IWR and GQ Pattern read Q for Jerry et al

[PatrickM]

I\'m looking at IWR and trying to figure out why I don\'t like him. I don\'t like Mullins or the IHEA group but they\'re aren\'t running the race. Never really liked the horse either but then I remembered the comments about GQ before the Blue Grass:

\"has a very nice developmental pattern that yielded new tops in each of his first three starts at Tampa, including a big figure to win the Sam Davis. Not surprisingly he finally bounced in his last after all those efforts, and now with four weeks rest should be ready to run well again.\"

GQ, of course ran back to his previous top.

Now I look at IWR\'s sheet and he, too, marched down to a new top (HUGE) then bounced the same number of points (3.25) in his race afterward. With 4 weeks rest, as with GQ, why can\'t he come back to his top?

GQ ran a 9 route top (turf) as a 2 year old and a 6.5 top sprinting. Then he proceeds to run a 1.75 top at 3 (rte) which is 7.25 points improvement over his route top and 4.75 over the sprint.

IWR ran a 6 route top as a 2 year old then ran the huge neg 3.5 routing which is 9.5 points improvement. He backed up the same points (3.25) from the top as GQ and GQ subsequently hit the previous top as the author predicted.

Again, I\'m not making a case for betting IWR. I actually am hoping for some input to convince me to keep him out of my top 2.

So, is it simply because he ran the huge negative?
Is it because the huge negative in 9.5 points improvement from his 2yr old top?
Is it because Mullins\' \"snake venom\" kit won\'t make it past inspection?
Other?

Someone, please, relative to my points above, talk me out of including him in my top 2 (or 3). Also, for the record, I have $30 win on FF at 70-1 bet 12/28 at the Grand Sierra in Reno. My rooting interest are squarely on one horse.

Thanks guys. I appreciate all feedback (except any negative rooting on FF :-))

Patrick

[TGJB]

I\'m going to save my comments for the seminar, but it seems to me you\'ve answered your own question.

[miff]

Big Brown went into the Derby with 11@1/2 \"points of development\" and whistled.BB\'s pattern was better than IWR going into the derby but his bottom and experience were not.

It is also reasonable to think that IWR is not the same horse on dirt as synth.  Using points of development from a juvie campaign strictly on synths might not be truly indicative of how much he has really moved forward from 2 to 3. It may not be as severe as the figs indicate.


Mike

[TGJB]

Not commenting on anything but the first part:

Development doesn\'t begin until a top is established. One race in September at 2 doesn\'t represent anything solid as a limit, and wouldn\'t have meant much even if it had been on dirt (and given subsequent developments, meaning BB\'s race on it at 3, he may not have liked turf as much).

[covelj70]

Patrick,

First of all, congrats on the great bet on FF, nice work there.  Good luck with it.

In terms of IWR, the big issue, as you suggested is the huge negative number.  The improvement is one thing but many will perhaps justifiably argue that its hard to measure that improvement because it\'s syn to dirt which is apples to oranges.

However, what can\'t be denied is that numbers like that knock horses out. Period, end of sentence.  It may take 2 or 3 races (Smarty or BB) or it may only take 1 race (Barbaro) but history suggests that horses that run massive negative numbers so early in their development unfortunately don\'t hold together.  Barbaro, Big Brown, Smarty Jones, seemingly (but too early to tell Quality Road).  Once you put a massive effort like that in, a horse needs alot of time to recover.  In my mind, it doesn\'t really matter what number a horse runs in their next race, whether they pair or top the massive number (BB in the KY Derby) or bounce and still win (Smarty and IWR in their races after the huge efforts).  If they run back in 4 or 5 weeks after that number, the damage is done very sadly.

I believe IWR regressed in the Wood because I believe a number is a number and when you start adjusting, you are going down a slippery path.  Others argue that the break and the hand ride means he didn\'t regress (much like many of the same people argued BB didn\'t regress in last years Preakness).  The bigger issue though is it doesn\'t matter if he regressed or not, the cumulative effect of those efforts makes it highly likely in my mind that he\'s not going to run his race in the Derby and at 4-1 odds, it\'s just a silly bet to make that he will run his race.  

Everyone makes the syn to dirt thing and the ease of the wood win the main points but the main point in my mind is the massive absolute number that has nothing to do with either of those issues.

As an aside, go back on the archives page to look at the TG numbers horses ran in winning the derby up to the mid 90s.  They just didn\'t go that fast.  Horses were winning the derbies with 5s and 6s.  People want to know why horses break down so much now.  One of the main reasons is that they are running too damm fast before their bodies are ready to handle it.  Kind of like the 11 year old kid who throws 80 MPH in little league and blows his arm out before he gets to high school.  11 year old body not built to handle that much stress and a 3 year old horse isn\'t meant to run 3 negatives.

[ronwar]

Covel,

That was well said.

[PatrickM]

Thanks everyone for the input.

Jerry, I\'ll buy the Derby rundown to get the full download. I figured I covered the answer just curious which one actually answered it or if it was a combination. I\'ll wait a week and get your thoughts.

Covel, I agree with most things you\'ve written on this board and appreciate your opinion.

Good luck to you all regardless of your choice(s); hopefully LJ can finally win one before he bows out :-).

[miff]

\"Once you put a massive effort like that in, a horse needs alot of time to recover.


