BB Food for Thought

[ronwar]

So how do you explain Afleet Alex sheet, just to use one example.  He ran a new top prior to the derby, \"bounced\" several points in the derby (at this point, you would say he is going the wrong way) comes back in only 14 days and pairs.

http://www.thorograph.com/archive/files/bel2005.pdf

Point Given comes to mind as well.  He ran a new top, \"bounced\" in the derby came back in 14 days and paired.

http://www.thorograph.com/archive/files/bel2001.pdf

I use these examples to say, just because a horse goes backwards or \"bounces\" does not mean he is going off form. Sometimes sh!t just happens as is in the Point Given case. Usually the good ones, if they\'re sound, come right back and fire a goodie. Every horse is different, and you\'re putting a blanket over all of them. Agreed, they all loose (Cigar comes to mind), but to say BB regressed in the Preakness while winning in a jog (I\'ve seen horses expend more energy in workouts than he did) so there for he is going the wrong way is trying to find facts to support your position. Its like watching MSNBC or FOX, depending what side of the fence you fall on, you will get a different spin to the facts.

I will end with this. Special horses do special things.

[TGJB]

CTC-- I\'m looking forward to barring you.

[mjellish]

Re: \"Manufactured Pattern\" (1 Views)
Posted by: ronwar (IP Logged)
Date: May 23, 2008 02:04PM

So how do you explain Afleet Alex sheet, just to use one example. He ran a new top prior to the derby, \"bounced\" several points in the derby (at this point, you would say he is going the wrong way) comes back in only 14 days and pairs.

[www.thorograph.com]

Point Given comes to mind as well. He ran a new top, \"bounced\" in the derby came back in 14 days and paired.

[www.thorograph.com]

I use these examples to say, just because a horse goes backwards or \"bounces\" does not mean he is going off form. Sometimes sh!t just happens as is in the Point Given case. Usually the good ones, if they\'re sound, come right back and fire a goodie. Every horse is different, and you\'re putting a blanket over all of them. Agreed, they all loose (Cigar comes to mind), but to say BB regressed in the Preakness while winning in a jog (I\'ve seen horses expend more energy in workouts than he did) so there for he is going the wrong way is trying to find facts to support your position. Its like watching MSNBC or FOX, depending what side of the fence you fall on, you will get a different spin to the facts.

I will end with this. Special horses do special things.



Ronwar,

I agree with some what you said, but I don\'t think you can call what happened to Afleet Alex or Point Given a \"bounce.\"  IMO the term \"bounce\" should apply when a horse has an otherwise inexplicable flat or sub par effort.  

Afleet Alex did not bounce in the derby.  He was too close to the fast early pace (109.59 to the 3/4) made a premature move into it and was one of the only horses anywhere near that pace to be around at the finish.  He ran a superb race in the derby!  A clear indication that he was the best horse and lost, which he later came back to prove in the Preakness and Belmont.

Same thing with Point Given, to close to the fast early pace of 109.25, made a premature, wide move into it and had nothing left for the stretch.  He also came back to dominate the Preakness and Belmont.  In fact as I recall he never lost another race.

Just because a horse runs an off number does not mean he bounced if there are other valid handiapping reasons to explain it such as the above, or tough trips, bad starts, etc.

If you want to see a bounce see Gayego in the Preakness.  He set a slightly above average pace which he should have easily handled, but tired badly in the stretch anyway.  He is a tired horse.  His connections should give him a minimum of 2 months off now if they want this horse to be around at all in the fall.

[TGJB]

Mjell-- this has nothing to do with saying the Packers will win because a different Packer team won in the past. The comparable stats would be how pitchers do on 3 days rest (terrible), or how NBA teams do on the back end of back to back nights (much worse than on the front end). Or predicting that batting averages for visiting teams in the old Colorado ballpark would be higher than anywhere else. I\'m talking about the conditions affecting the results-- namely, young horses being asked to run 3 times in 5 weeks. It\'s not just about how good they are, it\'s about resilience, and this is a situation where having come back quick once does not mean they can do it twice-- lots have done it once. Three big ones in 5 weeks is another story.

On a more important front, for reasons that I can\'t go into publicly right now, I believe there will be significant progress on some of the issues you mention before the year is out. And I am not optimistic about this game by nature.

[ronwar]

mjellish,

I totally agree, and that was kind of the point I was trying to make. covelj70 in his post is saying that BB \"bounced\" and that he is going the wrong way.  And if I didn\'t see any of the races, and disregarded any other info and just looked at the sheet he would be right. I guess what I\'m trying to say is a bounce in the sheet term is not always IMO an indication of going off form.  It simply indicates for that particular race under those circumstances he earned said figure.  I do believe the figure is the figure (and these are the best we got), but as you pointed that off number does not mean the horse is regressing or going off form which is sometime the case with cheaper animals and one hit wonders.

Let me just add this, if BB had not ran the Florida Derby number, I would look at him differently, because he would just have that huge derby number. The fact he threw that negtive 3 and came right back with a negative 4 and change, tells me that the negative 3 didn\'t hurt too much. No one here expected him to run another negative 4 on 2 weeks rest.  I love the last race, and the number he earned. Now, he has 5weeks since the negative 4 with only what looked very much like a workout to me and should be ready for his absolute best.

