JB any word on SNS # change yet?

[RICH]

Just wondering if you are sticking with the -1.25 or not?

Thanks

[TGJB]

Rich-- Still thinking about it, I have until we put together the seminar and final sheets tomorrow. Whatever we do, I\'ll be reviewing that race as results come in over the next few weeks-- it\'s a real tough one.

[Tony]

This does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling. He might of ran too fast?

[TGJB]

I posted in detail about this last week, you can find it with a search (try Illinois Derby). \"Too fast\" is a separate question.

[TGJB]

As far as we can figure out I have all the info on the Ill Derby horses that I\'m going to have by tomorrow. I\'m going to leave it the way I originally did it, I think it\'s about 60% or so it\'s right.

Some problems don\'t have easy solutions, and there are no answers in the back of the book.

[miff]

JB,


Looking at the entire card on Ill Derby day, I see and understand that you could have made it much faster as it related to the other two turn races.I do not have your data for that day.

One observation from a regular Hawthorne horseman was that the other routes featured some rather slow/cheap runners for a big day card. I know you have their previous figs, but is the problem that some of the cheapies looking  much worse on the day.

Mike

[TGJB]

Miff-- there were four routes on the day, including a cheap claimer, a nw1x alw, and a starter handicap. There was no way you could do them the same-- the first two (races 1 and 3) came up minus 4 and minus 6 (corrections by me to the mechanical variant). If you did the stake with them, SNS would have gotten around negative 10, as I said at the time, and the next seven horses would also have gone negative-- not real likely. So that race had to be cut loose, the only question being what variant to do it at. The track got slower again for the other route (last race), but not nearly to the degree it was early in the card.

Chicago tracks have always featured a lot of split variants, and years ago, when I started seeing them, it shook me up. Now I expect them, and am not surprised.
I also try to get what info I can, though I don\'t depend on it. This day, for example, they didn\'t water the track until the fifth race.

My guess is that somebody (not Beyer, who is not dogmatic, especially since my Expo presentation) tried to put this day together based on an average variant for the day. This will result in getting the stake too fast, the first two way too slow, and the last race about right.

[miff]

Thanks Jerry,


SNS appears to be a very serious factor on Sat. I will listen, with interest,as to what your read is on this one as far as his overall chances.

Mike

[jmetro]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Miff-- there were four routes on the day,
> including a cheap claimer, a nw1x alw, and a
> starter handicap. There was no way you could do
> them the same-- the first two (races 1 and 3) came
> up minus 4 and minus 6 (corrections by me to the
> mechanical variant). If you did the stake with
> them, SNS would have gotten around negative 10, as
> I said at the time, and the next seven horses
> would also have gone negative-- not real likely.
> So that race had to be cut loose, the only
> question being what variant to do it at. The track
> got slower again for the other route (last race),
> but not nearly to the degree it was early in the
> card.
>
> Chicago tracks have always featured a lot of split
> variants, and years ago, when I started seeing
> them, it shook me up. Now I expect them, and am
> not surprised.
> I also try to get what info I can, though I don\'t
> depend on it. This day, for example, they didn\'t
> water the track until the fifth race.
>
> My guess is that somebody (not Beyer, who is not
> dogmatic, especially since my Expo presentation)
> tried to put this day together based on an average
> variant for the day. This will result in getting
> the stake too fast, the first two way too slow,
> and the last race about right.

Two weeks later at Hawthorne two stakes were run at 1 and 1/8th miles the GIII Nat. Jockey Club and the GIII Sixty Sails for F&M.  Three Hour Nap won the NJC with a final clocking of 1:52.48 and Fleet Indian the SS in 1:49.37, a full 3 seconds faster.

I realize the NJC came up weak, even for a GIII, but can we really surmise that Fleet Indian would have beaten the boys by 15 lengths?  Any chance that Hawthorne can change that dramatically over a one hour period?

[TGJB]

JMetro-- very good catch. I posted about those two races a couple of days after they ran them, if you do a search you can find them. And yes, that was a perfect example of what goes on out there.