I find the complaints about GP speed bias yesterday interesting

[covelj70]

I posted this on Twitter and got a fair amount of pushback

The two fastest horses in the Fountain of Youth on the TGs ran 1/2 like they should have. Top Billing and Commissioner weren\'t in the same zip code at wildcat red and Arod so why was it the bias that produced the result and not the faster horses?

Pletchers 2 that won the 6th and 9th were the logical choices given the tg figs and patterns and Normandy invasion came from off the pace in the 5th.

I just don\'t see any results on the day that didn\'t make perfect sense to me

I didn\'t bet all of the winners because I don\'t bet short prices so not red boarding at all. I\'m just trying to figure out why so many are trying to discredit wildcat red and Arod and upgrade the performance of top billing?

Top billing had a great ground saving trip and a wicked pace to close into. He just got beat by better horses, not a bias

We won\'t get a better trip in the derby than he got in that race, I will bet on that for sure.

Everything will change as the distances stretch out but I thought the best horses won the race on Saturday and I\'m surprised they aren\'t getting more credit.

[TMW]

Whenever multiple horses on a single race day stretch out and go wire-to-wire -- no matter what their odds are, bias comments will be made. I happen to subscribe to a bias as the times were too fast including a track record by a horse coming off of a long layoff.

Closers like MexiKoma (running against what I perceive was a bias) were impressive to me (as were the winners).

[TreadHead]

I\'m with ya Jim, simply amazed by the group-think regarding bias.  The horses that were last and 2nd last in the FOY closed to be 3rd and 4th, while being slower on paper.  I\'m not sure what more you could want to indicate a fair track.

The 4 dirt races before that were won by very logical favorites, most of them odds on.

I\'m the first person to latch on to a bias and try to go with the flow in hopes of cashing a bet, but to me bias exists when horses that shouldn\'t be winning on paper suddenly are.  That\'s when you start looking.

[jimbo66]

Jim

I think it was pretty clear when reviewing all the dirt races that the track was extremely kind to speed.  

That said, the kudos to top billing are crapola IMO.  Rosario gave him a beautiful ground saving trip from that post and he was out closed sort of by the bomb who came 4th.   Top billing ran mediocre at best.

I do think a couple other horses running against the bias are worth following back.  The Clemente horse that chased constitution likely was out of his element chasing early and he still ran well late considering the chase.   I also think Mexicoma ran well late in that race.  The pace was slow and controlled on that track and he still ran on well.  As opposed to top billing who got a vicious and contested pace to run into.

The jerkins horse who chased in the Davons dale ran very well too.  Solis scrubbed on her for almost a mile and she never quit.  That Pletcher winner was clearly bias aided and very mediocre in victory. Would not be afraid to take a shot at her next time at underlaid odds.

I think the fact that the pace was contested and quick in the fountain of youth means u can\'t discredit the top 2.   Although as far as going forward can\'t say I would like either horse going any further distance. Wildcat red looks and is bred to be a sprinter. General A Rod is bred to go further but I can\'t help but feel like if he was a true 1 1/4 horse he is supposed to go by wild cat red.  I don\'t think I can forgive him for that. Maybe 1 1/8 in the Florida derby is within his grasp but he also got run over late by conquest Titan at Churchill fairly easily and I don\'t think that horse is a true contender.  Just not feeling general a rod will run better as the distances get longer.

But the good news is that u can safely scratch off every horse that ran at the fairgrounds this weekend.  An awful performance by the colts.

Starting to think Cairo prince went up in stature this weekend by not racing.

Jim

[belmont3]

Jimbo,

The \"bomb\" who finished 4th had a TG 4 in his first start as a 3yo. That 4 slightly exceeded his 3yo top of 5 which had a TU notation attached to it.

Reacted to a 7 1/2 on the synthetic and returned to the dirt with decent timing.  

Top Billing, on the other hand, had paired 5 3/4\'s coming into the FOY. A nice pattern for sure but still slower that 2 of 3 East Hall\'s races.

So why wouldn\'t one expect East Hall to sort of \"outfinish\" Top Billing?  Other than the poor post, somewhat of a no name jock and low profile connections and huge odds......??...he appeared capable of running faster than TB.

The FOY fact is that the 2 fastest TG numbers ran 1st and 2nd with the fastest sheet number winning. Both at decent odds.  

Sometimes what seems complicated is actually pretty simple.

[covelj70]

Tread,

You said what I took 6 twitter posts and a wordy tg post to say absolutely perfectly and in about 10 percent of the words

Bias exists when horses that shouldn\'t be winning win and than didn\'t happen


My English professor from college would be impressed by you and embarrassed by me (again)

Jimbo,

Pretty much agree with everything you said

General arod was off a bit of a layoff and chasing a faster horse playing that ones game but for sure the 1 1/4 is in question.

