Is Class Stamina?

[Capper Al]

If class is stamina then the first thing that pops into my mind is the stretch. How much juice does the horse have at the end of the race. But is this fair to a front runner that just hangs on by a nose to win at the end? Pace theory goes in depth discussing this. Early energy used is twice as asaperating as late energy. Yet doesn't common sense tell us that a horse gaining in a finish while winning at the same rate as a horse losing ground has more class then the early speed horse? How else might we look at this?

[thaskalos]

Whether a horse it tiring, or flying late, depends on what the horse was asked to do during the earlier parts of the race. It isn't a function of "class". If a horse contested the early pace...then it will tire late. And if another horse was reserved well off the early lead...then this horse will appear to be charging at the end. The vast majority of the closers are tiring too...albeit at a slower rate than the front runners around them.

To me..."class" is a fine balance between a horse's brilliance, and its consistency. IMO...the "classiest" horses are the ones who run big races consistently. It doesn't matter whether they fly early or late.

[Capper Al]

I do check consistency at what level a horse is doing well at. This too is a predictor of class. Stamina is the ability to hang in for what is asked.

[mickey_arnold]

If you believe there is an innate hierarchy in horses or other animals (that "look you in the eyes" superiority--so ease off, pal), how do you factor that into stamina or similar concepts?

Also, if a horse is capable of repelling multiple challenges for the lead or slightly lesser placements (position, lengths behind), is that not a measure of relative "stamina" or "class" or "gameness?".

I don't know...there is always that intangible element to these concepts and some pretty tangible ones ,too

[mickey_arnold]

Also, there is that idea of "seconditis", that some horses act in of races like they are fooling around and will let another consistently pass them.

Maybe that's an old-fashioned concept that says the horse has cognitive and behavioral abilities that manifest themselves regularly- regardless of their condition, inherent ability, racetrack, running surface quality, qualifying conditions for their.

Again, I just don't know if this make the existence of stamina a moot point.

[pandy]

If class is stamina then the first thing that pops into my mind is the stretch. How much juice does the horse have at the end of the race. But is this fair to a front runner that just hangs on by a nose to win at the end? Pace theory goes in depth discussing this. Early energy used is twice as asaperating as late energy. Yet doesn't common sense tell us that a horse gaining in a finish while winning at the same rate as a horse losing ground has more class then the early speed horse? How else might we look at this?


Basically, yes. Regardless of the fractions, the classier horses finish better against the pace of the race than their less classier rivals, and that's why they win the photos. But, you can't just look at late-pace ratings or fast final quarters and declare all fast finishers as "classy" horses. Obviously, a lot of horses can finish well when they go slow early. But the classy horses finish well even when they're used prior to the quarter pole.

One of the best explanations of this was found in harness handicapping books written by the late Steve Chaplin. These books, Bettor's Guide To Harness Racing and Advanced Harness Handicapping, were published in the 1970's. Chaplin wrote about comparing "stretch speed" to the energy used prior to the stretch.

My new thoroughbred book will delve into this in great detail, although there's more to it, as well.

[deelo]

I would also throw in that class includes a horse's ability to run on a variety of surfaces. We all know a horse could be classified as a dirt horse/turf horse/mudder/etc but I hold that cheaper horses actually have subsets...besides just being a dirt horse, some horses will actually only perform on harder dirt or softer sandier dirt. A classier dirt horse may hold his speed or stamina on dirt for example whether it's soft fast or hard fast.

[pandy]

I would also throw in that class includes a horse's ability to run on a variety of surfaces. We all know a horse could be classified as a dirt horse/turf horse/mudder/etc but I hold that cheaper horses actually have subsets...besides just being a dirt horse, some horses will actually only perform on harder dirt or softer sandier dirt. A classier dirt horse may hold his speed or stamina on dirt for example whether it's soft fast or hard fast.


I agree with that, and I also agree with Thaskakos assertion that classy horses are more consistent. That's why when evaluating horses, it's more reliable to use several pacelines rather than just one.

[Capper Al]

Basically, yes. Regardless of the fractions, the classier horses finish better against the pace of the race than their less classier rivals, and that's why they win the photos. But, you can't just look at late-pace ratings or fast final quarters and declare all fast finishers as "classy" horses. Obviously, a lot of horses can finish well when they go slow early. But the classy horses finish well even when they're used prior to the quarter pole.

One of the best explanations of this was found in harness handicapping books written by the late Steve Chaplin. These books, Bettor's Guide To Harness Racing and Advanced Harness Handicapping, were published in the 1970's. Chaplin wrote about comparing "stretch speed" to the energy used prior to the stretch.

My new thoroughbred book will delve into this in great detail, although there's more to it, as well.

What is the new book?

[pandy]

I think I'm going to call it, Power Pace, or something like that. I ran tests on my website, amazing results. I started writing it. With this method, you only bet on horses that are likely to have something left for the stretch run in this particular race, and, most of the time they'll be in good striking position, which is important. It will be the best book on Spot Play handicapping ever published.

[thaskalos]

I think I'm going to call it, Power Pace, or something like that. I ran tests on my website, amazing results. I started writing it. With this method, you only bet on horses that are likely to have something left for the stretch run in this particular race, and, most of the time they'll be in good striking position, which is important. It will be the best book on Spot Play handicapping ever published.

Be careful. I think Barry Burkin sold something with that name back in the 90s...and he might still hold the copyright to the title.

[deelo]

I think I'm going to call it, Power Pace, or something like that. I ran tests on my website, amazing results. I started writing it. With this method, you only bet on horses that are likely to have something left for the stretch run in this particular race, and, most of the time they'll be in good striking position, which is important. It will be the best book on Spot Play handicapping ever published.

^ I think you just found your title ^

[Cratos]

If class is stamina then the first thing that pops into my mind is the stretch. How much juice does the horse have at the end of the race. But is this fair to a front runner that just hangs on by a nose to win at the end? Pace theory goes in depth discussing this. Early energy used is twice as asaperating as late energy. Yet doesn't common sense tell us that a horse gaining in a finish while winning at the same rate as a horse losing ground has more class then the early speed horse? How else might we look at this?
No, class is not stamina because class is nonparametric whereas stamina is parametric.

However stamina is a function of class, but class is not a function of stamina because there are horses that have the stamina to get the race distance, but they don't have the class to win the race.

[whodoyoulike]

I think I'm going to call it, Power Pace, or something like that. I ran tests on my website, amazing results. I started writing it. With this method, you only bet on horses that are likely to have something left for the stretch run in this particular race, and, most of the time they'll be in good striking position, which is important. It will be the best book on Spot Play handicapping ever published.