...ahem,SOME horses need alot of time to recover.Smarty Jones was beat by a poor ride and a gang up.Barbaro took a BAD step according to most EXPERT observers and BB ran too poorly to consider it a bounce. Cov,ya gotta lay off the Kool aid, next you\'ll be posting that big neg figs are the cause of the financial crisis.

Mike

[covelj70]

Mike,

Smarty ran the 3 neg before the Derby.  He bounced and still won the Derby. He reacted to the number and then his career was over right after that.  The number impacted him

I was at the Preakness in the infield saddling area for the Barbaro tragedy and anyone who thinks he looked like the same horse there as he looked on Derby Day (I was there also) doesn\'t know anything about how to look at a horse.  He wasn\'t acting anything like/ looking like himself on Preakness day.  The number impacted him.

For BB, ask Kent, Ivaronne and Dutrow (I have spoken with all of them about it).  Kent decided he wasn\'t going to win the Belmont and wrapped up on him because he thought the horse was too great to be getting shipped down the stretch only to come in 5th which is the best Kent said he had in him that day.  Dutrow hasn\'t spoken to Kent since for giving up on BB too early in the race.  The number(s) impacted him.

The best part about the game is that we all get to vote.

[jimbo66]

Covelj,

As always, respect your thoughts, but don\'t agree with all your points.  Do you really want to consider Smarty\'s Derby a bounce? Not me.  I am not going to do that.  Nor will others.  I think you are being too much of a \"sheets purist\".  He won the derby handily over a sea of slop.  The fact one or two of the figure makers rated it slower than his Arkansas Derby is not enough for me to call it a bounce.  I don\'t believe he reacted at all.  And as for it \"ending his career\".  Come on.  I am not vet, but the common view at the time was they \"took the money\" and ended his career prematurely off of a very innocent injury.  Not sure about Barbaro, but I also don\'t think Big Brown \"reacted\" in the Preakness.  He was a brilliant and brittle horse, with foot problems, and he was given a very conservative ride in the Preakness off a huge derby effort.  I don\'t think he \"reacted\".  With his short foundation and brittle feet, it was not a surprise (to some) that he finally had that bad race in the Belmont that TGJB and others had been predicting since the Derby (I was also in that group).  

Just like there is no way I am reading I Want Revenge\'s Wood as a reaction.  Never had a chance to run faster until very very late in the race. That doesn\'t mean he won\'t react in the Derby, he very well may, but the Wood was not a reaction IMO.  The same way I can\'t ASSUME that IWR would have run another negative 3 without the slow start and trouble throughout, I don\'t believe TGJB andn others that are down on this horse\'s chances should ASSUME he could not.  Watch the replay, he never had a chance to run until the last 50 to 75 yards.  Could he have run faster, maybe?  Maybe not.  I think he got the best possible prep in that race and I know I am biased because of my futures bet, but we will see in about 6 days!!

[miff]

Cov,

Smarty \"bounced\" with a 1/16th of a mile to go after running his eyes out for 4-5 races? Right there at the 1\'16 pole the \"number\"impacted him?.VOODOO!

Barbaro took a bad step according to experts, number impact probably don\'t cause bad steps.

BB was connected to a personal friend of mine who was with the horse most days.  His version as to what really happened with this horse is not for me to say, but BOUNCE is not what was concluded.The medical experts had no real findings but one thought it may have had something to do with BB\'s sweat glands not functioning properly that day. I guess that would be attributed to the \"number\" also.

Agree, to each his own.


Mike

[covelj70]

Jimbo,

thanks for the thoughts.  In my day job, I get acussed of being a purist and a bit too dogmatic as well so at least I am consistent

It has served me ok in that world but I totally get that there is more than one legit way of looking at these things.

Interesting set of works today.  Going to be an awesome week.

[TGJB]

Just to get on the record, while I may disagree slightly (very slightly) with Jim about the details, I agree 100% with him overall. Miff, you gotta love a guy who accuses someone else of drinking kool-aid for asigning cause-effect relationships, then does the same thing himself.

The point is that big efforts are stressful. Do some horses handle stress better (or longer) than others? Yes, especially in this era of sportsmedicine and increased trainer awareness (time between races). So what? Doesn\'t mean the phenomenon doesn\'t exist. Everything we do in this game is based on percentages. Once there is a very stressful effort you are dealing with percentages as to when and how great the effect will be, and that factors into your assigning chances of different outcomes-- or should.

[miff]

JB,

We are not that far apart in our \"take\" on regression. When guys posting think that QR\'s recent quartercrack has something to do with the fact that he ran a big neg fig 4 weeks ago, that\'s just inane.

As you have always tried to educate your customers, I\'m surprised that you don\'t enlighten them about such flawed thinking.

Mike

[TGJB]

Miff-- I agree with Jim that the stress is probably part of the cause of the crack. Not because stress itself causes quarter cracks, but because exertion can cause horses to slightly alter their strides to compensate for discomfort, and the mechanics of something that large moving that fast coming down on something that small have to be perfect. I\'ve brought this analogy up before-- think pitchers slightly altering their motions due to an injury and ruining their arms.

Many years ago I worked with John Forbes, one of the best horsemen I ever worked with. If I remember correctly, he would look diagonally-- problem right front, see if there is something left rear that the horse is trying to get off. Something like that.

But the point is, you can\'t always tell where it will come out, and horses can\'t talk. So-- it\'s always something.