PDub,
A horse can certainly relish slop and run a big effort he can\'t repeat on dry footing.
What can also happen is that a large percentage of the runners can run non representative races on the slop and thus become poor or inaccurate extrapolation tools. So rather than say 80% of the field running their race for \"figure corroboration\" purposes, only two or three horses run their race and a big number is assigned in part upon the beaten lengths of the off form losers. Whats really horrific is if only 1 horse runs it race. In that event its possible to have a very bad apple assigned that can spoil other apples for races to come.
belveondarockz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> in my scattered fashion
:
>
> champions dont automatically win!many do though!
> your missing the point p dub. THIS YEAR.. THIS
> RACE.. THIS SITUATION... wp has a potential of a
> negative 3. im comparing this to a similar
> situation to street sense last year. street sense
> ran a top effort and ran a few off races then
> fired derby day. im not saying wp will do the same
> but the horses in the field this year look pretty
> terrible to be honest with you and many of the
> faster horses just ran new tops last out.
>
> about el gato malo... yes he has lost to colonel
> john twice but a 3-4 point improvement off his top
> effort isnt out of the question.. it is in
> question with colonel john.. he ran a top race and
> i have him regressing off that last effort. so in
> this ONE situation i would play el gato in front
> of colonel john at bigger and HUGE odds and take
> my chances. the horse has plenty of room for
> improvement.. i believe only 2-3 points overall
> improvement.
>
> as far as tomcito he has won those big races in
> another country yes i agree. i would think a
> horse like that could naturaly improve off those 2
> yo top numbers as they should so maybe he needed
> one out before firing a nice race?! i dunno but
> compared to the field i think he has a much better
> shot to do so then many of the ones in here bc
> they were faster figures...wp has off efforts that
> beat most in this field and im not trying to say
> that this negative 3 is god, but its a number he
> has a possibility of running too (at great odds
> probably about 7 to 1 or so or higher that day)
> and if not that wouldnt u think a \"0 to a neg 2\"
> would be good here?
>
> i cant see comparing the patriots to this
> situation?! every year in football is different
> just as every race presents a new situation. the
> edge to me in this years race is that many horses
> plain out suck and would need huge improvements to
> win. its a longshot...tooo long. il take a shot
> with the proven horse! everyone keeps talking
> about the wood but what no one says is that he can
> actually IMPROVE off that effort. u PROBABLY and
> MOST likely cant say that about Tale of Ekati! it
> took the poor horse 5 or so efforts to go forward
> and now with 4 weeks off comes off a race its
> never done before. il confidently say thatll be a
> bounce imo.
>
> i will agree with you that i shouldnt compare wp
> to ghostzapper, midnight lute or saint liam but im
> just trying to point out that although a horse
> like Commendable beat saint liam in stakes races
> or a horse like brother derek beat midnight lute
> (as an example) or a dominican horse beat street
> sense, when it came down to it, many have run
> championship effforts in championship races and
> stepped up like they proved previously. and by
> previously i mean an effort that was run that the
> horse could (with plenty of evidence and factors
> such as rest, condition and all) run back to and
> destroy the field or it be the best number in that
> particular race and be the best bet.
>
> the tampa bay race was a complete toss out race
> imo and just take a pen and scribble the number!
>
> it amazes me that you buy this product and dont
> take the numbers for what they are.. ive noticed
> many people in this forum say.. well a horse ran a
> \"6\" (as an example going 6f and an \"8\" going a
> mile and a 1/16 so the horse is \"better\" going
> shorter. How can that be true?! the horse
> couldve ran an 8 cause it reacted slightly to the
> 6 or it couldve went forward off of a \"9\" off
> effort. i hear people saying the same thing about
> slop efforts.. it makes me sick. You all pay for
> this accurate information.. u see a negative 3 for
> wp and then u make EXCUSES for discounting the
> information. my advice is that you take the
> number for what it is and stop discounting efforts
> (unless there is a true and valid reason to
> discount an effort),,, a sloppy track to me does
> not qualify for a discounted effort imo unless a
> horse specifically shows that he hates the slop
> and runs bad every time. a PRIME example of what
> im talking about is that race of the week! look
> at the numbers.. the pick of the week is a horse
> that bounced last time out 5 points! in this case,
> i dont care if its 190 days ago or 32 days ago or
> 3 days ago! and i dont care of the fact that it
> bounced going on a soft turf route! it bounce is a
> bounce! rebellion has run on the turf before and
> has done better....how do u play a horse TO WIN or
> make him a key, that has NO INDICATION at all to
> run a top effort or ANY decent effort for that
> matter at 6 to 1 odds!? cause of a trainer?! or
> rest?! u have to be joking me..yea il take a shot
> with rebellion being 25 to 1 lightly.. other than
> that i just dont see it. the horses in the race
> would have to be pretty bad for me to think he
> would run a winning effort.
>
> anyways, this is pretty fun going back and forth
> with our opinions.. i have no axes here either p
> dub and i do agree that my thoughts are scattered
> at times and i try to put light to what i say. i
> cant make promises with the drinkin.. i sure do
> heart premium voooodka! =D
