Raw Times and Smarty

[cj]

Anyone else tired of reading about how slow Smarty's races are? What a joke! This guy is fast. He ran a better speed figure than top G1 older horses in May of his 3yo year. That is very special. It does not happen often.

As for raw times, anyone remember Monarchos? I'll refresh your memory. Second fastest winning time in Kentucky Derby history. Did this make him a great horse? Hardly! They run as fast as the track superintendent wants them too. The CD supe took much flack over the strip that day. It will be a while before we see a track that fast again, and when we do, it will be despite the maintenance, not because of it.

[BillW]

Every year we have a below average crop of 3 YO's. Guess they changed the definition of average. :rolleyes:

[WINMANWIN]

Excellent point C. J. and also GREAT Analogy ! :)

[alysheba88]

Have honestly not read one single column or opinion saying Smarty's races were "too slow". Not one

[Turf2Dirt]

Originally posted by alysheba88
Have honestly not read one single column or opinion saying Smarty's races were "too slow". Not one

Is this the only forum you visit?

If not, you've miraclously avoided the flood of idiots that say this on a daily basis.

[alysheba88]

No this is not the only forum. Again never read it anywhere., certainly not from a media member. I think sometimes people thnk the worst and "create" an opinion to argue against.

I also think that people interpret things funny. Where if someone picked a horse other than Smarty Jones for the Derby that somehow they "hate" Smarty Jones

[cj]

I have read this on several different forums, including about.com and thorograph of all places. I'm not sure why you think I would make this up, check them out for yourself.

[alysheba88]

cj, I am not saying you are making anything up. Just saying I havent read anything about it.

I do think that some (not saying you) are annointing SJ as being Secretariat and when people point out the discrepancy in speed figures between the two that somehow this means they "hate" Smarty Jones.

[BIG HIT]

CJ jim said he think's smarty will lose why he didn't say as those that subscribe to his pick's will be the only one's privy to that.
As for smarty compared to big red he i think lost his mdn debut.?
smarty didn't personally think big red was best of all time but if smarty win belmont by 40 length's to me he get's the top billing as you know big red won by 31.Which showed just how dominnet he was as nobody else ever won by such a hugh margin.

[cj]

You really can't compare speed figures among the older horses, because none were publically available back in the 70s. Raw times is pure folly. Basically, it is impossible to accurately compare horses of different eras. I have to search my Quirin books, I know in there somewhere he gave figures of some of the great horses. But, they wouldn't have the recent horses. One other thing, like it or not, is that speed figures don't really compare across different eras anyway. The main reason is that they are based on how other members of the generation run. If the base group of horses used (say 10,000 claimers = 80) were actually getting faster over time, you'd never see it in the figures. Way too deep to get into now, but think about it.

Was Babe Ruth's 60 home runs better than Barry Bond's 73? I mean, when Babe did it, noone else hit more than 20 or so. But 73 is more by 13. But Babe did it against better quality pitching in less games, etc, etc, etc. You can always find an argument to make the case on either side of these debates. I'll just enjoy it for what it is, watching a great horse, and save the debates for when he is finished.

BIG HIT,

Yes, Sec lost his debut, was DQed once at 2, and lost the Wood Memorial to Angle Light and Sham. He later lost two other times to Onion and Prove Out. Personally, I think Seattle Slew was the better horse, but there is no way to ever really know.

[Valuist]

I remember after the 2001 Derby, a guy who I work with who follows sports a lot, but knows nothing about horse racing, asked me if Monarchos was really the 2nd "best" Derby winner ever. I almost fell over laughing. I tried to explain that raw times mean nothing; its all about the surface and track depth. I don't think he believed me. He knew what he heard on ESPN. I don't think Monarchos EVER won another race.

[delayjf]

.I think Seattle Slew was the better horse, but there is no way to ever really know.

CJ,

Beyer would disagree with you here, I believe he stated that Big red regularly ran figures in the 120 range while SS ran in the 115 range.

Perhaps some of the sheet players can give us some additional perspective as well, or pehaps some players who have been making figures for that long.

Comparing SJ to Sec, I believe some have pointed out that the final fractions in their respective Preaknesses were compatible.
BUT keep in mind the tremendous move Sec made around the first turn PRIOR to his final fractions. Don't know if the "Pimlico Bias" was in affect or not, if so, Sec's Preakness was all the more impressive.

[fmazur]

BUT keep in mind the tremendous move Sec made around the first turn PRIOR to his final fractions. Don't know if the "Pimlico Bias" was in affect or not, if so, Sec's Preakness was all the more impressive.


In the Sec. race the 1/2 was run in 48 1/5, so Sec. made his move into a slow 1/4.

In the Preakness with Smarty Jones the 1/2 was in 47 1/5 on a dead track with Smarty just off the pace.

