BOARD OF STANDARDS?

[high roller]

it infuriates me that the two services available come up with 2 totally different numbers on borrego. there should be a \"board of standards\" where both brown & ragazon would be called to appear and state their case.

just like any other scientific endeavor.

[jimbo66]

A board of standards huh?  It is pretty strange that they would be so different on a big number, but it also gives us users a chance to compare the two products, using our eyes/analysis to determine who is right.  You watched the race, I guess.  You know who was in the race and what some of their previous figures were and you saw how Borrego won the race.  I know \"visual interpretation can be deceiving, I still remember thinking after the Florida Derby a few years back that Harlan\'s Holidy was a derby lock, but in that case does it seem remotely possible that Borrego ran as slow as Rags said he did?  It doesn\'t to me.  It shouldn\'t to the Rags users either, at least those that are not blind disciples.  I know a couple who are ignoring the number completely or adjusting it.  

Although, I am SURE that Rags is wrong, I have to admit I do struggle with the negative 3 3/4 as well, especially since I have seen Jerry say it was possible it was actually faster.  The reason I struggle with it is because I truely believe the horse could have gone significantly faster.  Significantly to me meaning a second.  I could be wrong about that, but he was really geared down towards the end and almost pulled up.  So if the negative 3 3/4 is right, if we take a second off the time, what figure would that give Borrego?  Well, the fastest ever for sure and probably ridiculously too fast.  

Like I said in an earlier post, in this case I am not so sure it actually matters in the Breeders Cup as to who is right, TG or Rags (although I am as sure as I can be that Rags is wrong).  The reason is that if you are a Rags user you think Borrego is too slow to win.  If you are a Tgraph user you have Borrego coming in off a 4 point new top and very likely to bounce, thus also not usable at a somewhat short price.

[jimbo66]

But if you do form a \"board of standars\", I vote for Class as Chairman of the Board, with Chuckles as CEO.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Mr Roller,

Maybe it\'s time for you to decide for yourself which one is most correct or in fact better and then only use that one service. Too much data or worse yet bad data is bad for your business and or wallet. Quite frankly this type of difference should have helped you make your decision.

NC Tony

[NoCarolinaTony]

Hey Jimbo,

Now that was a \"priceless\" response.

NC Tony

[Michael D.]

it\'s usually tough to judge the accuracy of 10f #\'s, since there are no 10f preps and few big 10f races these days. in this case though, we will have ample opportunity to judge a series of 10f #\'s. a bunch of horses that ran in the travers, sar BC, hawthorne GC, super derby, dmr Hcp, and JCGC will be running in the BC classic. they will all be coming in on decent rest, and no bounce excuses will be accepted. even after the BC, it will not be possible to say that one # was definitely right or wrong, but we sure will know which figure makers did things better.

[kev]

The thing with Borego number for TG is you could go either way, I might look at it and say well he looks to pair that -3.3 in the BC and then bounce off of it the 2nd time he runs it, or some could say he might bounce coming into the BC. I only have Borrego sheet for Rag\'s coming up to AUG 21 race at DMR.....before that he had a 2+ I don\'t know what they gave him in that race....and forgot what Jerry said the number was in the JGC race. Will a 2+ get it done on rag\'s number for this year I don\'t know, like to see what the last two were to read the whole line. I have no problem him running a -3.3

[TGJB]

Jimbo-- the Gold Cup can only have been slightly faster (less than a point), and obviously I decided it was not-- that was just the range of the decision. Borrego was under a hard drive for about half a mile, and it looked to me like he could have won by maybe another 3 or 4 tops-- if he had won the Gold Cup by ten, would you really have trouble thinking it was one of the greatest performances ever? And if so, would it be because of the performance itself, or because it was Borrego?

With GZ and all the killers, it is really, really tough to give them that first big one-- I have to gulp and just do it. If GZ had not been in last year\'s Woodward, who the hell would have believed St. Liam\'s figure?

Michael-- the test of the figures from those races comes in lots of races. If you remind me a couple of weeks after the BC we\'ll put up the sheets from those past races you feel are in question, with the figures they have run since.

[TGJB]

Possible replies to that \"board of standards\"--

1-- \"I would rather lose my license\".

2-- \"You would have to gag me and put me in a straight jacket\".

3-- Real answer-- the real review board is the marketplace, IF THEY HAVE THE INFORMATION WITH WHICH TO MAKE A DECISION-- the customers should demand that both of us \"make our case\". The key point is that Friedman will not put his stuff out there for critical analysis, or engage in any real debate about figure making or specific numbers. That\'s why I subjected myself to that torturous Expo-- it was my only shot to get him out in the open, and then 10 minutes before it the moderator decided that it would not be a debate (as it was billed), but a Q and A, with him supplying the Qs.

Ragozin has virtually no internet presence, and that\'s how they like it-- those that come on line come here, and are exposed to all kinds of ideas that the fundamentalists want to keep them away from (that\'s why Iranians are not allowed to have sattelite dishes, by the way, which doesn\'t keep a lot of them from having them anyway). Friedman\'s extremely cynical position is that the hardcopy customers, meaning virtually all of them, don\'t know about any of this, so who cares? It\'s not working-- but it definitely is working better than their customers seeing an open discussion of the JGC figures would.  And I\'m not just talking about Borrego-- think about the other horses in that race.

[BitPlayer]

High -

You should be thrilled, not furious.  When opinions differ, there\'s money to be made.

[Michael D.]

Jerry,
I don\'t necessarily feel the races I mentioned are in question. IMO, the test of those figures will come in this one race. We have more than enough 10f figures to go on. There will be a few excuses in the classic, maybe a few bad patterns, but taken as a whole, past 10f figures need to hold up in the BC classic.

[jimbo66]

Jerry,

I just watched the race again.  Respectfully disagree with your assertion that Borrego was under a \"hard drive for about half a mile\".  Looks less than that to me.

So, I guess I believe he could have won by more than 3 or 4 more lengths.  Maybe double that (IMO).  I don\'t have trouble with believing it was \"one of the greatest performances\", but I struggle a little with it being the fastest race ever, by several points on your scale.  (maybe part of that is it IS Borrego and not Saint Liam or Ghostzapper, but rather a former suck up plodder)

Granted, there is lots of supposition there and the more supposition, the more likely I am wrong.  But it is my opinion, which probably only matters to me.  But I am the one betting my money, so I am going with it......

[TGJB]

Jimbo-- if Borrego had run 5 lengths better, his figure would have been almost exactly the same as GZ\'s.

[jimbo66]

Jerry,

I get that.  Maybe my grammar stinks.

I don\'t think he would have won by 4-5 more, if I did, I would be very comfortable with the figure.

I think he could have won by double that more.  (more bad english).  Which means about negative 8 or so.  

I don\'t know, like I said, I can\'t bet the horse no matter what he ran.  Too big of a jump up.  

Guessing how much faster a horse that was geared down could have run is a slippery slope and I won\'t make bets off of it.  Too hard to guess.

 

[NoCarolinaTony]

Jimbo,

I am of the opinion that Suave got held up some before he made his final run. His final run seemed to be all out but late. You can also say that borrego made his move at the right time when Suave got caught up on the turn. The matter was settled early, but Suave was gaining late. We all agree Borrego was wrapped up to some extent, but how do you measure all of the above? You can only measure what you got in the end.

NC Tony