asshandicapper

[bellsbendboy]

I honestly feel the difference between two starts, and three or more, takes a backseat to breeding,form,accomplishments,workouts etc. Perhaps putting up the statistics book and perusing the DRF would help. BBB

[NoCarolinaTony]

BBB,

Are you talking about Classhandicapping now?

We have come full circle on this thread!!!

NC Tony

[bellsbendboy]

I am on this forum to teach handicapping and to learn handicapping.  The thread you have joined/started, between three (plus) preps and only two is pure prattle. Personally, I strongly suspect that class, is an vital component of who will win the race, but realize the most telling handicapping factor of all- is ALL of them. BBB  

[bobphilo]

Tony,

The question is does having less than 3 preps hurt a horses performance so that it should be considered a negative factor. The reasearch clearly shows no such disadvantage. It also shows that a horse is usually ready to run his best after 2 preps. That means that, yes, he is more likely to Win, Place or fill out your Superfecta. Of course, the horse has to figure in the first place, but if he does, there is no reason that only having 2 preps will hurt his chances.
If you can show me any properly conducted study that shows that it does, I\'m all ears.

Bob

[bobphilo]

NoCarolinaTony Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
> And as Bob astutely points out the population of
> the sample size is much smaller for two vs three
> therefore the range of deviation should also be
> greater for two vs three. Data with a larger
> sample size tends to have more meanigful data  and
> has ironed out the anomolies better than a smaller
> sample does. >
> NC Tony

Tony, thanks for the reference to my astuteness, but I can tell you something even more astute (or more astuter, as we say in the Bronx). LOL. If the sample size of 2 prep horses is too small for meaningful conclusions about the fitness of these horses, it is also too small to draw conclusions about them not being fit. Since this is the only evidence that \"2 preps bad\" theorists have it makes their conclusion all the more shakey. Fortunately we do have studies like Dr. Quirin\'s using samples of thousands that show that the 3rd race post lay-off is the best. Whether you want to consider 2 preps ideal, at the very least, there is just no statitical justification that horses going into the Derby with less than 3 preps are less fit.
By the way, if it makes you feel any better, I hope your ultimate Derby pick has 3 or more preps. It won\'t help his chances but you\'ll probably sleep better if you think it does. LOL.

Bob

 




























>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 03/15/06 06:33PM by
> NoCarolinaTony.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Well BBB teach me something then. Please don\'t lecture me or talk down you arrogant BBB

NC Tony

BBB You didn\'t get the PUN, This thread started with asshandicapping which was reffering to a previous poster Classhandicapper. Sorry you didn\'t get it but please don\'t give me this prattle crap.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Bob,

Lets agree.

In harness racing the third race back off a layoff was always key race and so it is with TBreds.

Hey Im out of this discussion. You\'re right third time off the layoff has always been a good angle to play. Especially on Derby Day. But never in the Derby itself for some reason.

So is your point your not going to rule out 2 prep only horses? If So, I agree. I won\'t rule them out by rule.

NC Tony

[bobphilo]

Tony,

You\'ve got a deal, my friend. Lets hope we both have the winner, regardless of whether he\'s had 2 or 3 or whatever preps.

Bob

[Frost King]

Wow what an arguement. You guys are just chasing your tail on this. You are trying to find the DERBY WINNER, and not the horse that improves by five points and still finishes up the track. The raw numbers show that the WINNER must be seasoned at two and also at three. By trying to buck the trend, you are looking for a needle in a haystack! Yeah eventually it is going to happen, but when? Are you going to be the first to buck the trend. Like it was said before many great trainers and owners have tried to buck this trend. What do they have to show for it? Coolmore, Godolphin, Frankel and Pletcher nothing in the Derby except for some PRICEY broken down three year olds that ain\'t worth a crap anymore.

[richiebee]

Fellas:

      Its nice to try to attain an advantage in any wagering event, especially the event we most fancy.. the Derby.

      But I sometimes fail to grasp why we all expect to be able to somehow codify the Derby using common handicapping logic, whether it be derived from pedigree or performance figures or dosage formulae or recent trends. I for one think the fact that no BC Juvie winner has come back to win the Derby is a statistical aberration.

      My point is that although the Derby is almost always a great betting race.. and part of the best P4 of the year (the sequence which includes the Humana Distaff (won last year by long priced My Trusty Cat) and the Early Times turf race (won last year by long priced America Alive)).. there is no reason to subject it to a lot of the knowledge we employ every day in handicapping overnight races. Why?

     1) How often do horses run in 20 horse fields?

     2) How often do we bet a field of horses where almost every one of the     contenders is untried at the distance?

