Ask The Experts
General Category => Ask the Experts => Topic started by: Chuckles_the_Clown2 on August 29, 2005, 12:56:49 AM
-
You know, there is no intent to say the figure methodology is wrong in regard to Bellamania. TGraph had to make a figure. They had to make a figure with what they had. What they had was a wicked surface, a fast raw time and a big winning margin.
Ideally you have:
1. The race time
2. consistent efforts by the also rans
and
3. A big enough sample to create a comparative variant (Though I\'m really not sure Tgraph caluculates variants per se. But I keep my eye on them in the Form and after looking at variants enough, questionable variants make themselves apparent, like the one on Wood day.)
Unfortunately in regard to the Wood, Tgraph did not have number 2 or 3. They are in a slight bind for the Travers in that they dont have number 3. Anyway, they did the best they could in the circumstances.
Now, when Tgraph said Smarty Jones ran a -3.3 in the Rebel they had a much stronger case based on triangulation. The time was not only fast, but it held up as fast on comparison to the other 2 turn events and compared to the efforts of Purge and the others.
For the Wood, there just wasn\'t an abundance of corroborative data. A number had to be made and they made their best good faith calcuation as to what it was. Its not rocket science.
Anyway, I\'d be very careful with future books on this horse. Even if you still insist he ran a big Wood number. It is still a one timer and it was earned in ideal conditions.
-
Have to agree with the Clown in being careful on Bellamy in the future books. Based on his short history, we SHOULD have seen his best race on Saturday. That \"injury\" he had was minor, he was running fresh, which he does well, and he was running with an uncontested lead, which of course he prefers.
I know people see races differently and who is to say who is right, but I don\'t give Bellamy a big plus for his race on Saturday. The TV guys seemed to talk as much about him in defeat, as they did about Flower Alley in victory. One article I read compared Bellamy Road\'s defeat to Seattle Slew\'s loss years ago when he was so game in defeat after being dueled into submission, spotting weight, then coming again in the stretch. Bellamy had things his own way and for my nickel, he was not \"coming again\" in the stretch, what we saw was an illusion. Flower Alley has an established pattern of gawking and stopping once he makes the lead. He did that again in the stretch on Saturday until Johnny V got his attention and then he took off again.
I guess we have to reserve final judgment until the figures come out, but I don\'t think Bellamy ran that well. Very few people thought Flower Alley was a world beat before the race and Roman Ruler has been ouchy his whole short career and was coming back off 3 weeks rest, following a new top. The rest were slow. I guess it could be sour grapes on my part because I bet Bellamy hard on Saturday, but I didn\'t think the horse ran exceptionally well and I think he will be hardpressed to race better in the Jockey Club Gold Cup and BC Classic, considering there is little doubt he will be challenged hard on the lead, which to me is a bigger hindrance to this horse than the layoff.
Time will tell.
-
Bellamy looks like a friggin monster.....Flower had the perfect race span,improved last out,pletcher hits a # and cruises...Ruler looked good but is no zapper,will do better w/more rest....Bellamy looked very much like the Frankel champion appeared in grass race.
And I ain\'t no fan of zito or his horse...thanx again for the N.Y. money that allowed the best horse at that particular moment to go off at 3/1.
B.R. rules!
PARTYpokerON!
-
Looking past the TV HYPE guys, BR ran a fairly common race, unchallenged, and then taken when hooked a decent three 3 yr old.Anyone who thinks that was a great performance has obviously not seen the great performances.He hardly looked like the monster TG made him by his big questionable fig on April 9th, a day when the \"expert\" variant geeks made the track +180(9 lenghts faster than par)
-
Miff:
I am also intrigued by the praise being heaped on the world class layoff trainer (?) and his obviously talented colt.
In the Travers (and this is IMO a result of the over emphasis on the Triple Crown races, especially the Derby) there were basically two runners. Don\'t Get Mad, Reverberate, Andromeda\'s Hero and Chekhov never factored. Roman Ruler, like Baffert\'s other trainees in the Graded Stakes races, looked ill prepared for his mission.