How about the move Smarty made from the 3/4's to the mile?

He was 1 length of the lead at the 3/4's and exploded to a 5 length lead by the mile and continued to gain another 6 1/2 lengths from the mile to the finish.

Which move was more impressive? Sec. or S.J. or did you miss the S.J. move?

We can't compare Beyers or Figs as they were not around back in Sec's day, but the DRF speed rating plus varient was. For their races in the Preakness, Sec. ran a 111 and S.J. ran a 113, so for the only figure available, it looks like S.J. was best, at least in the Preakness.

Sec. got a 118 in the Belmount.

[cj]

Total DRF SR + TV for Triple Crown Winners:


Secretariat 342
War Admiral 325
Citation 322
Affirmed 320
Omaha 315
Count Fleet 313
Gallant Fox 306
Whirlaway 306
Seattle Slew 305
Sir Barton 304
Assault 288


Smarty so far, 213.

[trp]

Originally posted by fmazur
We can't compare Beyers or Figs as they were not around back in Sec's day, but the DRF speed rating plus varient was. For their races in the Preakness, Sec. ran a 111 and S.J. ran a 113, so for the only figure available, it looks like S.J. was best, at least in the Preakness.

If you use Secretariat's unofficial, but seemingly more likely to be correct, time of 1:53 2/5, his speed rating would jump to 103, while the track variant might drop a point to 12, for a total of 115 in the Preakness.

In addition, speed ratings were based on track records in 1973 and on best 3-year time now. I believe the calculation of the track variant is also a little different now.

[cj]

Yes, they now split sprints and routes, they did not do that back then.

[fmazur]

Originally posted by trp
__________________________________________________
In addition, speed ratings were based on track records in 1973 and on best 3-year time now. I believe the calculation of the track variant is also a little different now. [/B]
__________________________________________________

While the speed rating/varient are figuered differently, they still are the closest thing for comparing times. Another thing to consider; in Sec's day the track cushions were mostly clay with a 3 1/2 inch cussion, whereas today most tracks have more sand than clay and a 4 1/2 inch cushion.

This is (IMO) the reason that new track records are hard to come by. It is of course safer for the horse.

[fmazur]

Originally posted by cjmilkowski
Total DRF SR + TV for Triple Crown Winners:


Secretariat 342
War Admiral 325
Citation 322
Affirmed 320
Omaha 315
Count Fleet 313
Gallant Fox 306
Whirlaway 306
Seattle Slew 305
Sir Barton 304
Assault 288


Smarty so far, 213.
__________________________________________________ _

I think Smarty was shorted in his KD race by at least ten points in the variant. Smarty ran the following speed rate/variant starting with his 1st race--106-115-112-115-116-108-100-113. If the KD race was accurate, it would mean that this was the worst race and by a big margine in his career. I just can't buy that. I would put Smarty at 223 to 225 for his two TC races

[cj]

That's the thing with DRF ratings though, there is nothing to debate really. They are made by a formula, no intervention from humans, period. They aren't very good, but in this case, as you say, they are all we have.

[playintheponies]

delayjf wrote:

BUT keep in mind the tremendous move Sec made around the first turn PRIOR to his final fractions. Don't know if the "Pimlico Bias" was in affect or not, if so, Sec's Preakness was all the more impressive.


playintheponies replies:

I am local here at PIM. The first turn is not banked well. Any horse that goes wide on the first turn is deep manure. Secretariat is the ONLY horse in modern times to go wide on the first turn in the Preakness and go on to win.

[delayjf]

Which makes Sec's last to first move even more spectacular.

[fmazur]

I have to disagree with just how impressive the move by Sec. in the Preakness was. I cut my teeth on harness racing and this occurres all the time. Harness horses go a fast 1st quarter to gain position followed by a slow 2nd quarter. Often a harness horse would make his move into this slow 2nd quarter giving the illusion of a fast move. It just isn't so.

Sec. in his Preakness had only five horses to pass, The 2nd quarter was run in 25 seconds. Sec. probably ran the second 1/4 in 24 seconds while the others ran in 25 seconds.

I don't think a 24 second 1/4 mile is all that impressive.

I was much more impressed with the way Sec. ran his Belmont as he drew away from the field after attending fast early fractions.

[trp]

Originally posted by fmazur
I have to disagree with just how impressive the move by Sec. in the Preakness was. I cut my teeth on harness racing and this occurres all the time. Harness horses go a fast 1st quarter to gain position followed by a slow 2nd quarter. Often a harness horse would make his move into this slow 2nd quarter giving the illusion of a fast move. It just isn't so.

Sec. in his Preakness had only five horses to pass, The 2nd quarter was run in 25 seconds. Sec. probably ran the second 1/4 in 24 seconds while the others ran in 25 seconds.