I've been seeking this method for years. Please let us know when available.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

IMO...the "classiest" horses are the ones who run big races consistently. It doesn't matter whether they fly early or late.

Nail of head meet hammer. :ThmbUp:

[pandy]

Be careful. I think Barry Burkin sold something with that name back in the 90s...and he might still hold the copyright to the title.

Yeah, I thought that was used before but I did a search and can't find anything. I'm not sure if titles of books are exclusive or protected, especially when the book is out of print. I know if you search on book titles, there are usually many books with the exact same title. Of course, I wouldn't use a title of a book that's still in print, but many people do.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

The best definition of class I ever heard was the ability of a horse to hold its speed over longer distances. That can mean a horse that runs fast early and finishes (Seattle Slew), or a horse that has a great sustained style (Forego).

Cheap horses can't run fast early and finish, or they need a fast past to have an effective close. To me, Secretariat's Triple Crown run fit every definition of class you could think of. Running each quarter faster than the previous quarter in the Derby. Running by the entire field around the clubhouse turn in the Preakness. Running great fractions on his own courage and finishing with a world record in the Belmont.

One of the myths is that horses with a closing style couldn't run the same finishing time if they were closer to the pace. The best horses have gears that they can use whenever they want. That is class.

[098poi]

No, class is not stamina because class is nonparametric whereas stamina is parametric.

However stamina is a function of class, but class is not a function of stamina because there are horses that have the stamina to get the race distance, but they don't have the class to win the race.

And this is "Classic" Cratos. :D

Not a put down, just an observation. I always have to read your posts a few times and then I tell myself, "I think I understand".

[pandy]

The best definition of class I ever heard was the ability of a horse to hold its speed over longer distances. That can mean a horse that runs fast early and finishes (Seattle Slew), or a horse that has a great sustained style (Forego).

Cheap horses can't run fast early and finish, or they need a fast past to have an effective close. To me, Secretariat's Triple Crown run fit every definition of class you could think of. Running each quarter faster than the previous quarter in the Derby. Running by the entire field around the clubhouse turn in the Preakness. Running great fractions on his own courage and finishing with a world record in the Belmont.

One of the myths is that horses with a closing style couldn't run the same finishing time if they were closer to the pace. The best horses have gears that they can use whenever they want. That is class.

Agree.

[Dave Schwartz]

Be careful. I think Barry Burkin sold something with that name back in the 90s...and he might still hold the copyright to the title.

Believe it or not, titles are not copyrightable.

You can trademark them, though.

BTW, that Power Pace was a fine piece of work.

[thaskalos]

Believe it or not, titles are not copyrightable.

You can trademark them, though.

BTW, that Power Pace was a fine piece of work.

I bought the manual and the audiotapes for $200 about 30 years ago...and I talked to Burkin on the phone. I couldn't believe that a course called "Power Pace" used no fractional times or pace ratings at all.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

I bought the manual and the audiotapes for $200 about 30 years ago...and I talked to Burkin on the phone. I couldn't believe that a course called "Power Pace" used no fractional times or pace ratings at all.

So what you are saying Thask, is that you are dead money.

[thaskalos]

So what you are saying Thask, is that you are dead money.

I am embarrassed to admit that there was a time when I bought every promising-sounding handicapping product that came down the pike...regardless of price. And I didn't learn my lesson as quickly as I should have.

[NorCalGreg]

I bought the manual and the audiotapes for $200 about 30 years ago...and I talked to Burkin on the phone. I couldn't believe that a course called "Power Pace" used no fractional times or pace ratings at all.


Dammmnnnnnnn...........thirty years ago, $200 was comparable to at least $1000 now.

The first method I bought...still remember it well--was called "The United Method of Horseplay" Was just a silly Due-Column wagering method. Think I paid about $15 for it.

Wherever that guy is that sold me that method: YOU'RE DEAD TO ME!

He probably IS DEAD already...it was 30 years ago. :D

[pandy]

The thing I always found amazing about the handicapping systems that were sold through the mail, they would show stats that were totally absurd, like, "the method hit 40% winners at an average mutual of 9-2 odds..." As soon as you see that you know it's a lie but people still bought it.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I am embarrassed to admit that there was a time when I bought every promising-sounding handicapping product that came down the pike...regardless of price. And I didn't learn my lesson as quickly as I should have.
I'm reminded of an anecdote from Dr. Oz. Someone writes to him saying that they have been getting lots of emails for colon cleansing. They ask if they should order one of the products. Dr. Oz responds, you could get rid of a lot more crap by just deleting the emails.

[mickey_arnold]

The thing I always found amazing about the handicapping systems that were sold through the mail, they would show stats that were totally absurd, like, "the method hit 40% winners at an average mutual of 9-2 odds..." As soon as you see that you know it's a lie but people still bought it.

Sort of reminds me of the the following observation:

Q. What's the difference between professional wrestling and the sale of absurd handicapping systems?

A. The latter never stopped being a sport.

[thaskalos]

I'm reminded of an anecdote from Dr. Oz. Someone writes to him saying that they have been getting lots of emails for colon cleansing. They ask if they should order one of the products. Dr. Oz responds, you could get rid of a lot more crap by just deleting the emails.
I hope you don't take this personally, since you once wrote for the publication...but my favorite books back then were those wonderful anthologies of "tested, winning systems"...which were compiled by Henry Bomze, the esteemed editor of American Turf Monthly. 50 thoroughly-tested winning systems all gathered in one nicely-bound book? Who could resist?

How I wished that at least one of those systems was worth the paper that it was printed on. :)

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I hope you don't take this personally, since you once wrote for the publication...but my favorite books back then were those wonderful anthologies of "tested, winning systems"...which were compiled by Henry Bomze, the esteemed editor of American Turf Monthly. 50 thoroughly-tested winning systems all gathered in one nicely-bound book? Who could resist?

