some perspective on upsets

[dilanesp]

One of my formative experiences in horse racing was one of the greatest upsets in the history of the sport. When i was a kid we all went out to the 1977 Swaps Stakes at Hollywood Park, where 70,000 people saw JO Tobin and Shoemaker crush Seattle Slew.

Over the course of time, I have heard many Seattle Slew fans cry about that race, saying it never should have happened.

But I love that it did. I got to see history. And as i got older, i appreciated it even more- Shoemaker's great ride, the fast fractions and time, and the intelligent bettors who bet Tobin down to 5 to 2.

This idea that what the sport needs is for AP to never lose is crazy. Upsets are built into the fabric of the sport. Even the word "upset" is a reference to the 1919 Sanford Stakes.

We love this sport because it has an element of unpredictability. Even with a top horse nothing is assured.

This was good, not bad for racing. Seattle Slew's first loss made a fan out of me. Somewhere in the Saratoga grandstand today was a little kid who was just given the memory of a lifetime.

[thaskalos]

The difference being that Seattle Slew was afforded the opportunity to atone for his loss...

[cj]

I'm not sure when things changed and losses were considered as being so terrible. It isn't a good thing for the sport.

[pandy]

I know, it's silly. They acted as if the horse got hurt in the race or something, gee whiz. He lost, big deal. He ran a game race. In my mind there's no question that the tiring track did him in, but I give Baffert and the owners credit for not ducking the race. The Travers was the appropriate spot for a horse who has won the Triple Crown. Hopefully they run him in the class, where he belongs.

I love a track that doesn't make it easy for front runners. I'll take Saratoga's surface over Santa Anita any day. The races are more exciting.

[Laminarman]

For the Spa I think it's a good thing. The allure of winning there is what draws people I think. My in-laws are in town tonight, they live 20 minutes from Spa and used to frequent the track all the time. They watched the race with us on TV. They were pulling hard for AP but my father in law said, "Damn, I wanted that horse to win, but that's why people come back here. It's like Lambeau Field, a win here is very special....and rare."

[EMD4ME]

[QUOTE=pandy He ran a game race. In my mind there's no question that the tiring track did him in

Was the track tiring in race 8, when 3YO F ran 123 around the track in 2243 4454 10817 12054?

How about race 9 when Private Zone jogged on the lead in 2267 4510 10853 12054???

Track obviously changed after race 7, souped up for AP to jog.

Race 7 3YO F GRADE 1 2310 4604 11017 12254
Race 8 3YO GRADE 1 2243 4454 10817 12054

2 full seconds difference....I know the boys were faster but by 2 seconds???

Ready for retirement and off form Untapable and a horse I despise, StopChargingMaria went:

2406 4772 on a much duller track.

AP ran a very very very good 3rd n 4th quarters BUT should have had a lot left in the tank after his first half....

[pandy]

It did seem as if the track changed. This is why making variants is so difficult. Because of the slow first quarter in the 7th, they may have added a lot more water in between races. Of course, this is a guess but they certainly do things like that on big days.

I wonder if CJ split his variant.

[Tom]

AP ran a very very very good 3rd n 4th quarters BUT should have had a lot left in the tank after his first half....

What would have been a fast first half?

[Tor Ekman]

One of my formative experiences in horse racing was one of the greatest upsets in the history of the sport. When i was a kid we all went out to the 1977 Swaps Stakes at Hollywood Park, where 70,000 people saw JO Tobin and Shoemaker crush Seattle Slew.

Over the course of time, I have heard many Seattle Slew fans cry about that race, saying it never should have happened.

But I love that it did. I got to see history. And as i got older, i appreciated it even more- Shoemaker's great ride, the fast fractions and time, and the intelligent bettors who bet Tobin down to 5 to 2.

This idea that what the sport needs is for AP to never lose is crazy. Upsets are built into the fabric of the sport. Even the word "upset" is a reference to the 1919 Sanford Stakes.

We love this sport because it has an element of unpredictability. Even with a top horse nothing is assured.

This was good, not bad for racing. Seattle Slew's first loss made a fan out of me. Somewhere in the Saratoga grandstand today was a little kid who was just given the memory of a lifetime.
+1 My sentiments, exactly :ThmbUp:

[outofthebox]

One of my formative experiences in horse racing was one of the greatest upsets in the history of the sport. When i was a kid we all went out to the 1977 Swaps Stakes at Hollywood Park, where 70,000 people saw JO Tobin and Shoemaker crush Seattle Slew.

Over the course of time, I have heard many Seattle Slew fans cry about that race, saying it never should have happened.

But I love that it did. I got to see history. And as i got older, i appreciated it even more- Shoemaker's great ride, the fast fractions and time, and the intelligent bettors who bet Tobin down to 5 to 2.

This idea that what the sport needs is for AP to never lose is crazy. Upsets are built into the fabric of the sport. Even the word "upset" is a reference to the 1919 Sanford Stakes.

We love this sport because it has an element of unpredictability. Even with a top horse nothing is assured.

This was good, not bad for racing. Seattle Slew's first loss made a fan out of me. Somewhere in the Saratoga grandstand today was a little kid who was just given the memory of a lifetime.I was there too as a 16 yo fan. As a fan of this great game i only wish they keep him in training and give the BC a run. As a fan of many sports and individual athletes, i can't say i always took their losses well, but the pure emotion of rising from defeat, made it that much more sweet when they did redeem themselves. Please team Zayat, don't give in just yet..Give him a chance for redemption in our biggest race of the year...

[EMD4ME]

What would have been a fast first half?

A fair first half would've been approximately 23 3/5 47 3/5.

A fast half would be anything tangibly below that.

