Blind Luck

[TGJB]

Are you under the impression that horses \"carrying\" weight is like humans carrying weight, involving arm strength, a strong back, like that? Regardless, the idea that a certain amount of weight would make a difference and a lesser one would make none (as opposed to even just saying one too small to measure) makes no sense. How would you come up with it mattering at 10 pounds? Why not 20? Horses spotting 10 pounds win all the time, doesn\'t that mean it didn\'t matter?

[Rich Curtis]

Miff wrote:

\"A formula that adjusts EVERY horse by one length per 5 lbs(distance aside)\"

Good Lord.

[hotspringskid]

Have we learned nothing from the Casey Anthony trial. Define inference: an educated guess. Inference was not enough to convict her,but this game is all about the percentages as Moosepalm said. We use inferences every time we handicap a race and the more information we have that is valid and based on scientific data the better. I\'ll take my chances with TG\'s data any day of the week and 87 stakes winners validates that confidence. I have not heard a single viable alternative to what info we are working with now. Why not give this thread a rest and let\'s go hunt for Casey Anthony, sell her location to the media and make a million dollars. Now that\'s a sure thing.

[miff]

JB,

Firstly,there is no knock on the reasonableness of the formula that \"sheets\" use in coming up with a figure.That was never my intent,it\'s just not science. There is way too little \"racing science\" about weight, as it relates to race horses carrying it.The finish of the BL/HDG race may have been decided by the 2lb weight spot...or not!

Surely,you have been around animals with VERY different physical attributes and if measurable,different levels of strength.I know you are aware that strength/ power/balance/athleticism/desire are key attributes of fast horses.

Strength translates to the ability to comfortably shoulder different weight imposts.You cannot believe that a slight 3 yr old filly is as strong as a stout 3 yr colt or that every single 3 yr old colt is precisely affected,final time wise, by 2 lbs or 5 or 10.How is that possible, surely some are stronger than others.

The game was filled with great weight carriers, were they all only equal to their peers in strength,I don\'t think so.

Mike

[alm]

P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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.


I didn\'t say anything about physics nor do I think all horses are created equal...I\'ve bred about 65 myself and know what we are dealing with here.  What I did say was Larry Jones knows his horse better than any of us...he is accomplished in the field...more so than most...his pre-race comments harken back to how a lot of the greatest trainers sounded when handicap racing was more prevalent...and I trust that his fear was realize when his filly lost by a hair.

I didn\'t bet this race, but if I was going to bet it I would have leaned towards Blind Luck, based upon Jones\' fear.  That\'s logic.  That\'s common sense.  THat\'s not science, except if we are considering the science of the human mind.  That\'s what I meant by my comment.

[miff]

Rich,

Again you chose to dissect.There are people inside the game longer than you, and with far greater knowledge, that believe that a spot 5 pounds at 6f does not have the same affect as 5 lbs at 8f, while others believe it has the same affect at all distances.Personally, don\'t fall on either side.

Just opinions,Rich, no science. Whats yours? Guess you don\'t have one.


Mike

[alm]

Is it ok if I jump in here?  I know this has gone on ad nauseum following your comment, Jerry, but apart from agreeing with you about carrying weight (it\'s a simple argument...elegant and accurate...that it has to make some difference) one aspect of the animal that has been left out of the conversation is conformational balance.

A racehorse that is put together well, with great balance, can handle more of every stress of racing than one that is not perfect.  Weight carrying is one such stress (but there are many others.)

I am going to guess one could examine Blind Luck and find that she is extraordinarily well put together and able to handle weight better as a result. However much it slows her down, it slows her competitors down more, because they are likely to make miniscule stride adjustments that are not natural to them.  The reason some milers and sprinters can become great sires of distance running horses is because they are able to transmit conformation and balance through their genes.  They may not transmit the internals, which can come from the mare anyway, but if they give a great skeletal configuration to a horse, they enable him or her to carry their game further than they otherwise might.

A study of body weight to weight carried might be far less meaningful than a study of conformation to weight carried.  And as you know, but perhaps not all who post here, there are people out there in the field who do indeed study this stuff...and are very good at it.  For my part, I start breeding decent horses from the same stock that produced mediocre horses before I began using a couple of these people to suggest matings, based on......balanced conformation.

[TGJB]

Hopefully everyone realizes we are talking about 2-10 pounds ON TOP OF the 115 or so the horse is alreay carrying ON TOP OF its own 1,000. There is absolutely no sense to the idea that one horse or another will be \"better\" able to carry that 2-10 pounds out of 120 or 1120, depending on how you look at it, just as there is no sense to the idea that it will have no effect. The effect of the weight, as I have said here, is minor, when measuerd in terms of percentage of time running-- but not minor in terms of the outcome of races between evenly matched competitors.

AGAIN-- as I have said, what we use is an estimate. Yes, I think it\'s quite possible the effect on an 800 pound filly will be different from a 1200 pound colt. But only on a percentage basis-- not one can \"handle\" it, the other not.

