GP Track Speed and Bridgejumpers

[covelj70]

I don\'t want to get involved in this back and forth because I have absolutely no expertise on this topic (not that I have any on any other topic but we\'ll let that aside for a minute) but one thing I know for sure is that I cannot wait to see this board explode in a fit of rage if Dutrow significantly moves up the new IEAH purchase, Patena, and gets him into the Derby.

The horse has paired 6\'s in his last two which without some significant additional improvement (he has already improved ALOT from his first several races which were high teens numbers), will not get him into the money in one of these Derby preps where the top horses run low singles.

It won\'t matter that the paired tops for young horses suggest natural improvement in his next race anyway or that with his pedigree, he\'s bred to be better the longer he goes, or that alot of trainers could naturally move up the horse from what I understand has been a less than stellar training regime that he has been under up until now, everyone here will go nuts if he jumps to a 1 or 2 in his next race and winds up in the Derby.  

If this plays out, this board might spontaneously combust.

[TGJB]

You\'re right, I don\'t know the game.

The way SERIOUS people look at this is to look at the numbers run by horses, and who trains them, and what percentage are jumping up. You\'re correct, in the very narrow scope of your experience-- New York-- Pletcher has not been getting big numbers for months. That leaves out other time periods and other circuits, as well of course as other trainers, and that\'s aside from me not mentioning Pletcher over that time period. But other than those few things you\'re right.

Just keep shooting from the hip, and assuming other people haven\'t done serious research and don\'t know what they\'re talking about. That\'ll work.

[TGJB]

Jim-- if he runs a 3, no sweat. A negative 3 would be another story.

[Michael D.]

covelj70 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don\'t want to get involved in this back and
> forth because I have absolutely no expertise on
> this topic (not that I have any on any other topic
> but we\'ll let that aside for a minute) but one
> thing I know for sure is that I cannot wait to see
> this board explode in a fit of rage if Dutrow
> significantly moves up the new IEAH purchase,
> Patena, and gets him into the Derby.
>
> The horse has paired 6\'s in his last two which
> without some significant additional improvement
> (he has already improved ALOT from his first
> several races which were high teens numbers), will
> not get him into the money in one of these Derby
> preps where the top horses run low singles.
>
> It won\'t matter that the paired tops for young
> horses suggest natural improvement in his next
> race anyway or that with his pedigree, he\'s bred
> to be better the longer he goes, or that alot of
> trainers could naturally move up the horse from
> what I understand has been a less than stellar
> training regime that he has been under up until
> now, everyone here will go nuts if he jumps to a 1
> or 2 in his next race and winds up in the Derby.
>
>
> If this plays out, this board might spontaneously
> combust.


I liked the colt last out (along with the fine ROTW selection). A well bred colt from the Touch Gold family. Looking for a new top next out indeed (at low odds most likely).

Zito had one today in the Holy Bull from the same family, but he\'s been scratched. One to keep an eye on if he\'s sound.

[BitPlayer]

TGJB -

It would be helpful if people would start making data publicly available instead of just saying they have it.  The CHRB and Rick Arthur seem like a poster boys for the latter.  Didn\'t California refuse to provide their TCO2 data to you when you requested it?

Beyer is guilty of the same thing.  He could have dipped into his database, made a coherent case, and posted some data on the DRF website.  Instead he just threw out names.

As I recall, you did get some TCO2 data (in very raw form) from NY.  Did you ever get around to organizing and analyzing it?

[TGJB]

While Arthur is unable legally (I\'m working on that) to publish the individual results, he did publish a study based on them, which was posted on this site (try a search), and their was correlation between TCO2 level and finish position. I only requested one month of results at NYRA and dropped it because other things started taking place that will ultimately accomplish much more than my individual efforts. Since they only test some of the horses, one month is a very small sampling.

[Boscar Obarra]

I won\'t debate the issue of whether he moved up cripples, three legged horses, or what have you.

 Your point is that these guys are pikers by comparison. I think  not.

 Some drink the Kool Aid, some drink the Cobra Venom.

