Stellar Wind

[dsipes]

Interested in discussion/thoughts about Stellar Wind, whose TG figs in her 5yo year have surprised me.  Looks like she reached her peak as  4yo.  All 0\'s this year and the Thoro Pattern stats say it\'s a 71% chance she throws an X in the Distaff.  Not only this but she\'s never won at 9 furlongs and 60+ day layoffs in the Distaff are just 2 for 33.  Big time vulnerable favorite??

[Tavasco]

For some this will be bet against the short priced Stellar Wind. Simple maybe overly simple.

Another perspective might be that Stellar Wind has to be better than the competition because she is unlikely to get the best trip regardless of post.

Then there the issue of timing. She hasn\'t raced since the end of July. What condition is she in?  

Pattern readers are probable split. One group insisting that running a -4 a month before this race last year didn\'t work and another group figuring trainer John and owners have been pointing at this race for a year. Whoops that\'s the same group.

I do not conclude she is slower this year than last. I\'d bet her to win  @ 5/2 or better. Depending on who is riding her.

[dsipes]

The only point I can respectfully disagree with you on is the -4 being the cause of Stellar Wind performing poorly in the Distaff last year.  Wouldn\'t most agree that the real reason was her atrocious start out of the gate?  No way she could compete with Songbird and Beholder after that start.

[milwmike]

Don\'t be quick to discount that the -4 (a monster number for a filly) and the bad start next out are not related.  I\'ve heard TGAB many times (radio show and SPA seminars) point out this very situation.

[richiebee]

The 60+ day layoff in the Distaff needs to be expanded upon to be helpful:
A) what were average win odds of runners who raced in Distaff off 60+ day rest?
B) what is John Sadler\'s record with that sort of layoff?

[TempletonPeck]

Agree, and would add, how many of those 60+ day layoffs were un/planned?

[Tavasco]

dsipes: I agree with you that Stellar Winds start and resulting trip compromised her last year.

milwmike: reminds us of a true expert\'s knowledge and a fine point. If memory serves the horse was somewhat nervous and fractious before the start.

My idea here was that Trainer Sadler didn\'t want to overtax SW before the big race this year. It could be coincidental and yet there are several high profile horses training up to the big day this year, led by BB who knows a thing or two.

Hopefully Sadler will explain the long layoff before race day. As Richiebee & TempletonPeck point out it seems the story behind the layoff is essential for a read on Stellar Wind.

[TGJB]

Not specific to this horse but in general, there is a lot to be taken from workout info. Like, the dates of the works. Important when looking at layoffs, and really important in figuring out whether vet scratches are \"vet\" scratches.

[johnnym]

Jerry could you go into a bit more explanation regarding the \"vet scratch are really vet scratch?\"
Ty
John

[belmont3]

https://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/california-veterinarians-list-steroid-reporting-numbers/

This is the Paulick report article about California horses that \'train\' on steroids re Masochistic from 2016.

Seems that horse give steroids to \'recover\" from \"injuries\"are put on vets list for 60 days ....After that, they are free to race.

Is there a list available of horses that were put on vets list due to being administered anabolic steroids?
Are any on that list \'training up\' to the BC?

Am I making any sense?

Bob

[TGJB]

If a trainer wants to scratch and they won\'t let him, he gets his vet to say there\'s a problem. That gets the horse on the vet\'s list, can\'t enter for a week (or so, don\'t remember), as opposed to a regular scratch which is penalty free. If a horse is \"vet scratched\" Monday and works Tuesday, it\'s BS, not a real vet scratch, which is by the state vet, and reflects an actual problem (or occurrence, like at the gate). They are listed the same but are not.

[Tavasco]

A tactic to get anebolic steroid treatment for sixty days. Next you\'ll suggest there is some residual benefit a month or even two later. If one started early enough probably wouldn\'t even show up in pre race testing.

Or am I getting carried away?

[TempletonPeck]

I believe this is a place to start:

http://chrb.ca.gov/veterinary.html

[dsipes]

I believe she had a race or two this year where she didn\'t win by much which suggests she had to be all out.  Of she had 0\'s and was winning by 3-5 lengths, maybe I could understand.  But if she\'s all out and getting 0\'s, shouldn\'t that be a concern she can\'t get back to those lower figs from last year?

[SoCalMan2]

Another element here is that she is a mare as opposed to a horse.  

When I look at her sheet......i see a pattern that can be read one of two ways......(a) she is still the same horse she was before and the nature of her campaign is such that she has not been cranked up yet to get to peak performance and she is sitting on a peak performance.....(b) the other is that she came back as a different horse....and what you see this year is what the new horse is and what she did the prior years are not relevant to this year\'s pattern.

In general, looking at a sheet like this....if the horse in question is a horse or gelding, I would give a little bit more weight to (a) and less to (b).....if she is a mare....all of a sudden the (b) scenario needs to be giving more consideration.

I have not done any scientific research here and what I am saying could be just plain wrong.  However, I have a sense from three decades of sheet reading that female horses and male horses SOMETIMES have different tendencies and that this difference needs to be factored into the analysis.

In a similar vein, I find Lady Aurelia\'s sheet extremely unusual for a 3yo filly and really do not know how to read it.  If she were a colt, that sheet is an easy read....as a filly.....I just don\'t know.