I don't think a 24 second 1/4 mile is all that impressive.

I was much more impressed with the way Sec. ran his Belmont as he drew away from the field after attending fast early fractions.
Using the fractions from the official chart for the Preakness, the 1/4 time was 24 2/5 and the 1/2 time was 48 1/5. That would make the 2nd quarter 23 4/5 seconds. Since Secretariat went from 4th, 5 1/2 lengths back at the 1/4, to 1st at the 1/2, he ran the 2nd quarter in about 22 4/5 seconds.

[fmazur]

I did not have the information as to the 1/4 time only the 1/2 time, but still this means that Sec. walked the 1st quarter in 25 2/5. A 22 4/5 quarter after that is not great. I see 10K claimers do 22 flat all the time and that after a 1st quarter in 22 and change.

Smarty in his 2nd race as a 2YO while going 7 furlongs recorded fractions of 21.4 and 44.1 and the comment on him was "broke slow"

[playintheponies]

you seem bent on showing that Secretariat's times were not all that great.

point 1. the 1st turn at PIM is not banked well and going wide is a recipe for disaster

point 2. analyze the internal fractions as you may, Secretariat's feats have stood the test of time. track records still stand from over 30 years ago. since then there have been major improvements in track surfaces, vetinary medicine, racing silks, etc. his final time in the Belmont was a world record and a track record that is still in place. i don't see anyone threatening to break that track record tomorrow. would not be surprised if it lasts another 30 years.

[thelyingthief]

to all our friends who consider smartyjones the equine realization of jesus christ, abraham, and the buddha.

RAW SPEED COMES FIRST.

believe what you will, but sj's times were lackluster and lethargic, let me repeat that, LETHARGIC, gentlemen.

hosannah to the christchild. alas.

[trp]

Originally posted by fmazur
I did not have the information as to the 1/4 time only the 1/2 time, but still this means that Sec. walked the 1st quarter in 25 2/5. A 22 4/5 quarter after that is not great. I see 10K claimers do 22 flat all the time and that after a 1st quarter in 22 and change.

Smarty in his 2nd race as a 2YO while going 7 furlongs recorded fractions of 21.4 and 44.1 and the comment on him was "broke slow"
Next time you see a 10K claimer run a race remotely like any one of Secretariat's Triple Crown races be sure and let us know.

Barring a disqualification, the winner of every race is the horse with the fastest final time, not the fastest horse at 1/4, 1/2, ...

Besides, Secretariat was not tied to front running. He could run remarkably in just about any style: front runner, presser, closer. Why should he be measured by how fast his early fractions were?

In Secretariat's Preakness, all parties agreed that the electric timer had malfunctioned. The only difference was in the estimated size of the error.

Originally, the 1/4 time was 25 seconds. When the track adjusted the final time down by 3/5 sec, the 1/4 time was also reduced by the same 3/5 sec. The other fractional times were then reduced accordingly. The theory was that the timer had started too early.

Since the DRF time seems more likely to be closer to the actual time than the official time, there's still 1 second to be adjusted somewhere in the fractional times. If the timer did start early, the time of the 1/4 might be another 1 second faster than the official time of 24 2/5.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by thelyingthief
to all our friends who consider smartyjones the equine realization of jesus christ, abraham, and the buddha.

RAW SPEED COMES FIRST.

believe what you will, but sj's times were lackluster and lethargic, let me repeat that, LETHARGIC, gentlemen.

hosannah to the christchild. alas.


How do you explain the fact that nobody beat Smarty until the Belmont? He's slow?

One last question. Did your "RAW SPEED" come up with Birdstone? I doubt it.

[alysheba88]

If Raw times are the be all and end all then I guess the finest racing in the country is at Turf Paradise. Of course I am sure everyone here knows that already. Best horses in the world run there.

[Valuist]

Raw times mean NOTHING. Maybe 10K claimers are running :44s at TuP but not at real racetracks. I guess guys like Davidowitz and Beyer, who've followed the MD circuit for years know nothing. Both say that Secretariat was the greatest horse of all time.

[JackS]

It has been pointed out that CLASS can have a lot to do with the way other less classy horses perform. Someone had pointed out that if a group of horses were turned out on a track and allowed to run without a jockey, the horses would line up in an exact pecking order and regardless of how slow the leader of this pack ran, no one would dare pass him. Couldn't this have been the case with Secritariat the classiest horse we may ever see in our lifetime? If true, any horse asked by the mere human jockey to ignore Secretariat and run past and in front of him, was asking the horse to ignore all natural instinct. There is probably something to this, and the fact that Secretariat was every beaten cannot every be fully explained. The horses that did actually beat him, no doubt had a very nice measure of class themselves and were willing to challange the pecking order.