He was not really attacked by Frosted until after 3/4. Frosted shadowed him from the half to the 3/4 and then hit his accelerator after 3/4 was run.

I saw 3 horses running up and down in place in the lane.

If AP would have had to clear a speed horse early AND THEN get hit by Frosted, I'd say OK, he was great in defeat. He literally JOGGED an opening quarter ON A STRAIGHTAWAY in 24.28, had a stress free 2nd quarter in 24.02.

Again, a ready for retirement Untapable and a horse I think has been dressed up for a dozen races, StopChargingMaria ran 24.06 47.72 111.51 ON A SLOWER SURFACE earlier in the card and they did it head and head from the bell.

Why am I the ONLY one who's sees this?

[AndyC]

One of my formative experiences in horse racing was one of the greatest upsets in the history of the sport. When i was a kid we all went out to the 1977 Swaps Stakes at Hollywood Park, where 70,000 people saw JO Tobin and Shoemaker crush Seattle Slew.

Over the course of time, I have heard many Seattle Slew fans cry about that race, saying it never should have happened.

But I love that it did. I got to see history. And as i got older, i appreciated it even more- Shoemaker's great ride, the fast fractions and time, and the intelligent bettors who bet Tobin down to 5 to 2.

This idea that what the sport needs is for AP to never lose is crazy. Upsets are built into the fabric of the sport. Even the word "upset" is a reference to the 1919 Sanford Stakes.

We love this sport because it has an element of unpredictability. Even with a top horse nothing is assured.

This was good, not bad for racing. Seattle Slew's first loss made a fan out of me. Somewhere in the Saratoga grandstand today was a little kid who was just given the memory of a lifetime.

The race brings back fond memories. Whether or not I was an intelligent bettor at the time, I backed J.O. Tobin with a substantial bet. In today's world that race never happens.

[MJC922]

Good post. There's a lot to be said for being valiant in defeat, to see a horse tested and see how they react. It's a measuring stick. Mike Ditka once said you can't be a great football team until you beat another great football team. The best test is to take on older horses. There's no point in throwing around the word great IMO until you beat older.

The Travers (like the Haskell) is a nice race but they come up light some years because it's for 3's. Look at a horse like Forty Niner, he took the Haskell and next out stole the Travers on a soft half. In the BC against older it's a whole different ballgame, stuck chasing swift horses from 5 or 6 lengths off, horses that don't back up until they're well past the quarter pole, and by that time a horse like Alysheba is coming to get you.

American Pharoah for me is potentially great. Potentially great 3yos come and go, Big Brown would be another. Great doesn't come into play for me until you go up against older horses at 4, nice to see a horse give up weight at some point too. Competition at 3 is suspect often enough that I find it hard to call any of them great, a great 3yo yes, an all-time great, no.

[ILovetheInner]

So true. With all this talk about how a TC winner will be good for the sport, etc., upset factors IMO start to flow the juices of many casual observers. Be it by starting to dissect and understand why a superior horse lost, or being an underdog person and aroused by the payoff of the unexpected. I remember Secretariat losing to Onion. I thought him losing the Wood was a downer. I thought him losing to Onion was exciting. I think that was true for a lot of people. And it made things more interesting from that point on.

[clocker7]

One of my formative experiences in horse racing was one of the greatest upsets in the history of the sport. When i was a kid we all went out to the 1977 Swaps Stakes at Hollywood Park, where 70,000 people saw JO Tobin and Shoemaker crush Seattle Slew.

Over the course of time, I have heard many Seattle Slew fans cry about that race, saying it never should have happened.

But I love that it did. I got to see history. And as i got older, i appreciated it even more- Shoemaker's great ride, the fast fractions and time, and the intelligent bettors who bet Tobin down to 5 to 2.

This idea that what the sport needs is for AP to never lose is crazy. Upsets are built into the fabric of the sport. Even the word "upset" is a reference to the 1919 Sanford Stakes.

We love this sport because it has an element of unpredictability. Even with a top horse nothing is assured.

This was good, not bad for racing. Seattle Slew's first loss made a fan out of me. Somewhere in the Saratoga grandstand today was a little kid who was just given the memory of a lifetime.

Why anyone would get jollies watching a champion colt be subjected to unreasonable treatment baffles me. I get it that an upset may have been a draw as a kid, but cmon. You have grown up since then and understand how great animals should be handled judiciously.

It isn't "crying" to cringe about shipping a champion colt across country only weeks after a very trying trio of TC races (his near-fateful KD, the speed duel Preakness, and the Belmont in deep mud). No, it is "decrying" the abuse of a wonderful gift, and putting it into conditions where it was impossible to shine.

[cj]

A fair first half would've been approximately 23 3/5 47 3/5.

A fast half would be anything tangibly below that.

He was not really attacked by Frosted until after 3/4. Frosted shadowed him from the half to the 3/4 and then hit his accelerator after 3/4 was run.

I saw 3 horses running up and down in place in the lane.

If AP would have had to clear a speed horse early AND THEN get hit by Frosted, I'd say OK, he was great in defeat. He literally JOGGED an opening quarter ON A STRAIGHTAWAY in 24.28, had a stress free 2nd quarter in 24.02.

Again, a ready for retirement Untapable and a horse I think has been dressed up for a dozen races, StopChargingMaria ran 24.06 47.72 111.51 ON A SLOWER SURFACE earlier in the card and they did it head and head from the bell.

Why am I the ONLY one who's sees this?

This slower surface stuff is nonsense.

[raybo]

This slower surface stuff is nonsense.