How I wished that at least one of those systems was worth the paper that it was printed on. :)

I started writing for ATM for two reasons. One, I thought Ray Taulbot was a genius. As it turns out a long passed away genius, but I'll always give him credit for being my first serious handicapping influence. Two, doing the type of articles they specialized in was a piece of cake. I did my share of "How to....," and "10 Rules....," articles. If you remember, one of the common articles was on some angle with a PP for a horse that fit perfectly. When I was writing for them Richard Bomze was my first editor, but then turned over editing to Ian Blair. He was a great guy, but he made it clear that stepping too far outside the lines wasn't going to work. So I eventually moved to Horseplayer Magazine where they gave me a lot of leeway. In any case, ATM was like that old comfy chair - you knew what you were getting and you got it every month. Given the dearth of good handicapping books in the late 60's/early 70's, other than Ainslie's seminal book, ATM's books (A Treasury of the American Turf and others) were like water to a thirsty handicapper. Actually, in the 70's when I was making $5 win bets on horses I loved, I used the $57 Betting Method, which came out of the book, and a couple of the system plays, like bet the 2-year old with the fastest half method.

If you were reading ATM in June 1993 I did an article on how to bet "Triples" and Superfectas, as well as one on betting Pick 4's and Pick 6's. I don't know if it helped, but at the time it was fresh stuff because the bets were fairly new. Don't think I ever got into an ATM anthology though. I figure you learn something even from crap, even if it is only to ignore crap!

[Robert Fischer]

class is ability and the robustness against limiting factors


quote: racing book

Today, American Racing uses the 'Claiming System' rather than the 'Handicap System', but we refer to the process of estimating a horse's chances at a specific wager-outcome, as 'Handicapping', just the same.

In the Claiming System, it is necessary to understand the Class of an animal. There are many theories about class, some of which get quite fancy. The class is determined by the Level at which a horse can contend.

The level at which a horse can contend is determined by ability. Key factors such as tactical speed can be 'Limiting Factors' as a horse attempts to climb the class ladder. Such horses contend against cheaper competition, but are also-rans in competitive fields.

Trainer Intent is important as well. High percentage trainers tend to run horses at, or below, their class level.

'Class', in the Claiming System, is as important as 'Weight', in the Handicap System.

[Actor]

Be careful. I think Barry Burkin sold something with that name back in the 90s...and he might still hold the copyright to the title.You can't copyright a title.

[ReplayRandall]

You can't copyright a title.
Post #20 by Dave Schwartz
Believe it or not, titles are not copyrightable.

You can trademark them, though.

BTW, that Power Pace was a fine piece of work.

[Capper Al]

No, class is not stamina because class is nonparametric whereas stamina is parametric.

However stamina is a function of class, but class is not a function of stamina because there are horses that have the stamina to get the race distance, but they don't have the class to win the race.

Crazy. I like your replies. Definitely out from left field. Most people evaluate class in what I call baseball scoring methods, wins or ITM at what race rating (class). I did a study a while back and found what separated graded sprints from other sprints was late pace. Most graded stake sprint winners had amazingly good late pace. This shows stamania as a physical indicator of class and is different than a baseball score.

[Tom]

I think you are better off using the blueprint Quinn set forth in his book Handicapping by the Conditions. Of course, it need to be updated to today's realities, but an overall evaluation of the horse's record, allowing for less than A races during development, will serve you far better than any kind of a numerical definition.

[Capper Al]

I liked Quinn's book on class of the field. I think one of those updates to his book would be late pace.

[thaskalos]

If late pace=class...then Zenyatta was the classiest of them all.

[pandy]

If late pace=class...then Zenyatta was the classiest of them all.


Not necessarily. Just having the best late pace isn't enough. It has to be relative to the pace and final time of the race. But using late pace to evaluate a horse's class, in general, isn't necessary. The only thing that matters is how the horse "classes up" against the horses it is racing against in this particular race.

All great horses have good late pace relative to the pace. Yes, Zenyatta had far superior late pace ratings than Seattle Slew, but Slew was still a strong finisher relative to the fast pace he established. All great horses finish well relative to their energy expenditure prior to the quarter pole, that's why they win most of their races.

Of course, in Zenyatta's case, her late pace ratings were the fastest I've ever seen by a considerable margin, so the sheer fact that her closing kick was so freakish put her in an elite class.

[Capper Al]

Those horses that could hang in with a fast early pace and still kick late had the class edge. This is especially good for 3 year olds moving up the ladder. The ones without a late kick who depend on an early pace usually won't make it to the next level up the ladder.

[pandy]

Those horses that could hang in with a fast early pace and still kick late had the class edge. This is especially good for 3 year olds moving up the ladder. The ones without a late kick who depend on an early pace usually won't make it to the next level up the ladder.

Totally agree.

[thaskalos]

Those horses that could hang in with a fast early pace and still kick late had the class edge. This is especially good for 3 year olds moving up the ladder. The ones without a late kick who depend on an early pace usually won't make it to the next level up the ladder.
And what about those confirmed closers, who NEVER "hang with the early pace". Don't THEY ever deserve the "class edge"?

[shots]

If late pace=class...then Zenyatta was the classiest of them all.
Silky Sullivan wasn't to shabby at late pace.

[pandy]

Silky Sullivan wasn't to shabby at late pace.


Those Silky Sullivan race replay videos are among the best on youtube, amazing.

[Capper Al]

And what about those confirmed closers, who NEVER "hang with the early pace". Don't THEY ever deserve the "class edge"?

Confirmed closers probably won't be able to hang in with those horses showing the ability to go early and late in the same race. There are no magic numbers here. The only conclusion suggested is that a horse in both the top half of early speed and late pace has the class to compete and are likely contenders.

[thaskalos]

Confirmed closers probably won't be able to hang in with those horses showing the ability to go early and late in the same race. There are no magic numbers here. The only conclusion suggested is that a horse in both the top half of early speed and late pace has the class to compete and are likely contenders.
If the horse is in the top half of the field in both early and late...it could just as easily be a lackluster non-contender.

[Capper Al]

If the horse is in the top half of the field in both early and late...it could just as easily be a lackluster non-contender.

What else is new about handicapping?

[Cratos]

Crazy. I like your replies. Definitely out from left field. Most people evaluate class in what I call baseball scoring methods, wins or ITM at what race rating (class). I did a study a while back and found what separated graded sprints from other sprints was late pace. Most graded stake sprint winners had amazingly good late pace. This shows stamania as a physical indicator of class and is different than a baseball score.
Crazy? I have answered your question of: "Is Class Stamina ?"

Your question posed one of difference in quantity because one has a measurable boundary and the other does not.

As stated, "Class" is nonparametric because it a variable without quantitative limits whereas stamina arise from energy and is quantitated by the joule metric and have limits.

A simple example is the one of Honor Code who was named "Older Male Horse of the Year."

Whether you believe that Honor Code deserved that award, I think most will agree that he had an abundance of "Class" in the way it is determined in horseracing, but significantly lacked the stamina to be competitive and a winner at the classic distance of 1-1/4 miles.

