Stop the presses

[TGJB]

According to Friedman\'s post on the other board, Ragozin has Zenyatta faster than Rachel on best for both, with several other figures close to Rachel\'s best. Also has Z \"head and shoulders\" faster than Sightseek and every other mare, evidently.

So Andy and I are heading back to school. Right after I buy those mares that have been finishing close to Zenyatta and ship them east to run against Seventh Street et al.

Meanwhile, back in Boysville, the Travers is setting up to be a very interesting race.

[P-Dub]

Thanks Jerry.

Hopefully this will put and end to all The Zenyatta comments and I won\'t have to post 10 times a day defending her.

Somebody finally gets it.

On a serious note, when example after example are shown that their numbers are out of whack how do their customers keep using and defending them?? You guys with buddies that use them, what do you hear from them?? Just curious...

[miff]

\"On a serious note, when example after example are shown that their numbers are out of whack how do their customers keep using and defending them?? You guys with buddies that use them, what do you hear from them?? Just curious...\"

Paul,

Raggies swear by the data and feel that the TG figs are often overstated (too fast) and too contrived(too many pairs). Having studied Rags a bit, it is not surprising that a ground loss type runner,Zenyatta, has equal/superior figs to Rachel,a tactical ground saver. Now, if one believes that Z has run as FAST or FASTER than Rachel as per RAGS,you are blindly following figs and dismissing what is happening on the racetrack.

Zenyatta is terrific and has accomplished much but she has not been capable of producing the figs that Rachel runs.She has not run as fast as Rachel to date,maybe she will in the future.

I\'m surprised that Friedman made that statement,if he did.The two of them are a few lengths apart on all other credible data I have seen. I have not seen RAGS for both horses.


Mike

[jimbo66]

Miff,

I read the posts by Friedman.  He mentions something that I didn\'t realize he does and I don\'t believe TGJB does.  He actually adjusts the numbers for pace.  And  he adjusts them differently for different horses in the same race.  He mentions adjusting Zenyatta\'s figure more than any other horse in the last race.  

TGJB,

I know you mark the races hot pace and slow pace, but do you adjust any figures?  If so, do you adjust horses differently in the same race.  

How can one closer be adjusted by 1 point, but a different closer by 3 points?

[Deadrockstar]

Not intending to pour gasoline on the fire. Coming to the Spa Sunday and will be using TG data. (JB: Key advantage for me is last 10 or 15 starts for 1st and 2nd-time starters)

But let me simply point out that JB himself admitted that it was impossible to have confidence in the Mother Goose figure given the track condition and the fact that it was for all intents and purposes a walkover. I think similar situations, though not as dramatically illustrative, probably happen all the time.

[richiebee]

Deadrockstar:

Nine of the 22 races run at the Spa on Saturday and Sunday will be maiden
events,so those first/second start trainer stats should come in handy.

On the other end of the spectrum, alta kokkers Hotstufanthensome, Better Talk
Now and Brass Hat all on the Saturday card.

[miff]

Jim,

I would love to converse with Friedman about the adjustments,a very slippery slope which makes lots of assumptions.We all understand that slow paces often lead to slower figs as horses just can\'t make up the time. I prefer a pace notation with the fig rather than the adjustment.

Can\'t imagine that Friedman has seen Z and Rachel perform and concluded that Z is faster by ANY method whatsoever.RAGS is notorious for ground loss fast figs on their product whereas horses that wire are given relatively slow figs vs the other credible fig makers.

Something has smelled for quite awhile with some figs and personally I\'m pleased as I think that players who fly blindly by figs are dead money in the pool from time to time.


Mike

[Michael D.]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jim,
>
> I would love to converse with Friedman about the
> adjustments,a very slippery slope which makes lots
> of assumptions.We all understand that slow paces
> often lead to slower figs as horses just can\'t
> make up the time. I prefer a pace notation with
> the fig rather than the adjustment.
>
> Can\'t imagine that Friedman has seen Z and Rachel
> perform and concluded that Z is faster by ANY
> method whatsoever.RAGS is notorious for ground
> loss fast figs on their product whereas horses
> that wire are given relatively slow figs vs the
> other credible fig makers.


Mike,

What does Ragozin do that is different from TG when it comes to ground loss? Are you just talking about the pace adjusted races? Can you provide an example of a race that is not adjusted for pace where the wide horses got figures too fast in relation to the other horses?


