, there is a speed figure company that for many years claimed quarter point accuracy.

\"Now I am ready to change the variant to fine-tune the numbers based on an analytical look at each horse\'s development-- but if I change one figure, I must equally change them all. If I want to change Holy Bull\'s provisional rating for a 1 1/4 mile race from 5 1/4 to the more likely 4, I must subtract 1 1/4 from every other horse -- including sprinters-- running on the dirt that day\".
--- The Odds Must Be Crazy, by Len Ragozin, \"with Len Friedman\".

That might be the least true statement about making figures ever made.

Unrelated-- you will probably be surprised to learn that a guy who is in the running for best active professional horseplayer (and an occasional poster here) asked me yesterday why I go so easy on you.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
 
> I\'ve made both the specific point (that horses
> behind the frontrunners can pick up dirt/mud which
> weighs something) and the general one (that
> figures are inherently limited in accuracy because
> the underlying information is not perfect) before.
> Other examples are:
>
>
> The effects of weight (which would vary depending
> on the weights of the horses, which we can\'t get),
>
>
> Weight itself (see \"Elliott Spitzer\"),

I\'m the last guy in the world that should clarify someone elses spelling, but with Elliott Spitzer its, One L, One T, Lots of Spit.

[NoCarolinaTony]

TGJB,

This is a second of that emotion!!!

This is becomming more of a Blog than a forum. It seems to me that this has become the CH and CtC show. Occasionally they come with pearls of wisdom, (I\'ll give CtC his pedigree data and CH the betting dicipline of Methusala), but they two gentlemen remind me of persistent children who scream in the mall (or worse Katie Couric) for more Ice Cream.

I am dreading their laborious posts as we lead up to the BC.

NC Tony

[miff]

Jimbo said:

\"The third place finisher was questionable at 1 1/4 and it did not appear that Perfect Drift ran his race on Saturday\"

Jimbo,

You,me, and many others know nothing about racing and what you saw was really a pair.The idea that Perfect Drift ran as well on Sun as his previous three races, figure wise, or in any mannner, is another joke, which is becoming NOT funny.It doesn\'t matter what the jockey(Guidry) said or that you saw like me  that PD never lifted a hoof (compared to his prior effort especially). It\'s another \"ugly\" pair. File it with Kansas City Boy and the host of others.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Just an example, it doesnt get any more figure oriented than this:

NoCarolinaTony Wrote

\"Just to help those who don\'t have it in their dictionary:

Omphaloskepsis is a word you won\'t find in all dictionaries.
It refers to the practice of meditating while contemplating one\'s navel. I would venture to say there aren\'t many omphaloskeptics in your county or parish, unless of course there\'s some subculture you\'re not aware of.

Well Done Richie\"

\" [news.bloodhorse.com]

The Famous Dr. Allday also re-appears in this article.

This horse may also miss the Turf Classic

NC Tony\"

\"I\'ve hit him last year at Monmouth. I thought Tap Day retired? ....I\'m Kidding.

Would be intersting to see if he shows up.

NC Tony\"

I\'m pretty sure my Leroid, Super Frolic and Scrappy T threads are inherently figure oriented. Maybe its just that more questions and ideas pop into my head than the average poster. But I promise to keep the better ones to myself. The only B.C. races I\'ll be discussing will be the Classic and Mile primarily because I am not as certain about them.





NoCarolinaTony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TGJB,
>
> This is a second of that emotion!!!
>
> This is becomming more of a Blog than a forum. It
> seems to me that this has become the CH and CtC
> show. Occasionally they come with pearls of
> wisdom, (I\'ll give CtC his pedigree data and CH
> the betting dicipline of Methusala), but they two
> gentlemen remind me of persistent children who
> scream in the mall (or worse Katie Couric) for
> more Ice Cream.
>
> I am dreading their laborious posts as we lead up
> to the BC.
>
> NC Tony
>
>

[HP]

Chuckles,

You are an \"above average\" poster in every way.  You have nothing left to prove.  You can stop anytime.  

HP

[TGJB]

Miff-- that\'s an interesting approach, given the position and numbers that appeared here, in ROTW, BEFORE the race. In fact, the same guy who wrote ROTW (yours truly) did not have PD ON A TICKET, based on what his figures looked like, AT THE WEIGHTS, relative to-- drum roll-- the three horses who beat him. I boxed those 3 in exactas and tris, so you are going to have a hell of a time convincing me that a result I predicted, based on those figures, shows those figures to be wrong. In fact, I MANAGED SF with those figures, telling the owner two weeks out that the Gold Cup was the right idea BECAUSE PD was going, would scare others out, and was way overrated based on THIS years form.

But what do I know.

