Did Bode Bounce?

[JR]

I haven\'t seen the Rags numbers for the derby but they must have projected the same outcome because it doesn\'t sound like anybody over there hit the race either.

[miff]

JR,

Pre Derby,spoke to maybe 20 long time sheet readers,few more Rags than TG. All but one or two had Bode a toss on either 3 weeks spacing, big new top or both. That would be the conventional read for most sheet readers that I know.After the figs come out,you will also be told by those same sheet readers that Bode bounced in the Derby.

Powerful stuff that Kool Aid.


Mike

[JR]

I\'m guessing TG will also show a Bode bounce. Your reference to Kool Aid is throwing me off. Are you questioning the numbers or their interpretation?

[miff]

The numbers will be correct by the methodology but not reflective of the race, e.g. Creative Cause did not run faster than Bode... not even close!

[HP]

Mike - if you know better why do you post here?  If I knew as much as you do and could make my own figures I wouldn\'t bother.  What exactly is the point?  Do you want us to say, \"gee Mike you\'re right, we\'ve drank the Kool Aid.  We\'re wrong.  Thanks.\"  If so, okay, I agree with you.  Now what?  

Your superior knowledge should give you an edge that you wouldn\'t want to blunt by telling us the truth?  Your posts are sometimes interesting but I\'m mystified as to why you feel the need to go to such lengths to say you think the figures are wrong, or going to be wrong, or we don\'t know how to read or use them.  Can we buy YOUR figures instead?  

And as far as I can tell you are just another guy who lost, so what good is all of this?  I\'m sure you do well otherwise, but all this hoohah and at the end of the day you\'re tearing up your Derby tix just like me.  Please use all your conversions, etc. and let me know who to bet in the Preakness.  I\'d much prefer to read something forward looking.  

HP

[miff]

HP,

Someone posted \"Did Bode Bounce\" and many different opinions were advanced, my posts included

Your transparent support of the product is noted.Won\'t post on this anymore.

Good Luck


Mike

[HP]

MIFF - I don\'t transparently support the product.  I think you have some valuable points, but how can I USE what you\'re saying in a constructive way?  

Pointing out errors and coming up with a better way of doing this are two entirely different things.  

Like I said, you\'re right, now what?  Personally I\'m not going to run 2,000 or however many races through any conversion.  So the fact that YOU are doing this does ME...absolutely no good at all.  

Can you translate this into something constructive for the Preakness, when it gets a little more finalized?  If not the Preakness, ANY race at all where you can show us what you\'re doing and what conclusions you\'re drawing?  You\'d make more headway picking a race, showing us your thinking and specifically how it diverges from TG, and then tell us how you\'d play.  If you just did it once it shouldn\'t kill your profits too much?  That would help and that\'s all I\'m saying.  

If you\'re not drinking Kool Aid show me some orange juice or whatever.  

HP

[Silver Charm]

Miff that would be me!

And even if the Derby # does look like a \"Bounce\" I would be very surprised if his figure did\'nt also include

h_pace Unusally fast pace

I heard some # a few days again like a 3.25 for Bode which would technically be an X. This was not an X effort!!

The Figure Makers have their work cut out for them. Which might be why its taking so long to Post the Numbers. And please do not make this your last comment on the subject. You are to knowledgable.

[TGJB]

Mike-- I tried, but actually lost track of how many adjustments you would have to make-- not just in the figures coming into the race but in the figures they got IN the Derby-- for your thesis to have been \"confirmed\" correct, as you say.

One example-- Bode runs fast splits and gets a final figure (roughly) 4 points worse than his previous one, and you say that confirms the previous one should have been a point faster. Why not 4 points slower, or 4 points faster?

[miff]

JB

Not at all,it was stated that Bodes last fig was about 1 point faster, not 4 ,you I previously exchanged where you felt you could not make Bodes last faster without giving the rest of that field new tops.I completely understand your take but I stay closer to the adjusted  clock than you,hence the difference.

Re Bodes derby fig,I stand by my assessment that he did not bounce but dynamics caused his fig to be slower than his true performance. From what has been hinted I believe the figure you give him will be perfect but NOT representative of his performance on this occasion.That was my only point on the bounce question from the outset.Apologies to HP for posting.


Mike

[TGJB]

You need to read my post again re 1 vs.4 points.

We\'re giving the race an \"H pace\", and people can analyze Bode\'s performance themselves-- our figures only represent effort over the whole distance. But out of curiosity-- this horse ran a 52+ last half. I don\'t doubt he would have run a faster last half if he ran 2 seconds slower for the first half-- but a) what makes you so sure he would have run more than 2 seconds faster for that half, and b) if he had run the same 52 last half and got run over by a bunch of horses running 1\'s would you still be impressed, and c) is there ANY last half he could have run where you would NOT be impressed? I mean-- 52?? That impresses you, 53 would not?

