Ask The Experts
General Category => Ask the Experts => Topic started by: jbelfior on October 03, 2003, 02:42:06 PM
-
TGJB---
GREAT CHOICE FOR ROTW. I already had my strategy outlined , but this now reinforces it. I think this race was decided when EXCESSIVEPLEASURE and CHRISTINE\'s OUTLAW drew the inside.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
-
Anyone consider the possibility that one of the contributing factors to Grand Hombre\'s victory in the PA Derby was the off track?
Dynever obviously ran a sub par effort that day. He finished well behind some very mediocre horses that he figured to beat easily. There\'s no way that was \"his race\".
Toccet also ran poorly. He finished behind a horse he had just beaten and basically ran his worst race in quite awhile.
I guess we\'ll know more soon because Dynever will be facing Volonpi and a few other horses that occasionally fire big shots. If he runs very competitively (or wins) in that spot we know for certain he didn\'t fire in the PA Derby.
Toccet also comes back tomorrow in a Grade II for olders. Same goes for him.
Main reason I bring this up is that maybe Grand Hombre was a little underrated in the PA Derby, but he may be overrated now as a result of beating 2 \"name\" horses....that didn\'t fire in the mud that day.
He might be an overrated short priced horse that has also drawn outside and could get a tough trip.
-
Dynever ran a top at Pha-- he had almost no shot at the weights, and there is absolutely no question about the figure-- the race came together perfectly from a figure making point of view, as you can see in part by the ones who are running at Hoosier. Toccet would have had to run about 4 points better than he ever did to have a shot, but he did not. It was a great betting race BECAUSE those two were such underlays-- which has nothing to do with how they will fit going forward in other races, or how they will run.
Take a look at the three horses in ROTW that come out of that race, and look at Dynever and Toccet\'s sheets in the Red Board Room after they run tonight and tomorrow, and you\'ll see what I mean. And you might become convinced that is good information to have BEFORE the race.
-
Anyone consider the possibility that one of the contributing factors to Grand Hombre\'s victory in the PA Derby was the off track?
***************************************
No. Grand Hombre was 2 pts faster than everyone else and was being spotted 5#\'s from Toccet, 8#\'s from Dynever
********************************************
Dynever obviously ran a sub par effort that day. He finished well behind some very mediocre horses that he figured to beat easily. There\'s no way that was \"his race\".
*******************************************
More silliness. Did it ever occur to you that these two were highly overrated and indeed not that fast? Only Valley Man and Max Forever were slower in the race (without weight adjustments!)
*************************************************
Toccet also ran poorly. He finished behind a horse he had just beaten and basically ran his worst race in quite awhile.
Sorry Charlie but Ashmore earned a better figure in that race and hit his top of 1.25
***************************************
I guess we\'ll know more soon because Dynever will be facing Volonpi and a few other horses that occasionally fire big shots. If he runs very competitively (or wins) in that spot we know for certain he didn\'t fire in the PA Derby.
Obviously you don\'t use T-graph figs at all and make up stuff as you go along. You buy the hype of whatever horse without knowing they can back up the b.s.
Volponi may lose, but it may be he\'s finished running all those -2\'s this season.
***********************************************
Toccet also comes back tomorrow in a Grade II for olders. Same goes for him.
A very, very weak Goodwood field, no BC Classic winner in this bunch.
*************************************
Main reason I bring this up is that maybe Grand Hombre was a little underrated in the PA Derby, but he may be overrated now as a result of beating 2 \"name\" horses....that didn\'t fire in the mud that day.
He might be an overrated short priced horse that has also drawn outside and could get a tough trip.
Again, with the issue of weights and trips, G.H. is vulnerable. He\'s spotting some fast horses 7-9#\'s toss in a wide trip and voila an upset. Again having nothing to do with being over-hyped.
Good luck.
-
I agree that Toccet had never run a good enough race to win going in the PA Derby. I though he was an underlay there also. However, based on his early year form, he was certainly eligible to improve enough 2nd off a layoff to be a strong contender there. IMO there is credible vidence he ran worse despite YOUR figure.