Thanks everyone for the thoughts

[Topcat]

jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jim
>
> I think it was pretty clear when reviewing all the
> dirt races that the track was extremely kind to
> speed.  
>
> That said, the kudos to top billing are crapola
> IMO.  Rosario gave him a beautiful ground saving
> trip from that post and he was out closed sort of
> by the bomb who came 4th.   Top billing ran
> mediocre at best.
>
> I do think a couple other horses running against
> the bias are worth following back.  The Clemente
> horse that chased constitution likely was out of
> his element chasing early and he still ran well
> late considering the chase.   I also think
> Mexicoma ran well late in that race.  The pace was
> slow and controlled on that track and he still ran
> on well.  As opposed to top billing who got a
> vicious and contested pace to run into.
>
> The jerkins horse who chased in the Davons dale
> ran very well too.  Solis scrubbed on her for
> almost a mile and she never quit.  That Pletcher
> winner was clearly bias aided and very mediocre in
> victory. Would not be afraid to take a shot at her
> next time at underlaid odds.
>
> I think the fact that the pace was contested and
> quick in the fountain of youth means u can\'t
> discredit the top 2.   Although as far as going
> forward can\'t say I would like either horse going
> any further distance. Wildcat red looks and is
> bred to be a sprinter. General A Rod is bred to go
> further but I can\'t help but feel like if he was a
> true 1 1/4 horse he is supposed to go by wild cat
> red.  I don\'t think I can forgive him for that.
> Maybe 1 1/8 in the Florida derby is within his
> grasp but he also got run over late by conquest
> Titan at Churchill fairly easily and I don\'t think
> that horse is a true contender.  Just not feeling
> general a rod will run better as the distances get
> longer.
>
> But the good news is that u can safely scratch off
> every horse that ran at the fairgrounds this
> weekend.  An awful performance by the colts.
>
> Starting to think Cairo prince went up in stature
> this weekend by not racing.
>
> Jim


Rail was a pretty good place to be.   Made a pretty good move on the Chief in the Davona against God-and-country himself (even WITH Solis, which says a lot, in my mind) . . . but Mr. Untouchable was hogging the rail.   On a fair track, I win.

[BitPlayer]

Jimbo -

Two points:

The Risen Star time was only half a length slower (at roughly equal weights) than the handicap horses ran in the Mineshaft that followed it.

It\'s only February.

[jimbo66]

Bit

I would make a different comparison than the Handicap race after the Risen Star.  That race was slow.  Won by a horse that the ROTW said was too slow.

The filly race earlier in the card was better than the Risen Star.  never a good sign, unless Untapable is the next Rachel Alexander, which I seriously doubt...

And February is almost over.  Time to start making a short list, or at least a \"medium list\"....

Jim

[covelj70]

Bit,

I hear you that it\'s only February but most of the horses that ran on Saturday will only have 1 more race before the Derby so if they haven\'t run fast enough or close to fast enough yet, I think it\'s agressive to look at them as a legitimate Derby contender.

As is discussed often on this board every year around Derby time, very few horses run a new top in the Derby so it\'s tough to play a horse in the Derby to have to run a new top to win.  And so if you haven\'t run at least a 2 or so already and you only have one more start left, you are either looking for a horse to make a big jump in the final race and not bounce in the Derby or run a new top in the Derby, both of which are unlikely (though obviously both have been done before so not impossible)

Obviously each year is different and \"rules\" are broken all the time but it\'s getting pretty late in the game for horses that haven\'t run a good number yet so I am with Jimbo in that it\'s ok to start making some \"medium\" lists if not \"short lists\" of those with a real shot at this point.

[BitPlayer]

Jim -

I don\'t disagree with what you\'ve said, but I\'m guessing Intense Holiday ran about a 2.  The others would need major improvement.

Jimbo -

I think the fairer comparison with the filly race is with the fillies who finished 9 lengths in arrears of Untapable.  (As someone has said once or twice on this board, \"You have to look at all the horses.\") Those fillies should have been running a TG 5 or 6 and would have been 7 lengths or so behind the Risen Star winner.

Both -

It\'s been said before, but I really enjoy the contributions you guys make to this board.

[louisvilleguy1111]

covelj70 Wrote:

> \"Bias exists when horses that shouldn\'t be winning
> win and than didn\'t happen\"


I totally disagree with this statement. A bias can be present on a track even when the horses that should be winning are winning.

Even a horse that is suppose to win a race can be aided by a track bias and make that effort look better then it in fact is or was. Just saying not trying to butt heads or make waves I always enjoy reading these forums and listening to peoples opinions. Thanks

[covelj70]

I get your point but how can we know there is a bias if the fastest horses/horses with the best patterns are winning the races?

3rd was about where Top Billing was projected to finish, a bunch of lengths behind the top 2, that\'s what happened.  I just don\'t see how we can read a bias into that.

The one race on the card where the best horse was a stalker/closer, the stalker/closer won (i.e. Normandy Invasion).

Otherwise, the horse that was the most obvious on the TGs won every race.

So could there have been a bias?  Sure, what the heck do I know, my point and what I thought Tread articulated alot more eloquently than I did was that you can\'t call for a bias when the horse that was supposed to win every race won every race, including one of the closers.

this has been a fun discussion, I enjoy these kind of threads alot

[TGJB]

The right way to look at this is to look at what figures horses ran, not where they finish.

Tell you what, Castellano knows where the rail is. Smart rider.

[covelj70]

JB,

I actually don\'t think that\'s right.

If I believed in a bias on Saturday, which I don\'t, then I would believe that , in the fountain of youth, Wildcat Red and Arod got faster figures than they should on a \"neutral\" track.  To the extent you base the numbers for the others on the figures of the top two, then the entire race could be upgraded by the \"speed bias\" (which I don\'t believe in).