Preakness Day

[TGJB]

The whole day is up in the ROTW. Surprised nobody is commenting.

According to Thoroughbred Times, Ragozin had the Preakness the equivalent of a point slower. Tough to see how he could have gotten there-- I had the routes getting faster late in the day and added a fair amount to that race. Really would like to see what he did with Zakocity and the rest. The alternative way to go with the Preakness was faster, not slower-- I gave out an awful lot of \"X\"s.

Beyer had it the same as I did, but if you adjusted for weight he comes up quite a bit faster. Since all horses in the race carry the same weight, they could have been carrying anything...

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

TGJB wrote:

> The whole day is up in the ROTW. Surprised nobody is
> commenting.
>
> According to Thoroughbred Times, Ragozin had the Preakness the
> equivalent of a point slower. Tough to see how he could have
> gotten there-- I had the routes getting faster late in the day
> and added a fair amount to that race. Really would like to see
> what he did with Zakocity and the rest. The alternative way to
> go with the Preakness was faster, not slower-- I gave out an
> awful lot of \"X\"s.
>
> Beyer had it the same as I did, but if you adjusted for weight
> he comes up quite a bit faster. Since all horses in the race
> carry the same weight, they could have been carrying
> anything...

Don\'t see the Pinpoint race. Oversight or proprietary interest?...lol

Didn\'t notice you had put it up, but with all the two turn races anyone questioning how you guys scored it out ought to have their head examined. The X horses you referred to in the Preakness certainly look like X horses. Who wants to argue against that? The only issue would be the lost ground for the top two Preakness finishers but that can\'t be scored. Though it looks to be about a point or so. Thought Scrappy was very much wrapped up late though.

Giacomo validated his previous number and though some questioned the Derby number it might be time to concede upon it. Wide still helped him there though.

The other validating figure looks to be Sun King\'s 2. Certainly not top class but fast enough to believe his Bluegrass number was in line as well.



Post Edited (05-27-05 14:18)

[Michael D.]

jerry,
i see you adjusted the cool conductor # quite a bit for pace. could you explain how you came up with the \"1.5\"? thanks.......

and what do you have for the zito three yr old that won the stks? the ap indy in the second ran about three lengths faster in terms of time, and that guy was pretty wide.



Post Edited (05-27-05 16:09)

[TGJB]

Michael-- that one was very straightforward, in that you really couldn\'t make it faster and you couldn\'t make it slower, and those two horses had tops that were close together, so the decision was entirely whether to pair up CC and have AS running a slight (1/2 point) new top, or pairing AS and having CC going back a half point. I decided the third horse looked better this way, and that AS was a second out 4yo with lots of numbers around the 2 level, and so not unlikely to go forward a little. The rest get \"X\"s no matter what you do.

[JohnTChance]

My two cents contribution to this thread is that over the years, generally, the sheets lines
of Tim Ritchey\'s horses have had a tendency to zig-zag up and back. Bounce up, bounce down.
A goodie is followed by a lesser effort, which is then followed by a relative goodie again. Etc.
For example, take AFLEET ALEX\'s last few: An off-the-layoff orgasm [-0] is followed by a big
bounce disaster [11], which [obviously, after being injected] was followed by the terrific
Arkansas Derby smasher [-2], which was followed by the lesser Kentucky Derby run [2.5] ,
which was followed by the terrific Preakness top. Zig up, then zig down. Bounce up, then
bounce down. Last year, I asked Jerry for the sheets of most of Tim Ritchey\'s horses - like
50 of them? - for the purpose of getting a line on how they react in certain situations - second
-timers, layoffs, etc. - apart from just the stats. And, I think, the sheets of his horses bear this out.
Even MARCIANO, Ritchey\'s Preakness entry in 2001 has this zig-zaggy pattern to a great extent.

Big deal? All horses bounce, right? \"You\'ve just described The Bounce Theory 101.
What\'s profound about that?\" Well, maybe nothing. But maybe the point is - duhh - that
each trainer\'s horses \"react\" to tops in a unique way that\'s tied to the way they train
their horses, and how their horses are vetted. For example, maybe Ritchey\'s horses
react in a certain way. But other trainer\'s horses react differently. For example,
see the NO-BOUNCE \"steroid line\" repeat of Rick Dutrow\'s WILLY OF THE VALLEY,
who won the sprint stake earlier last Saturday. To get a line on how each trainers
horses react, maybe you have to look at a large sampling of his work.

Anyway... AFLEET ALEX\'s zig-zaggy line is now obvious, and the key question of the
Belmont Satkes in two weeks is exactly how much he\'ll bounce up. Can he bounce
as high as a 0.5 and still win? Will he bounce higher? Your move.

JohnTChance

[Michael D.]

jerry,
i was intersted in how you adjusted the race for pace. in giving those horses a \"1.5\", you ignored how fast they actually ran around the race track. they literally jogged for the first 6f (1:17) and 1m (1:41), then sprinted home in under :12.

[TGJB]

Michael-- the definition of an \"S. Pace\" race is one where we didn\'t use the final time literally. In grass races the pace is often very slow relative to the final time, and the final time is therefore not indicative-- this happens extremely often in Europe, which is why TimeForm publishes two figures for the races. The one based on \"collateral form\" is the right one to use, and that\'s what we do here.

