B.C. Review

[TGJB]

1- It wasn\'t as obvious as last year, but there was a dead rail, which happens frequently at Arlington. The only horse who got a top racing on the rail on the backstretch, second turn and stretch was Thunderello. Among the horses who may have been compromised were Summer Colony, Santa Catarina, Whywhywhy, Dollar Bill, and Perfect Drift.

2- It\'s hard to know what to make of the Euro-numbers. The horses in the mile ended up running a couple of points better than I gave them for their European races, while the FM turf figures were dead on, unbelievably so. With the exception of Domedriver, I believe every horse that ran a \"new top\" was a 3 year old, so they in fact may have really done so-- I think it was only 3 or 4 of them, and a lot of the other 3 year olds ran right back to their Euro numbers. On balance, I think we had it right, with the possible exception of Domedriver\'s second race back, where I decided Time-Form had him too fast. I would add that Banks Hill ran exactly back to the figure I gave her in the same race.


3- Storm Flag Flying is the greatest 2 year old filly in history, by far. I said before the race that I didn\'t know what result would confirm our figures or Ragozin\'s for the 9/15 race-- I meant that she could be played to x on either (I didn\'t have her on a ticket). But she ran back to the 1 1/2, so it should be clear who was right, and that Ragozin not only got it wrong, but got it wrong by a whole bunch.

4- Rock of Gibraltar ran a very big figure, and is a very good horse. But he got no worse a trip than he figured to get from out there, and there were several horses who got really messed up by the break down, like Aldebaran.

5- Between the press party Thursday and Saturday at least 5 people told me they knew for a fact that Orientate was lame.

6- Starine got me back my losses from the early part of the card.

7- I think With Anticipation got the best BC grass figure ever, and lost, due to ground loss.

8- A win/place bet on Volponi and the exacta made me a decent winner. Not huge, decent.

We will post BC sheets, with the numbers they ran, in ROTW. Hopefully Ragozin will also post full sheets, but I doubt it. I\'ve seen them, and I\'ll let you draw your own conclusions.

[Marc At]

\"I would add that Banks Hill ran exactly back to the figure I gave her in the same race.\"

Given that she\'s first time Frankel on Saturday, is this really even worth adding?


\"3- Storm Flag Flying is the greatest 2 year old filly in history, by far. I said before the race that I didn\'t know what result would confirm our figures or Ragozin\'s for the 9/15 race-- I meant that she could be played to x on either (I didn\'t have her on a ticket). But she ran back to the 1 1/2, so it should be clear who was right, and that Ragozin not only got it wrong, but got it wrong by a whole bunch.\"

She debuted with a ~6 on Ragozin. Even if they got 9/15 too slow, just about every Ragozin player I know thought she made perfect sense to break through the 6... Which she certainly did... I\'m not sure how Saturday\'s run by SFF show they got in wrong on the 15th-- they may have, but I don\'t understand how Saturday proved it...

[Michael D.]

TGJB,
Very well done on the #\'s concerning Storm Flag Flying. She looks to have inherited that Secretariat heart. I hope she stays sound enough to become one of the all time greats (who knows, maybe Vindication turns out to have the Slew speed...... could be a very interesting spring).

[TGJB]

Banks Hill-- coming back to the number is not proof of anything, any more than Domedriver running a better number is proof the Euro numbers are wrong. But if I got the race wrong the number in Europe would be better, not worse, and if Frankel was a factor the number here would also be better.

Storm Flag Flying-- Which is more likely:
   1- That a 2 year old filly that has never run that fast before would run that incredible a figure, or
   2- one that has already run that fast would run back to it.

If the answer to that question is 1, we should all stop using figures. I would also point out that as it happens, the filly who won the Miss Grillo Sunday at Aqu was out of the 9/15 race.

Meanwhile, what ever happened to that joint venture you were talking about?

[Mall]

The reason Storm Flag is one of the greatest isn\'t just because of her impressive nos. She didn\'t see Composure until that one got by, but when she did you all saw what happened. Fortunately for her, Composure passed her early enough in the stretch to give her time to fight back. IMHO, the only way she was(and maybe is) going to lose was if she beat herself & she was perfectly calm in the paddock & on the track before the race. Give her connections credit for not giving the jock a leg up until she was through the tunnel, in light of her previous \"freezing\" episodes.

I have an open mind, but there is research which suggests that one of the few times that AP doesn\'t have a dead rail is when the main track is drying out, which was the case on Sat. I think looking at the charts & considering the relative abilities of the horses, one could make the case that at best the one path might have been at a disadvantage & that if anything the other inside paths were the place to be.

