Who said Pace is a Handicapping Issue??

[Silver Charm]

These are the fractional times from todays two primary dirt races at Belmont:

Fractional Times: 24.11, 48.11, 1:12.56, 1:36.53, 1:48.25

Fractional Times: 23.66, 45.70, 1:08.75, 1:33.35, 1:46.38

Naturally one would assume that in the first race the speed horses controlled the race and went on. That is what happened.

But in the next race the speed horses also went on and destroyed the rest of the field.

If Ghostzapper can lay down these kinds of fractions and still hold on, who is going to go with him and beat him in the Breeders Cup.

No One



Post Edited (09-11-04 18:24)

[TGJB]

One way to look at the Woodward and Whitney (as was posited here) is that the performances of some horses were better because they did it in spite of the hot pace.

Another is that the pace was a non-issue-- the same horses would have been there if the pace was slower, and the hot pace didn\'t hurt them. In other words, in most cases, performance for the whole event is measurable in terms of a final figure, which is the best indicator.

There is another angle on all of this, having to do with performance enhancers, fatigue curves, and ceilings of performance. It will be interesting to see (again) whether some of these super horses fire at the BC with the whole world watching.

Sightseek is every bit as good a filly as GZ is a colt. And was going into last year\'s BC.

[jimbo66]

Silver Charm,

I see a difference between the two races, which I believe is very relevant.

In the first race, Stellar Jayne was marginally faster than her competition going in.  With the added advantage of a soft pace, she proved impossible to beat.

As most everybody on this board knew and agreed, Ghostzapper was significantly faster than his competition going into this race.  As a vastly superior horse, he overcame the fast pace and still won.  Who exactly was going to come from behind and beat him in that race?  There was no Pleasantly Perfect or even a true \"closer\".  Saint Liam is speed, Newfoundland is also speed, Jerkens horse sometimes runs big figures and can close and I thought he should have at least made up ground today, but he didn\'t.

Last point.  About the BC Classic.  I look forward to Ghostzapper being the favorite in the Classic.  I may lose, but I will be glad to bet against him.  IMO there is a big difference between a 1 turn 1 1/8 race, than a true 1 1/4 mile two turn race.  And yes, I do realize he ran huge going 1 1/8 at Monmouth.  I won\'t repeat my thoughts on that.

Don\'t give him the Classic yet.  PP can run some too.

[Saddlecloth]

I cant imagine ghostzappers figure once ground loss is figured in, -5?

[Mall]

I thought by now someone might have offered a possible explanation for your opinion that Mth is a \"quirky\" track. I have read that it is one of only two tracks in the US where horses do not have to slow down going around the turns, which I\'m guessing has to do with the way the turns are banked, although it has never been something I\'ve been able to see with the naked eye. I\'ll bet you can guess the name of the other track where they don\'t have to slow down around the turns, but I\'ll give you a hint anyway: It\'s the track where they\'re holding the BC this yr.

[cozzene]

Gentlemen

I love Ghost Zapper and I love Monmouth and I love Lone Star.

But TGJB\'s point about Mr Frankel and the BC when the \"whole\" world is watching is the most important comment.

We all know the Ghost gets a little \"help\" but will he get \"it\" on BC day.

Your Friend who never got a little help

Cozzene

[Silver Charm]

Jimbo66, TGJB wrote

\"Another is that the pace was a non-issue-- the same horses would have been there if the pace was slower, and the hot pace didn\'t hurt them. In other words, in most cases, performance for the whole event is measurable in terms of a final figure, which is the best indicator.\"

You owe me an apology, I don\'t agree with everything TGJB says, no he agrees with everything I say. LOL

Cozenne to your point, don\'t Dutrow and Frankel use the same Vet and does he practice in Texas. Also Cozenne I bet and scored on you in BC #2 at Aqueduct. The reason you never got any help is that your trainer was taking all the drugs himself.

[jimbo66]

Silver Charm,

I apologize.

I was wrong about which one of you was \"holding the strings\".  

So we were all wrong in the Gazelle for our own different reasons!!

[kev]

Here we go again, what kind of help are you talking about???

[Silver Charm]

Thanks Jimbo and since I mentioned that I had Cozenne in BC #2, TGJB please feel free to delete my post if that is considered to be redboarding.

[cozzene]

Kev

Is it the needdle or the spoon?

For a trip to the moon. Come take me away.