[Michael D.]

thanks jerry ...... that was a nice $24 hit by TG.

[Campbreeze]

I have a question, not a comment.

What do you make Giacomo\'s chances of going forward or pairing in his next race? I\'m thinking the Thoro-Pattern understates it a little.

[TGJB]

Camp-- Actually, it\'s pretty much what I would have said just eyeballing the sheet.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

John, there is an apparent O-X pattern in Afleet Alex\'s three year old form. He looked positioned for a good Preakness upon that angle. Alex didnt bounce and rebound as a 2YO though. Is there a viable reason for the difference between 2YO and 3YO form? Theres the two a days certainly. Theres the lung infection. Some interpreted the Derby as a subtlely taxing trip, bias factored. Was it? (The Preakness but for the stumble was a dream route) But per Ritchey, the two a days are suspended due to the nature of the Belmont Stakes. If Alex is on an O-X pattern he\'s due for the bad race next. Is he on an O-X pattern?

JohnTChance wrote:

> My two cents contribution to this thread is that over the
> years, generally, the sheets lines
> of Tim Ritchey\'s horses have had a tendency to zig-zag up and
> back. Bounce up, bounce down.
> A goodie is followed by a lesser effort, which is then followed
> by a relative goodie again. Etc.
> For example, take AFLEET ALEX\'s last few: An off-the-layoff
> orgasm [-0] is followed by a big
> bounce disaster [11], which [obviously, after being injected]
> was followed by the terrific
> Arkansas Derby smasher [-2], which was followed by the lesser
> Kentucky Derby run [2.5] ,
> which was followed by the terrific Preakness top. Zig up, then
> zig down. Bounce up, then
> bounce down. Last year, I asked Jerry for the sheets of most of
> Tim Ritchey\'s horses - like
> 50 of them? - for the purpose of getting a line on how they
> react in certain situations - second
> -timers, layoffs, etc. - apart from just the stats. And, I
> think, the sheets of his horses bear this out.
> Even MARCIANO, Ritchey\'s Preakness entry in 2001 has this
> zig-zaggy pattern to a great extent.
>
> Big deal? All horses bounce, right? \"You\'ve just described The
> Bounce Theory 101.
> What\'s profound about that?\" Well, maybe nothing. But maybe the
> point is - duhh - that
> each trainer\'s horses \"react\" to tops in a unique way that\'s
> tied to the way they train
> their horses, and how their horses are vetted. For example,
> maybe Ritchey\'s horses
> react in a certain way. But other trainer\'s horses react
> differently. For example,
> see the NO-BOUNCE \"steroid line\" repeat of Rick Dutrow\'s WILLY
> OF THE VALLEY,
> who won the sprint stake earlier last Saturday. To get a line
> on how each trainers
> horses react, maybe you have to look at a large sampling of his
> work.
>
> Anyway... AFLEET ALEX\'s zig-zaggy line is now obvious, and the
> key question of the
> Belmont Satkes in two weeks is exactly how much he\'ll bounce
> up. Can he bounce
> as high as a 0.5 and still win? Will he bounce higher? Your
> move.
>
> JohnTChance
>
>

[JohnTChance]

CTC wrote:

>there is an apparent O-X pattern in Afleet Alex\'s three year old form. He looked positioned for a good Preakness upon that angle. Alex didnt bounce and rebound as a 2YO though. Is there a viable reason for the difference between 2YO and 3YO form? Theres the two a days certainly. Theres the lung infection. Some interpreted the Derby as a subtlely taxing trip, bias factored. Was it? (The Preakness but for the stumble was a dream route) But per Ritchey, the two a days are suspended due to the nature of the Belmont Stakes. If Alex is on an O-X pattern he\'s due for the >bad race next. Is he on an O-X pattern?

Why not the 0-X in Afleet Alex as a 2 yr. old?

I don\'t have a clue. But, my personal thought is that any horse that runs a 2 in July of their 2 yr old year AND THEN KEEPS RUNNING THE 2 FIVE MORE TIMES IN A STRAIGHT LINE [!!!] though November... is clearly the posterboy of a steroided horse. The classic no-bounce line.

When AA came out with the exceptional 0 off the layoff as a more mature 3 yr. old and tubed badly next out, his line took on a whole new dimension.

I certainly feel he\'ll bounce in the Belmont. To a 2-ish?

JohnTChance

[MO]

Afleet Alex bounces and so does Giacomo. Sun King will probably win this at underlayed odds in very slow time.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

MO wrote:

> Afleet Alex bounces and so does Giacomo. Sun King will probably
> win this at underlayed odds in very slow time.

I dont think hes gonna run Sun King MO. Even if he does Sun King can maybe toss a 2 or 3 at 12 marks (optimistically) that can\'t be fast enough to do it.

[MO]

How come? Sun King is sitting on a forward move. Probably run a zero.


One thing for sure - the winner won\'t come out of that Allowance race they call \"The Peter Pan\". What a bunch of pigs.