I believe he is STILL eligible to improve. I wouldn\'t take him tomorrow against graded older horses, but again, the improvement that one could have expected in PA Derby actually may have happened. It may have simply been masked by the sloppy sealed track and will be revealed tomorrow instead. We will see. If he does not improve a lot then he will get beaten badly again.
With all due respect, your figure for the West Virginia Derby is wrong. Dynever and Soto ran very well that day. I tried to say that politely in the analysis of the performance of Soto vs Ten Most Wanted. (the gap was not as huge as you thought - from both perspectives) Dynever was horrible in the PA Derby relative to his performance in the West Virginia Derby.
I think that was further clarified last night. Without even seeing the speed figure for the Med race, I can can tell you for certain he ran a terrific race there. He finished quite well despite racing from behind a slow pace against \"decent\" older horses.
-
>Obviously you don\'t use T-graph figs at all and make up stuff as you go along.<
Well, it\'s hard to discuss these matters with someone with this attitude. I don\'t make anything up. I use several sources of speed figures and other subjective methods for evaluating performances.
Over the years I learned 2 lessons.
1. Every speed figure maker makes mistakes because of the complexities of the task. So I never assume that the set I view with a religious devotion is always right - even when the result matches the figures.
2. Even when I have the correct speed figures, they do not always reflect matters of pace and other intangible qualities of ability.
-
Rather than debate the various sets of figures and which races are underrated and which are overrated, I will sum up my view this way.
1. Dynever and Grand Hombre are much closer in ability than believed here. Dynever may actually be the better horse.
2. If I believe that about Dynever, then I believe that about Soto too.
3. Dynever ran poorly in the PA Derby relative to the W. V. Derby.
4. Toccet has been below all all of them, but is/was eligible to improve enough to be on their level based on his 2yo form and first race back. He obviously did not do that in the PA Derby, but IMHO, it is not 100% certain whether that was due to the sloppy track or simply NOT making any progress. We will learn more tomorrow where he will have to improve a lot to contend.
5. Grand Hombre may now actually be overrated and vulnerable today at a short price. Though, IMO, that field is not too good - so he may win anyway. If I were going to bet, I\'d be looking to beat him.
-
I love this \"believe\" stuff. When you are ready to back it up-- when you are ready to reveal the data behind the W. Va. figure being wrong, when you are factoring in ground loss, weight, wind etc. (and rain right before the race in that case), when you can give detailed reasoning that doesn\'t have to do with horses winning or finishing well in OTHER races (with all the assumptions that entails) but is about the nuts and bolts of figure making, let me know. If it\'s not that it is about only belief and faith, like class handicapping, choosing a religion, or thinking a hot early pace causes closers to actually run faster (you eloquently stated your BELIEF, and offered no evidence to back it up-- I could just as easily contrive a scenario where it caused the other closers in the Travers to get discouraged and not fire).
-
Well, I say \"believe\" because I am not arrogant enough to assume that every piece of information I look at is 100% accurate - including those I calculate myself. In fact, it is quite clear to me that equally competent and quite good figure makers often disagree on individual races. I see it every day.
If you insist on actual data, just look at the Beyer figures for the W.V. Derby - in and out. It is quite clear at this point that the performances by Soto and Dynever that day were quite good - better than you gave them credit for.
In fact, that 114 Beyer was quite consistent with the figures of the horses that finished behind the Dynever and Soto based on what they had run coming into the race.
I saw the rain too. No doubt that threw a monkey wrench into the figure making process for the WV Derby for EVERYONE - INCLUDING YOU.
Now I understand that paths etc.. are a big part of your figures, but they do not account for subsequent results.
We just need to examine how they came out of it. Soto figured 10 lengths slower than Ten Most Wanted based on your figures, but figured real close on Beyers - with Ten Most Wanted having earned his figures against tougher competition. They finshed close in what in my view was a very logical outcome.