I was in the Orientate is lame camp long before it was fashionable, but know I wasn\'t the person who started it. And at least I can say that I did what I could to try to verify it.  Who do you suppose started it all, or was it just one of those things that spreads like an urban myth?

[TGJB]

Lukas having a lame horse and Lukas winning are not mutually exclusive.

[Mall]

I\'m well aware of that, but are you aware of how close my BC Review came to including candid digital shots of you, Roger, PGGM & others from Fri night at the steakhouse? But for a few scheduling problems, I would have finally met her & her husband & would have been able to use what I thought were some pretty clever captions for the photos. Maybe next yr.

[fastspeed]

TGJB,

Obviously respect your opinions as I but your numbers but:

\"banks hill ran exactly back to the figure....\" - then your figure is wrong. that piece of form (with clear sailing between 1,2,3,4,5 finishers - with 2nd to 5th going on to run great races next out) was exceptional and to compare it to an effort where she basically finished in the pack (I believe there were 6/7 horses in the bunch behind starine) is an insult to a great horse who was over the top.

if you think with anticipation could have beaten high chapparal but for the ground loss, then you must have been already in line for the volponi bet at the time.

[Marc At]

\"Storm Flag Flying-- Which is more likely:
1- That a 2 year old filly that has never run that fast before would run that incredible a figure, or
2- one that has already run that fast would run back to it.\"

I really, genuinely, don\'t understand where you\'re coming from with this type of perspective, and I just don\'t understand why anyone trying to decide between different sets of Sheets would buy into this sort of logic.

1. Your initial post was \"who was right...who was wrong\". These imply absolutes. Now you\'re saying \"more likely\"... That\'s a different animal...

2. Moreover, I\'m highly skeptical of short 2-yr-old lines as a source for proving anything, especially the 2-yr-old lines of horses who are bred to do unusual things.

Let\'s assume (a guess) Ragozin has her BC number a 4.

So then her Rag line is
6, 12, 7, 4

You guys have it
7, 1.5, 4, 1.5

Isn\'t a ~1 a number that a 2-yr-old is incredibly *unlikely* to run back to? Since you\'ve been making figures, I suspect you\'ve never seen a 2-yr-old filly go 1-4-1, right?

A Ragozin 6 is an extremely fast debut number for a Summer 2-yr-old, especially from Shug, who doesn\'t usually wind them up all that hard.

A reaction of some sort could be expected in her next race. It certainly wouldn\'t be surprising. Rag has it a pretty big reaction, to a 12. Too big? Perhaps, but the filly was so far clear of a miserable field in her second start, she was notably green and goofy in the stretch... And the filly who won the Miss Grillo won it with a slow number, right? And had a *horrific* trip in the Matron-- surely that doesn\'t prove anything, does it?

Then, in a more professional effort in the Frizette, the Rags say SFF runs back towards her top in the third start. Finally, bred to love two turns, she breaks through and runs a new top at AP...

Look, I\'m *not* saying the Ragozin version is correct. I\'m *not* saying that they didn\'t have her second start as too slow.

I am saying that using the number *you* came up with for her performance at AP as some sort of proof that Ragozin blew it on the 15th, well, it leaves me uncomfortable, and I can\'t imagine that it does anything other than preach to the converted.

A savvy Sheets player I know (a purchaser of both products, depending on what track he is playing) told me that he thought that Ragozin clearly had some performances on 9/15 too slow and Tgraph had them too fast.

Perhaps this is the case, perhaps not.

But when you\'re talking about the wealth of unusual circumstances surrounding SFF (her breeding, the quality of the Matron field, the shortness of her line, etc.), I think it\'s the last place you should start to prove anything.

I\'m just stuck with this thought in my head. Every Ragozin player I know thought SFF was the most likely winner in the race, with Composure the only filly with a chance to beat her. I don\'t think they looked all that different on Tgraph... The exacta paid $12.80. Zzzzzzz...




 

If the answer to that question is 1, we should all stop using figures. I would also point out that as it happens, the filly who won the Miss Grillo Sunday at Aqu was out of the 9/15 race.

Meanwhile, what ever happened to that joint venture you were talking about?

TGJB

[Marc At]

SFF\'s BC number on Ragozin-- a 5.25. Small new top.

[TGJB]

1- In regard to your overall position: the 2 year old fillies who can run that fast are probably 1 in 10,000. Here\'s what we\'ll do-- next time a horse runs really fast, I\'ll take that one to run back to the number, and you take another horse who hasn\'t run that fast to do so, and we\'ll bet. As much as you want.