[Hank]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxP24eAq-zg


The mighty Slew clawing back at Exceller in the final yards, after his BRUTAL trip,exemplifies what "class" is really all about.

[pandy]

Perhaps the word stamina is a bit too broad. Maybe "finishing power" is more appropriate.

[Capper Al]

Perhaps the word stamina is a bit too broad. Maybe "finishing power" is more appropriate.

You might be right.

[Capper Al]

Crazy? I have answered your question of: "Is Class Stamina ?"

Your question posed one of difference in quantity because one has a measurable boundary and the other does not.

As stated, "Class" is nonparametric because it a variable without quantitative limits whereas stamina arise from energy and is quantitated by the joule metric and have limits.

A simple example is the one of Honor Code who was named "Older Male Horse of the Year."

Whether you believe that Honor Code deserved that award, I think most will agree that he had an abundance of "Class" in the way it is determined in horseracing, but significantly lacked the stamina to be competitive and a winner at the classic distance of 1-1/4 miles.

That's the topic of the thread is Class (nonparametric) really Stamina (a parametric)?

[classhandicapper]

One of the best explanations of this was found in harness handicapping books written by the late Steve Chaplin. These books, Bettor's Guide To Harness Racing and Advanced Harness Handicapping, were published in the 1970's. Chaplin wrote about comparing "stretch speed" to the energy used prior to the stretch.

My new thoroughbred book will delve into this in great detail, although there's more to it, as well.

IMO those books by Chaplin were all time great handicapping books.

[classhandicapper]

To me "class" is all encompassing.

Things like speed, stamina, competitiveness, versatility, etc... are all individual components of a horse's overall ability. Horses have varying degrees of each of these.

Class is basically the level at which a horse with various combinations of these individual abilities can be competitive and win.

Horse A may have more speed than horse B.
Horse B may have more stamina than horse A.
Horse C may have a hair less speed than A and a hair less stamina than B, but he's more versatile and super game.

One a net basis they can all be of similar class.

The thing about speed is that there are some horses that are very fast that can run very fast final times if they are loose, catch a speed favoring track, or get away with a slowish pace, but they do not have the stamina, competitiveness, and reserves to run as fast if they are pressed hard early. What I am describing here is the old saying "tested for class". In other words, we know horse X is fast, but we don't know yet what will happen when he's engaged by horses that are very similar in ability. He may prove his class or he may quit and finish up the track.

[CincyHorseplayer]

That's the topic of the thread is Class (nonparametric) really Stamina (a parametric)?

We all know the complexity in the question but I will go with an obvious answer=class has to be stamina(definition-the ability to sustain a prolonged physical or mental effort). With horses it is a combination of both but if they don't sustain their run they don't win and class wins. I think the better question is what is stamina to you? Is it late pace, being able to run long distances and win repeatedly, is it genetic? If class IS stamina what does that mean to you Al? Just curious.

I found this little excerpt. Not sure if it helps at all.

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/speed-and-stamina-a-tale-of-two-genes

[Capper Al]

We all know the complexity in the question but I will go with an obvious answer=class has to be stamina(definition-the ability to sustain a prolonged physical or mental effort). With horses it is a combination of both but if they don't sustain their run they don't win and class wins. I think the better question is what is stamina to you? Is it late pace, being able to run long distances and win repeatedly, is it genetic? If class IS stamina what does that mean to you Al? Just curious.

I found this little excerpt. Not sure if it helps at all.

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/speed-and-stamina-a-tale-of-two-genes

Thanks for the link. I looked at dictionary definitions for stamina before starting the thread, and just forgot to include them. Stamina has to be behind class. Any horse that can fight early and late in the same race has to cross the finish line more than a one dimensional horse with only early or late speed.

[whodoyoulike]

...
I found this little excerpt. Not sure if it helps at all.

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/speed-and-stamina-a-tale-of-two-genes

Thanks for the link.

And, welcome back!

Missed your posts. It seems a lot of you guys disappeared and once we get a triple crown winner you guys come back.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Thanks for the link. I looked at dictionary definitions for stamina before starting the thread, and just forgot to include them. Stamina has to be behind class. Any horse that can fight early and late in the same race has to cross the finish line more than a one dimensional horse with only early or late speed.

Hell, that is a great definition. There might be a player out there that when they think stamina they think pedigree and the names of old sires or get a visual of a deep closer winning marathon races. I think I have had all these representations at one time or another! But the ability to run early AND late could define stamina best than just as a pedigree trait that imparts distance ability. All these moving parts of a thoroughbred's nature and how they interact are fascinating. Looking at them in this living sense as opposed to a bundle of attributes IMO brings out more creative interpretations from a player. It definitely fits my style because I like to eliminate for the most part all human connections and think about the primary universal attribute that translates to every racetrack in the world, the horse. Then secondarily the track. Anyway good to see ya Al.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Thanks for the link.

And, welcome back!

Missed your posts. It seems a lot of you guys disappeared and once we get a triple crown winner you guys come back.

Thanks man. Funny I had my first grandson last year after a 37 year TC drought. I was born in 1973 after a 25 year TC drought. Since the term was coined(and I'm sure it was after Sir Barton in 1919) those are the longest droughts in it's history. We have TC slumpbuster in our pedigree over here. Those are my kind of statistics! :cool:

[Capper Al]

Thanks man. Funny I had my first grandson last year after a 37 year TC drought. I was born in 1973 after a 25 year TC drought. Since the term was coined(and I'm sure it was after Sir Barton in 1919) those are the longest droughts in it's history. We have TC slumpbuster in our pedigree over here. Those are my kind of statistics! :cool:

Grandkids are the best! Enjoy

[Cratos]

That's the topic of the thread is Class (nonparametric) really Stamina (a parametric)?
Correct me if I am wrong, but “Is Class Stamina” is a question.

However most of what I have read in this thread are examples of one or the other and the question is not answered.

It is good to have examples of the “what”, but there is an ambiguous disconnect until the “why” is succinctly explained.

[Capper Al]

Cratos,

The observation about graded sprints is an example of a correlation between stamina and class.

[classhandicapper]

I don't think you can say "stamina is class" for the simple reason that there are loads of horses that can run all day at a steady pace but they lack the speed to compete against horses with way less stamina.

What you might be able to say is that given horses of similar speed, stamina will often be decisive in a competitive race.