I agree, AP just didn't have his "A" game. Maybe it was all the shipping, maybe it was not having raced at Saratoga, whatever caused it I have no idea, but he didn't have his regular game Saturday. The fractions didn't cause it, the surface didn't cause it, he had a fairly easy first 1/2, but when Victor urged him when Frosted cam alongside, AP didn't have that extra gear he normally has.

[castaway01]

I'm not sure when things changed and losses were considered as being so terrible. It isn't a good thing for the sport.

Maybe when horses' campaigns/careers got shorter, so every loss is magnified that much more?

[cj]

Maybe when horses' campaigns/careers got shorter, so every loss is magnified that much more?

Probably so. I've always thought it is the wins that matter, not the losses. Nobody cares that the Super Bowl winner lost games along the way.

[pandy]

Probably so. I've always thought it is the wins that matter, not the losses. Nobody cares that the Super Bowl winner lost games along the way.

Totally agree. Kelso lost 24 times but he set 9 track records, won 5 horse of the year titles and had a legion of fans that few horses that ever lived can aspire to.

[dilanesp]

Why anyone would get jollies watching a champion colt be subjected to unreasonable treatment baffles me. I get it that an upset may have been a draw as a kid, but cmon. You have grown up since then and understand how great animals should be handled judiciously.

It isn't "crying" to cringe about shipping a champion colt across country only weeks after a very trying trio of TC races (his near-fateful KD, the speed duel Preakness, and the Belmont in deep mud). No, it is "decrying" the abuse of a wonderful gift, and putting it into conditions where it was impossible to shine.

You would have hated Ben Jones and Citation.

It isn't animal abuse to run a horse every few weeks. And if a horse never loses, that usually means he is being overprotected.

[pandy]

You would have hated Ben Jones and Citation.

It isn't animal abuse to run a horse every few weeks. And if a horse never loses, that usually means he is being overprotected.


Agree. Of course, Citation was a powerful and muscular horse, just going on photos I've seen, his body and his legs seemed stronger and thicker looking than most of today's horses. So there certainly is more to the story, the breeding, the drugs...but, even with the weaker horses we have today, they can certainly run more than they do. I wonder if any of the horses than ran in the Travers are going in the PA. Derby. I know if I owned any of those horses and they came out of the race in good shape, they'd be going for that race. There aren't many big races left on the schedule this year.

[OTM Al]

This idea that what the sport needs is for AP to never lose is crazy. Upsets are built into the fabric of the sport. Even the word "upset" is a reference to the 1919 Sanford Stakes.


Commonly held belief but not true. The word is known to have been used in this way since at least 1877. In fact the Washington Post writer reporting the race made a comment about how many puns would be written because of the name of the horse, thus confirming the common usage of the term.

[clocker7]

You would have hated Ben Jones and Citation.

It isn't animal abuse to run a horse every few weeks. And if a horse never loses, that usually means he is being overprotected.
I understand horse racing history going back into the early 1800s and realize that usage changed drastically over the years. And that Citation mostly overcame his over-usage ... but eventually paid the price.

My beef with the Slew ownership for sending him westward after an extremely taxing spring classic season has to do with their stupidity, and not cupidity. That colt didn't stand a prayer of competing fruitfully at Hollywood after having run his Belmont in deep mud. Not after his CD and Pimlico races, and because of the way they played out.

Although they never fully explained, I suspect that the Taylors weren't after the increased Swaps Stakes purse money per se, but rather pursued it as a vehicle to finance the trip to the Northwest for the charity exhibition at Longacres; and to show off their champion for the homefolks. (I had tickets for both exhibition days.) The trainer obviously had a more realistic view, along with a plan for the fall of '77. But he was cluelessly overruled, to the detriment of the horse and the sport.

[dilanesp]

I understand horse racing history going back into the early 1800s and realize that usage changed drastically over the years. And that Citation mostly overcame his over-usage ... but eventually paid the price.

My beef with the Slew ownership for sending him westward after an extremely taxing spring classic season has to do with their stupidity, and not cupidity. That colt didn't stand a prayer of competing fruitfully at Hollywood after having run his Belmont in deep mud. Not after his CD and Pimlico races, and because of the way they played out.

Although they never fully explained, I suspect that the Taylors weren't after the increased Swaps Stakes purse money per se, but rather pursued it as a vehicle to finance the trip to the Northwest for the charity exhibition at Longacres; and to show off their champion for the homefolks. (I had tickets for both exhibition days.) The trainer obviously had a more realistic view, along with a plan for the fall of '77. But he was cluelessly overruled, to the detriment of the horse and the sport.

Citation didn't "pay"- he won a million dollars in purses!

Which is better than an undefeated record.

[biggestal99]

You would have hated Ben Jones and Citation.

It isn't animal abuse to run a horse every few weeks. And if a horse never loses, that usually means he is being overprotected.

Or she. Zenyatta was overprotected, faced males only twice and never shipped oversseas

Compare that to ouija board, took on all comers in the UK, France (Arc), Japan, Hong Kong and the UAE, not to mention her yearly trip to the US, to dominate the turf mares here.

Yeah she lost some, but she won her fair share too.

Allan

[burnsy]

And if a horse never loses, that usually means he is being overprotected.