2- As I have indicated in earlier posts, there were lots of reasons even before this start to know that Ragozin got the 9/15 number wrong (like, it\'s completely ridiculous on the face of it that she would get 6 points WORSE for winning a G1 by 13 lengths than she got for winning a maiden race by 1-- they are saying that just to  match her first out figure she would have to have won the stake by 23 lengths), and it was only by taking a dogmatic approach to the day-- tieing the variants together despite sealing and unsealing the track during racing, and torrential rains after the filly race and during the 2yo colt race-- that anyone could come up with that preposturous number (which I predicted in advance they would do).  
    Marc, try this-- the number in question was the filly\'s second. Take the sheet and cover up the last two numbers, and ask yourself what you think she would have gone on to do. Then do it with ours.
    Bottom line, I\'m not going to change your mind. But I\'m doing this to encourage those with open minds to look and compare on an ongoing basis

[Marc At]

\"In regard to your overall position: the 2 year old fillies who can run that fast are probably 1 in 10,000. Here\'s what we\'ll do-- next time a horse runs really fast, I\'ll take that one to run back to the number, and you take another horse who hasn\'t run that fast to do so, and we\'ll bet. As much as you want.\"

I guess I\'m missing your point here. I think it\'s far more likely for a 2-yr-old to run a Thorograph 1 and change only once, but you think it\'s more likely for them to run it twice in a 6 week span?
 

\"Marc, try this-- the number in question was the filly\'s second. Take the sheet and cover up the last two numbers, and ask yourself what you think she would have gone on to do. Then do it with ours.\"

Maybe I\'m just a bad Sheets reader. But when a 2-yr-old filly runs a 6 and a 12, my thought would be:

Next number should tell us a lot.

When she runs a 7 then a 1.5, my thought would be: 1 more big effort at most, probably a ~2 point regression, then the smart play is to expect a big bounce.

[TGJB]

You didn\'t miss the point, you intentionally misstated my position-- as I said in my original post, I played against her. What I said was that a horse who has already run super fast is more likely to run that number again than ANOTHER horse who has never run that fast. And if you really don\'t believe that, you have the opportunity to take a lot of money from me.
    After the first two races, here is what you know, on Ragozin: she backed up 6 points off a 6, so that 6 was probably a big effort for her, and she is not likely to better that in the short run (the next 2 starts came at 3 week intervals). Here\'s what you know on TG: she\'s a freak. The first out 7 took nothing out of her, and she has proved she is capable of running a 1 1/2.

[Alydar in California]

JB wrote: \"You didn\'t miss the point, you intentionally misstated my position\"

   He did nothing of the kind. You owe him an apology.

[Marc At]

\"You didn\'t miss the point, you intentionally misstated my position\"

No, this is untrue. I don\'t do stuff like that.

\"What I said was that a horse who has already run super fast is more likely to run that number again than ANOTHER horse who has never run that fast. And if you really don\'t believe that, you have the opportunity to take a lot of money from me.\"

The specifics of this situation, I guess we do disagree on them then. Because I would think that it\'s more likely for one 2-yr-old filly to run that number once at age 2 who has never run it (but who has a healthy line that hints that she could do something like this), as opposed to a 2-yr-old filly running that number twice within 6 weeks (and you bet with skepticism that she could do it twice within 6 weeks, too, apparently). In other words, Composure made more sense to me than Storm Flag Flying.

\"After the first two races, here is what you know, on Ragozin: she backed up 6 points off a 6, so that 6 was probably a big effort for her, and she is not likely to better that in the short run (the next 2 starts came at 3 week intervals).\"

The 12 was a big question mark. The track was terribly strange that day, and it was tough to know how much that would play into an off number... Plus she was less than focused in the stretch, or so it seemed... It was a *classic* wait and see kind of number. The third number would tell us a lot... We know some horses run off numbers on off tracks, yes?

\"Here\'s what you know on TG: she\'s a freak. The first out 7 took nothing out of her, and she has proved she is capable of running a 1 1/2.\"

Interesting take, but from what I\'ve seen, 1.5s are so rare among 2-yr-olds (especially summer/fall) that it makes more sense to play them as the type of numbers that would be damaging to a horse, period.

You\'ve seen many more two-yr-old lines than me, for sure. Unless I\'m still misunderstanding you, I guess you are saying that it\'s more common to see 2-yr-old fillies run back to numbers in the 1 range than it is to see those who have lines like Composure\'s run them once and that\'s it...

To me, it seems like if you looked at every 2-yr-old filly who had ever run in the 1 range, you\'d find many more that did it once than twice...

I don\'t want to seem like I\'m avoiding your bet-- the single most likely scenario is clearly for a 2-yr-old filly to never run a number that fast.

I would think the second most likely scenario is that she would run it once, but that\'s it.

The third most likely scenario is that she would run it twice in 6 weeks...

Or so I think...