Dynever got buried by 12 lengths against a Grade 3 field in the mud. Some of the horses that finished ahead of him would be 100-1 against Ten Most Wanted. You insist that it\'s his lifetime top and the mud had nothing to do with it.
Then he comes back and runs a huge race against decent older horses from well behind a slow pace last night.
I am saying maybe, just maybe, you underestimated the WV Derby despite your theories on rain etc...
Perhaps the WV Derby WAS HUGE and the mud was a factor in the dismal performance by Dynever in PA Derby.
It makes a hell of lot more sense that Dynever, Soto, and Ten Most Wanted are reasonably close based on virtually every result since then. Those results were also consistent with what other figure makers thought of the WV Derby.
Please don\'t take it personal. I could show you dozens of figures that IMO Beyer and others got wrong and you got right.
There is an old saying. To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I think you are holding a hammer on this one.
-
Read my post carefully, and see if you can understand it better. More to follow when I have the time and inclination.
-
For starters, quoting someone else\'s figures is not underlying \"data\", especially when they don\'t take into account weight and ground, as I said-- Soto was carrying 15 pounds less than TMW, which is 3 TG points, 10 Beyer points. The Beyer figures (and those like them) are very good for the money, which is to say free for 5 tracks when you buy pp\'s, but they can only be used to get a general idea of how fast a race is.
We\'re going to attach sheets for the W. Va. race, and if you look in the RBR you will see how Dynever fit with the Meadowlands field, especially with Volponi not firing.
Again, feel free to give opinions before the fact. Retro-fitting selected examples and tying them to BELIEFS loaded with assumptions (like Dynaver running badly at Pha based on where he finished and your BELIEFS about other horses, like the idea that we would think TMW would repeat the Travers # next time out) is meaningless.
-
I think \"your figures\" modestly underestimated the performance of Dynever and Soto in the WV Derby.
I think \"your figures\" modestly overestimated the performance of Ten Most Wanted in the Travers.
I think \"your figures\" overestimated the performance of Grand Hombre in PA Derby. I think the reality is that some of the horses that finished behind him did not fire on the wet track.
I think Dynever was one of them. He ran poorly in the PA Derby relative to the WV Derby.
My opinions on these specific races are more closely alligned with the Beyer figures in these particular circumstances, but I think the Beyer figures are also often \"suspect\" in terms of actually capturing a horse\'s performance.
The Beyer Figures also do not take into account the impact that pace can have on the outcome and speed figures of individual participants. Personally, both in his case and yours, I have no problem with that because there is no scientific formula for determining exactly what the impact was in any individual case. It is very close to impossible to make really accurate pace figures to begin with.
HOWEVER, it is beyond silly to deny that the pace impacts both the results and times of individual horses. Just because it can\'t be measured with perfection as you attempt to do with your speed figures, does not mean you should ignore when it is fairly clear.
Last night\'s MED CUP was a slow pace. Anyone with a reasonable amount of racetrack experience that watched that race could see they were crawling early. Dynever clearly ran well to overcome that when he ran hard and wide into the quickening pace later. Volponi did not. There is close to a zero percent probability that he race as well in the PA Derby as he did both last night and in the WV Derby.
As far as I am concerned it is beyond silly to think that some of the horses that buried Dynever in PA would have won last night - perhaps by daylight.
Also, many individuals PREFER that the paths not be included in the speed figures because they believe that racetracks are not uniform. That is, a horse that is racing 3-4 wide might have an advantage over a horse running on the rail on some days. On other days, racing 3-4 might be a death sentence that goes well beyond the lost ground.
This is another thing that cannot be measured scientifically. It is highly subjective. However, it is beyond silly to deny that biases of various types exist on occasion.
I believe you are looking for a magical formula. I can\'t debate with you because I do not believe what you require of me exists in the real world...though it would be nice.
What I am saying is that you (everyone really) should look at all the evidence and try to make sense of the results in light of ALL the information available and not just what CAN BE MEASURED REALLY WELL.