Unless its Native dancer. The "grey ghost" lost once in his career and it was the derby when he got mugged. If he had won that he probably would be the greatest 3yo horse ever. He still may be, taking the Preakness, the Belmont, The Dwyer, The Arlington Classic, The Travers and then the American Derby. That was after The Wood and Gotham. When he was 4 he took the Met Mile and ran again at Saratoga before retiring. People sort of overlook him because of the Triple Crown hype but he was as good a 3yo as any of them if not better. Losing is part of any game, the fans and the media make a big deal but its just reality. How great can any competitor be if they "duck" certain adversaries or conditions. I totally agree with you. What always irks me is the media and fans that think winning is a forgone conclusion. That happened with this horse (AP). "Will he see the whip?" and all the garbage....He saw it and like I said, if he feels it, he's in trouble.....and he was. If we knew who was going to win every time........What kind of sport is that? None, the only thing that works like that are rigged elections in third world countries. The only reason people watch is because the "champ" may lose....if it were a forgone conclusion.....no one would give a crap.......that sport would die. Even the "grey ghost" lost just once......no matter how good a horse, a person or a team is.....there's always someone else that's almost as good, that's what competition means....ducking it, is pretty much a form of cheating to pad that record. Upsets make the sport go round, not vice versa.

[pandy]

I think there have been some good points made on this thread about a horse's overall record and losses. Great horses lost races years ago because they raced in the toughest spots against the best horses and they raced often, they didn't stay in the barn.

With these modern day thoroughbreds, it's difficult to figure where they stand in history. American Pharoah is only going to race once against older horses. He's a great colt, but is he a great horse in the same vein as Forego, Kelso, Affirmed, Seattle Slew, John Henry, Seabiscuit, and all of these other horses that took on all comers, carried heavy weight, and performed admirably over a period of years? Those champions were battled worn and tested, over and over. They were toughened by hard fought races.

I don't see how you can rate a horse that will end his career with 11 starts in that elite category. For a horse with 11 starts, he would have to be breaking track records left and right to be put in that class. That's my opinion. These legendary horses didn't just race against three year olds a handful of times.

By today's lower standards, he's a great horse. By historic standards it's a different story. If he ran against the horses I mentioned, would he stand a chance? What would his true odds be in that field?

[EMD4ME]

This slower surface stuff is nonsense.

I could be terribly wrong but I see it that way.

My entire basis for that opinion is that I visibly saw a totally different track for races 8,9 and 11.

Races 7 and 8, run a half an hour apart, were 2 seconds apart. Yes, race 7 was for fillies with a different pace and the 8th for boys but they were both a G1 for 3YO's.

For Runhappy to receive a 113, that means Holy Boss, who received a 100 Beyer ran his near best race in defeat. Holy Boss was all in at the 5/8's, chased very hard 3W the entire far turn, tired and flattened out late. He even went back to the wrong lead after drifting out and in during the stretch drive.

Hard to believe he ran his near best race.

Private Zone jogged early, hence making his time really slower than what he could have run if he just ran a bit quicker early. He also was not all out in the lane. Hence, affecting someone's possible variant change. He could have run a 120 final time if pressed early and ran on late, a Beyer of 118 would have been awarded for a 120. He's a nice horse but a 118 Beyer????

If Runhappy validates with another 113 performance (if he runs his A race with a similar pace set up of course, not counting his next race if he bombs out in duel, I'm a fair guy)

And/Or

Limousine Liberal validates his 104B

And/Or

Holy Boss validates with a 107-110 (107-110 because if he can run a 100 while hung out and forced to chase aggressively too early, then he should improve to a 107 with a better trip)

THEN I'll believe that I was totally wrong in saying the track was souped up for races 8,9 and 11.

Horses were not running fast near the rail for races 2467.

In race 2 the leader was WAY off the rail and when he finally moved inside at the 1/8 pole, he slowed down visibly.

It is my contention that Shared Drama had a perfect set up in race 6, her 98B is at least legit, more than likely a 100-102B (Hard to make an accurate # as there were only 2 dirt routes.) If you project her out to 10F, she runs realistically a 202.30-202.40. .73-.83 slower than the Travers. 6-7 points lower than the Travers. I didn't see a Travers field that ran a 106B-110B. I saw horses going up and down in the lane.

For the Travers to come home in 26.49 and for Shared Drama to come home in 13.09 (project that out to 26.40 for a final quarter) tells me that the track was faster in Race 11 compared to Race 6 as well.

Respectfully, in my insane (as many insinuate here) opinion, the track was Faster and the rail became much better after race 7.

[pandy]

It did seem odd. I had watched the first five races and then we had to go to a relative's house for a birthday party. I watched the Travers at their house and I figured AP fell victim to the tiring track. But later when we came home I watched all of the races on my DVR and when I saw the fractions and times of the two sprints I was surprised. It's hard to call a track tiring with those fractions and times.

[Fager Fan]

END, you may be interested in this post made over in the Thorograph forum:

In 43 years of wrestling with the Spa I've never seen anything like today. I was in the backyard for the first 4 races before going up to my seats, so I don't know what when on before then. After races 4-8 the track was watered very heavy with 2 trucks covering all the running ground. Nothing after race 9, before the Travers ONLY one truck came out and soaked the inside paths, no 2nd truck covering the outer ground. It was barely 80 today and no humidity and more water went on to that track than any day it was 90 with high humidity.

The Ellis Shipper and Private Zone benefitted from it and I have to assume that AP was meant to?

[EMD4ME]

END, you may be interested in this post made over in the Thorograph forum:

In 43 years of wrestling with the Spa I've never seen anything like today. I was in the backyard for the first 4 races before going up to my seats, so I don't know what when on before then. After races 4-8 the track was watered very heavy with 2 trucks covering all the running ground. Nothing after race 9, before the Travers ONLY one truck came out and soaked the inside paths, no 2nd truck covering the outer ground. It was barely 80 today and no humidity and more water went on to that track than any day it was 90 with high humidity.

The Ellis Shipper and Private Zone benefitted from it and I have to assume that AP was meant to?

OF COURSE HE WAS. Once he drew PP 2, to me, it was evident that the outside bias would be gone.