     3) How about the fact that 2 of America\'s top trainers (R. Frankel and     T. Pletcher) have had very little impact on the race, and especially in the case of the latter, that might change in any given year?

     As I have said in the past, go back to the endless though fascinating posts surrounding Giacomo\'s Derby. Do a search for Giacomo going back to January leading up to the race. Did any of the oft mentioned indicators point to Giacomo? How many of the brilliant posters (and I dont mean that facetiously) who like to post here especially at Derby time take a strong position on Giacomo?

     Personally, I researched the 05 Derby as extensively as any Derby in the last 30. I ended up using 5 horses --25% of the field-- in a multiple race wager, and after 5/8s of a mile not one of them had an honest chance to win. I will be a passive observer of this years Derby debate, chiming in only when a post about the Derby offends my sense of \"taste and decency\". Might take all of a day.

     In re 2Y0 experience, last years best 3Y0 was the most seasoned 2Y0.

     As to Classhandicapper, Robespierre and Indulto have been pillorying him from the start, going back to about the first or second of his posts over there. The best thing about Class is his ability to sway from one end of an argument to another-- sometimes within his own post.

     Have just returned from 10 days in that winter wonderland, Moscow. On the ninth of the ten days, I made my wife take me to the Hippodrome (opens for racing March 18) over her friend\'s and family\'s objections that only hardened criminals would be seen within 500 yards of the place. Took some photos of the facility, which dates back to 1834 and is just amazing to look at...

[bobphilo]

You say that we are chasing our tails while you continue to see an advantage that is just not there. Would you say that grays are at a disadvantage because most Derby\'s are won by bays and chestnuts. That\'s just the kind of logic you\'re using here. According to your reasoning, any gray that wins the Derby is bucking a trend. Your statements that the raw numbers support your position is based on the fact that the numbers tell you things. Sorry to tell you this but any statistician knows that raw numbers don\'t tell you anything until they are interpreted properly. Do you just use raw unadjusted times in your handicapping? No you interpret them in relation to the track variant. Raw number of winners tells you nothing unless you interpret them in relation to what proportion of the field has the value of the variable your trying to measure. Every properly done study shows no advantage for horses with 3 or more preps. If you want to bet your money on a theory with no statistcal merit where all the good evidence points in the opposite direction, feel free, it\'s your money.

Bob

[SoCalMan2]

RichieBee

I wish you had let me know you were in Moscow!  I live just over 500 yards from the Hippodrome (ryadom byeloruskam vokzalam, if your wife is Russian). Although the facility is pretty impressive to look at, the racing is pathetic and the information is even worse. They also race dogs and camels there, but in recent years they have cut that down/out.  If you want to bet horses in Moscow, though, you are far better off going to Metelitsa on Novie Arbat.  They focus much more on English and South African racing, but you can usually bet Philadelphia Park and on occaison a few other American races.  They have insane rules there, so you need to make sure you know them before you bet.  Also, your wife may object to you going there because Metelitsa is very well known for its prostitutes.  However, the racebook is downstairs (v podvale) and the prostitutes are upstairs, if you bring her along, she will realize that they might as well be a mile apart.  Let me know the next time you are in Moscow if you are interested in meeting a stranded American horseplayer here.  Were you here for the huge snowstorm this past weekend?  I was taking a taxi to Korona (on Novie Arbat), and the driver told me that, if I thought the city was bad, I should see the suburbs.  He said they got more than 2 meters (over 6 feet) of snow just over Saturday night/Sunday morning.

SCM2

[SoCalMan2]

got to correct a mistake in my Russian...it is ryadom s byeloruskim vokzalom

[magicnight]

I\'ve taken some abuse in the past for correcting spelling and punctuation, so I was going to let this one slide ... thanks for keeping your own house clean, SCM2!

[Frost King]

See it is like a friend of mine said. He was doing a seminar at GP park and mentioned that Phil Gleaves was 0/30 with layoff horses. Gleaves got upset about it and finally got a winner off the shelf. He saw him in the pressbox and snarled at him and said I can win off the layoff. My friend just turned and said you are now 1/31. See guys, there is an historical correlation between winning the derby and the proper prep path and seasoning. See some just want to bet numbers and disregard all the other factors. As for Giacomo last year the only thing he had going for him were improved works after his last prep before the Derby. Banged off a FAST 7F work after his last prep. When it comes to fast improving 2/3 yr olds, the workout pattern after taxing efforts is a sign of things to come. Works are improved relative to before the last race, expect improvement. If they are worse, into the tank he goes! Did I bet Giacomo? No I didn\'t but if you look into the BC races and the Triple Crown, watch the workouts and then lok for the numbers to either fall or rise.