Slop Figs??

[Lost Cause]

I almost always discount slop figs in races as being too fast, there might be another correlation but I\'ve just seen plenty of times where horses come back and don\'t run close to the same fig after a sloppy track win. Does anyone notice this also or am I just seeing something that isn\'t there .  I\'m trying to get a handle on Orb\'s pair up in the slop, as in was it truly a pair up or did a lot of horses not run their race which inflated his derby number..

[Silver Charm]

Orb handled the Track and ran HUGE. Most of the top 5 or 6 were logical. One wasnt. I would say this is fairly typical.

[Lost Cause]

Lost Cause Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I almost always discount slop figs in races as
> being too fast, there might be another correlation
> but I\'ve just seen plenty of times where horses
> come back and don\'t run close to the same fig
> after a sloppy track win. Does anyone notice this
> also or am I just seeing something that isn\'t
> there .  I\'m trying to get a handle on Orb\'s pair
> up in the slop, as in was it truly a pair up or
> did a lot of horses not run their race which
> inflated his derby number..

I just want to bring this back up..I played the race based on the above ..I pretty much treated the KY slop race in which Orb was set up pacewise as the middle of an 0-2-X pattern and played for him to X out yesterday.  I still lost which goes to show that even though you can beat the main one in a race you still have to get by the others in the race too...

JB not knocking the numbers at all because I do not do any discounting of fast track or turf/poly numbers just strictly slop especially pace setup slop races but are your numbers affected by the other horses in a slop race that do not perform and do you see a higher percentage of having to go back and re-look at numbers for slop races as opposed to other races?

[bellsbendboy]

You mention the word slop repeatedly and i wonder if you consider wet fast, good, muddy etc. all the same.

Each condition is quite different and horses who relish mud may not care for a sloppy surface at all.   Tracks are also different with many speeding up when they get moisture and others becoming dead, whether it has been floated or not.

Nowadays with the advent of computer \'capping most lump these together. It is their error.

bbb

[Lost Cause]

bellsbendboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You mention the word slop repeatedly and i wonder
> if you consider wet fast, good, muddy etc. all the
> same.
>
> Each condition is quite different and horses who
> relish mud may not care for a sloppy surface at
> all.   Tracks are also different with many
> speeding up when they get moisture and others
> becoming dead, whether it has been floated or not.
>
>
> Nowadays with the advent of computer \'capping most
> lump these together. It is their error.
>

Agree there is a difference between the track conditions but very hard, at least for me, to keep track of if a track has been drying out to turn muddy or good or if it was desgnated that in between the transition from fast to sloppy..
I usually treat the muddy and good as drying out and harrowed and treat the wet fast/sloppy as raining and most likely sealed but it is very hard to know for certain unless you are keeping track which I no longer have the time to do.  That was for pace handicapping the race, as in he got loose on a sloppy track and rolled or he closed strong on a muddy track because the speed probably tired...As far as figures I pretty much discount/look really hard at any wet number. Like I said there could be another correlation which is why I asked the question originally but I have seen it multiple times myself.