In the Wood, BR got off to an impossible lead and maintained his advantage. In the Travers, BR got his uncontested lead but may have only been fit for 8-9 furlongs. I still haven\'t seen him hooked early in a quality race, put away challengers, and then draw off.
With regards to NZ, he seems to want to train more of his horses more of the time up at Saratoga. When he shipped In the Gold from Saratoga to Belmont for the Acorn (sorry to bring it up again, Jimbo), she showed slow Oklahoma works and I had nagging doubts about her fitness for the distance (bet her anyway). Look at BR\'s two training track works BEFORE his two bullets on the main track --identical breezes 5/8ths in 1:04.2. I know the training track surface is deep, but what is a horse getting out of works like that?
Virgil \"Buddy\" \"Pop\" Raines once said that once he got a horse to the races, he would never work them more than a half mile. You rarely see Mott or Shug work an animal more than 5/8s of a mile; I think Shug may have gotten this from Frank Whiteley. Is it possible BR needed one or two 3/4 mile works to have him ready for 10 furlongs? Is Flower Alley just a better horse?
Hate to be a wise guy, but if forced to bet a BC future now, I might press the \"all other\" button and hope for some euro I never heard of.
-
I can\'t believe this is actually still being debated when it seems so obvious to me. :)
1. The Wood Memorial figure had to be slightly suspect because there was only one 9F route race and it was a very windy day.
2. BR was a dominant speed horse in the WM and set a solid pace relative to what his competition could deal with. When dominant speed horses beat up cheaper horses, the winning margins are often much larger than would typcially be the case because the cheap horses get used up chasing a pace that is too fast for them - thus complicating the figure making process.
3. The Wood Memorial day track seemed to be kind to speed. The few closers that won did so after a few races were already run wire to wire and the jockeys started gunning the speed horses to the lead in extremely fast fractions. Worst case scenario is that even if the track wasn\'t speed favoring, it sure wasn\'t unkind to speed types like BR. That track had to have helped him a bit.
4. BR got loose in the Wood Memorial and no one in that race had enough quality to challenge him at any point enough to take any startch out of him at all. In other words, the quality of that field was low and maximized his ability to run fast.
Summing up: Every bit of evidence about his performance in the Wood based on subjective trip handicapping, pace figures, figure complications, and subsequent performances etc.. indicates that his performance in the Wood wasn\'t nearly as good as the figure indicates regardless of whether it was measured properly or not (and IMHO TG and Beyer got it right) . For those of you that don\'t like subjective answers and want everything to be summed up in a single number, I guess nothing will satisfy you. As much as you might like to believe that exists, IMO it does not.
There were several questions about him going into the Travers.
1. He had never demonstrated conclusively that he would like 10F.
2. Regardless of whether Zito is good with layoffs or not, many trainers that win races with layoffs (and get new tops or close doing so), often fail miserably when they try it against Grade 1 horses of similar ability. The very best guys do get solid performances out of their horses, but they fail more often than not when the real pressure is on. The very best horses in the world often seem to seperate themselves with intangibles that just aren\'t going to show up in speed figures. They certainly show up in ROI and in the last 1/16 though.
3. He was hurt. Even though it wasn\'t a major injury, he was definitly out of training for awhile. That\'s different from a freshening where you are still galloping almost daily etc....
Given that it\'s impossible to measure exactly how well he ran in the Wood other than to say almost defintely NOT AS WELL AS THE SPEED FIGURE INDICATED (for the all the reasons above), it\'s impossible to measure exactly what contributed to his defeat in the Travers and to what extent. That should be OK. There ISN\"T one number that tells you everything except in some people\'s fantasies.
IMO he ran well.
The figure will not be exceptionally fast, but even though he got loose and had the rail, he at least resisted a tough bid from a very sharp horse in FA before giving up. He even tried to come back again briefly. IMHO, there\'s is close to ZERO percent chance that he\'s not capable of a better performance with a race under his belt (Zito layoff or not). However, given that this was not a great performance and he might run up against tougher pace trips in the future, he is certainly nothing special based on his Traver\'s performance. The problem of course is that it\'s difficult to know how much he might improve because it would be foolish to base any opinion on that on his Wood race because of all the complicating factors in measuring that performance.