By the way, I don\'t have a firm opinion one way or the other on the question of whether he would have run a better final figure. I suspect he might have run a little better if he had gone 47, but there\'s no way anyone can look at a horse who ran fast early then stopped to a crawl and say it DEFINITELY means he could have run faster otherwise, let alone confirming he ran faster than we gave him in an earlier race. And the question of what you do with this horse next time is complicated no matter what you do with his Derby-- whether you take his figure as true, give him credit for running better, or throw the figure out with an excuse, you still have to deal with a big top, another race, and coming into a third one, all in 5 weeks.

[justwin]

There may be a few others running for the 3rd time in 5 weeks and some for a 3rd time in 6 weeks but he is going to have 6 races in 5 months where others will be on their 4th race. I will be playing against him if he runs based on his expected low odds from all of the pro-Bode talk.

[miff]

JB,



Really don\'t what get into a pissing contest but on your point B, there is almost no chance imo that horses with 1s were running over Bode if he ran one second slower much less 2 seconds.Would love to bet on that if it were possible.You are completely ignoring the fourth fastest 6 f in derby history and ALL others at that pace were up the track, best finishing 10th.Track glib for sure but this horse smoked under flank pressure for like 7f.

Next time out etc who knows but he was on his belly Sat, never a good bet back short spaced ,regardless of figs.Think more damage done this race than if Bode ran slower early and won the race with a faster paired TG fig.

Mike

[alm]

Mike

To simplify things, I view the sheets methodology as consisting of two parts.  First there are the numbers.  The numbers science focuses on speed, the numbers art is in interpreting the relative values of external events: such as but not exclusively what happened in other races on a given day; what happened to change a racing surface during the day etc.  The second part of the methodology is the interpretation of a horse\'s pattern of races.  There is no science to that, rather there is an art.

To me, the strength of the method, particularly at TG, is in the latter part of this simplified equation.  I have learned a lot from this board and from the founder.  It has made me a far better informed participant in the sport.

However, as you have pointed out in relation to West Coast figures, the numbers can be questioned on occasion.  There are personal, non-scientific decisions lumped into them in order to make them work or fit across a large platform of data.  When these decisions are wrong, you end up with a number analysis that is wrong as was the analysis for this year\'s Derby.  It was really wrong....really, really wrong.

I don\'t question the pattern part of the analysis, since I believe the underlying numbers were skewed.  That falls into the category of garbage in, garbage out.

Frustrated I printed out the equibase pages for the Derby.  As someone pointed out the BRIS numbers that are used there are computer generated.  On this board that means they are flawed.  And in some respect they are flawed...but they are not meaningless.  If I had to trust in a baseline of information before I started handicapping, I might want to know that it follows a rigid path.  That allows me to interpret what it means; to make adjustments; to fit it into my analysis.

As I explained in an earlier post, the BRIS numbers showed very different progressions for the numbers, as opposed to the TG numbers, for horses like El Padrino, Gemologist, Creative CAuse, and the list goes on.  Even after adjusting the BRIS numbers for ground loss, which I did, some things stood out.  Except for Bode, IAH and Dullahan, every other horse in the race was too slow or in a regressing pattern.  It was obvious and palpable.  

I am not saying that you need to accept this as a new gospel, but if you just noodle the BRIS numbers, it will get you thinking.  A lot of people on this board think a lot, but a lot of them have drunk the Kool Aid and can\'t even imagine that something was flawed with the Derby.  If you read most of these posts it sounds something like: \"well most horses don\'t run well in the Derby and that explains why the TG selections ran badly.\"

This entire race was about two fast horses coming in from the West Coast and two others who had improving patterns, racing in the East.  They stood out, but not on the TG metric.  So now we should blame some cosmic force that slowed down the other 16 horses?  Excuse me, but that\'s just a lot of noise.  It\'s like the \'yada yada\' on the Seinfeld show.  A lot of talk about nothing.

It\'s been nice getting to know you, Mike, if only through a blog, but don\'t bother answering this post.  It\'s my last one.  God knows there are better things to do with my time.

Al

[TGJB]

Before this goes too far:

1-- Someone cashes after every race. Good bets lose, bad bets win, all the time. The test of figures and theories comes in the long run, not with the result of an individual race.

2-- The fastest horses-- ones with the fastest TG tops-- ran well. Several of them came from California. There\'s no basis for the idea that making those figures faster changes anything.

3-- BRIS and other speed figures do not take into account weight and ground loss, and will be different on that basis alone (aside from, as Michael said, being based on large-population figure making methods-- meaning averages--  which have nothing to do with serious figure making, by anyone, and haven\'t for a very long time, like 25 years).