[Capper Al]

I don't think you can say "stamina is class" for the simple reason that there are loads of horses that can run all day at a steady pace but they lack the speed to compete against horses with way less stamina.

What you might be able to say is that given horses of similar speed, stamina will often be decisive in a competitive race.

Okay, that works. I wasn't clear on the everything else being equal.

[Cratos]

Cratos,

The observation about graded sprints is an example of a correlation between stamina and class.
I have no idea about how that relates to the thesis of the thread you initiated except to say you offered another tangent.

However it is your thread and the merit is your responsibility; I will just read from the sidelines.

[Magister Ludi]

Class has absolutely no correlation with stamina, speed, or pace. Class is the measurement of a horse's ability to overcome chaos. Just as chaos can be measured, so can class.

[thaskalos]

Class has absolutely no correlation with stamina, speed, or pace. Class is the measurement of a horse's ability to overcome chaos. Just as chaos can be measured, so can class.

But, without considering speed and pace...how do we determine the level of "chaos" that the horse was asked to overcome?

[ReplayRandall]

Class has absolutely no correlation with stamina, speed, or pace. Class is the measurement of a horse's ability to overcome chaos. Just as chaos can be measured, so can class.

Chaos by definition is unpredictability. Therefore, chaos can't be used sufficiently to predict winners in horse racing. My question ML, How and Why would you measure chaos in the context of selections? Isn't this counter-intuitive to "prediction logic" itself?

[Tom]

Class it the combination of speed, stamina, brilliance, heart.

[Magister Ludi]

TrifectaMike presented a chaos index in one of his posts:

sum{1/[O(i) + 1]^2}/N

where O(i) = odds of the ith horse
N = number of entries

The larger the value, the more uncompetitive the race. My own chaos index is much different than TrifectaMike's but his is much easier to calculate.

The most competitive possible race with an N-horse field would be one in which each horse’s subjective probability of winning is 1/N. The least competitive possible race would be a match race where one horse’s subjective probability of winning is just under 1 and the other’s subjective probability of winning is just over 0. Needless to say, the subjective probabilities in most races will be more dispersed than the former race and more concentrated than the latter race. Longer fields cause a greater concentration and homogeneity of subjective probabilities, thus making forecasting more difficult.

Now that you know how to measure race chaos, I'll leave it to you to determine how to measure a horse's class.

[ReplayRandall]

Now that you know how to measure race chaos, I'll leave it to you to determine how to measure a horse's class.


All you've done here is used a Bayesian methodology to determine if the race is chaos or not, using only field size and number of entrants. In your previous post, you stated "Class has absolutely no correlation with stamina, speed, or pace. Class is the measurement of a horse's ability to overcome chaos. Just as chaos can be measured, so can class."

So to stay on topic, according to you, class has no correlation with stamina, speed or pace. Fine, class does not equal stamina, for topic's sake. You're saying, in effect, class has to overcome chaos, when chaos has been defined by number of entrants and odds. So, is this your answer for defining class as well?....Field sizes and number of entrants?? What is the Bayesian model for defining an INDIVIDUAL horses class? What are the variables used?

[whodoyoulike]

Thanks man. Funny I had my first grandson last year after a 37 year TC drought. I was born in 1973 after a 25 year TC drought. Since the term was coined(and I'm sure it was after Sir Barton in 1919) those are the longest droughts in it's history. We have TC slumpbuster in our pedigree over here. Those are my kind of statistics! :cool:

Interesting angle and I remember you liked handicapping angles. FYI, I suspect there will be a TC winner next year so you should tell your kids to get busy. Not just for their sake but for horse racing history (no pressure intended).

[Cratos]

Class has absolutely no correlation with stamina, speed, or pace. Class is the measurement of a horse's ability to overcome chaos. Just as chaos can be measured, so can class.
We are in agreement

[Cratos]

Chaos by definition is unpredictability. Therefore, chaos can't be used sufficiently to predict winners in horse racing. My question ML, How and Why would you measure chaos in the context of selections? Isn't this counter-intuitive to "prediction logic" itself?
Not entirely true; in a given time interval the accuracy and magnitude of "chaos" can be measured, but the mathematical conundrum is the extent of the time interval.

[pandy]

I'm not going to dignify the chaos remarks, unless you can prove to me that you can use a "chaos" figure to pick winners.

As far as pace and speed, to say that they are no indication of class makes no sense. When Runhappy won the King's Bishop at Saratoga he ran pace and speed figures almost identical to Seattle Slew's track record he set in his sensational 3yo debut...that made Runhappy the automatic favorite to beat the best sprinters in North America in the Breeders Cup. His figures, fractions, speed, whatever you want to call it, stamped him as a top class sprinter. And, when he won the Breeders Cup Sprint, he didn't win it because he overcome chaos, he won it because he was the fastest horse in the race. Furthermore, Runhappy is a great sprinter because, like most graded staked winning sprinters, Runhappy can go fast early, but, he finishes strong relative to the pace of the race, stronger than even the top sprinters, and that's where the class comes in, and why he is so damn tough to catch.

[Capper Al]

Chaos actually proves that stamina is important. Let's say we have a race that has several early horses. They break out of the gate get in each other's way and are still fighting at the first call. A horse with stamina hangs in because he has early speed also. They reach the second call and the early type weaken because they've used up their energy earlier. Now comes the stretch. The only horse left with fight are the closers. But those closers without early ability aren't in position to close because of the early duel. Now comes the stamina horse, who is in the right place, and has the kick to close in the stretch.

[pandy]

Chaos actually proves that stamina is important. Let's say we have a race that has several early horses. They break out of the gate get in each other's way and are still fighting at the first call. A horse with stamina hangs in because he has early speed also. They reach the second call and the early type weaken because they've used up their energy earlier. Now comes the stretch. The only horse left with fight are the closers. But those closers without early ability aren't in position to close because of the early duel. Now comes the stamina horse, who is in the right place, and has the kick to close in the stretch.


Seattle Slew proved this over and over. In his Derby, Cordero tried to fry him but Slew just shook off pressure and despite dueling for the lead through a sensational pace he still had something left. Slew had speed, and, stamina, a tough combination to beat.

[DeltaLover]

My answer to the question "Is Class Stamina" is that it simply is a matter of semantics and nothing more.

Class (or Stamina) is exactly what you define it to be.

For me Class is an opinion in the mind of some humans that is either confirmed or rejected by reality.

[Capper Al]

My answer to the question "Is Class Stamina" is that it simply is a matter of semantics and nothing more.

