BC racing

[Fairmount1]

I\'m not even going to wait until the end of the BC to say it.

This event was run clean.  I\'m 100% convinced.  No doubts whatsoever.  

Others thoughts?

Euro\'s crushing the cup just one of many clues to suggest this to me.

Edit Post:  I want to add I believe this is a very good thing.  Now it just needs to happen all the time in all jurisdictions.

[TreadHead]

Are you suggesting there is a difference between the level of \"clean\" this year vs last year?  The Euros didn\'t run a step last year under similar circumstances.

[Fairmount1]

I don\'t know that I was comparing last year to this year necessarily.  I hadn\'t considered such a comparison in making my statement.  I\'ll think about that some more.  I feel like a comprehensive look at many, many factors can lead to such a conclusion.  Immediately, I can say that one example of why I thought last year was run clean:  trainers Wilkes and Ritvo run 1-2 in Classic.

Edit post:  Tread, the Euro\'s weren\'t horrible last year.  Flotilla, George Vancouver, and an Argentina horse, Calidoscopio won.

[richiebee]

Fairmount:

I will agree with your \"clean\" assessment.

The track bias guys might quibble with the \"fairness\" of the two day event,
but as horseplayers we are charged with the task of identifying a track bias
and wagering accordingly.

I do not mind if the BC will continue to be run at SA. Horses which raced or
trained in California enjoyed quite an advantage in the main track races --
Blueskiesnrainbows big effort in the Marathon, Goldencents in the Dirt Mile,
Beholder\'s dominant effort in the Distaff (easy to dominate when the
competition no-shows), the DQ\'d She\'s A Tiger in the Juvie Fillies, New Years
Day in the Juvie, Secret Circle in the Sprint, and to an extent Mucho Macho,
who spent two months in Arcadia prepping for his big win in the Classic.

This is not a provincial Richiebee complaining that East Coast horses were
disadvantaged; I have always played the \"horse for course\" and \"acclimation\"
angles and the success of California based horses is not at all surprising.
Also note in this vein that some of the non California horses who ran their
races -- Wise Dan, Groupie Doll, Will Take Charge -- are Midwest based.

Congrats to Covel, owner of one the only NY based horses who ran their race
over the weekend.

What of Todd Pletcher and Chad Brown, the two trainers who dominate the top
class racing from New York to Florida month to month and year to year? Do they
enjoy some advantage on the East Coast which does not travel well to
California and increased BC scrutiny? Do East Coast trainers need to follow
Kathy Ritvo\'s lead and send their BC contenders to SA for the month/six weeks
leading up to the BC for prep races and acclimation?

From what I can tell from my seat in Living Room Downs, Santa Anita seems like
a beautiful venue for the BC, with good weather guaranteed and force majeures
such as forest fire and earthquake only rarely a factor. There is a lot of
silly California s--t going on, and indeed Bo Derek\'s face seems frozen in
time, but it would be best for Racing if the event visits other venues on a
regular basis.

[Rick B.]

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The track bias guys might quibble with the
> \"fairness\" of the two day event,
> but as horseplayers we are charged with the task
> of identifying a track bias and wagering accordingly.

I agree with the idea that it our job as horseplayers
to identify and deal with track bias; I\'ve said the
exact same thing about our beloved \"Supertrainers\":
don\'t complain about who is using, figure who and
when, cash in when they do, and toss \'em when the
testing is tight.

I feel like I made all the necessary adjustments
this weekend, and I did well at the windows.

That said, if I am an owner or trainer of a top dirt
horse NOT based in Southern California, I would *never*
ship into a BC run at Santa Anita. Ever.

That track played pretty fair for almost the entire
month of October...then it\'s a paved concrete superhighway
for the BC?

That\'s bullshit.

[miff]

\"That track played pretty fair for almost the entire
month of October...then it\'s a paved concrete superhighway
for the BC?

That\'s bullshit\"

Hi Rick,

The talking heads may have gotten to you. Of 6 dirt races on BC Saturday, 5 went to closers, 1 to the Dq\'d wire job.

Friday was surely a speed biased \"paved concrete superhighway\" as you noted.

