Blind Luck

[phil23]

It is this sort of lack of exactness and disclosure that is discouraging to me as a horse player (don\'t even get me started on run ups and fractional times...). They should weigh each horse before each race and weigh each jockey (with EVERYTHING he is going to be wearing/using).  Then we\'d get a much better picture.  I believe they are far better at this sort of thing in Hong Kong.

Tangentially and speaking of horses\' weights - there was a good point made in a thread over at DRF about HDG and BL and their respective size.  On Gomez\'s ESPN blog, he estimates that BL is 15.2 hands and weighs no more than 980 lbs.  A commentator in the drf thread estimates that HDG is perhaps 16.1 hands and 100 lbs heavier than BL.  Based on these two estimates, HDG was carrying 11.4% of her body weight in the race while BL, even though carrying \"less official weight\" was actually carrying a higher PERCENTAGE of her body weight, at 12.5%

Regardless of whether the two estimates of their body weights are correct, to me, this brings up a very good point.  Of course weight carried matters.  But should it not also be taken in the context of the size of the animal carrying it?  For instance if a 140 lb sprinter runs against a 170lb sprinter and they carry 2lbs, wouldn\'t it be wise to assume that those two pounds negatively impact the smaller sprinter\'s final time more?  Granted - attempting to get to this sort of contextual level in horse racing is all but impossible as they do not publish the actual body weight of horses.

On another tangent, this reminds me of a debate in hockey right now.  Some people are in favour of bigger nets to create more offence, but many see that as fundamentally changing the game.  But back 20 or 30 years ago, goalies were far smaller and thus shooters saw much more of the net (ie there was more empty space to shoot at).  So wouldn\'t widening the net simply be returning the ratio of goalie:space in the net to it\'s original ratio...actually returning to the fundamentals of the game.

At any rate, good debate.

[alm]

I\'d rather bet on Larry Jones theory of weight carried as opposed to yours...and in this case he appears to have been right.

[P-Dub]

Moose,
I didn\'t say it doesn\'t matter. I\'m saying 2 pds isn\'t going to sway me if the price is right.

Alm,
You can agree with Jones all you want. You have no idea whether that 2 pds made a difference. If you think all horses are created equal, and that weight affects them all equally, you are well within your rights. It\'s possible that if made a difference, and it\'s possible it didn\'t.  If all of the amateur scientists on this board want to ramble on about physics, more power to them.

[moosepalm]

It\'s your money.  You\'re entitled to ignore whatever you want.  My point was addressed to your comment that \"complaining about a couple pounds without knowing how that weight truly affected a horse is specious at best\".  No, we don\'t know such matters conclusively, and as I said above, there are many such variables with indeterminate impact, but does that mean they\'re off the table for discussion about a horse\'s performance?  It is not specious, but rather speculative, and speculation that is grounded in sound theory.

[Funny Cide]

phil23 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is this sort of lack of exactness and
> disclosure that is discouraging to me as a horse
> player (don\'t even get me started on run ups and
> fractional times...). They should weigh each horse
> before each race and weigh each jockey (with
> EVERYTHING he is going to be wearing/using).  Then
> we\'d get a much better picture.  I believe they
> are far better at this sort of thing in Hong
> Kong.
>
> Tangentially and speaking of horses\' weights -
> there was a good point made in a thread over at
> DRF about HDG and BL and their respective size.
> On Gomez\'s ESPN blog, he estimates that BL is 15.2
> hands and weighs no more than 980 lbs.  A
> commentator in the drf thread estimates that HDG
> is perhaps 16.1 hands and 100 lbs heavier than BL.
>  Based on these two estimates, HDG was carrying
> 11.4% of her body weight in the race while BL,
> even though carrying \"less official weight\" was
> actually carrying a higher PERCENTAGE of her body
> weight, at 12.5%
>
> Regardless of whether the two estimates of their
> body weights are correct, to me, this brings up a
> very good point.  Of course weight carried
> matters.  But should it not also be taken in the
> context of the size of the animal carrying it?
> For instance if a 140 lb sprinter runs against a
> 170lb sprinter and they carry 2lbs, wouldn\'t it be
> wise to assume that those two pounds negatively
> impact the smaller sprinter\'s final time more?
> Granted - attempting to get to this sort of
> contextual level in horse racing is all but
> impossible as they do not publish the actual body
> weight of horses.
>
> On another tangent, this reminds me of a debate in
> hockey right now.  Some people are in favour of
> bigger nets to create more offence, but many see
> that as fundamentally changing the game.  But back
> 20 or 30 years ago, goalies were far smaller and
> thus shooters saw much more of the net (ie there
> was more empty space to shoot at).  So wouldn\'t
> widening the net simply be returning the ratio of
> goalie:space in the net to it\'s original
> ratio...actually returning to the fundamentals of
> the game.
>
> At any rate, good debate.

It\'s legitimate to question weight as it pertains to body weight.  That said, there\'s another issue to consider, and it\'s the build of the horse, not just their weight.  Some smaller horses and ponies can more easily carry weight than larger horses.  The width and strength of their loin is important in weight-carrying ability.

Now, how we\'d check for this, I don\'t know.  At one time I thought, too, that weight should be a percentage of body size instead of flatly assigned regardless of the animals\' sizes, but it\'s entirely possible to have a very big horse like Zenyatta have a weaker loin and have less weight carrying ability than a smaller horse like Blind Luck.