[mjellish]

Re: BB Food for Thought (36 Views)
Posted by: TGJB (IP Logged)
Date: May 23, 2008 02:42PM

Mjell-- this has nothing to do with saying the Packers will win because a different Packer team won in the past. The comparable stats would be how pitchers do on 3 days rest (terrible), or how NBA teams do on the back end of back to back nights (much worse than on the front end). Or predicting that batting averages for visiting teams in the old Colorado ballpark would be higher than anywhere else. I\'m talking about the conditions affecting the results-- namely, young horses being asked to run 3 times in 5 weeks. It\'s not just about how good they are, it\'s about resilience, and this is a situation where having come back quick once does not mean they can do it twice-- lots have done it once. Three big ones in 5 weeks is another story.

On a more important front, for reasons that I can\'t go into publicly right now, I believe there will be significant progress on some of the issues you mention before the year is out. And I am not optimistic about this game by nature.


Appreciate your thoughts Jerry.  

And I hope there is progress.  It\'s about time.  Part of the reason I got out of the game professionally, other than getting married and starting a family, was watching horses inexplicably jump up.  You\'d see a guy claim horse, lay em off for 30 days and then triple jump him up and class, run him back and win easy.  I must admit I managed to make money on this, but it really did reek havoc on my confidence.  I know some trainers are better than others, but some of that stuff just defies logic.  

When I was playing a meet seriously, I always kept a file of every winner or surprise runner filed alphabetically by trainer.  That way I could go back and reference a trainer\'s pattern for other winners or other horses that ran well unexpectedly.  When you found someone who was regularly baffling you, even if you didn\'t know exactly how they were doing it you still had to factor it in to your handicapping.  I always referred to this as \"getting beat by the juice.\"  Maddening stuff...  There was a guy down in Florida named Oscar Delgado that I was making a killing off of back in the late 90\'s.  His horses would suddenly go off at 9/2 and pay like a 20-1 shot in the exotics.  I remember crushing a race down at Calder on one of his horses named Mr. Sanchowitz or something very close to that.  

Then there was the guy that turned out to be rubbing Cayenne pepper on his horses...

Not trying to be a brown nose or anything, but it\'s good to know that there are knowledgeable, concerned people like you that the industry may finally start to listen to.  What the hell took em so long....

[TGJB]

I\'m pretty sure that Cayenne pepper wasn\'t moving up Passero\'s horses that much.

We have the \"last 90 days\" stat to reference the kind of thing you did with move-ups in a broader context because of space limitations.

What took so long is right. But there finally is some interesting stuff going on, and it\'s coming from unusual places.

[fkach]

I find the term \"bounce\" to be too broad.  

The TG Sheets themselves note \'dead rails\', extreme \'hot and slow paces\', and other significant trip info. Clearly that\'s to let handicappers know that conditions were extreme enough that they could have impacted the result and final time of some of the horses.

I think there needs to be two different terms for a backward move in a horse\'s figures.

One should refer to a horse whose figures moved backwards because one or more tough races put him on the downside of his form cycle.

One should refer to a horse whose figures moved backwards because of some specific trip issue that impacted his final time.

Seperating the two can (and should) lead to an entirely different read of the figure pattern.

Of course, there are also less extreme and more subjective trips that handicappers might disagree about. As a result, categorizing a figure move may not always be that easy. But I really don\'t see that as a problem.

If one person thinks a horse \"bounced\" from exertion in his last start and another thinks he got used in the pace and was running on one of the slower paths, they may come to different conclusions about today\'s race and bet different horses, but what\'s wrong with that?

If one person thinks that BB \"bounced\" in the Preakness because of his tough races in the FL Derby and KY Derby and another thinks his Derby trip wasn\'t as tough as it looked and he could have run a lot faster in the Preakness if he was urged, what\'s the big deal?

The figures are the figures and the handicapping and use of them is personal.

At least people won\'t misunderstand each other.

[Beginner]

Thanks all -
very helpful all around.  I went to Barnes & Noble yesterday and bought the Crist book and another called Expert Handicapping by Dave Litfin.  I\'ve read the first few chapters of the Exotic Betting book this morning - eye opening (at least for me).  

I had no idea (as my username suggests) that there are separate pools for the doubles, pick 3, pick 4, etc.  I naively presumed the payout came from the win pools.  Once I read that, the efficieny of taking advantage of the takeout percentages became quite clear.  It\'s like eliminating double taxation in certain instances.

Can\'t wait to get throught the rest of the books.  As a totally unrelated aside, for those in NYC, the B&N on 20th and 6th in NYC closed and move to within 150 feet of the B&N flagship store in Union Square - totally absurd.

The more I learn about this game, the more I love it - it\'s too bad it\'s not marketed the right way  - this would have enormous appeal to so many young wall streeters who are already enamored by the risk / reward premise.  Throw in the possibility of \"getting an edge\" on the competition and it\'s a slam dunk in terms of appeal - MJ, you\'re right, what a game!