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Box,
>
> Your memory can\'t be too good. Oscar took
> cripples, horse vanned off, ran them back 4 days
> later and they whistled and went on win streaks.
> No one close to his consistent legendary feats.
>
>
>
> Mike

[covelj70]

JB, fair enough, I am really looking forward to seeing this play out one way or the other.

Thanks so much,

Jim

[BitPlayer]

TGJB -

I remember the study.

http://www.thorograph.com/phorum/read.php?1,39120,39298#msg-39298

I\'m not sure how strongly it supports the proposition you are citing it for.  It studied TCO2 as a dependent variable, looking at the the causes, not the effects, of TCO2 variation.  It found a very small difference in TCO2 concentration (around 0.2 mM or 0.6%) between the top 3 finishers and the rest of the field.  Even if the study uncovered a real correlation, correlation is not causation.  It seems equally likely, for example, that the trainers with the resources to play close to the edge with TCO2 have better in-the-money percentages than the trainers who lack those resources.

My point, however, is not to reopen the TCO2 debate.  My point is that this kind of data shouldn\'t be made available only to a few researchers at Texas A&M, who publish the results of THEIR analysis in a veterinary journal to which most have limited access.  This is the Internet area.  Scientists routinely post enormous data sets in support of their papers.  The CHRB, the Jockey Club and the industry as a whole make a habit of burying data, preferring to spin it themselves, rather than expose it to unbiased analysis.  And racing \"journalists\" play along.

[miff]

Bit,

On this subject, a few years ago,DR.George Maylin Head of Drug Testing for New York State directed me to some fantastic sites on Milkshakes and there is stuff all over the internet.

Jerry, you may wish to read it to add to your knowledge.From what you are saying, it seems that you are only relying on the take of the Cali findings and not including the several medical experts who were specifically charged with doing studies in the US, Australia and Canada re milkshakes. The studies were very comprehensive and showed very mixed results.Not one study concluded that milkshakes improve the performance of EVERY horse shaked, across the board.Interestingly, several things can innocently affect TCO2 levels.Of course the studies dealt with intentional performance enhancing attempts.More than one studied live race meets and gave results by levels and order of finish.

The history of examining it\'s affect on horses was originally studied in Australia 20 years ago.Many studies since have concluded that SOME horses, up to 40% in one study were ADVERSELY affected when the TCO2 levels were too high.Other horses were only marginally improved, performance wise, and yes some were improved by up one second(5 lengths), thats huge!


My point is/was that it is NOT conclusive that all horses move up and some studies suggest that the milkshake is only effective when administered 1-2 hours before the race. How is that now possible with horses in detention 4-6 hours before a race.I guess a crook can always find a new way.

I\'ll stand by what I\'ve thought all along, milkshakes are old news, there is no place for them in racing and agree that venues should publish TC02 results. I\'ll add that when and if they do publish,most of the usual suspects will probably win at their normal rate.

Mike

[TGJB]

Miff-- the Jockey Club Committee studied all available data (they quoted some Australian studies when talking to me) and talked to just about everyone who is working on the drug problem. They also talked to me at length, and still do. If you look at their report and the section on TCO2 standards and practices you will see what they have to say.

Bit-- a) The California study, because that state takes drug testing seriously, concerns almost exclusively horses UNDER the limit, and even with them there is correlation-- what about those states that are not testing seriously, or at all, or after the race...

b) YES, exactly, the data should be made public. The Jockey Club made that one of their recommendations, and I\'m the reason they did. I pushed very hard for it, am continuing to do so, and will do so going forward. It is crucial. IT IS NOT THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS-- but it\'s one of them.

It is extremely important that the JC did this, and made the other recommendation about freezing blood. The reason is this-- it will be a lot easier to force tracks to accept the JC recommendations than the Thoro-Graph ones.

[Boscar Obarra]

Heres a direct link to Beyer talking the talk

Its Hour 2 of the 3 hours listed

http://www.thoroughbredracingradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_events&task=view_detail&agid=431&year=2009&month=01&day=28&Itemid=35

[Rick B.]