Class (or Stamina) is exactly what you define it to be.

For me Class is an opinion in the mind of some humans that is either confirmed or rejected by reality.

Class is relative to the field. If there is a horse in the field that could contend with better horses then it is the class of the field. Outside of today's field, class is difficult to compare.

[pandy]

Class is relative to the field. If there is a horse in the field that could contend with better horses then it is the class of the field. Outside of today's field, class is difficult to compare.


In most races, there isn't a horse that is the class of the field, so it becomes a moot point.

[pandy]

You know Al, going back to your original premise, I'd say that closing ability and stamina are potent factors, if the horse has speed. That's really what it all comes down to. Some could argue that a deep closer with potent late pace figures doesn't have speed, but it depends on the final time. Zenyatta and Forego didn't have early speed but they ran fast final times, and to me, final time is the absolute best indicator of a horse's speed, not pace, which comes in second. So they had that powerful combination of speed and stamina, which all great horses have, regardless of their style.

So, in a regular overnight race, if you can pinpoint the horse that has the best combination of speed and stamina in the race, that horse should be tough to beat, especially in races 7 furlongs and longer. In shorter races, sometimes cheap speed horses get lucky because they shake loose on the lead and the stamina horses are at a disadvantage. As the distances increase, it's hard to get lucky because the class shows in the final quarter.

Perhaps I shouldn't call my book Power Pace, maybe Speed And Stamina is more appropriate. One of the reasons why I decided to study and research this was going way back over 20 years ago when a customer of mine was crushing Gulfstream exactas keying horses with the best sustained energy. But he had another factor that he included.

[classhandicapper]

Seattle Slew proved this over and over. In his Derby, Cordero tried to fry him but Slew just shook off pressure and despite dueling for the lead through a sensational pace he still had something left. Slew had speed, and, stamina, a tough combination to beat.

This is what I am getting at. The horse's class is his combination of speed, stamina, competitiveness, versatility etc...

There have been faster horses than Slew.

There have been horses that could sustain a decent rate of speed for a further distance.

You can count on one hand the number of horses that could get left in the gate in the 10F Derby, have the competitiveness and speed to bull himself between horses, get back in the race quickly, duel off a major contender in a fast pace, and still finish with something left in the tank. He had extreme quantities of speed, stamina, and competitiveness. He was a fire breathing dragon. He had revealed some of that in his first 2 starts when he got left once and raced on a dead rail the other time. He demonstrated that again in the JCGC. The people that were looking at the occasional soft trip or easy field were missing the point.

[raybo]

IMO, class is the ability to set the pace, or handle the pace, and finish strong. Stamina is similar but pace and speed can kill a stamina horse.

[Capper Al]

here's the problem with the speed, pace, class verse stamina. As the old saying goes a horse that can run a speed fig of 100 in a lower class field can lose a race in a higher class with a speed fig of only 94, for example. With speed figs we get it, 115 is better than 105. With class our numbers only work within today's field, not being able to compare to other similar fields in a universal sense of the word. Why? Because of the stamina in the today's field.

Let's say we have two races- One race with a par of 100 and another of 80. We know that most any horse in the field of 100 can beat any horse in the field of 80 because of their speed. We then wrongly associate class to speed. Yes, the horses in the 100 group can be viewed as having more class. But class isn't what separates the two groups, speed does. if a horse in the 100 par group faced a horse in the 80 par, he would beat the 80 par horse because of speed, not class. Class is the ability to fight within their own kind which is manifested by stamina.

[ultracapper]

In most races, there isn't a horse that is the class of the field, so it becomes a moot point.

Yep, and that's why when you find a field with a horse that stands out from a class perspective, you really have to be aware of what that horse will be doing in that race. The race goes through that horse.

[MPRanger]

Class = Tactical Speed

My concept of class:

To me, a race is more like a fight than a race. It is a contest for position on the pace.

A horse which can rise in class vs the competition is better able to be rated when needed.

I think of it as being able to hit the accelerator when needed to get position and being able to let off when needed to save energy. Classier horses are able to do this more times in a race or better than less classier horses.

That's even though they may be able to run similar speed figures.

Class = Tactical Speed.

[raybo]

Class = Tactical Speed

My concept of class:

To me, a race is more like a fight than a race. It is a contest for position on the pace.

A horse which can rise in class vs the competition is better able to be rated when needed.

I think of it as being able to hit the accelerator when needed to get position and being able to let off when needed to save energy. Classier horses are able to do this more times in a race or better than less classier horses.

That's even though they may be able to run similar speed figures.

Class = Tactical Speed.

That's kind of what I was getting at when I said "able to set the pace or handle the pace, and finish strong". If a horse is allowed to set the pace, then tactical speed isn't a requirement, but to be able to both set the pace, or handle the pace, the horse needs tactical speed, the ability to do whatever is necessary to win, whenever it is needed, regardless of what the field does, during the running of the race.

[Capper Al]

This is a good thread even if you disagree with me about class.

[classhandicapper]

here's the problem with the speed, pace, class verse stamina. As the old saying goes a horse that can run a speed fig of 100 in a lower class field can lose a race in a higher class with a speed fig of only 94, for example. With speed figs we get it, 115 is better than 105. With class our numbers only work within today's field, not being able to compare to other similar fields in a universal sense of the word. Why? Because of the stamina in the today's field.

Let's say we have two races- One race with a par of 100 and another of 80. We know that most any horse in the field of 100 can beat any horse in the field of 80 because of their speed. We then wrongly associate class to speed. Yes, the horses in the 100 group can be viewed as having more class. But class isn't what separates the two groups, speed does. if a horse in the 100 par group faced a horse in the 80 par, he would beat the 80 par horse because of speed, not class. Class is the ability to fight within their own kind which is manifested by stamina.

I agree with what you saying here.

That's why I don't refer to class as a unique quality all on its own. I keep saying a horse's class is the blend of multiple qualities.

The same thing can be said about versatility.

Let's way we have 2 horses that seem identical based on speed and stamina, except one can either wire a field or relax behind horses, between horses, buried inside etc... depending on the circumstances. The other doesn't relax well. He gets rank or uncomfortable unless he's on the lead. They are not really the same. The more versatile one has an advantage that may enable him to win in some races where the other would lose. To me, that versatility makes him classier too.