> Something has smelled for quite awhile with some
> figs and personally I\'m pleased as I think that
> players who fly blindly by figs are dead money in
> the pool from time to time.
>
>
> Mike

[miff]

Hi Mike D,

There are many, I don\'t save them but will in the future.There was recently  a ridiculous one,Funny Moon(Rags 14 3/4) that I posted here, JB may remember the horse. Rags was like 5-6 lengths off everyone, it was a split variant fig but not a wire to wire winner on this occasion.JB may want to post Funny Moons sheet.

On the assumption that Rags is accurate like TG on ground, the only difference could be the variant.Jerry feels the \"averaging\" by Rags, when tracks change speed, is the reason. I say, not so some of the time!The differences from time to time are far greater than any averaging would produce. If I knew the people over there I would ask.


I have noted it is almost always a wire  to wire winner that Rags has much slower than TG,BEyer,Bris, Equiform, Pace figs and my observation of an entire card.Wide ground loss types get ridiculously fast figs on Rags vs wire jobs.


Is there a better example of Rachel vs Z?? It\'s not that close fig wise and the idea that some pace adjustment makes them equal is for KOOL AID drinkers. If the paces in the Zenyatta races were faster and she had to keep up/chase more, who says she would kick as hard/finish as fast??

I\'ll guess they are getting it wrong, don\'t know why.

Mike

[TGJB]

Okay, several things.

Dead-- actually, Ragozin had the Mother Goose faster than we did-- that\'s where he gave her her top (the other big ones were on wet surfaces, see below). So that race is not why they have Zenyatta faster than Rachel on their best.

Jimbo-- YES, THEY ARE MAKING ADJUSTMENTS WITHIN THE RACE. I can\'t begin to tell you how unbelievable that idea is to a figure maker-- not that one wouldn\'t think some horses were advantaged/disadvantaged more than others, BUT THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE CHUTZPAH TO THINK THEY COULD QUANTIFY IT. Think about that a second. Anybody want to take a stab at a method of deciding one horse was penalized exactly 2 points by the pace, another 3 1/2, another not at all?

(And on a humorous note, our friend Class Handicapper says he\'s happy they are doing this, applying their judgement about what horses WOULD have run to figures they are selling. This after ranting at me 100 times about using my judgement just about track speed changing).

Friedman first mentioned doing this last year for Pyro in one of the FG stakes, and I said at the time they were entering the Twilight Zone. I\'ll tell you this-- they didn\'t do it when I was there, or even when Paul was there years later. It\'s nuts.

Miff-- we used to use some of the same trackmen Len uses (not in NY, since Connie), and you are right. Some of their guys give much wider ground calls, or at least used to when I checked. I brought up a few examples of their bad ground in the Breeder\'s Cup a few years ago, which is when Friedman responded with the hilarious thing about centrifugal force only existing on one part of the turn.

The other thing is that Ragozin absolutely refuses to give out big numbers on wet tracks-- he probably averages 2-3 points slower than us, on scale. That could keep him from giving out a big figure for Rachel in the Haskell. Back in the 80s there was some rationale for this, when the tracks had more clay in them and got sticky and slow when wet, causing most of the horses to \"X\". But with the modern sand based tracks, if it rains they mostly just get wet. Horses ON AVERAGE do run a little worse (see the TGI\'s in the sire profiles), but nothing like what Len gives them.

SO-- Len: a) Please post Rachel and Zenyatta\'s sheets, and b) please explain how you determine how much of a correction to use on each horse in pace situations.

Edit-- as I recall they did give Rachel the equivalent rating for the Oaks, so the wet track didn\'t stop them there.

[Michael D.]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Okay, several things.
>
> Dead-- actually, Ragozin had the Mother Goose
> faster than we did-- that\'s where he gave her her
> top (the other big ones were on wet surfaces, see
> below). So that race is not why they have Zenyatta
> faster than Rachel on their best.
>
> Jimbo-- YES, THEY ARE MAKING ADJUSTMENTS WITHIN
> THE RACE. I can\'t begin to tell you how
> unbelievable that idea is to a figure maker-- not
> that one wouldn\'t think some horses were
> advantaged/disadvantaged more than others, BUT
> THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE CHUTZPAH TO THINK THEY
> COULD QUANTIFY IT. Think about that a second.
> Anybody want to take a stab at a method of
> deciding one horse was penalized exactly 2 points
> by the pace, another 3 1/2, another not at all?
>
> (And on a humorous note, our friend Class
> Handicapper says he\'s happy they are doing this,
> applying their judgement about what horses WOULD
> have run to figures they are selling. This after
> ranting at me 100 times about using my judgement
> just about track speed changing).
>
> Friedman first mentioned doing this last year for
> Pyro in one of the FG stakes, and I said at the
> time they were entering the Twilight Zone. I\'ll
> tell you this-- they didn\'t do it when I was
> there, or even when Paul was there years later.
> It\'s nuts.
>
> Miff-- we used to use some of the same trackmen
> Len uses (not in NY, since Connie), and you are
> right. Some of their guys give much wider ground
> calls, or at least used to when I checked.