NYRA was thankful he showed up, they catered to him and he still LOST.

The track changing made it all the more sweeter as he went down.

[Stillriledup]

OF COURSE HE WAS. Once he drew PP 2, to me, it was evident that the outside bias would be gone.

NYRA was thankful he showed up, they catered to him and he still LOST.

The track changing made it all the more sweeter as he went down.

I guess the 64 dollar question is this. If AP wins, do people linger longer, purchase more expensive adult beverages and possibly purchase more food and souvenirs?

With an AP win, the vibe in the place would have been a happier one, and happy people spend more money.

Am I right?

[EMD4ME]

I guess the 64 dollar question is this. If AP wins, do people linger longer, purchase more expensive adult beverages and possibly purchase more food and souvenirs?

With an AP win, the vibe in the place would have been a happier one, and happy people spend more money.

Am I right?

Yes, I would agree wholeheartedly. I loved The 2004 Belmont but as soon as Birdstone Surges Past, Birdstone wins the Belmont Stakes, Smarty Jones was valiant but vanquished....was said by the legendary Tom Durkin, that place was like a morgue....

[classhandicapper]

The Ellis Shipper and Private Zone benefitted from it and I have to assume that AP was meant to? [/I]

Both the Ellis shipper and Private Zone spent most of the backstretch wide and off the rail on the turn. They didn't come to the rail until the stretch drive and even then weren't hugging the rail as horses often do on the turn where biases are typically felt the most.

[EMD4ME]

Both the Ellis shipper and Private Zone spent most of the backstretch wide and off the rail on the turn. They didn't come to the rail until the stretch drive and even then weren't hugging the rail as horses often do on the turn where biases are typically felt the most.

Runhappy was 7 wide on the backstretch, moved down to 2w late backstretch and was on the rail for the last 1/2 mile.

Private Zone is a bit of a different case. He was tons the best, jogged early and late. Rode the rail from the 1/4. If he truly ran, he would've ran a 120 7F time in my eyes. The quicker track and rail wasn't evidenced in his race as he was just galloping around as the lone speed.

Does anyone here believe Runhappy is better than Private Zone? Runhappy ran appreciably faster than Private Zone (Hence the rhetorical question) Of course not, so it gives credence to my thought that Private Zone's race was not a true indication of the BETTER rail race 8 on AND that the track was quicker Race 8 on.

[cj]

The Personal Ensign went in 1:49.05, or about a 113 raw Beyer rating. The Travers went in 2:01.57, or about a 120 raw rating. So Beyer kept the track speed the same since the Beyers are 8 points apart.

Is your argument based on using Beyer figures and then you turn around and say Beyer got this one wrong? That doesn't make a lot of sense. You either believe in the figures or your don't. Can't have it both ways.

I personally think the Runhappy race is the only one that can be questioned. The Private Zone race and the Travers fit perfectly with the earlier races on the card in my opinion. Runhappy has been winning his races in a canter previously, and the runner up was running for what, the third time? You think those horses weren't eligible to jump up big time?

[pandy]

You have to admit, :23, :46, 1:10, 1:22 in the Ballerina, a closer wins the race, then the very next race a three year old goes wire to wire :44, 1:08, 1:20.2. It's hard to believe that the track speed was the same. I watched both races again just now on my Plasma TV and the track actually looks darker in color for the King's Bishop. There certainly is a good chance that they felt that the track was too dull after the Ballerina and watered it heavily, and water can make a huge difference. Runhappy's performance surprised me. Not because he won, but the fractions and time seemed fast for a track that has been pretty tiring most of the meet. Runhappy ran faster and more impressively than Private Zone, who is probably the fastest sprinter in North America. It looked like they watered after the Ballerina, the track was lightning fast for the King's Bishop and then drying out and not as quick for each subsequent race thereafter.

It's stuff like this that drives figure-makers crazy.

[RXB]

You have to admit, :23, :46, 1:10, 1:22 in the Ballerina, a closer wins the race, then the very next race a three year old goes wire to wire :44, 1:08, 1:20.2. It's hard to believe that the track speed was the same. I watched both races again just now on my Plasma TV and the track actually looks darker in color for the King's Bishop. There certainly is a good chance that they felt that the track was too dull after the Ballerina and watered it heavily, and water can make a huge difference. Runhappy's performance surprised me. Not because he won, but the fractions and time seemed fast for a track that has been pretty tiring most of the meet.

I agree. I was able to watch through R7 on Saturday and I thought that the dirt track was favouring off-pace runners. Then I checked the R8 and R9 results last night and suddenly there were two merry-go-round races despite noticeably faster fractions. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not.

[cj]

You have to admit, :23, :46, 1:10, 1:22 in the Ballerina, a closer wins the race, then the very next race a three year old goes wire to wire :44, 1:08, 1:20.2. It's hard to believe that the track speed was the same. I watched both races again just now on my Plasma TV and the track actually looks darker in color for the King's Bishop. There certainly is a good chance that they felt that the track was too dull after the Ballerina and watered it heavily, and water can make a huge difference. Runhappy's performance surprised me. Not because he won, but the fractions and time seemed fast for a track that has been pretty tiring most of the meet.

I agree, it is a tough call. The outside of the track before the Travers looked almost sloppy, so obviously there was lots of work being done by maintenance unless there was a rainstorm nobody witnessed. It just goes to show how tough figure making can be sometimes.

A few other things...that was not a good group in the Ballerina. It was a G1 in name only. Of course Linda Rice scratched and made it even weaker, but that is a different story. A slow time can't be entirely credited to the track.

My point was that if you are going to use Beyer figures as the crux of your argument like they are gospel, how can you then turn around and say they are wrong this time?

