Breeders Cup

[TGJB]

Now that the smoke has cleared... not a single comment about the numbers?

[Tavasco]

Looking at the BC Turf Mile - virtually all the horses regressed from their tops except Za Approval. Most entries significantly. I would have expected more of the entries (pointing to this race) to have paired or nearly pair tops

This phenomena reminds me of a notion I developed watching the races. The pace handicapper concept that if a horse cannot get its desired position within its speed or pace capabilities it will not run its race. The quick overall pace of the races apparently compromised many.

So what are the physics of the BC speed bias? Usually I think of a speed bias as one horse running on a narrow paved road with the closers trying to pass by running on the unpaved shoulder of the road.

Was Pace or Physical Surface a meaningful factor. Why?

[TGJB]

The Mile was the only race I seriously considered doing differently (2 points faster). As a stand alone it was a coin toss, using the grass races from that and surrounding days it fit better the way I did it. I will be reviewing it down the line. In the other races the issues were at the half point level, or less.

[miff]

Friday was speed biased, Sat featured 1 wire only. Jocks sending hard on Sat led to favorable dynamics for stalkers/off the pace types.Can be argued track slowed down later in the card both days(Sat more so)

Mostly vanilla performances imo, Wise Dan not supposed to win but just too superior to that field.A few ugly trips, dynamically speaking, led to a couple of slower final figs but strong performances.

Beyer and TG figs highly reflective of performances imo,for the most part.RAGS converted slower in several races, not uncommon when converting/comparing Beyer/TG/RAGS.

[TGJB]

The track clearly got slower as the day went on, both days. Ragozin has serious sprint/route issues in California (Goldencents going back 3 and winning, Beholder not getting back to her 2yo top), and of course they\'re on record as saying the track doesn\'t change speeds during the card (hence having the entire Juvenile field running lousy including the winner, who they had going BACK two points off his maiden win. Which is ridiculous to anyone with a brain).

Re the \"bias\", I would like to see someone break down running styles by figures they ran using the top/pair/off/x analysis we use, as opposed to whether they won, which can simply be a function of saving ground on the lead. I have no opinion either way pending that.

[covelj70]

JB,

As you and I had previously discussed, I think you had ZA Approvals previous race too slow. Would it make the bc mile \"fit\" better if he had run 2 points faster in the last race at Belmont?

The horse set a stakes record in that race giving a bunch of weight to most of the field and he gave up some ground. A \"0\" never made any sense to me for that effort.

[phil23]

Beholder going backward is, to be polite, insane. Not comparing to the surrounding races on the card, but just using the trakus charts and assuming either the 2nd or the 3rd paired their tops, I thought B might have even run a couple of points faster.

The Juvi is interesting, or should I say, all the hype coming out of it. Even the trainer of the winner seems to be almost disregarding his other horse...who paired a very fast fig on very very short rest. Damside is all route and there\'s certainly not anything wrong with the sire to go long.

[phil23]

Just looking over his chart a bit more, you know he reminds me of just a bit. A certain Smooth Jazz colt who, if not for getting sick 2 wks before the derby, might have given the big equine steroid a run for his money. He paired his fast fall 2yo top as well.

[TGJB]

Ragozin (or somebody) didn\'t have Beholder going back, they had her not getting back to her 2yo top (or close to it). They did have Goldencents (3 1/2 points) and the Juvy winner (2) going back.

[TGJB]

Za wasn\'t the problem with the 10/12 race, he was getting a new top either way. And he\'s only a small part of the picture with the Mile. Grass courses don\'t change speed like dirt ones do, if you break a race out you better have a damn good reason, like \"S.Pace\"-- and they went 44 2/5 to the half. Hard to give them better than the time.

Having said that I\'ll keep an eye on the 10/12 race too. So far two aside from Za have come back-- Plainview went back 1/2 point from the 10/12 figure, Paris Vegas paired it exactly.

[covelj70]

Btw, for anyone on twitter, you should definitely follow Phil. His tweets are great, great combination of funny and informative.

I would have thrown a few \"awesomes\" in there to describe his tweets but then grumpy JB would have gotten made at me!

[TGJB]

I didn\'t get mad at you, and if you had to write the BC seminar you would be grumpier than I was.

I actually think your posts are awesome.

[Deadrockstar]

What\'s his Twitter handle?

And congrats on the BC, BTW

[MO]

Only surprise for me was the figure Beholder got. In a race that contentious, I could not imagine her winning the way she did, let alone getting back to her top which she hadn\'t run in a year......How does Mandella do it??

[Rick B.]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now that the smoke has cleared... not a single
> comment about the numbers?

I\'m wondering if you have had time to assess your
play in the BC Contest.

I try to do a \"look back\" after each contest, to
see how I could have used TG better; sometimes,
the horses just didn\'t run as I expected, and other
times, I have flat out missed things that would
have put me on more winners.

Any insights for us contest fanatics?