There is nothing wrong with not being sure and building \"not sure\" into an odds line. It\'s vastly superior to being sure about a number that says the wrong thing.
-
2:02:76 is a legitmate time at Saratoga. If my math is correct the winner came home in 26:28. Certainly not top class, but not bad considering he had to force the front runner.
The defeated front runner came home in 26:98. Thats bordering upon chuck it, but was certainly better than his Derby fraction. Roman Ruler finished about the same. 26:93
Roman Ruler probably isn\'t a 10 mark horse, but when TGraph makes the number its pretty clear it will score out better than Bellamania\'s figure. He went another furlong on a real surface and he picked up 7 pounds doing it. The question is did he repeat his -1.1 in doing so. Somewhat unlikely. I thought Roman Ruler ran a good race all things considered and its fairly clear he did.
Just guessing Flower Alley was in the neg 1 to perhaps neg 2 range. Not bad, but not enough for a horse like Alex and probably not enough for some of the others he\'d have to face. Big speculation as to whether Alley can sweep the last two 10 mark races to even cause a debate regarding Champion 3YO or Horse of the Year. If he does sweep them, in all likelihood hes gonna have to run quite a bit faster than he did on Travers day.
-
CTC said:
\"Roman Ruler probably isn\'t a 10 mark horse, but when TGraph makes the number its pretty clear it will score out better than Bellamania\'s figure. He went another furlong on a real surface and he picked up 7 pounds doing it. The question is did he repeat his -1.1 in doing so. Somewhat unlikely. I thought Roman Ruler ran a good race all things considered and its fairly clear he did\"
Chuck,
It\'s interesting reading different views.I watched the race 4 times and RR never lifted a hoof,imv.Never accelerated, did nothing I could see.Where did you see him run \"a good race\". Even the jock and the connections said he was empty.
-
Miff:
Beyer gave BR 120 for the Wood, so TGJB wasn\'t the only one who tossed anchor figure wise.
Its true. Sometimes the popular question should be phrased \"Are figure makers making horses faster than they were years ago?\"
And its not just the stake horses. I would be interested to know how many horses broke their maiden with a TG# of 5 or less or a Beyer over 90 (use your own #s, you get my point) in 2004- 2005; check the same #s for the years 2002- 2003. When we have our exchanges on this board we talk about Dr Fager and Smarty Jones hooking up, horses at the top level, but are even MAIDENS getting faster? Noticeably so?
The problem for racing big picture wise is that the inflated figures (of course not ALL of them are inflated) inflate the value of potential stallions. I have my stallion register out, and Halo\'s Image\'s page mentions his Beyer #s, not his final times; Albert the Great\'s page mentions that he ran triple digit Beyers 15 times (no mention of any final times).
The big #s are being used by the farms to market these stallions. The farm owners who will try to buy BR for stud have their ad all made up for them....\" Breed to the world\'s fastest three year old\". The big #s, TG, Beyer or Rags, almost assure that the slightest infirmity will result in BR\'s retirement.
Class, I say this without animus. When you START a post (to paraphrase) \"Why are you all debating something that is very obvious to me\", you\'re going to tick some folks off.
-
I missed the empty quote. Did they think he was empty when he was running third and three wide? Did they think he was empty when he completed a mile in 1:36:78 and was only 2 lengths back? Did they think he was empty when he was able to beat Flower Alley in the Dwyer with an inferior figure?
Sure he did come up empty in the late drive, he surged and hung. Mabye they thought they had a better figure than Alley from the Dwyer and can\'t understand how they didn\'t go by. Maybe Baffert and Bailey need a few pointers on saving ground in a very competitive race.
-
Rich comments
\"The big #s are being used by the farms to market these stallions. The farm owners who will try to buy BR for stud have their ad all made up for them....\" Breed to the world\'s fastest three year old\". The big #s, TG, Beyer or Rags, almost assure that the slightest infirmity will result in BR\'s retirement\"
Rich,
I can\'t imagine one person with strong racing knowledge that believes that BR is the fastest 3yr old ever.That\'s a bad joke!! The \"finely crafted\" variant used by the fig makers that day wasn\'t even close.The track was as hard as the Belt Parkway on 4/9.