My feeling is that I'm very leery of the high figure I assigned Runhappy. I'll be watching that one closely. The other races all lined up quite well on my numbers. Maybe they overdid it for that one race on the maintenance side. If you really believe the track got significantly faster and stayed that way, it is really tough to explain the times of the Personal Ensign and the Travers in relation to each other.

[pandy]

I agree. I was able to watch through R7 on Saturday and I thought that the dirt track was favouring off-pace runners. Then I checked the R8 and R9 results last night and suddenly there were two merry-go-round races despite noticeably faster fractions. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not.


Same with me, I was watching the races then we had to go to a family get together, I watched the Travers there and figured the dull track hurt AP. Then I got home and watched the replays of the races I mixed and the track looked completely different.

[pandy]

I agree, it is a tough call. The outside of the track before the Travers looked almost sloppy, so obviously there was lots of work being done by maintenance unless there was a rainstorm nobody witnessed. It just goes to show how tough figure making can be sometimes.

A few other things...that was not a good group in the Ballerina. It was a G1 in name only. Of course Linda Rice scratched and made it even weaker, but that is a different story. A slow time can't be entirely credited to the track.

My point was that if you are going to use Beyer figures as the crux of your argument like they are gospel, how can you then turn around and say they are wrong this time?

My feeling is that I'm very leery of the high figure I assigned Runhappy. I'll be watching that one closely. The other races all lined up quite well on my numbers. Maybe they overdid it for that one race on the maintenance side. If you really believe the track got significantly faster and stayed that way, it is really tough to explain the times of the Personal Ensign and the Travers in relation to each other.


I think that makes sense.

Runhappy might be a bet-against next time out.

You know....the more I think about it, the track had to faster, maybe much faster, for the Kings Bishop than the other races. Either that or Runhappy is the next Seattle Slew. This horse shipped in off a wire to wire win at Ellis Park, which might be the most speed biased track in the country. Stepping up from NW2 at Ellis to a GR1 over a Saratoga track that has been unkind to speed most of the meet and this colt runs faster at every point than Private Zone, a very fast horse who has close to 3 million in earnings.

[dilanesp]

Or she. Zenyatta was overprotected, faced males only twice and never shipped oversseas

Compare that to ouija board, took on all comers in the UK, France (Arc), Japan, Hong Kong and the UAE, not to mention her yearly trip to the US, to dominate the turf mares here.

Yeah she lost some, but she won her fair share too.

Allan

Yep, Zenyatta ran way too many races against crappy California distaffers. (Another point of comparison would be Dahlia.)

Having said that, Personal Ensign was more overprotected still- 4 races a year, only 3 in her life against any decent competition, no Breeders' Cup Classic.

[cj]

Yep, Zenyatta ran way too many races against crappy California distaffers. (Another point of comparison would be Dahlia.)

Having said that, Personal Ensign was more overprotected still- 4 races a year, only 3 in her life against any decent competition, no Breeders' Cup Classic.


Well, to be fair she had screws put in her leg.

[dilanesp]

Well, to be fair she had screws put in her leg.

She was at the Breeders' Cup in 1988. Easily could have run against Alysheba and lost. Instead ran against Winning Colors whom she had already beaten, caught a bias in her favor, and still almost lost.

She was injured for one of the prior Breeders' Cups in California, but Shug flat ducked the other one.

[cj]

She was at the Breeders' Cup in 1988. Easily could have run against Alysheba and lost. Instead ran against Winning Colors whom she had already beaten, caught a bias in her favor, and still almost lost.

She was injured for one of the prior Breeders' Cups in California, but Shug flat ducked the other one.

Like I said, she had screws in her leg, can't blame them for an easier schedule. I don't personally consider her one of the all time greats or anything.

[cj]

Travers pace perspective:

http://www.horseracingnation.com/blogs/zatt/NBC_is_Wrong_American_Pharoah_did_not_have_it_easy _in_the_Travers_123#

[delayjf]

CJ,

Interesting - do you know what the Beyer for the race is? How did he come out in your ratings?

[cj]

CJ,

Interesting - do you know what the Beyer for the race is? How did he come out in your ratings?

I don't know on the Beyer. I'm sure it was a 10-something, that is the 3yo Beyer cap---except for Materiality.

For me:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=125567

[dilanesp]

Like I said, she had screws in her leg, can't blame them for an easier schedule. I don't personally consider her one of the all time greats or anything.

That's reasonable.

To be clear, it isn't that having a protected career is terrible. It's just that the all time greats were tested. A career like Affirmed's is far better than the Pharoah's, even though Affirmed lost several races.

[PaceAdvantage]

END, you may be interested in this post made over in the Thorograph forum:

In 43 years of wrestling with the Spa I've never seen anything like today. I was in the backyard for the first 4 races before going up to my seats, so I don't know what when on before then. After races 4-8 the track was watered very heavy with 2 trucks covering all the running ground. Nothing after race 9, before the Travers ONLY one truck came out and soaked the inside paths, no 2nd truck covering the outer ground. It was barely 80 today and no humidity and more water went on to that track than any day it was 90 with high humidity.

The Ellis Shipper and Private Zone benefitted from it and I have to assume that AP was meant to? Why would you put more water on a high humidity day?

[affirmedny]

Well, to be fair she had screws put in her leg.

She did win the Whitney over Gulch and Kings Swan, I wouldn't call that being overprotected.

[dilanesp]

She did win the Whitney over Gulch and Kings Swan, I wouldn't call that being overprotected.

King's Swan was a claimer and Gulch was best as a sprinter, and it was a 3 horse race.