[CincyHorseplayer]

You know Al, going back to your original premise, I'd say that closing ability and stamina are potent factors, if the horse has speed. That's really what it all comes down to. Some could argue that a deep closer with potent late pace figures doesn't have speed, but it depends on the final time. Zenyatta and Forego didn't have early speed but they ran fast final times, and to me, final time is the absolute best indicator of a horse's speed, not pace, which comes in second. So they had that powerful combination of speed and stamina, which all great horses have, regardless of their style.

So, in a regular overnight race, if you can pinpoint the horse that has the best combination of speed and stamina in the race, that horse should be tough to beat, especially in races 7 furlongs and longer. In shorter races, sometimes cheap speed horses get lucky because they shake loose on the lead and the stamina horses are at a disadvantage. As the distances increase, it's hard to get lucky because the class shows in the final quarter.

Perhaps I shouldn't call my book Power Pace, maybe Speed And Stamina is more appropriate. One of the reasons why I decided to study and research this was going way back over 20 years ago when a customer of mine was crushing Gulfstream exactas keying horses with the best sustained energy. But he had another factor that he included.

I agree Pandy.If we define stamina as the ability to finish strong while also running fast that eliminates running style from the equation. Both early types and closers could possess both qualities. And this gets away from the notion that stamina is just a horse rationing out a mediocre amount of evenly distributed energy over long distances which ends up as a critique and label of a plodder etc. But when you think about that definition it sums up class nicely as well.

[thaskalos]

If we define stamina as the ability to finish strong while also running fast that eliminates running style from the equation. Both early types and closers could possess both qualities. And this gets away from the notion that stamina is just a horse rationing out a mediocre amount of evenly distributed energy over long distances which ends up as a critique and label of a plodder etc. But when you think about that definition it sums up class nicely as well.

I agree.

When you define "class" as the ability to "finish strong" while also staying close to the early pace...then you are giving extra credit to the stalkers in the race...while taking away from the pace-setters and the closers. The pace-setters will only "finish strong" under ideal racing circumstances...while the closer will always be criticized for "loafing" during the race's early stages.

IMO...it doesn't matter how the particular horse rations its speed. The "class" label is applicable to horses of every running style.

[CincyHorseplayer]

This thread makes me think of how we being "Pace" handicappers are looked at by some as early speed guys and that simple minded notion that makes pace a dirty word. It seems now though that "Stamina" is the dirty word because it is interpreted as an almost degenerate quality as the above. Anyway...

[CincyHorseplayer]

I agree.

When you define "class" as the ability to "finish strong" while also staying close to the early pace...then you are giving extra credit to the stalkers in the race...while taking away from the pace-setters and the closers. The pace-setters will only "finish strong" under ideal racing circumstances...while the closer will always be criticized for "loafing" during the race's early stages.

IMO...it doesn't matter how the particular horse rations its speed. The "class" label is applicable to horses of every running style.

This brings up another good question. What is the mediocrity here? A frontrunner that can go fast early and only win under ideal circumstances? A plodder that can only pick up the pieces after the front gets obliterated? Well how about that stalker? A horse that doesn't possess the ability to go fast early and also can be outfinished by by the closers. This doesn't describe a horse with a superior skillset that has versatility ingrained in it's disposition,it describes the dream trip horse and a mediocrity in every sense.

[pandy]

I agree.

When you define "class" as the ability to "finish strong" while also staying close to the early pace...then you are giving extra credit to the stalkers in the race...while taking away from the pace-setters and the closers. The pace-setters will only "finish strong" under ideal racing circumstances...while the closer will always be criticized for "loafing" during the race's early stages.

IMO...it doesn't matter how the particular horse rations its speed. The "class" label is applicable to horses of every running style.


Totally agree. Closers that win a high percentage of their races are actually remarkable animals, since most races are won by horses close to the pace. Their efforts don't deserve to be minimized.

[pandy]

This thread makes me think of how we being "Pace" handicappers are looked at by some as early speed guys and that simple minded notion that makes pace a dirty word. It seems now though that "Stamina" is the dirty word because it is interpreted as an almost degenerate quality as the above. Anyway...


I've said this for years, don't fall into the "pace handicapping is early fractions" trap. Late pace figures are still pace figures and if you use that type of rating, you are using pace handicapping.

[EMD4ME]

I'm surprised no one has asked it yet....So I will!

Is Stamina, Class? :cool: :lol:

And before anyone answers.....it was truly a joke. No more....

[Capper Al]

Totally agree. Closers that win a high percentage of their races are actually remarkable animals, since most races are won by horses close to the pace. Their efforts don't deserve to be minimized.

Especially on the grass.

[Cratos]

This is a good thread even if you disagree with me about class.
I agree that this has been a good discussion although much of the response has been toward the definition of "class" or examples of "class" as oppose to answering the question: "Is class stamina?"

Those responses raises a question to the other part of the supposed equality and it is: "What is stamina?"

[raybo]

I'm surprised no one has asked it yet....So I will!

Is Stamina, Class? :cool: :lol:

And before anyone answers.....it was truly a joke. No more....

IMO, stamina is only an attribute of class. In other words, high class horses have stamina, but high stamina horses don't necessarily have class. There is at least one attribute that a high class horse usually has that a stamina horse may not have, that being intelligence. That is why some high class horses never seem to extend themselves fully. They have the intelligence to do only what they need to do, to win, and nothing more. They don't waste their energy, that's why they often win races in close finishes, rather than open lengths. Not that they couldn't have won by open lengths, it just wasn't necessary, to finish ahead of the pack. This ability often gets criticized by players as being "unimpressive", or getting a "perfect trip", or "won against a weak field", or "never challenged"/"never pressured", etc., etc.. "Class" horses just win.

[raybo]

I agree that this has been a good discussion although much of the response has been toward the definition of "class" or examples of "class" as oppose to answering the question: "Is class stamina?"

Those responses raises a question to the other part of the supposed equality and it is: "What is stamina?"

Stamina is the ability to do work, over a significant period of time. But, the volume of that work does not have to be high, only consistent. This of course, is my opinion, so in my opinion, stamina can be class, but doesn't have to be.

[Cratos]

Stamina is the ability to do work, over a significant period of time. But, the volume of that work does not have to be high, only consistent. This of course, is my opinion, so in my opinion, stamina can be class, but doesn't have to be.
I understand what you are saying, but in all due respect stamina is not the ability to do work; stamina is the endurance (output) from work and measured by the energy used by the joule metric.

[raybo]

I understand what you are saying, but in all due respect stamina is not the ability to do work; stamina is the endurance (output) from work and measured by the energy used by the joule metric.