[miff]

TGJB,

Can you comprehend anything beyond your self serving opinion? What you JUST posted makes sense.Congrats on the score and the purchase.

My ONLY point was that PD did NOT(imo and many others) run as well on Sunday as in his previous race. Two other sources (fig makers) agree with what I felt and saw that PD regressed, not paired. I\'m waiting for Beyer and Rags figs for PD and I\'ll post them all.

All I said was another \"UGLY\" pair.

[magicnight]

I concur, HP! He even cares about spelling now! He\'s reached nirvana!

[TGJB]

Miff--

1-- PD\'s figure is set in stone, relative to those run by the first 3 finishers (and everybody else), because of the relationships of weight, ground loss, and beaten lengths. If I give him worse, I have to give all the others worse. That would mean you have a 750k stake with no one running as well as their previous best. (Keep in mind that I gave none of them a new top).

2-- The evidence (not proof) that we were right, regardless of what Beyer and Ragozin do, is the result of the race, AND HOW THE FIGURES CAME OUT. You miss this point regularly-- I don\'t start with some theory of how PD ran, and work towards it-- I can\'t give him that figure and the others their figures unless the relationships hold up. Get it? Just like I don\'t start with a theory that horses are getting faster-- you make the variants based on the older, proven horses, and if the younger ones are getting faster, they\'re getting faster.

3-- I hope Beyer and Ragozin got it \"different\". I live for that.

4-- There is a reason people started making speed figures-- they enable you to as objectively as possible compare performances, and without them people draw the kinds of conclusions you have. Also, other figure makers, who either don\'t use or don\'t have the proper relationships of ground loss, weight, and CIRCUITS, can come up with anything.

All of which is good, because those two things are the reason I have had success with buying and managing horses-- if the public perception (even the reasonably educated one of guys at your level) was accurate, there would be no possible edge. If you and others could tell just by looking how well horses ran, I\'d be out of business-- but I have continually found horses whose ability is concealed, and have succeeded with them, because both the figures and the analysis have held up, in a very tough game.

[Michael D.]

Jerry,
\"That would mean you have a 750g stake with no one running as well as their previous best.\" Using purse as a factor when giving out figs? Please explain why you included the amount of the purse when defending your figure for the race. No reason to doubt the figure, but I would feel better about it if it was based on how fast they ran around the track, and not on the class of the race.

[miff]

Jerry,


1. I\'m well aware.That was a \"common\" group for 750k with only one declining legit stake runner, PD, in the field.


2. It is apparent that one of your personal \"prejudice\" that stake horses runs lots of tops and pairs is on display here. Your prejudice is correct SOMETIMES, not always, but seemingly always used regardless.

There is no evidence that horses are 10 lenghts faster than before, but a couple of lengths seems far more logical, all things considered.Your figures are much faster, by 4-5 tg points imo.


3. No comment.


4. The only propositions being pushed here are yours. After 17 years with your produc my conclusion is that present figs are not as reliable as they were for the better part of the previous 14 years. I firmly believe that you have a few misconceptions about what happens on the track every day(RACING STUFF) and such misconceptions have crept in the figs.


With regard to the art of making figs, I have given you props for many years but there seems to be profound changes to the methodology which I have serious issues with and PD\'s fig is yet another one.

[miff]

Michael D said:

Jerry,
\"That would mean you have a 750g stake with no one running as well as their previous best.\" Using purse as a factor when giving out figs? Please explain why you included the amount of the purse when defending your figure for the race. No reason to doubt the figure, but I would feel better about it if it was based on how fast they ran around the track, and not on the class of the race.


Mike,

When it suits Jerry there is no such thing as \"class\" but as you stated whats the difference what the purse is. Hmmm, maybe it suits in this case for \"class\" to exist.

[TGJB]

Michael-- I don\'t adjust the figures for the purse or use pars of any kind. What I meant was, stake horses are treated differently than other horses-- more time between races, given time off between campaigns, not run with problems most of the time. As a result, they run their race a much higher percentage of the time than other horses-- when you look at this weekend\'s stakes, count the times the stake horses have either run their previous tops or new ones, this year. You won\'t find too many (or probably any) situations where nobody runs at least their previous top-- and in this case, if you did it any other way, not only would that have been true, but 6 horses would have run exactly or almost exactly the same AMOUNT off their previous (or recent) top, which is beyond unlikely.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Chuck-

Results 1 - of 1416 of your laborious posts for the past year.

In my defense, You have edited my comments, have been selective in choosing them to be out of context to serve your purpose. That\'s all fine. Kind of expected it from you. Your tenacious get in your face style is, well, what it is.

I\'ve said enough on this subject.

Have a Great day.

NC Tony