Stuck in the middle with you...

[miff]

Right, there\'s your science, Beyers science, Rags, CJ and a host of others science which disagree 28% of the time. True scientific formulas/methodologies produces the same result, all the time.

[ajkreider]

That seems like a somewhat questionable view of science, as it would mean that all of the stuff called \"science\" from Aristotle to Darwin to Hawking isn\'t really science.

[TGJB]

The first sentence was a straw man, I didn\'t say it. Most of the rest I\'m okay with, especially your use of the word \"might\". Not going to look up the original post (PDub, you\'re not going to either).

[TGJB]

No. Things that are ALL science do. Not ALL science and NO science are a universe apart.

[TreadHead]

Miff,
Apparently TGJB sees a fine line between implying someone is stupid (\"it\'s over your head\") and openly stating someone is stupid, but nothing you\'ve posted yet on these topics is even approaching my knee cap, let alone over my head.  If you\'ve got more detail you\'d like to go into, don\'t be shy, I think most of the people here can handle it.

[TGJB]

I\'m not too fond of either, but yes I see a distinction.

[miff]

Thread,

Picking on an old man is not fashionable. Early on in a post, you referenced Bris figs, that sort of deflated my baloon.


Mike

[TreadHead]

If someone were to look back at the posting history and how your responses to any of my posts are worded, I think any reasonable person would find it somewhat incredible that I would be accused of picking on you.  The opposite is more like it.

I said I use BRIS PACE data (not their speed figures) as one tool to help better understand race shape and stretchout potential, instead of just guessing only based on visual assessment or breeding.  I use them fully understanding the caveats that they are not taking ground, wind, weight, or other TG factors into account.  I think they are of little use on their own without the higher-level context that TG figures provide but do find them helpful in doing something like completely dismissing Goldencents ability to run a better figure at 10F, as an example.

[TGJB]

I\'m pretty sure Miff was kidding about being picked on. He only gets upset when I do it.

[Bet Twice]

Fun time of year.....a very lively board.

[Silver Charm]

Try: zzzzzzzzzz

[baron1970]

Was browsing through the archives and noticed that horses like, Silver Charm, Captain Boget, Real Quiet and Victory Gallop would not a have a shot in any of the last few derby\'s. Pretty bizarre. That being said as always tough to handicap without post positions. At this point I\'m interested in Samraat. He ran well in the Wood being after doing all of the dirty work.

[jerry]

Don\'t understand the reason for all the debate. If you think you have a better methodology, shut up and bet it and if you\'re right, take the spoils. What else do you want...praise?

[TFUSfigs]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So on one side we have Friedman once posting that
> Ragozin (Jake? Sherman?) figures are an \"objective
> measure of the resiliencey (sic) of the track\", on
> the other we have Miff saying \"zero science\" is
> involved.
>
> Below find the SA Derby as I did it. Put aside for
> a moment that (as I said at the time) we got the
> race about 3/5 slow, timed a couple of times by a
> couple different guys. Just look at the horses.
>
> We don\'t just make figures off the winners. If you
> make the race faster you are giving out a new top
> to the winner (who was clearly eased up, by the
> way), as well as a bunch of others behind him who
> this way get figures tight to their histories. In
> other words, to make it faster you would have to
> believe they all picked the same day to jump
> forward.
>
> Everything we do here is probability, and nothing
> is 100%. But this one is at least 85%.


I\'m not for one second questioning your figure for CC.  I agree with you and respect your work greatly.  I\'ve learned a lot reading this board over the years.

That said, there is no evidence the time of the SA Derby is off at all.  Using video editing software, it can be proven the race is timed exactly like every other 9f race at Santa Anita.  I use it to time from the gate.  The method is accurate to within a few hundredths.

I timed the last five Santa Anita Derbys.  The run up isn\'t very long at that distance, 63 feet.  The time of the run up (gate time minus official time) falls right where it always does for the race, between 3.15 and 3.35 seconds.  If this race is off, every race at that distance at Santa Anita is off.  This year\'s race was on the fast side before hitting the beam, 3.18, compared to 3.32 last year.  So, gate timing actually makes this race better than appears, not slower.  There is no evidence the race is mistimed, certainly not to to the tune of .60.  Frame by frame video doesn\'t lie, and as I said is precise to within a few hundredths.

2013 Gate Time: 1:52.08
2013 Official Time: 1:48.76
2013 Difference:  3.32

2014 Gate Time: 1:50.70
2014 Official Time:  1:47.52
2014 Difference:  3.18

I\'ll be happy to email you the other years if you are interested, but they all look the same.


On a separate note, what did you think of the timing of Gulfstream mile dirt races this year?  I personally think they were, and continue to be, wildly inaccurate.

[covelj70]

This is cool info. Thanks for posting