Jerry,

Dan Illman wrote this in his blog over at DRF:

\"Growth hormone is probably the illegal drug of choice for trainers willing to
cheat, and it is pretty much undetectable in any form of testing.\"
 
Is GH on your radar? Will this be addressed as part of what you indicated will
be announced or released in the near future regarding drugs and racing?

I haven\'t seen growth hormones mentioned before in relation to horses; most of
what I have seen in the past few years, here and elsewhere, deals with TCO2
levels.

[TGJB]

The theory is that freezing blood will deal with the \"unknown\" factor. I DON\'T think alkalizing agents (milkshakes) are the only thing being used. I DO think that the public has a right to the testing for them (and other drugs) being done properly, and the results published.

Many tracks have made a big deal about steroid testing recently. Do you know which horses were tested? Do you know what the results of the tests were?

A point I have made here a couple of times-- which Miff and others never seem to get-- is that aside from what I see on the figures (which on a mathematical basis is conclusive in its own right), I have some direct knowledge on the subject. Some of it I am not allowed to discuss (and in one case I truly hope at some point the individual goes public and tells everyone what he told an investigative group, what a story).

But I\'ll quickly recount one story I have told here before. A couple of years ago I was trying to get the TCO2 test results published for the BC at CD as a way of getting the ball rolling. I was told that couldn\'t be done, because they were not testing. When I expressed shock and dismay, I was told that the guy who did the testing had quit at the start of the meet and they just hadn\'t replaced him. (I would point out that trainers know if someone is drawing blood or not. Think anyone took a shot?).

So I called a major racing journalist and told him this, and he inquired directly. They told him that was true, but that they would be testing random horses at the BC. Did they? Who the hell knows-- they didn\'t publish any results, so a) we don\'t know if they did, and b) we don\'t know if they would blow the whistle if they got a positive-- we already know they don\'t care about the integrity issue, or they would have ben testing.

There was a famous Daily News headline many years ago-- Ford To City, Drop Dead.

Tracks To Horseplayers, Drop Dead.

[Cartman]

Pletcher has often been accused of being a \"super trainer\". If his success  wasn\'t the result of great stock, great management, and great horsemanship, we have to assume he\'s no longer doing whatever illegal things he was doing before.

Well, why not?

I can only assume he can\'t do it anymore because he thinks he\'ll get caught.

Unfortunately, that opens the door to a question.

If they can detect what he was doing, why is there never a shortage of new super trainers in NY as the former ones get caught or have to stop?

Am I to believe that there are numerous magic potions out there and its always a new set of guys that have the latest magic bullet?  

Right now there are a few move up trainers in NY that weren\'t even training here a few meets ago.  

Why is that?

Do the new guys have \"the juice\" but Levine, Contessa, Pletcher and a few others that are currently performing like mortals can\'t get the same stuff?

That\'s hard for me to accept.

I can see a trainer or two doing something illegal, getting caught, and then going really bad. We see that from time to time. But that\'s the exception. Most of the time a few guys get hot for awhile, but then over time they get replaced by new guys as the former ones die out. If it\'s something illegal that accounts for that repeated pattern, someone has to explain it all.

In my opinion, there are a only handful of trainers around the country that consistently do things that defy the normal bounds of improving horses over the work of lesser horsemen. Most of them are not even among the household names that get tossed around. I think what we are mostly seeing is competent horseman, that are good managers, with good stock, and the resources and willingness to go to the edge of legality to improve on the work of those that can\'t. That in turn creates its own momentum for continued success. Then when they finally go bad or get old and lazy, the process reverses itself and new guys take their place.  


TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You\'re right, I don\'t know the game.
>
> The way SERIOUS people look at this is to look at
> the numbers run by horses, and who trains them,
> and what percentage are jumping up. You\'re
> correct, in the very narrow scope of your
> experience-- New York-- Pletcher has not been
> getting big numbers for months. That leaves out
> other time periods and other circuits, as well of
> course as other trainers, and that\'s aside from me
> not mentioning Pletcher over that time period. But
> other than those few things you\'re right.
>
> Just keep shooting from the hip, and assuming
> other people haven\'t done serious research and
> don\'t know what they\'re talking about. That\'ll
> work.