Mike

[Topcat]

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fairmount:
>
> I will agree with your \"clean\" assessment.
>
> The track bias guys might quibble with the
> \"fairness\" of the two day event,
> but as horseplayers we are charged with the task
> of identifying a track bias
> and wagering accordingly.
>
> I do not mind if the BC will continue to be run at
> SA. Horses which raced or
> trained in California enjoyed quite an advantage
> in the main track races --
> Blueskiesnrainbows big effort in the Marathon,
> Goldencents in the Dirt Mile,
> Beholder\'s dominant effort in the Distaff (easy to
> dominate when the
> competition no-shows), the DQ\'d She\'s A Tiger in
> the Juvie Fillies, New Years
> Day in the Juvie, Secret Circle in the Sprint, and
> to an extent Mucho Macho,
> who spent two months in Arcadia prepping for his
> big win in the Classic.
>
> This is not a provincial Richiebee complaining
> that East Coast horses were
> disadvantaged; I have always played the \"horse for
> course\" and \"acclimation\"
> angles and the success of California based horses
> is not at all surprising.
> Also note in this vein that some of the non
> California horses who ran their
> races -- Wise Dan, Groupie Doll, Will Take Charge
> -- are Midwest based.
>
> Congrats to Covel, owner of one the only NY based
> horses who ran their race
> over the weekend.
>
> What of Todd Pletcher and Chad Brown, the two
> trainers who dominate the top
> class racing from New York to Florida month to
> month and year to year? Do they
> enjoy some advantage on the East Coast which does
> not travel well to
> California and increased BC scrutiny? Do East
> Coast trainers need to follow
> Kathy Ritvo\'s lead and send their BC contenders to
> SA for the month/six weeks
> leading up to the BC for prep races and
> acclimation?
>
> From what I can tell from my seat in Living Room
> Downs, Santa Anita seems like
> a beautiful venue for the BC, with good weather
> guaranteed and force majeures
> such as forest fire and earthquake only rarely a
> factor. There is a lot of
> silly California s--t going on, and indeed Bo
> Derek\'s face seems frozen in
> time, but it would be best for Racing if the event
> visits other venues on a
> regular basis.


 What could be REALLY shaky is if Cali BC form begins to swing Eclipse votes based on distorted BC/SA results over trick tracks . . . especially as laid down on the dirt, Friday.   Beholder should NOT be voted champion of her division, based on the Distaff.

[Rick B.]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Rick,
>
> The talking heads may have gotten to you. Of 6
> dirt races on BC Saturday, 5 went to closers, 1 to
> the Dq\'d wire job.

Hi Mike,

To my way of thinking, all that changed on Saturday
was that now all the jocks knew the track was playing
super fast, and several went on suicide missions in
the dirt races, leading to the pace collapses you noted.
Look at the ridiculous early splits in those races; the
final times in a few races were eye-popping.

An overwhelming speed bias doesn\'t mean you can just
send \'em faster and faster, and get away with it;
sooner or later, physical limitations and unbalanced
energy distribution starts kicking in.

Rick

[FrankD.]

A little birdie said quite a bit of work was done on the track after Friday\'s races!

[P-Dub]

Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> miff Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hi Rick,
> >
> > The talking heads may have gotten to you. Of 6
> > dirt races on BC Saturday, 5 went to closers, 1
> to
> > the Dq\'d wire job.
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> To my way of thinking, all that changed on
> Saturday
> was that now all the jocks knew the track was
> playing
> super fast, and several went on suicide missions
> in
> the dirt races, leading to the pace collapses you
> noted.
> Look at the ridiculous early splits in those
> races; the
> final times in a few races were eye-popping.
>
> An overwhelming speed bias doesn\'t mean you can
> just
> send \'em faster and faster, and get away with it;
> sooner or later, physical limitations and
> unbalanced
> energy distribution starts kicking in.
>
> Rick

Rick,
It didn\'t take them a whole day to figure that out. Goldencents set insane fractions too, and nobody closed into him.

Speed horses run as fast as they can early. I don\'t think you can send one of these horses extra fast, that\'s what they do.

Friday was a prominent bias, can\'t say the same about Saturday. If Gentleman\'s Bet runs on Friday, he might have lasted. We\'ll never know, but I think the track played fairer yesterday.

As for east based horses, many don\'t fire, but Havana ran a good race. Groupie Doll won. Will Take Charge fired. Local horses will always have an advantage. That\'s racing. Sometimes the Super Bowl is in a dome on a fast track, sometimes it\'s on grass. I don\'t think the NO Saints will refuse to play in it if it\'s outside on grass, even thought they play much better inside.

Agree it should be moved around a bit more, it shouldn\'t be out here 3 years in a row.

[BitPlayer]

Rick B -

Have you seen the Cal v. non-Cal stats from the analysis?

[miff]

Funny,all the yelping about the dirt surface. BC employed the guru of surfaces, Dr.Mick Peterson, to oversee BC surface for safety/fairness.

Would love to know what Dr. Peterson thought.JB,you bump into him out there?