Cozzene

[twoshoes]

Regarding the fractional and final times and the relative speed of the track - someone posted on another string that they watered the track 11 minutes prior to the Woodward.

TGJB - Do you know if that\'s true and if so do you think it was enough to speed the track up to any degree? Clearly the top two ran big races.

Jimbo,

I think agree with you.

Pace is not black and white. It\'s grey.

You have differentiate between the effect the pace had on the outcome and the effect it had on the final time of the individual participants. They are not always in sync because horses are individuals.

IMO, Stella was a deserving favorite going into the race. If anything, the slow pace almost certainly helped her chances of winning because she has some brilliance and had the advantage of position. I am less certain about the impact on her final time. She had a very easy trip, but she also came home in 11 4/5. You could probably argue she ran \"so slow\" early, it may have negated her ability to run a faster final time even if it helped her win. 11 4/5 is flying. IMO, this is grey.  

However, that is not always the case. Here\'s an extreme example.

Imagine a race between a champion marathon runner and a champion 1/4 mile runner at 2 miles. They run the first 1 3/4 miles in 16 minutes and the marathoner has a small lead.

Who do you like in from there?

I say the sprinter buries the marathoner because the pace was so extremely slow his advantage in brilliance is greater than the marathoner\'s advantage in position and stamina! In other words, there wasn\'t enough pace to use up the sprinter\'s stamina and give the marathoner\'s edge in position and stamina the upper leg.

Both are probably capable of running faster 2 mile times under perfect pace scenarios for their unique qualities.

Perfect pace is just different for both!  

These are grey area scenarios.

Ghostzapper, was a deserving heavy favorite going in. He and St Liam ran huge races - probably better than the final figure will indicate.

Personally, I do not believe the pace was quite as fast as others seem to think though (the first quarter was moderate). It was the middle part of the race was very fast. That almost certainly took some toll, but this wasn\'t a suicidal duel from the start and it wasn\'t a marathon.

If it did take something out of both, there was no one in that field good enough to take advantage of it yesterday.



Post Edited (09-12-04 17:39)

[Silver Charm]

>It was the middle part of the race was very fast. That almost certainly took some toll, but this wasn\'t a suicidal duel from the start

Both jocks started letting their horses out pretty good early in the race. Treating as almost a match race.

However to somewhat agree with the \"Pace makes the Race\" lovers. I would think it is not as big an issue when you are talking about high quality horses vs lesser. And yes both of those races were Grade I.

Go back and look at the fractions in the Brooklyn, Suburban, Whitney and now the Woodward.

In the end it didn\'t matter

SC,

>However to somewhat agree with the \"Pace makes the Race\" lovers. I would think it is not as big an issue when you are talking about high quality horses vs lesser.<

I think in most races the pace doesn\'t matter much. Most paces are within a few fifths of par one way or the other. Perhaps you are correct, there might be more horses that are misplaced and exposed to paces that hurt their chances (and figures) at lower levels.  

Running a couple of 1/5s faster or slower than par is not going to have much of an impact on the result or final time except perhaps between two equal opponents. Certainly not enough to demononstrate anything to a skeptic\'s satisfaction.

However, it does impact results and times more than the typical sheet player thinks. I am convinced of this because I\'ve been  making pace figures and studying the issue from a non-numerical perspective for a very long time.

There are MANY final figures and performances that pure numbers players explain away as subpar performances, bounces, new peaks, etc... that are easily and consistently explained by pace. Subsequent performaces routinely verify my view.

Unfortunately, to a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

People can choose to ignore the more subtle situations where understanding pace gives you a better understanding of how well horses have actually run and what their real figure pattern looks like, but that doesn\'t make them go away.

A high percentage of my profits come from that area. It\'s actually better for me if lots of people keep believing that pace doesn\'t matter except in very extreme circumstances. Then they won\'t be able to seperate the legitimate form fluctuations and bounces from the horses that have maintained or improved their form despite what their figure says.

It\'s not science. However, common sense, fractions, and a decent set of eyes for watching races often goes a long way to explaining results and fluctuations of figures. You just have to take the time to examine fractions and videos well enough to know what is fast/slow for each group.

I think the lack of science and precision is a problem for many people.

It is very difficult to reconcile a method of handicapping that promotes the idea that small moves in figures could mean a real lot with one that is saying that pace impacts the figures, but you can\'t be totally accurate about how much.



Post Edited (09-12-04 20:55)