-
Miff:
No argument here. But you know how advertising works. It sounds better to say \"Breed to the World\'s fastest Three Year Old\" than it does to say \"Breed to the colt who got the highest number ever from a couple of guys who may or may not know what they\'re talking about and may have disregarded a variant\".
I might say that Spec Bid was the fastest 3YO I\'ve ever seen, and, ironically, he wasn\'t much as a stud.
Unless the animals are all running in the same race, \"fastest\" when it pertains to racehorses of one, or several, generations, will always be quite the subjective judgment. No matter how much the art/science of figure making evolves.
-
CHUCK,
I don\'t have time now, but I don\'t believe RR was EVER two lengths off the leader at ANY point in the race. I could be wrong,I\'ll check later. In case you didn\'t notice, RR was ridden in much the same way by Bailey as his prior two wins.
You\'re entitled to think RR ran a \"good race\" but I saw a decent regression from his prior two races even considering the weight he picked up.
-
Sounds like you bet Roman Ruler Miff. I was worried about him.
I think you\'re absolutely correct about the weight and the wide though. He picked up pounds he hadn\'t run with and they changed his running style for the Eastern tracks. They also asked him to run further than it looks like he really wants. I think he did regress marginally. To about a zero, but I\"m guessing. I think this was a good race and the horses fired and that Tgraph will make a very solid number upon it.
-
CTC:
Welcome back.
You think the Travers was a good race and the horses all fired?
I didn\'t know the Travers was carried on radio.
Lack of speed and inability to get a certain distance are not excuses.
Those are weaknesses.
-
richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CTC:
>
> Welcome back.
thx
> You think the Travers was a good race and the
> horses all fired?
Yes and No...It was a good race and enough of the horses fired. I think the top four fired though someone is gonna have to explain to me why they\'d bet Don\'t Get Mad at 10 marks.
> I didn\'t know the Travers was carried on radio.
I didn\'t either
> Lack of speed and inability to get a certain
> distance are not excuses.
> Those are weaknesses.
Well, if you\'re talkin Roman Ruler his figure should be right there with Bellamania. The top three got the trip in this weakened version of the Midsummer Classic. Alex on form would have crushed them. Flower Alley has an improving horses shot against the handicappers, but clearly you\'ll want good odds to risk it.
-
I have to say I can\'t remember the last time I was so interested in a 7 horse race. (one that I think we can all agree was really a 3 horse race at best, and, to my mind, only a 2 horse race when I got done handicapping)
I\'ve really enjoyed all the posts. This is what makes this such a great sport.
A couple of points:
1. I agree that, in the end, this is really about the breeding shed. that is where the real money is made. Anyone who\'s had a nice horse knows that used car salesmen have nothing on the reps from the various breeding outfits as they schmooze and angle there way in to getting the best studs on the most profitable terms. That\'s why we had a 7 horse feild that only amounted to 3 contenders at best on Saturday. The triple crown is what gets the attention. That\'s what everyone shoots for.
2. That said, Flower Alley stood out once one accepted his conditioning edge over BR, plus the \"effect\" of the Wood, either super effort (read career knockout) or over inflated number that may well be no better that FA\'s -2 in the Dandy. In any event, neither horse disgraced themselves Saturday. And I\'m hoping we\'ll get to see them both race at least once before the BC, and against older horses. Unless one of them shows something special in their next race, I don\'t think they have what it takes to beat older horses. And I have to say, I like the idea of a Euro shipper, given the continued decimation of the US handicap ranks.
-
richiebee
\"Class, I say this without animus. When you START a post (to paraphrase) \"Why are you all debating something that is very obvious to me\", you\'re going to tick some folks off. \"
I know. That\'s why I threw in the smiley face.
Seriously though, I don\'t think there are too many complicating and controversial factors in evaluating BR performances this year unless you view speed figures alone as gospel.