Are Racehorses Getting Faster- Part One

[TGJB]

NOW you chime in? Where the hell have you been?

Thoughts about the grass times?

[miff]

Frank,I\'m not about winning on anything in this debate.

Very seriously,to me, this goes to the heart of the very fast figs being awarded to horses by TG in recent times.As a frequent user of the Sheets forever, I need to be confident that there are no UNSCIENTIFIC PRE-CONCEIVED notions that are biasing the figure makers thoughts, such as \'Horses are now 10 lenghts faster than in the past\"

JB, you are not allowed to give up because we disagree,state your case with facts, I don\'t care what some people \"think\"

[TGJB]

I will try this one more time.

There are no preconceived notions here. That\'s the whole point. Everything I am saying about horses getting faster is the RESULT of the same methodology that tells me how fast the track is on any given day, and how fast the horses are running on that day. If those efforts yielded an opposite result, I would take the opposite position. And I\'m having a hard time understanding why you guys are having a hard time understanding that logic. The underlying methods can always be called into question, but the logic can not. It\'s the same as is responsible for all the data we create, for being able to say how SJ rates against Ghostzapper..

An example of a preconceived notion would be, Secretariat is better than Smarty Jones, because I say so, or because he ran a faster raw time.

[JimP]

TGJB: I believe most of us do get it. There just seems to be a couple of people having trouble with the concept. And actually, I think you should give up. You\'ve made your point very well. The figure methodology stands on its own. For those who don\'t accept the methodology, there\'s no arguing against \"horses in the 70s should have better figures because they looked better or were of higher quality\". I agree that Secretriat was an impressive looking speciman. But I think I\'ll rely on the figures for deciding whether he was faster than Smarty Jones or Ghostzapper. But no one is going to prove anyone right or wrong on that point.

[Michael D.]

Jim,
\"i believe most of us get it\"..... i do not know one professional in the game that gets it (at least not to the extent that TGJB takes it). exactly who is the crew that gets it? name a few professionals? in fact name anybody, anybody who is not a regular yes man for TGJB or anybody who is not an employee of TG? your point that this argument is a tough one to solve is quite correct, but to say that most in the racing business \"get it\" is absurd to say the least.



Post Edited (11-20-04 18:47)

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

michael, I agree with you that the 10 mark figures are an issue. You\'d have even greater issues at 12 marks if they ran them with any frequency. They are not an issue however on track speed and generational comparison, other than previous generations ran the distances more frequently. And thats the issue. Its an issue of sampling quantity.

I am not a professional figure maker, though I think im in the top bracket as far as understanding the game. The tracks are slower and the horses are getting faster. 1973 Secretariat would have a tough row today. 2004 Secretariat would be a different issue. TGJB is NOT the only one saying it. Friedman said it too per Jerry. I know enough to know its true and I loved Easy Goer more than many women I\'ve known..lol

Now, did anyone else notice the subtlety of Wildcat Heir\'s break in the Keeneland race and realize he had anywheres near .75 T-Fig to improve with a better start and more on a return to form. I thought the track played very well. Midas made a nice run saving ground.






Post Edited (11-20-04 19:14)

[Michael D.]

\"10 mark figures are an issue, and i would have a greater issue at 12 marks\" ... CtC, those are my exact issues. so i guess i have some legitimate points here? i am sick of this topic, but when somebody says that most \"get\" TGJB\'s point that today\'s horse run 10f and 12f much, much faster than they used to, well that is simply not true.



Post Edited (11-20-04 19:24)

[JimP]

Michael: Re \"most\". Just another one of those points that can\'t be proven either way. My assertion stands on its own and I don\'t feel any compulsion to try to prove it. My final comment on the subject. I would rather spend my TG time handicapping or discussing relevant handicapping factors.

[jimbo66]

Michael,

The \"most\" comment is typical of what you sometimes see on this board.  This board is the best I have seen for intellectual debate on horse racing, which is the \"positive\".  The negative is that there are a number of posters who just agree with whatever Jerry says just because Jerry says it.  I certainly concede that JB is more of an authority on horse racing than I am or most of us on this board, but we are all wrong from time to time.  I am not saying he is necessarily \"wrong\" on this debate, but it is questionable.  When two of what I consider the \"big three\" in figures (Beyer, Ragozin and T-Graph), diagree with Jerry, it is at least conceivable that he is wrong.  Doesn\'t mean he is wrong.  But he might be.

I guess most of us believe that horses are getting faster, but as CH said in several posts, it is the speed at which they are getting faster on T-graph that is possibly questionable.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

I\'ve questioned Jerry\'s positions. In this game you don\'t take things at face value. If you do theres a strong likelihood its a  mirage. Five years ago I tended to be more aggressive probing here at TGraph. Today, I try to reflect more carefully before I open my mouth and get burned again. The very fast figures are holding up guys. When they don\'t its more a matter of efforts taking their toll than the figure being off. The other problem is truly fast figures can ruin a horse and the animal never gets a second chance to prove the merit of the figure that sent him South. (Abbo may be experiencing some of that) Through all this questioning theres been a constant. When the other board won\'t allow new registrants; or deletes posts by those that disagree; or won\'t debate or discuss topics that question their conclusions; or attempts to interfere with the business of others;  here at this site there is a constant. Its open doors, sunshine policy and grace under pressure.

CtC

[Michael D.]

jim p
the racing professionals who disagree with TGJB are not \"having trouble with the concept\". the notion that you think you are able to understand some concept, and others who disagree with TGJB don\'t have the ability to grasp concepts is laughable.

>Now, did anyone else notice the subtlety of Wildcat Heir\'s break in the Keeneland race <

As is often the case, there was a wide discrepancy in a few figures for several horses. Wildcat Heir was one of them and Abbondanza was another.

As I\'ve often stated, no one has a lock on the accuracy of figures or the interpretation of results - especially when all aspects of trip are not considered as contributing to a figure.

I still think Abbodanza has been highly overrated just like I stated before the race. Abb\'s only shot was to get loose again because the Pha figure was suspect at worst (as many stated before the BC and as his subsequent perormances have indicated) and at best earned while being loose on a paved highway against tomato cans.

Several figure makers diagreed on WH\'s last two figures/performances (which one was better). Personally I think his last race was better because it was at least earned against real horses - that much is clear. I watched the replay of the Kee race several times and that\'s all I needed to make my comment that \"he isn\'t that far off the best horses\" in the race. With only 9 races and a fine overall record, taking him at this price was a bet that he would improve enough to win - which was not an outrageous assumption considering the lightly raced solid record and top trainer - which he did.



Post Edited (11-21-04 13:52)

[TGJB]

Thank you, CTC.

[fasteddie]

I STILL want to see anyone\'s thought about weight, or lack thereof, these days. I was looking at Ta Wee\'s (Dr. Fager\'s half-sis) PP\'s, and not only did she carry 140lbs to win the Fall Highweight to beat the boys, she came right back to wire the colts under 142, spotting the runnerup 29, and running in a fast time.

Yes, JB, it is hard to compare different crops, but high-class horses of yesteryear ran more often, carried MUCH more weight, and they all didn\'t run on cement.

[P.Eckhart]

In case anyone\'s interested, attached is a graph I have of the times of the Epsom Derby 1844-2004. Wartime races were run at Newmarket so are excluded. (You\'ll need to rotate it clockwise once in Acrobat)

http://www.thorograph.com/hold/63.pdf