It also makes sense to review prior opinions when new information comes in (basically when the horses run again) because we all make mistakes.
These subjective ideas are what lead me to the conclusions above. I did not come to them after the races. I came to them before.
For the record, I have not cashed a single bet on any of them. Just discussing the horses in hopes of cashing in the future.
The only bet I\'ve made in the last few weeks was During. My opinion and reason for that bet was clear. He stalked a blazing pace in a very high quality and deep field that I thought was better than EVERYONE\'s speed figure indicated.
Good Luck.
Really, just trying to discuss horses and performances etc... I think your work is awesome. Not being critical.
-
I think the moon is made of green cheese. If you ask me to prove it I will say it is my opinion, and beyond silly for anyone with moon-gazing experience (defined as those who agree and don\'t ask for evidence) to think otherwise.
And I\'m not too sure about gravity, either-- after all, look at all those airplanes flying around.
-
It is apparent you do not want to not ackowledge or discuss the way some things impact race results and times because they can\'t be measured with the same precision as other factors. You would rather simply ignore them.
Personally, I don\'t know a single handicapper with more than a few years of experience that doesn\'t acknowledge the impact of pace on both results and time.
It really doesn\'t matter whose figures you are using. You can usually get a reasonable guage on who the contenders are going in even if the figures you are using aren\'t as accurate as \"your figures\".
You then watch the race race development. Somtimes the extremeness of the pace is very apparent - so is its effect on the outcome.
Second, it is also abundently clear that two brilliant speed handicappers can subjectively analyze the results of a few races and come to different conclusions about how fast the track was and what the figure should really be.
Third, after you make your subjective figure, if the way the horses run coming out of that race indicates that the figure was wrong, you are better off fixing it than making excuses for every horse or saying they all improved.
Grand Hombre ran exactly as I expected. He\'s a pretty good horse that spotted the winner a few lengths because of his wide trip. That was good enough to beat him. The other horses coming out of the PA Derby finished up the track - further indicating that the PA Derby was not as fast as thought.
Toccet also ran horribly (though we all agreed he would have to improve a real lot to run well in that spot) further indicating the PA Derby was not that strong.
In fact, the only horse to run huge coming out of the PA Derby was Dynever who made a huge close off a slow pace into a reasonable fast race - because he didn\'t like the mud the night of the PA Derby and did not fire that night.
-
Boy, if only you had told us how you thought Grand Hombre would run BEFORE the race we might take it seriously! I guess you didn\'t have room in those posts yesterday.
Against my better judgement, I might do a point by point later, although this really is kid\'s stuff.
-
classhandicapper wrote:
> It is apparent you do not want to not ackowledge or discuss
> the way some things impact race results and times because they
> can\'t be measured with the same precision as other factors. You
> would rather simply ignore them.
I\'ve been happy to discuss them. I won\'t accept your theories without back-up, and I won\'t accept hand picked red-boarded examples as significant, since it\'s really easy to find examples that \"prove\" the opposite, like the failure of the other closers in the Travers to run well.
>
> Personally, I don\'t know a single handicapper with more than
> a few years of experience that doesn\'t acknowledge the impact
> of pace on both results and time.
I know LOTS of PROFESSIONAL handicappers who disagree, with the exception of the extreme examples I mentioned in the early stages of this discussion.
>
> It really doesn\'t matter whose figures you are using. You can
> usually get a reasonable guage on who the contenders are going
> in even if the figures you are using aren\'t as accurate as
> \"your figures\".
Clearly not true, or so many pros would not be paying more for our stuff (and Ragozin for that matter), they would just use Beyer. I would estimate that at least 80% of the pros use one set of sheets or the other.
>
> You then watch the race race development. Somtimes the
> extremeness of the pace is very apparent - so is its effect on
> the outcome.
Ah yes, \"sometimes\", \"extremeness\", \"apparent\", and \"effect\". Nothing like hard facts.