Miff\'s right? He made the assumption that Ragozin gets the ground correct, and miraculously blamed the error on variant. You said the opposite. He\'s been bashing your \"phony\" wide figures for years Jerry. Remember this post from Miff:


On Varick Street, what equals negative -3.75

ROUGHLY:
Quarter 25.3

Half 50.3

Three Qu.114.2

Mile 136.3

Mile&Qu. 202.4 (last quarter in 26.1 held)

Variant geeks had the surface minus 50( ie 2 and 1/2 lenghts slower than what they call par)with no other quasi two turn race to compare to.

Like I said before, carry 122 plus pounds and race wide and you\'re in TG negative territory almost regardless of what the adjusted raw time is.This classic \"phony wide\"fig, is probably correct by this \"racing\" flawed formula.


Having said that,Borrego joins the TG list of other rather nice but \"common\"performers who ran faster than Seattle Slew, Cigar, and many others with his Monsterous adjusted 2.02.2 performance at 10F.


Jerry, you responded:


Miff, if you don\'t believe that 126 pounds and a wide trip matter, you are using the wrong product. And if you keep repeating the same things over and over, after I have answered them a few dozen times, I\'m going to start deleting them-- I don\'t want to have to keep answering them, and I won\'t let them stand unanswered as if they have merit. Open your own website, with the variant geeks (www.variantgeeks.com? You don\'t owe me anything for that).


But now Miff bashes Ragozin for wide figure errors, and he\'s right?


>I
> brought up a few examples of their bad (too wide)
> ground in the Breeder\'s Cup a few years ago, which
> is when Friedman responded with the hilarious
> thing about centrifugal force only existing on one
> part of the turn.
>
> The other thing is that Ragozin absolutely refuses
> to give out big numbers on wet tracks-- he
> probably averages 2-3 points slower than us, on
> scale. That would keep him from giving out big
> figures for Rachel in the Oaks and Haskell. Back
> in the 80s there was some rationale for this, when
> the tracks had more clay in them and got sticky
> and slow when wet, causing most of the horses to
> \"X\". But with the modern sand based tracks, if it
> rains they mostly just get wet. Horses ON AVERAGE
> do run a little worse (see the TGI\'s in the sire
> profiles), but nothing like what Len gives them.
>
> SO-- Len: a) Please post Rachel and Zenyatta\'s
> sheets, and b) please explain how you determine
> how much of a correction to use on each horse in
> pace situations.

[TGJB]

Michael-- You know I disagree with Miff about whether ground loss matters. What he said in this string is that Ragozin trackmen have horses wider than we do   and give \"wide\" horses better figures scale-to-scale (\"Ragozin is notorious for ground loss fast figures\"), and he\'s right.

[Michael D.]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Michael-- You know I disagree with Miff about
> whether ground loss matters. What he said in this
> string is that Ragozin trackmen have horses wider
> than we do   and give \"wide\" horses better figures
> scale-to-scale (\"Ragozin is notorious for ground
> loss fast figures\"), and he\'s right.


Miff did not say that Ragozin trackmen have horses wider. He said:

\"On the assumption that Rags is accurate like TG on ground, the only difference could be the variant\".

[TGJB]

Read his first post, Michael.

But of course, if the ground loss was the same (as opposed to what he had said, and as opposed to what is SOMETIMES true), yes, it would be a variant issue. UNTIL RECENTLY. Because if they are making adjustments within the race, anything goes.

Why not ask them about this? You sometimes use their data, and it\'s a legitimate question.

[miff]

Mike D,

What possible explanation could there be for a winner of an ALW-NW2X in NY getting a figure equal to a TG 11 1/4(Beyer 70) that Rags gave Funny Moon, who won by a pole no less. What did the other horses in that race run?. That RAG figure is amateurish and should be an embarrassment for them.

Take a shot at why a fig maker would be wrong by 5-6 lengths if not for ground or variant.


Mike