[miff]

Paul,

Guys are all around it. Size alone may not determine any specie\'s ability to carry weight. A smaller horse could be stronger,a better weight carrier than a larger horse.Until science has a way to measure each individual horses strength, there is only speculation/opinion as to what affect there may be under various weight scenarios.

The \"scientists\" here completely ignore that all horses having the EXACT ability/strength to carry weight is out there in la la land. Check out the Beyer Speed Figures for the Fall Highweight each of the last 20 years and tell me about physics, as it applies to weight carrying in horse racing.Watch some horses drilling in the am under 135-140 lbs ripping off splits with impunity under much heavier imposts than they ever carry in a race,never showing any slow down despite the extra weight.

Incidentally, Garret Gomez who rode BL stated the two pounds WAS the difference in his opinion and feels 2 pounds always makes a difference, contrary to what others opine about that.

Lots of differing opinions but no science.I\'ll always take the 2 pounds for insanity insurance in case I get head bobbed.


Mike

[Rich Curtis]

Miff wrote:

\"Check out the Beyer Speed Figures for the Fall Highweight each of the last 20 years and tell me about physics, as it applies to weight carrying in horse racing.\"

Len Friedman uses the Fall Highweight as evidence that the sheet weight correction is accurate. From an old post of his:

\"As I\'ve posted before, those who say that weight doesn\'t matter or that its effect is too hard to quantify will have to explain to me how the horses in the Fall Highweight Handicap over several decades have run slower in time in proportion to our correction for the extra weight that they carry over their usual imposts. These were situations where the horses were carrying substantially increased weight so that the effects were more easily measured and were horses of enough quality that there was sufficient consistency in their performances so the measurement of the effect of weight was possible (as against their before and after performances). On the one hand trainers and owners complain about two extra pounds in a handicap (so much so that racing secretaries have been intimidated from make realistic handicapping decisions on highweights that they hope will enter their races) and on the other hand you have putzes that believe that contrary to all known physical laws that added weight doesn\'t require more effort to move it! The idea that the weight differences are so small as to be de minimus in relation to the weight of the horse (or the jockey)is sophistry. All the measurements we make as to the effort that each horse has put out are based on relatively small differences. A point at 6f is based approximately on a difference of 1/3 of a per cent of the time of the race and the ground loss correction is a similar % of the distance of the race for each point. To get accurate figures there are many precise measurements that need to be made and the idea is to make them, not make excuses for why they don\'t matter or are too tough to work out.\"

[miff]

Len Friedman, too funny, not self serving at all. Don\'t know him well enough, ask him if he\'d like to bet using an impartial ref, my data against his.

Nice science too, duh!

Mike

[Rich Curtis]

\"Len Friedman, too funny, not self serving at all.\"

You are quoting jockeys and sending people to Beyer figures, and then you are complaining about \"self serving\"? And while we\'re at it, whom are you serving, Mother Teresa?

\"Don\'t know him well enough, ask him if he\'d like to bet using an impartial ref, my data against his.\"

Is this one of those, you know, rhetorical challenges that are meant only for grandstanding purposes? If not, if in fact you are serious about it, then why not post it on Friedman\'s board? You don\'t have to know Friedman to post there.

[miff]

Rich,

Never posted there ever but speak daily to a serious Raggie gambler who knows them well.You\'d like to locked up in a room with them gambling horses, head to head.

You have selective memory also, If I offer a bet here,I follow through.Not surprising you have stayed away from \"all horses are not of equal strength\"as that kinda flies in the face of the weight discussion here.

Mike

[Rich Curtis]

\"Never posted there ever but speak daily to a serious Raggie gambler who knows them well.You\'d like to locked up in a room with them gambling horses, head to head.\"

I thought \"News of the World\" went out of business.


\"You have selective memory also, If I offer a bet here,I follow through.\"

 I have no way of knowing what happened to the bet you and Jimbo were trying to work out a few years ago. Is that what you are talking about? If you\'re talking about something else, then this is going to get very funny very fast.

\"Not surprising you have stayed away from \'all horses are not of equal strength\' as that kinda flies in the face of the weight discussion here.\"

How so? I have no reason to believe that all horses are equally good at carrying weight. But what is your solution? You began this string by ridiculing Larry Jones\' weight adjustment. What is yours? Interview the jockey after the race, ask him how much he thinks the weight cost the horse, and adjust in that manner?

[miff]

We did,Jimbo beat me for big money.

On weight, easy, physics.Have a kool aid on me!

Mike

[moosepalm]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
 
> Not surprising you have
> stayed away from \"all horses are not of equal
> strength\"as that kinda flies in the face of the
> weight discussion here.

I don\'t see any inherent contradiction there.  Yes, weight affects horses differently, in ways we don\'t fully understand.  Shall I document other facets of the thoroughbred that we don\'t completely understand?  It would be a very long list.  However, there are numerous variables which will affect them to a degree, which can be quantified and, over a sufficient period of time, will hold true more often than not.  We look to these for an edge that will serve us well over the long haul, which also means they won\'t necessarily hold true for every race, or every horse.  What else is this game if not about percentage plays, and percentage angles?

[Rich Curtis]

\"Have a kool aid on me!\"

Meanwhile, you are drinking an invisible drink out of an invisible cup, with the occasional visible jockey quotation mixed in, and when that same jockey turns out to have said the complete opposite of what you believe, you yourself become invisible.

[miff]

Rich

Serious,the kool aid has impaired you. I posted that Gomez completely disagrees with me on the 2  pounds.Disappeared? Let\'s cool it,making a fool of yourself

Mike