>
> Second, it is also abundently clear that two brilliant speed
> handicappers can subjectively analyze the results of a few
> races and come to different conclusions about how fast the
> track was and what the figure should really be.
Take out \"brilliant\" and I agree with you. So?
>
> Third, after you make your subjective figure, if the way the
> horses run coming out of that race indicates that the figure
> was wrong, you are better off fixing it than making excuses for
> every horse or saying they all improved.
Even if I accepted the idea that it\'s a good idea to go back and change figures, it would be done using future FIGURES, meaning super accurate ones using weight and ground, not just the subjective viewing of future races. And I certainly wouldn\'t be basing it on what horses did in their next start, which would be anti-theory, since the whole reason we put figures on graphs is that horses do NOT put in the same performance every time out.
>
> Grand Hombre ran exactly as I expected. He\'s a pretty good
> horse that spotted the winner a few lengths because of his wide
> trip. That was good enough to beat him. The other horses
> coming out of the PA Derby finished up the track - further
> indicating that the PA Derby was not as fast as thought.
Please. See above, and AGAIN, all you have to do is give us examples before the race. There is a ROTW every week, feel free.
>
> Toccet also ran horribly (though we all agreed he would have
> to improve a real lot to run well in that spot) further
> indicating the PA Derby was not that strong.
Huh? If anything it indicates TOCCET is not that strong, which is one reason the Pa. Derby was a great betting race.
>
> In fact, the only horse to run huge coming out of the PA
> Derby was Dynever who made a huge close off a slow pace into a
> reasonable fast race - because he didn\'t like the mud the night
> of the PA Derby and did not fire that night.
Absolutely, that proves it. Those of us who thought it was a GOOD performance were disproved when he ran back to roughly that figure (probably) at the Meadowlands. That aside, see if you can count the assumptions and subjective judgements in that one sentence. I came up with eight.
-
yo classhandicapper:
If you had just taken the time to look at the Meadowlands Cup sheets, you\'d know how off base you are. Dynever\'s PA Derby was a lifetime best figure and his pattern very explosive for another good effort. Your assumptions of the PA Derby being a bad race just doesn\'t hold.
Good luck, you\'ll really need it.
-
On several occasions I suggested to you that perhaps your figures misrepresented the actual performance of the horses.
One was the Travers, where a fast pace hurt both duelers that clearly had much tougher trips than in their prior races. In looking at your figures, I suspected that you made the Travers figures too fast and gave Ten Most Wanted too much credit for that performance - probably because you didn\'t take into account the impact of the pace on Peace Rules and the ease of trip for Ten Most Wanted. (but I am not a mind reader)
Other sources of speed figures like Beyer, Logic Dictates, etc. also seemed to suggest that was the case. So it wasn\'t just me.
At the same time, I also suggested that it was extremely difficult (for everyone) to make the WV Derby figure because it rained just prior and during the race. However, other figure makers were making that race faster than you did and I did not think either interpretation was conclusive. This is not an exact science.
Finally, I said the PA Derby was also suspect for similar reasons and that Dynever did not like the slop that night. HE DID NOT RUN A LIFETIME TOP IN AN EXTREMELY FAST RACE.
In the past, you trashed me for coming forward after the race with my interpretations of prior results and figures.
So this time beforehand I tell you Dynever will run big at the Meadowlands because you are underrating him and all the other horses coming out of the PA Derby will not run at well as you think.
Dynever then runs a huge race closing off the slow pace in a fast race at the Meadowlands against older. Other than him, the other supposedly fast horses out of the PA Derby all finish up the track beaten badly or lose at even money.
If you want to ignore my observations, go right ahead. You are welcome to make things up about those results in order to satisfy your own arrogance about your figure making.
I know everyone bounced. Everyone moved forward blah blah blah.
The reality is that making figures is TOUGH and we all make mistakes. I happen to be looking at multiple sources of info and have made figures myself for many years. I also happen to be focusing 100% of my energy on stakes. So when there are huge discrepencies
I take notice (and I do look at paths etc..) and watch the subsequent results.