Mike

[kekomi]

i agree that the BC was run cleanly, or at least more cleanly than the majority of races the rest of the year.

i don\'t think that pletcher and baffert\'s poor showings were due to home track advantage or shipping.

how does home track advantage or shipping hold up with declaration of war or bgame on dude?

several of thier super-star horses didn\'t just lose, they were completely different horses in their races--like princess of sylmar, palace malice, and game on dude.

with the exception of havana, did either trainer hot the board with any horses other than their second stringers? second stringers are less likely to be routinely doped--just like in cycling.

i\'ve loved game on dude for a long time, but i\'ve come to the conclusion he\'s regularly doped. when doping protocols are strict, he\'s not the same horse.

the ramsey\'s also weren\'t the unbeatable monsters they\'ve been all year...but point of entry ran a respectable 4th after having been sidelined for most of the year with an injury, and he lost to some pretty quality horses.

none of the JCGC horses ran a lick in the classic. that race should probably be completely discounted. the only two horses in it to brake cleanly finished 1-2, but both the 2-3 horses in that race were non-factors in the classic.


one last thought--the 3 biggest horses in the classic were a in blanket finish at the wire, how much of an advantage at 10fs do good giant horses have?

i ended the weekend with just $2 in my wallet =)  but i have to say, losing money at the track is the most fun way to lose money in the world.

[Rick B.]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Funny,all the yelping about the dirt surface.

C\'mon, Mike: where else do mares run 22.19, 44.19...
and still finish 108.19, besides Turd Paradise?

(This was on Saturday, after they supposedly worked
on the track.)

Don\'t listen to me. When horses of national or world
significance refuse to ship into Santa Anita in the
future, please do enjoy the watered down \"California
on Speed\" Championship races. By then maybe they
will at least call them what they are.

[P-Dub]

Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> miff Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Funny,all the yelping about the dirt surface.
>
> C\'mon, Mike: where else do mares run 22.19,
> 44.19...
> and still finish 108.19, besides Turd Paradise?
>
> (This was on Saturday, after they supposedly
> worked
> on the track.)
>
> Don\'t listen to me. When horses of national or
> world
> significance refuse to ship into Santa Anita in
> the
> future, please do enjoy the watered down
> \"California
> on Speed\" Championship races. By then maybe they
> will at least call them what they are.


Nobody denies the track was ridiculous Friday.  Frank D noted that they worked on the track after the races.  The results of the races support that, as the track played much more fair on Saturday.

2nd race two horses came from off the pace to complete the exacta going 7 furlongs.
4th race dirt route, She\'s A Tiger attempted a wire job and the next 3 finishers all came from well off the pace.
6th race 7F fillies. 1/3/4 finishers again came from well off the pace.
8th race 1 1/16, the winner came from 7th at the 3/4 call.
10th race sprint, the exacta was made up of closers.  Yes the pace was wicked, but when is it not in this race??
12th race, more horses from off the pace hitting the board.

As for the race you mentioned about fillies going those fractions??  The 2 horses on the lead at those points of call were Teddy\'s Promise and Sweet Lulu. TP has gone 22/change - 44/change on more than one occasion.  SL went 22.28 and 44.95 at Saratoga, her lone sprint on a dirt surface. Why wouldn\'t you expect them to carve out fractions like those you mentioned??  

Most horses have distinct running styles. The more horses with front speed entered in a race, the hotter the pace.

Was the surface glib on Saturday?? Yes. The difference between the 2 days is that running styles weren\'t compromised on Saturday. How is that a problem?

Your comment about connections skipping future BC at Santa Anita is pure hyperbole. \"California On Speed\" championships??  Seriously, after one off the pace horse after another were winning races and filling out the exotics??

It will never happen. Its a nice thought for people complaining about Santa Anita hosting the event too often, which is a valid point. It may be a nice way to vent about the surface. Everything else is nonsense.  

I saw a horse prepped at Belmont win the Juvenile albeit via DQ, a horse prepped in Kentucky finish second in the same race.

2 Euros complete the exacta in the F&M turf and the show horse prep at Kee and Belmont.

F&M sprint won by a horse prepped at Kee and Pid, place horse the same tracks, the show horse exclusively in NY.

The 2nd and 3rd place finishers in the Juvenile prepped exclusively in NY.

BC Turf first 2 finishers were European.

A California horse actually won a race, the sprint.  Not terribly shocking, as California sprinters do very well regardless of where the event is held. 2nd and 3rd prepped outside of California.

The Classic won by a horse prepped at SA, but before that race had run plenty on the East Coast.  The place horse came from Europe, and the show horse ran several times in NY (not to mention Prx, and was prepped for the TC at Oaklawn Park).
 
Judging by the horses who hit the board on Saturday, you are way off base. I wouldn\'t put too much on a future wager that horses of \"national or world significance\" will start skipping future BC held on the West Coast.

Judging by the horses that hit the board, how on earth can you suggest that horses not based in California were compromised??