I say we have a HOTY do over

[smalltimer]

mjellish,

Help me analyze this please.

I\'m looking at the Redboard Room for Saturday\'s FG and SA races, specifically Rachel and Zenyatta.

In Rachel\'s case, her sire Medaglia D\'Oro doesn\'t have a 5 year old crop yet, and since Rachel\'s only 4, it doesn\'t pertain to her.

Medaglia\'s 3 year olds, 120 horses, with 606 starts and 20 Stakes wins and it looks like their TGI number is 10.3.  So 20 of the wins were stakes races for
16%.  

His 4 year olds, 39 head started only 66 times with 2 Stakes wins for 5%.  Also, his 4 year old TGI\'s moved from 10.3 to 11.1, so does that show a slight degression on his older horses?  I\'m just asking because I\'m not familiar with the TG system.

In the case of Zenyatta and her sire Street Cry, it appears differently:

His 3 year olds, 127 horses, with 673 starts and 15 Stakes wins and it looks like their TGI number is 11.2, higher (less overall quality?) than Medaglia\'s 3 year olds. So 15 stakes wins of 127 horses won stakes for @ 12%.

Street Cry 4 year old numbered 84 head, with 443 starts and 24 Stakes wins. Of the 84 head, 24 were stakes wins for 28%. They also improved in the TGI number from 11.2 to 9.1

Street Cry 5 year olds and up showed 28 head with 151 starts and 13 Stakes wins.  Their TGI number also continued to drop, in this case to 6.  

Am I reading this wrong, or does it suggest based on these samples, that Medaglia  4 year olds may actually degress a bit, where the Street Cry horses may improve as they get a little older.  

I don\'t guarantee I have these numbers sequenced exactly as they should be, but it did seem to explain why Z continues to run well as a 6 year old.      

It seems odd that Medaglia\'s horses moving from their 3 to 4 year old year show dramatically less horses and less starts:  120 head and 606 starts as 3 year olds, but as 4 year olds 39 head for only 66 starts and only 2 Stakes wins.

Whereas, Street Cry 3 year olds 127 head for 673 starts and that number shrinks as 4 year olds to only 84 head but still 443 starts.  

Help me out here.

Thanks

[nyc1347]

hey small timer

the sample for Medaglias horses at 4 year olds is really small compared to 3 year old so i wouldnt use that at all...  plus the TGI comparison 10.3 to 11.1 is really just spliting hairs anyway.. theres not enough information at all with the second sample size.

as far as 5 year olds and up with street cry.. only about %18 of horses (28 horses ran as 5 years old and up telling me that most retired and stopped racing at that age.  The ones who were actually racing were at the championship, stakes, and allowance level and were still able to compete at the highest level at that age.  We know Zenyatta has consistent neg 1 so her efforts this year will only better that but dont compare the 6 to Medaglias 66 starts at 4 y.o. cause the 5 yr old and up category doesnt even come close to existing and the 4 year old TGI is not well established yet

[mjellish]

The sample size is too small to begin looking at the data that way.  39 runners and 66 starts is not enough to make an assessment of Medaglia D\'Oro\'s runners at age 4.  We won\'t really have the data for at least another year, or even better two or three years.  With only 66 starters, the 4 year old TGI number could be skewed by something as simple as let\'s say his best runners just haven\'t run much yet this year, or his worst couple of runners have run more often.

You have to be careful with how much credence you lend to early sire stats.

[smalltimer]

Sounds like solid reasoning.  I just figured 3 and a half months into the 2010 season most horses would have had at least 1 or 2 starts by now.

Appreciate it !!

[nyc1347]

thats exactly why i tell everyone that every individual horses pattern is much more important than ANYTHING else coming into a specific race.  as an example, just because a horse runs a negative 3 as a new top from lets say a previous top of a 2 (5 point jump) last out and only has 10 days rest coming into a race THAT specific horse is a bounce candidate. No matter what u tell me about sires or pedigree or whatever a horse in that same race running consistent 0\'s with rest will most likely beat that neg 3 horse on that given day (and probably at better odds).

In my opinion, try to focus on an individual race rather than a whole picture.  Since we wager and put money down we shouldnt be too concerned at what 600 other horses did because those other horses ran in different conditions, biases, time off, etc (even though the TG figures take that into consideration).   But by taking each race as an individual and forming an analysis that is more consistent for all the horses that day (weather that day, rest for each horse, post positions) you will be able to get a better idea on how that race will run with your money in THAT specific race situation and most likely make more money.

[Silver Charm]

\"because the Rachel of last year would have still kept on going and drawn off anyway\"

This was not a 100% fit animal. You can not perform at your best if you have not been conditioned to do your best.

Tiger Woods should just go hit a bucket of balls and show up at Augusta and expect to be the winner.

NOT!!!

[mjellish]

Silver,

I still have no idea what the hell you are talking about.  The Rachel of last year WOULD have kept on going.  She clearly showed she could run that fast early and still kick away at the top of the lane.  She\'s obviously not there yet this year.  I\'ve been saying, right here on this board, for 2 weeks now, that I did not think she was fit at this time and would be vulnerable.  So either you are not understanding me or I am not understanding you or you just don\'t see it that way.  Whichever it is that\'s fine with me.  But there is nothing ridiculous about my statement.

If people want to make up their mind about Rachel after her first start back since last fall then I guess that is up to them.  But if she moves forward off this and trains well you are going to see a whole different animal in her next race.  I thought form cycles were one of things this board was supposed to be about...

[sekrah]

You didn\'t expect these guys to suddenly become rational in this debate did you?

[martoon]

How many workouts do you guys think a horse needs after a layoff like that?  Didn\'t she have 7 or 8?  That what is so hard about this game, you could work them forever and risk overdoing it on the training track or you have to give them a race to get there.

Either way they may have done better to turn her out on a farm for a couple months during her break or kept her in light training like Zenyatta.  Because hot housing her for months in the barn just got her fat and way out of condition apparently.

[Silver Charm]

Jellish I rest my case. She is nowhere near last year from a conditioning standpoint to last years form. So how can you say \"the Rachel of last year would have drawn off.\"

\"She\'s clearly not up to her previous level,\" Asmussen said. \"We\'re going to regroup and come back again. The disappointment from yesterday continues.\"

[mjellish]

Ok, I\'m done with this.  Obviously you either aren\'t a very good listener or you are taking what I said the wrong way as that is EXACTLY what I was saying and have been saying on this board for over two weeks.  When I say \"The Rachel of last year\" you should be reading \"a fit and ready Rachel.\"  Go back and read my posts.  I think most people on this board know I am a big Rachel fan even though all she has done so far is cost me money.  I have no clue why you have a beef with me.  

You aren\'t a dentist named Kevin Smith by chance, are you?

[Boscar Obarra]

From Joe Drape in the NY Times

\"There was an e-mail message in my in-box from a fourth-generation horseman and breeder who knows more about thoroughbreds than most.

“Sometimes fillies want to be broodmares and lose their competitive edge,” it read. “Zenyatta looked like a tiger and Rachel looked resigned to me, but time will tell.”


  Basically, that\'s what prompted my initial post, though I\'m just a first generation horseplayer.

[Silver Charm]

No I am the dentist from the The Marathon Man and was brought here to torture you.

I think we are saying the same thing.

[Boscar Obarra]

I just notice tonight that the official chart caller also used the term \'inhaled\' to describe the win.

[Flighted Iron]

Is there a doctor in the house to explain further?