That\'s how I find my own errors.
What I never do is ignore tons of evidence that I am wrong about a figure just to satisfy my own ego.
If everyone coming out of the PA Derby ran well, I would be the first one here to tell you I was wrong.
-
>Good luck, you\'ll really need it.<
I have a significant edge over the game playing stakes races exclusively.
The way I achieve that edge is in the realization that people look at their own figures, trips, etc... (whatever method they use) and assume they are always right.
What I have found is that on some occasions figures and information is solid as a rock and on others it is \"highly suspect\". By suspect I mean some days and/or races are tougher to make accurate figures for because of pace, weather, distance, wind etc.. We all know that.
\"HOWEVER\" handicappers view all the information the same all the time as if it is all equally accurate.
I observe the suspect figures and races and study them to death in an effort to determine beforehand what the reality is.
You simply cannot do that for the many many dozens of races around the country. But you can do to for specific types - like stakes or maidens in NY etc...
Then I observer the results closely and adjust my opinions when I am wrong fro future refernce and bets.
In this particular case, there is not doubt in my mind that the PA Derby was not as fast as thought around here and that Dynever ran poorly that night because of the slop.
Every single horse out of the PA Derby has disappointed relative that supposed super fast race EXCEPT DYNEVER.
-
>>Toccet also ran horribly (though we all agreed he would have to improve a real lot to run well in that spot) further
indicating the PA Derby was not that strong. <<<
>Huh? If anything it indicates TOCCET is not that strong, which is one reason the Pa. Derby was a great betting race. <
I never said that Toccet was a good bet in the PA Derby. I also said he was an underlay. What I did say was that I wasn\'t 100% certain he ran \"his\" best race there because it was in the slop.
What I meant on my above comment was that the PA Derby figure you DID GIVE HIM was not so slow as to make it certain he would finish dead last and totally buried. So that is another peformance out of the PA Derby that does not support it being an extremely fast race for 3yo Grade 3 horses in the fall. Just as the Indiana Derby horses also indicate - with 2 finishing up the track and Grande Hombre running very well, but not as fast as the PA Derby.
-
>Boy, if only you had told us how you thought Grand Hombre would run BEFORE the race we might take it seriously! I guess you didn\'t have room in those posts yesterday.<
I DID!!!!!!!.
I said Grand Hombre was not as good as your figures indicated, but the field was so weak he could probably contend anyway. However, I though he might get beat by the outside post.
-
By the way, just read through this whole thread. My opinion on the PA Derby and Grand Hombre was quite clear BEFORE THE RACE - JUST LIKE YOU REQUESTED.
>Boy, if only you had told us how you thought Grand Hombre would run BEFORE the race we might take it seriously! I guess you didn\'t have room in those posts yesterday.<
I DID!!!!!!!.
I said Grand Hombre was not as good as your figures indicated, but the field was so weak he could probably contend anyway. However, I though he might get beat by the outside post.
-
I could carve you up again, but it would be a waste of time--if you could not (or would not) understand the distinctions I made before, you won\'t now. As a guy who has made his living exclusively using and/or making this kind of data his entire adult life (I\'m guessing you don\'t), I strongly suggest you make a serious attempt to understand what I was saying. In the meantime, feel free to offer opinions before any races, but any red-boarding will be deleted.
-
Red Boarding? Read the darn thread. My opinions on your PA Derby figures and the Indiana Derby were clear prior the race. So are the results. The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that you overrated that race. Oh yea, sorry, I can\'t prove it beyond a showdow of a doubt. I can only say beforehand you overrated it and watch all the horses run like crap. How about proving you were right despite all the evidence against?
I have now lost respect for you.
You won\'t have to delete any of my messages. I will leave voluntarily because it is clear you do not wish to discuss any race results or figures that might shed your own work and methodology as anything less than pure perfection no matter what the results of the races suggest.