That was the most meaningless win over colts by a filly in history. She ducked Alysheba (as well as Forty Niner, Brian's Time, Waquoit, and several others who would have crushed her).

[EMD4ME]

The Personal Ensign went in 1:49.05, or about a 113 raw Beyer rating. The Travers went in 2:01.57, or about a 120 raw rating. So Beyer kept the track speed the same since the Beyers are 8 points apart.

Is your argument based on using Beyer figures and then you turn around and say Beyer got this one wrong? That doesn't make a lot of sense. You either believe in the figures or your don't. Can't have it both ways.

I personally think the Runhappy race is the only one that can be questioned. The Private Zone race and the Travers fit perfectly with the earlier races on the card in my opinion. Runhappy has been winning his races in a canter previously, and the runner up was running for what, the third time? You think those horses weren't eligible to jump up big time?

Beyer is wrong a tremendous amount of time. You want another example? In tomorrow's third at the SPA, Runaway King is running in a decent 2 Yo Turf Stakes Field. He ran at Delaware on Aug 5th in a 7 1/2 Turf race and received a 54 Beyer Figure.

The figure is a mistake. Should be a 75B, a 21 point MISTAKE. To top it off the winner, had 5 lengths of trouble, so really the horse ran an 83 figure.

Thanks to his mistake, the horse is 15/1 ML in a field of 6. 3 speeds in the race and 3 closers. He will offer tremendous value in exactas, tris and sups in this race.

Why is the fig a mistake?

His race. race 4: 23 3 47 2 112 1303 (7 1/2 F) 54B

Race 2: 234 474 1114 1371 141 (1 70 yds) 71 B

Race 6: 24 481 1122 1381 142 (1 70 yds) 60B

If you project out Runaway King's time to 1M, he got his last 1/16 in about 6 1/5 (made up 1 L in the last 1/16, last 3/16 went in 18.52 and he made up 5 in that span, so he came home in about 17.52) he would have run his 1M in 136 4/5, 2 ticks faster than race 2 or a 75B.

Of course the Private Zone race fits with your variant, he jogged the whole way and produced a slower final time, which skews the ability to see the change in the track.

[pandy]

I found the third race tomorrow to be a very interesting race, especially for pace handicappers. The horse you mentioned also received low speed figures on Bris (72) and Timeform (69). There are two others in the race that ran very fast when they won their turf debuts, Site Read (90 Bris, 95 Timeform) and Monster Bea (84 Bris and 97 Timeform).

Site Read is the ML favorite. But another interesting horse is Unbridled Daddy. He ran comparatively slow race when he won stretching out on turf (79 Bris, 89 Timeform).

But when you look at the pace analysis, that's when it gets interesting. Site Read ran a fast race but rallied from far back off a blazing pace. Monster Bea set a pretty lively pace and fought back for a game win after being passed at the quarter pole. And Unbridled Daddy had to check while behind a slow pace, was last, came five wide and finished strongly to win.

It looks like Monster Bea, who they purchased for a bargain price of $2,000, was sold after the race and is now in the Casse barn.

I thought Monster Bea and Unbridled Daddy were both impressive. It looks like there's sufficient early speed in the race to set up Unbridled Daddy, which is my pick.

The race is interesting because the ML favorite ran very fast but that time was aided by the fractions. Unbridled Daddy didn't run that fast, but the final time was probably slowed down by the fractions. Monster Bea just looked damn good.

[EMD4ME]

I found the third race tomorrow to be a very interesting race, especially for pace handicappers. The horse you mentioned also received low speed figures on Bris (72) and Timeform (69). There are two others in the race that ran very fast when they won their turf debuts, Site Read (90 Bris, 95 Timeform) and Monster Bea (84 Bris and 97 Timeform).

Site Read is the ML favorite. But another interesting horse is Unbridled Daddy. He ran comparatively slow race when he won stretching out on turf (79 Bris, 89 Timeform).

But when you look at the pace analysis, that's when it gets interesting. Site Read ran a fast race but rallied from far back off a blazing pace. Monster Bea set a pretty lively pace and fought back for a game win after being passed at the quarter pole. And Unbridled Daddy had to check while behind a slow pace, was last, came five wide and finished strongly to win.

It looks like Monster Bea, who they purchased for a bargain price of $2,000, was sold after the race and is now in the Casse barn.

I thought Monster Bea and Unbridled Daddy were both impressive. It looks like there's sufficient early speed in the race to set up Unbridled Daddy, which is my pick.

The race is interesting because the ML favorite ran very fast but that time was aided by the fractions. Unbridled Daddy didn't run that fast, but the final time was probably slowed down by the fractions. Monster Bea just looked damn good.

My initial look had me excited as I hate the ML fave, Site Read. He looked good but all horses will look good when running into a collapse with an ultra perfect ride and trip. Toss from win spot.

I loved Unbridled Daddy and crushed him that day. Was not out quick but was bottled in rail traffic early. He had zero flow, no pace and overcame it all with a wicked late close 7 wide. His figures were effected by the slow pace of the race (which caused the slow overall time). Still LOVE this horse tomorrow.

3 Speeds in the race. Hate them all. The rail horse did not impress me. CONS: He was loose on the lead, was on the wrong lead and no one seemed to fire in that race to my eye. PROS: T Rice off is always a plus. The fact that the runner up's connections bought him privately is a plus but I don't like his race's time. Solid 1st quarter with progressively much slower remaining quarters. Almost like a speed pop type of run. That won't work in here with 2 other 2 speeds and 3 legit closers lined up. Even if he could rate and finish can he do that AND outkick the 3 closers? I personally don't think so. BUT, we'll find out as they are 2 year olds and can improve, show new traits quickly.

