These posts are driving me nuts.

[Dana666]

(Ok, we know I was NUTS to start with, but. . .) I realize I\'ve been touting the slowest horse of all the major contenders in POTN - he\'s slowest on Byers, T-G\'s, Rags, and Brisnet (I don\'t know of any other rankings, but I\'m sure he\'s slow there, too). BUT I have a theory about this horse and I\'m sticking with it; I might be full of crap as has often been the case, but as I read these posts I want to laugh or cry about some of them.
 
It\'s not just all about numbers!

I realize none of this would exist without sheets, but please if I have to read one more time about how IWR regressed in the Wood I\'m going to lose it.

How can you say he regressed when he spotted the field five lengths at the start and cruised through them like it was a morning workout? IWR is not my top pick, but I\'m just saying - do you guys have eyes?

Lastly, about POTN, he ran on a FAKE track - you can\'t tell anything about how accurate his numbers might be from the Pro-Ride Santa Anita strip - Hollywood, yes, but Pro Ride no.  

Do you all realize how biased and wildly fluctuating that crap is to run on - how the hell (apologies to JB) is anyone going to tell me you can get a real accurate gauge on his performances? The track has only been around for a short time anyway, and it\'s a hundred times worse than any dirt biases they used to have out there. When it\'s hot, when it\'s cold, when it rains, when it\'s dry - the surface is always changing and almost always f-ed up!

I can tell you this for a fact, POTN did not like it at all in his last two starts - he hated it, really - yet he still performed professionally enough for me to believe he has a huge top coming when he gets on real dirt. He\'s bread for the mile and a quarter (more than most), he\'s doing super physically, he\'s got the best trainer, and probably the best big race jockey, and he \'s not going to be the favorite - maybe third or fourth choice in the wagering (another scream coming when I hear there\'s no value in POTN - it\'s the freaking Derby - no value? exactas? supers?) Please help me. . .

[Rick B.]

Any other comparisons aside -- am I the only one, that, when he sees \"POTN\", thinks \"PYRO\"?

(As in, the horse that doesn\'t seem to have any shot at all...but some just can\'t let him go?)

[covelj70]

Dana,

In terms of the regression for IWR in the Wood, everyone said the same thing about Big Brown in last year\'s Preakness.  Because BB suppossedly didn\'t expend any energy, there\'s no way it could have been a regression.  In my opinion, that\'s not the way it works.  

Maybe think about it this way.  How many young 3 year olds have paired 3 negative numbers in the last 10 years?  I think it\'s been 2.  Smarty and BB (in the Fla and KY Derby).  Is it more likely that IWR did something that only 2 out of 300,00 thoroughbreds have done in the last 10 years or is it more likely that he reacted like 99.9% of the rest of them?

[jack72906]

Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Any other comparisons aside -- am I the only one,
> that, when he sees \"POTN\", thinks \"PYRO\"?
>
> (As in, the horse that doesn\'t seem to have any
> shot at all...but some just can\'t let him go?)


Well that\'s a new one. POTN has been called Colonel John, Giacomo, and now Pyro. Monba can\'t be far behind. Lol!

This debate will rage on until next...well I don\'t know. At this point if you\'re on POTN or if your off, outside of the PP draw, there probably won\'t be a statistic/percentage that will come up over the next 10 days to change your mind.

[miff]

Think the point that some make is valid in that IWR never had a chance to run a faster fig as a result of trip. Maybe that will allow him to run one more big one before going back. The fig was a regression for IWR, the performance was not,same with Rachel Alexandra who \"regressed\" to a TG 3 3/4 under a hammerlock the last 1/8th. How\'d she do next out?


Mike

[TGJB]

Look, Dana-- you\'ve been posting here for a while. Your posts have nothing to do with figures and demonstrate no knowledge of them. Which is fine, I have no problem with you being here. But that\'s what this site is basically about, so you can\'t be too surprised when they form the basis for analysis here.

You are free to adjust POTN or IWR\'s figures for other variables if you want to (or not to use figures at all). But we measure just the things that can be measured. In the case of IWR, we mark the OP, and I personally upgrade the figure 1 1/2 points. I have found it\'s not a great idea to take that kind of thinking any farther. Thinking a horse may move up on a certain surface is different than upgrading a past race.