1. You won’t consider Beyer speed figures that suggest that individual races were either faster or slower than you suggest (even though you are very willing to publicly criticize specific ones like the WV Derby as being too fast because they missed the fact that it was raining)
2. You won’t consider my proclamation that speed figures I purchase from Logic Dictates suggest that individual races were either faster or slower than you suggested.
3. You won’t consider that 2 sources disagree with you.
4. You won’t accept any proclamation by me that a specific pace was very fast or slow and might have impacted the final time of some of the participants despite the clear visual evidence, fractions, and results of the race relative to their form and your figures coming in.
5. You won’t accept any race results that conflict with you own figures as being evidence that your figure might have been wrong EVEN IF those results are very much in line with the figures and opinions presented by others prior to the race or as a post-mortem.
6. My guess is that even if almost every horse coming out of a suspect race ran just like I said it would based on YOUR SUBSEQUENT FIGURES for them, you would interpret that as them ALL BOUNCING or ALL IMPROVING and not that the specific race in question was wrong to begin with.
You are right about one thing. I do not make my living betting. I make a few dozen bets each year in stakes races on which I have averaged between a 40%-50% profit for the last 8 years. That comes out to less than I earn working in data processing. So I continue to work and play horses casually - taking advantage of other people\'s arrogance.
-
It\'s been great. Feel free to post those opinions in advance, I don\'t think anyone here will kill your price.
-
When you make the figures for all the horses coming out of PA Derby, post them along side the figures those same horses earned \"in the PA Derby\" according to you.
Then let me know if you \"still\" think the PA Derby was an \"super extremely fast\" race for 3YO Grade 3 horses at this time of year in which Dynever ran a new top but got killed anyway because the others were so good.
Maybe you will change your mind and conclude you overestimated it - as I suggesed to you \"BEFORE\" the race.
I\'d also love to see your figure for Dynever in the Meadowlands race. I will post the Beyer as soon as it is available - just for discussion purposes. I know you think it is worthless.
We will see if Dynever\'s figure at the Meadowlands (your and Beyers) is more in line with my expressed opinion that you may have underrated the WV Derby and that he had in fact had run poorly in the PA Derby.
Personally, in looking at the result of the Med race, my first impression based on the huge gap between Valponi and the rest of that field (which was not all that weak) was that Valponi did not run all that bad. He ran OK, but got beat by two horses that ran extremely well (the winner was first time Jerkens).
-
>Feel free to post those opinions in advance, I don\'t think anyone here will kill your price.<
I can try that, but it will be difficult. I don\'t pick horses. I handicap races and then decide whether the odds are way out of line with my estimation of their chances of winning. So typically I don\'t know if I am going to bet a race until quite close to post time. That would make my task quite difficult since I am trying to get my bet in. :-)
What I can do very easily is make guesstimates about the probabable post time odds and let you know beforehand that I suspect a particlular horse will be very overbet or very underbet.
That\'s what I did with Grand Hombre - look at the beginning of this thread. I suspected he would be overrated because I did not think he was as fast as commonly thought around here. I also thought the outside post could/would further compromise his chances. I wound up not betting the race because I agreed with the general consensus that Wando wasn\'t all that good either. I didn\'t like anyone else much in terms of a positive opinion. I believe I was right about Grand Hombre being an underlay, it was simply unfortunate for me that I couldn\'t figure out a way to take advantage of it.
-
I\'ve got people here begging me not to continue a discussion in which every reader of this board understands the distinctions that you fail to, so I\'m giving you the last word. And it\'s killing me, because you are one easy target.
Just for the heck of it, see if you can find the 8 assumptions/arguable subjective opinions/givens in that one sentence I mentioned.
-
>I\'ve got people here begging me not to continue a discussion in which every reader of this board understands the distinctions that you fail to, so I\'m giving you the last word. And it\'s killing me, because you are one easy target.<
All I can say is that your own arrogance is quite astounding.
I said USE YOUR FIGURES for the PA DERBY and the figures you gave each of those horses coming out of that race. Then we could evaluate the evidence based on your figures which would contain the paths etc... and none of my subective analysis of pace, bias, trip, etc... We could avoid using someone else\'s figures etc...
