As JB says, "it's always something" that knocks them out

[HP]

First off, I admire your tactic of trying to switch the burden of proof over to me.  

You can\'t provide ONE post to support your original statement, nor can you get even ONE person to support your point of view now.  This is AMAZING given the fact that you are referring to ALL of these dogmatic sheet players that you talk to who have this point of view.  NOT ONE EXAMPLE Miff.  Can you address this resounding silence?  

It really doesn\'t matter.  Let\'s face it, you are constantly posting and acting like the arbiter of opinions here.  You over-stepped and I\'m calling you on it.  You have no real response.  So now you\'re throwing the ball back in my court.    

Let\'s get to your next point, since you can\'t address what we were originally talking about.  

Miff - \"Ahem, since you gave seminars for TG, tell me what OTHER reason would you offer, other than the standard dogma, as to why a big neg fig horse bounced.\"

Well ahem, there are lots of variables.  

Reasons for big neg fig horses bouncing could involve any or all of the following - age; sex; time between races; injury history; trainer; surface; shipping; reaction to previous big neg figs (if any); workouts; and what I would call \"wildcard\" factors like dead rail or a bad trip.  

Conversely, many of these factors may be cited in an analysis of why a horse would NOT bounce off a big neg fig.  I would not attempt to make one general statement to attempt to cover all of these situations.  

You have to look at each individual case to try to make a useful appraisal.  

The alternative is what you do, which is to put know-it-all generalities into other people\'s mouths to prove yourself correct (and by the way, I\'m not sure any of these so called \"dogmatic sheet players\" exist since you have not been able to cite ONE example beyond your \"conversations,\" which for all I know are imaginary and take place in your own head).  

You\'d have to show me the sheet for the horse and ask me.  Does this qualify as \"standard dogma?\"  Or do I need to use your method and just make stuff up and put it into other people\'s mouths?  

HP

[TGJB]

Miff gets one response, then I\'m closing it down.

[miff]

Thanks JB,

HP,

The reasons you cite, other than the standard dogma are the reasons I HAVE STATED here many times before you joined in this discussion.You will not find those reasons, as you correctly cite, stated by any other poster as far I remember on this board.FYI, there are many sheet players, RAGS and TG that follow the strictest interpretation of what TG and RAGS teach in their intros, notwithstanding Jerry\'s comments re finding one\'s own style/interpretation of the data.

Incidentally,I\'m not an arbiter of opinions,I just don\'t drink the Kool Aid, get it?

Mike

[Rick B.]

Looks like he might make it to The Swale after all.
 
Worked 5f Monday at GP, 1:01 breezing.

See worktab at:

http://magna.equibase.com/eqbWorkoutsDisplay.cfm?TRK=GP&CY=USA&DATE=03/23/2009&STYLE=GP

[covelj70]

yeah, I saw this yesterday.  Quite a turnaround this one made overnight!

[Rick B.]

Is it possible that the horse just healed up, in boring, uneventful fashion?
 
Or is it a must that everything that happens in the Dutrow barn be described here in the style of the National Enquirer?

[richiebee]

...now if someone could please look at Tricky\'s TG trainer profile and tell
me how his runners can win so frequently while only rarely posting tops or
pairs. Ditto Scott Lake.

For comparison\'s sake look at TG trainer profiles of Asmussen and K.
McLaughlin, whose runners also win between 20-25% of the time, but whose
runners seem much more likely to \"top\" or \"pair\" (ok to use those words as
verbs?).

Not the first time I\'ve mentioned this. With apologies to Walt \"Clyde\" Frazier,
I find these statistics vexing and perplexing.

[SoCalMan2]

Well, I see Lake and Dutrow dropping tons of horses when it looks like the horses have shot their magic wad.  Those ones that are \'done\' could easily have an adverse impact on the performance based statistics. I seem to rarely see McLaughlin doing such dropping.  Asmussen, I must confess i am not familiar enough with his overall operation to have a sense of what his stock is like and how he moves it.  Compare BFFs Dutrow and Frankel...Dutrow runs all sorts of stock at all levels and makes all sorts of moves in the claiming ranks.  In the last 15 years, I do not think i have seen Frankel enter a horse in a claiming race lower than the uppermost claiming ranks in California.  Think how many times you have see a horse where you say this horse can bounce and still win.  That often happens when somebody is willing to make a sharp drop down the claiming ranks.

I wonder if it is possible to split performance based stats between those that are 1st, 2nd, or 3rd time after the barn switch versus 7th, 8th, and 9th times after the barn switch.  I suspect you would see a difference.

As I look at this, i could also be dead wrong.  We probably need one of the statistics mavens to weigh in to separate us chaff from the wheat.