Runaway King was a throw out to me when I opened the PPs. I said to myself, why is he here? Then I dug and dug. The figure is 21 points off. He was off slow (many horses break slow and helps them in turf routes as seperation is created, if the pace is fast and a collapse ensues, it helps them etc.) but his "off slow" didn't help him. He ranged up early in the race, hit some bad traffic, lost action on the far turn, I LOVE how he rerallied and came home with more to spare.

His Beyer of 54 is WRONG. He really ran a 75. Add 5 lengths of trouble and he ran an 84. Add expected improvement and he can run an 88 with the right trip.

Don't laugh but he should be 3/1 ML. Not 15/1 ML.

[pandy]

I ended up making Unbridled Daddy my Best Bet tomorrow. It's a good race,should be entertaining.

[EMD4ME]

I ended up making Unbridled Daddy my Best Bet tomorrow. It's a good race,should be entertaining.

I would agree, he is a great bet (in terms of possibility of winning) and should be a respectable price.

I will be boxing him and the Del sneaky play in weighted exotics.

[bcgreg]

Travers pace perspective:

http://www.horseracingnation.com/blogs/zatt/NBC_is_Wrong_American_Pharoah_did_not_have_it_easy _in_the_Travers_123#

Thanks for posting this CJ. Well written perspective.

A very game effort is what I witnessed. Regardless of the "bias" or the "ride" or the "splits" or the "path", this jet-lagged horse ran his heart out!

AP may not get the chance to redeem himself, but there is NO doubt in my mind that he would make his presence known. Does he deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the greats of the sport? Maybe. Maybe not.

I will remember him for the rest of my life as a Triple Crown Winner, and as a horse that did a lot for a sport that sorely needs it's champions to cheer for. For me, he has done enough to call him; One of the Greats!

Regards,
bcgreg

[EMD4ME]

I could be terribly wrong but I see it that way.

My entire basis for that opinion is that I visibly saw a totally different track for races 8,9 and 11.

Races 7 and 8, run a half an hour apart, were 2 seconds apart. Yes, race 7 was for fillies with a different pace and the 8th for boys but they were both a G1 for 3YO's.

For Runhappy to receive a 113, that means Holy Boss, who received a 100 Beyer ran his near best race in defeat. Holy Boss was all in at the 5/8's, chased very hard 3W the entire far turn, tired and flattened out late. He even went back to the wrong lead after drifting out and in during the stretch drive.

Hard to believe he ran his near best race.

Private Zone jogged early, hence making his time really slower than what he could have run if he just ran a bit quicker early. He also was not all out in the lane. Hence, affecting someone's possible variant change. He could have run a 120 final time if pressed early and ran on late, a Beyer of 118 would have been awarded for a 120. He's a nice horse but a 118 Beyer????

If Runhappy validates with another 113 performance (if he runs his A race with a similar pace set up of course, not counting his next race if he bombs out in duel, I'm a fair guy)

And/Or

Limousine Liberal validates his 104B

And/Or

Holy Boss validates with a 107-110 (107-110 because if he can run a 100 while hung out and forced to chase aggressively too early, then he should improve to a 107 with a better trip)

THEN I'll believe that I was totally wrong in saying the track was souped up for races 8,9 and 11.

Horses were not running fast near the rail for races 2467.

In race 2 the leader was WAY off the rail and when he finally moved inside at the 1/8 pole, he slowed down visibly.

It is my contention that Shared Drama had a perfect set up in race 6, her 98B is at least legit, more than likely a 100-102B (Hard to make an accurate # as there were only 2 dirt routes.) If you project her out to 10F, she runs realistically a 202.30-202.40. .73-.83 slower than the Travers. 6-7 points lower than the Travers. I didn't see a Travers field that ran a 106B-110B. I saw horses going up and down in the lane.

For the Travers to come home in 26.49 and for Shared Drama to come home in 13.09 (project that out to 26.40 for a final quarter) tells me that the track was faster in Race 11 compared to Race 6 as well.

Respectfully, in my insane (as many insinuate here) opinion, the track was Faster and the rail became much better after race 7.

The above post caused many views back and forth......

Here we are 7 weeks later.....



It's been my belief ever since that Aug 28th card at the SPA ended that the track was quickened (specifically the inside paths) AFTER race 7.

The key race to disect in the aftermath is Race 8 (for many reasons, if you ask I'll explain why-too much to say right now).

Many horses have run back. Here are their Beyers that were given for the 8/28/15 race (again, I think the fig is ridiculously TOO HIGH) and what they earned next out.

Runhappy 113 104
Limousine Liberal 104 93
Holy Boss 100 92
Watershed 98 89
Grand Bili 97 88
Mr. Z 95 86


Not one of the top 7 came within 7 Beyer Points of their assigned figure on 8/28/15.

It is my contention, that the Travers also received an erroneously high Beyer as the track was vastly faster for races 8 on.....

Many people arguing with me feverishly, think that I am nuts.

After looking at the run backs from race 8, I am more concrete in my belief that the track was souped up from race 8 on and yes race 11 was over valued as well.

Yes, Frosted came back with a 106 in his next start. That's a start to proving my thesis wrong but it's just 1 race and a race where he had a dream trip against cream puffs. It is my contention that he didn't earn a 102 in the Travers and that he earned more like a 97-98.

Yes, you can say both AP and Frosted suffered from their latter part of the race duel but their loss in defeat is not as good as it looks. Which to me, makes Keen Ice's winning fig not so hot either. Yes, AP can come back and run a 106 or 108 as Frosted did but only against creampuffs in an ideal situation.

Not going to happen in the BCC.