[Rich Curtis]

Miff wrote: \"What JB and others cannot get their hands around(and avoid it like the plague) is that every horse is NOT of equal weight carrying ability. A formula that adjusts EVERY horse by one length per 5 lbs(distance aside) is assuming that ALL horses are of equal strength and are ALWAYS affected by precisely one length per 5 lbs of spot.\"

Miff wrote: \"There are people inside the game longer than you, and with far greater knowledge, that believe that a spot 5 pounds at 6f does not have the same affect as 5 lbs at 8f\"

Yep. You need to read the Thoro-Graph introduction because you do not understand how TG adjusts for weight.

[miff]

Good one Rich, but before you ever heard of Thorograph,I was buying NY TG sheets every day on 86th Street in Brooklyn. Quite familiar with TG adjustments although I can\'t write it chapter and verse.

Now, whats your opinion on anything about racing, guaranteed you don\'t have a clue. Let me dissect it,be a sport.

Mike

[Rich Curtis]

Miff,

You are confusing your nihilism with taking a stand.

I\'ve been defending fixed terrain: Race Shapes, sheets weight adjustment.

I don\'t fancy the chances that you will get my point, but there it is.

And now a non-racing opinion: \"I Wanna Marry You\" is Springsteen\'s most underrated song--a buried gem to end all gems.

[moosepalm]

OK, discussing weight has grown tedious, and points of agreement are obvious to most, but the assertion that Curtis has no opimions has to be the funniest comment I\'ve read here in the post-Chuckles era.  I went to law school with people who had fewer opinions than Curtis, which is no small feat, and in this game, I have never met anyone whose opinions are more carefully calibrated, and substantiated by fact and logic.  What is apparently the rub here is his ability to unmask opinions of others which are built on hearsay or other unsupported assertions.

[Funny Cide]

alm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is it ok if I jump in here?  I know this has gone
> on ad nauseum following your comment, Jerry, but
> apart from agreeing with you about carrying weight
> (it\'s a simple argument...elegant and
> accurate...that it has to make some difference)
> one aspect of the animal that has been left out of
> the conversation is conformational balance.
>
> A racehorse that is put together well, with great
> balance, can handle more of every stress of racing
> than one that is not perfect.  Weight carrying is
> one such stress (but there are many others.)
>
> I am going to guess one could examine Blind Luck
> and find that she is extraordinarily well put
> together and able to handle weight better as a
> result. However much it slows her down, it slows
> her competitors down more, because they are likely
> to make miniscule stride adjustments that are not
> natural to them.  The reason some milers and
> sprinters can become great sires of distance
> running horses is because they are able to
> transmit conformation and balance through their
> genes.  They may not transmit the internals, which
> can come from the mare anyway, but if they give a
> great skeletal configuration to a horse, they
> enable him or her to carry their game further than
> they otherwise might.
>
> A study of body weight to weight carried might be
> far less meaningful than a study of conformation
> to weight carried.  And as you know, but perhaps
> not all who post here, there are people out there
> in the field who do indeed study this stuff...and
> are very good at it.  For my part, I start
> breeding decent horses from the same stock that
> produced mediocre horses before I began using a
> couple of these people to suggest matings, based
> on......balanced conformation.

Good post, Alm, but I don\'t think anyone would say that BL is well put together.  Instead, most would say she\'s a rat (in looks only, not heart and talent).  Remember that she was bought for a pittance, and she would\'ve brought a very nice sum for her sire if she had outstanding conformation.

All this said, it\'s still possible that she possesses good weight carrying ability without being much to look at.

[HP]

Miff - this shows how difficult it is to design a scientific study, if nothing else.  There are very few absolutes, even in science.  

If the basic question is, what is the impact of weight, for me, if the TG database and observations gives it a number and says 5 pounds is a point, I can use that.  If it\'s a system you can use it as an internal adjustment within the system.  I don\'t see anything inherently wrong with that.  

Of course there are horses that do a better job of carrying weight...but if you need a rule of thumb this is pretty good.  There are SO MANY variables and this is just one of them.  I\'ve found it useful in my handicapping and I see some of the exact same potential flaws that you do in blindly applying it.  But until I see something better, I will use this when I look at the TGs.  It\'s not a BAD rule of thumb.  HP

[alm]

I do appreciate your comment, but it misses my point a bit...large or small may have less to do with weight carrying ability...conformation and balance may have more to do with it.  Small horses generally sell for less at sales, regardless of how they are put together.  If you are interested start reviewing Equix Biomechanics\' website and branch off from there for other material on this subject.  This is not the be-all and end-all of understanding horses, but it\'s a good piece of insight to have into just how the smallest piece of bad conformation can compromise a horse\'s stride.  This stuff won\'t help you make better bets, but it\'s interesting beyond that.