[jimbo66]

Covelj,

That is an example of making the numbers tell a lie!  No offense intended.

How many three year olds have run negative 3\'s in routes the last 10 years?  Less than 10 would be my guess.  

2 paired up.  That is 20%.  Not 2 in 300,000.

A horse has to have the talent to run a negative 3 before we talk about pairing it up.  I Want Revenge has the talent.

Actually, as I think about it, I would bet there are not even 10 three year olds that ran negative 3\'s in route preps of their 3 year old season.  It may only be 5.

[covelj70]

Mike,

Big difference between rebounding from a .25 negative compared to a 3.75 negative.  Lots of horses have recovered quickly from a slight negative, very few from a 3.75 negative.

The way I think about it is that it doesn\'t matter what number you run after coming back so quickly from a huge effort, its the fact that you come back so quickly period.  Whether you move foard, pair, x or off, you are in trouble if you don\'t take the time to recover from the first big one.

[covelj70]

Jimbo,

good point, well taken


On a seperate note, we should get a few interesting reads this weekend from Mullins\' horse in the Derby Trial as to whether a Mullins runer can translate good form to KY.  He\'s also the horse that IWR breezed with yesterday.

Also, Just a Coincidence in the Withers could flatter both IWR and West Side Bernie with a big effort, albeit around one turn.

[jimbo66]

Covelj,

The point Miff makes about Rachel Alexandra is a valid comparison.  The 0 for a 3-year old filly is probably similar to the negative 3 for a 3 year old colt (in terms of relative effort - no male chauvinism intended).

RA had the huge effort.  Came back on short rest and \"reacted\" as you would say (while under a hammerlock).  But then right back to the 0 on relatively short rest again (under a tighter hammerlock).

Her spacing was no better than I Want Revenge\'s will be.

[miff]

\"The way I think about it is that it doesn\'t matter what number you run after coming back so quickly from a huge effort, its the fact that you come back so quickly period. Whether you move foard, pair, x or off, you are in trouble if you don\'t take the time to recover from the first big one\"


Cov,

That theory suggest that EVERY single horse is of equal resiliency with the same recuperative power.I don\'t think thats remotely possible.


Mike

[TGJB]

Jimbo-- her top was a whole lot better than IWR\'s, even before adjusting for her being a filly. (And on that note, our legal filing to try and get me paid what I\'m owed for advising her purchase goes in tomorrow).

Covello-- if that Zito horse doesn\'t bounce next time out it will be a news story.

[covelj70]

Mike,

Fair points as well but if I ammended to say \"in almost all of the cases, it doesn\'t matter what number you run after coming back too quicky....\" then I would be in the clear.

Maybe IWR is a total freak and he will be the rare one that can come right back and run the big one again.  I have said this before, if he does it, I will be the loudest in proclaiming his greatest and I will take my hat off to him (and cash 10k worth of futures tickets) but I will be betting against that happening next Sat.

[Rick B.]

jack72906 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At this point if you\'re on POTN or if your
> off, outside of the PP draw, there probably won\'t
> be a statistic/percentage that will come up over
> the next 10 days to change your mind.

Since I have POTN ranked anywhere from 9th to 13th on the list of Derby contenders (depending on whose goes), yeah, I\'d say you\'re right.
 
Too many good horses have to either run terrible races at the wrong time, or not improve an inch, for POTN to win -- even if he does improve on dirt, which isn\'t a given.
 
I\'m giving him about a 5% chance of winning, max.

[miff]

Cov,

Back to basics. Next Sat 19 of these are going to lose for one reason or another. IWR cannot never be dismissed becasue he\'s run faster than 18 of them. Is he a great play at a relative short price, of course not. Making assumptions based SOLELY on pattern reads or various theories is a slippery slope,imo.If it was that easy,then more than 3% of the players would be beating the game.

Without going into the reasons why, I think that IWR will more likely than not run well.His last  2 races, while fast, were not gut wrenchers imo. I think those synth races legged him up and he\'s a new horse on dirt. He showed up 5 times as a 2yr old so I\'m kinda thinking he\'s resilient and sound.

Mike