I guess I must simply realize that some people are incapable of a discussion about a horse\'s performance that goes beyond a number on a piece of paper that was calculated by you.
It is no wonder I still find so many overlays despite the high quality of overall information you offer. There seems to be a religious devotion to your number without any consideration that you might be wrong on occasion or that your methodolgy is incomplete or flawed on occasion.
I\'ll tell you what, next time there\'s a massive dead rail bias at Belmont I\'ll be the first to laugh at the extra credit you are giving to horses that raced wide that day relative to rail runners. I\'ll cash my subjectivness at your expense all day long.
-
If you can\'t understand the subjective nature of making figures and how future results NEVER conclusively prove anything you are being amatuerish.
However, if you totally ignore EVIDENCE you are being idiotic.
-
With the way the track was set-up in Indiana, Saturday night, the horse that got to the lead first, came home with it, regardless of ability. The first three routes, followed that pattern, and some bombs finished first. The Indiana derby became a race of who got to the rail first, and who got the lead. Wando went ding-donging for the lead, but tired because he was wide the whole trip, besides he had been over raced. He needed a break. Excessivepleasure was the only other speed with all of the scratches that occurred. Grand Hombre closed quite nicely, but the race seemed to be too short, or he got going to late. Prado took him into mid pack, and rode like he had the best horse. He just didn\'t recognize the rail bias that night.
-
Hi all,
Great discussion here, not necessarily this thread. I\'ve never really looked at the Sheets much growing up, they were out of my price range when I was younger. I\'m trying to learn now and maybe take the plunge.
One question I have for Mr. Brown. Where did the 15 pounds equals 10 Beyer points come from that I saw you mention earlier in this thread? I\'ve used homemade Beyer style pace and speed figures for a long time, and I\'ve never heard that. In one of Mr. Beyer\'s books, he mentions adjusting for weight. He concludes if you must adjust for weight (which I think is silly not to do), its about 5 pounds is equal to 1 length at 1 mile. For a 1 1/8 mile race, this would equate to roughly 5 points at the most for a 15 pound swing. Can I assume you are using the same scale you use for Thorograph Sheets weight adjustments to get that number?
Thanks in advance!
-
5 pounds is worth one TG point. As it happens, 3 TG points is worth 10 Beyer points. I don\'t know where Andy got his estimate from, but ours is pretty damn close, pending size of the horse, which we can\'t find out.
-
>He concludes if you must adjust for weight (which I think is silly not to do)<
I think there are at least four theories on adjusting for weight.
1. It makes sense and is consistent with some studies of horses\' subsequent speed figures when there are shifts in weight load.
2. The impact of weight is individual so it is best to NOT put it in a formula. Simply look at the record of the individual horse and work subjectively.
3. There is little or no impact from weight shifts other than real extremes.
4. There is an impact, but betters wildly overrate it so from a value perspective you are usually better off going against the grain by betting on the horse picking up weight.
I lean to #1, #4, and to a lesser extent #2.
-
Prior apologies if you\'ve heard this before, but my memory isn\'t what it used to be. The season before last, the clocker at Raceform, who are the publishers of the official form book (UK), ran some software over their database. The upshot (which subsequently caused a bloodbath in the letters pages of their weekly newspaper) was that the data was to them so convincing that they decided to move to \'weight free\' timefigures (I say timefigures to make the distinction from performance figures). I\'m certain they did not do it lightly because anyone with half a brain could\'ve predicted the verbal abuse (and lost subscriptions) they would take.
Not now, but in the past, like a lot of people I have made my own numbers. What always troubled me (which I swept under the carpet) were amateur rider handicap races. There must be about 60 of them each season and the weights range from 9-7 up to 12-0.
Some of them turn out to be just too quick that either you have to conveniently ignore they were part of the card or you come to the conclusion that there are instances where weight just isn\'t impacting as conventional wisdom would tell us.