Not everyone's definition is what you state. With all due respect.

stam·i·na
ˈstamənə/
noun
the ability to sustain prolonged physical or mental effort.
"their secret is stamina rather than speed"
synonyms: endurance, staying power, tirelessness, fortitude, strength, energy, toughness, determination, tenacity, perseverance, grit

[Cratos]

Not everyone's definition is what you state. With all due respect.
You gave a generalized dictionary definition which is correct; what I gave was an applied physics application from Dr. Ohanian textbook from RPI.

My point here was to associate stamina with horseracing in a measurable metric; therefore an output.

However whatever understanding you have is okay with me.

Finally, the definition I gave wasn't mine; it is one that is used in statics and mechanics and can be applied to horserace handicapping.

[Capper Al]

I agree that this has been a good discussion although much of the response has been toward the definition of "class" or examples of "class" as oppose to answering the question: "Is class stamina?"

Those responses raises a question to the other part of the supposed equality and it is: "What is stamina?"

Class is, within the current race speed par, having a horse that shows an ability to fight for the lead both early and late in the same race.

[Capper Al]

Stamina is the ability to do work, over a significant period of time. But, the volume of that work does not have to be high, only consistent. This of course, is my opinion, so in my opinion, stamina can be class, but doesn't have to be.

Damn those confounded variables. They get everything mixed up.

[Magister Ludi]

Horses have two sources of energy: aerobic and anaerobic. At the start of a race, 100% of the energy that is expended is supplied from anaerobic sources. Energy expenditures are for kinetic energy, locomotion, and to overcome aerodynamic drag. At t~50s, 50% of the expended energy is aerobically sourced and 50% is anaerobically sourced. At t~100s, about 70% of the expended energy is aerobically sourced and 30% is anaerobically sourced. Horses with “stamina” are horses with relatively larger stores of aerobic energy due to biological individuality and/or training. It is not a vague, touchy-feely, ephemeral, bit of “class” but a phenomenon which can be observed and measured.

[Capper Al]

Horses have two sources of energy: aerobic and anaerobic. At the start of a race, 100% of the energy that is expended is supplied from anaerobic sources. Energy expenditures are for kinetic energy, locomotion, and to overcome aerodynamic drag. At t~50s, 50% of the expended energy is aerobically sourced and 50% is anaerobically sourced. At t~100s, about 70% of the expended energy is aerobically sourced and 30% is anaerobically sourced. Horses with “stamina” are horses with relatively larger stores of aerobic energy due to biological individuality and/or training. It is not a vague, touchy-feely, ephemeral, bit of “class” but a phenomenon which can be observed and measured.

Do you think pace makes a good observation for stamina?

[Tom]

It is not a vague, touchy-feely, ephemeral, bit of “class” but a phenomenon which can be observed and measured.

What was American Pharo's stamina the Travers and Classic?

[RacingFan1992]

What was American Pharo's stamina the Travers and Classic?

The Travers was one of those times when American Pharoah wasn't allowed to run loose on the lead. I think had Jose Lezcano ridden Frosted in the Classic instead of Joel Rosario, AP would have been beaten that day. JL sacrificed his mount which was one of the smartest yet dumbest thing he could have done.

[classhandicapper]

Totally agree. Closers that win a high percentage of their races are actually remarkable animals, since most races are won by horses close to the pace. Their efforts don't deserve to be minimized.

I'll extend this further with the example of Zenyatta (but you can add other great closers to the list).

Most come from behind horses do NOT possess a lot of speed (I'm not talking about speed figures here I am talking about actual speed). They are even paced. They may be able to run a decent final time if they have good stamina, but they are not fast. That's why they lose so often even when they look to be spotted fairly well. To win, they more or less need for the faster horses to get tired enough so they can get into the race and then catch them. They can't catch them on their own.

Compare that to Zenyatta.

Zenyatta was not a slow horse. She was brilliantly fast. She was just so darn big and slow to get into gear early the other horses would open up on her. But once she caught her gear, it didn't matter if the pace was fast or slow. She would make a brilliantly fast first move on the turn that other horses could not match to get into contention. Then she had enough reserve stamina and speed to outrun even fresh horses late after that brilliant move on the turn.

I think that's the critical point about closers and class.

The classy closers are actually fairly fast. Closing for them is a running style not a matter of lacking a good level of speed also. That's why they can keep winning. What's going on in front of them matters a lot less to them than it does to the even paced closer.

[cj]

Not that class is simple, but if I were looking for simple definition I would say it is the ability to perform well when outside a horse's normal comfort zone in regards to trip and pace.

[Cratos]

I'll extend this further with the example of Zenyatta (but you can add other great closers to the list).

Most come from behind horses do NOT possess a lot of speed (I'm not talking about speed figures here I am talking about actual speed). They are even paced. They may be able to run a decent final time if they have good stamina, but they are not fast. That's why they lose so often even when they look to be spotted fairly well. To win, they more or less need for the faster horses to get tired enough so they can get into the race and then catch them. They can't catch them on their own.

Compare that to Zenyatta.

Zenyatta was not a slow horse. She was brilliantly fast. She was just so darn big and slow to get into gear early the other horses would open up on her. But once she caught her gear, it didn't matter if the pace was fast or slow. She would make a brilliantly fast first move on the turn that other horses could not match to get into contention. Then she had enough reserve stamina and speed to outrun even fresh horses late after that brilliant move on the turn.

I think that's the critical point about closers and class.

The classy closers are actually fairly fast. Closing for them is a running style not a matter of lacking a good level of speed also. That's why they can keep winning. What's going on in front of them matters a lot less to them than it does to the even paced closer.
I disagree; closers lose because of lack of early acceleration and race distance; Forego was a contradiction to that assertion.

[Capper Al]

Not that class is simple, but if I were looking for simple definition I would say it is the ability to perform well when outside a horse's normal comfort zone in regards to trip and pace.

I don't disagree with that.

[pandy]

I'll extend this further with the example of Zenyatta (but you can add other great closers to the list).

Most come from behind horses do NOT possess a lot of speed (I'm not talking about speed figures here I am talking about actual speed). They are even paced. They may be able to run a decent final time if they have good stamina, but they are not fast. That's why they lose so often even when they look to be spotted fairly well. To win, they more or less need for the faster horses to get tired enough so they can get into the race and then catch them. They can't catch them on their own.

Compare that to Zenyatta.

Zenyatta was not a slow horse. She was brilliantly fast. She was just so darn big and slow to get into gear early the other horses would open up on her. But once she caught her gear, it didn't matter if the pace was fast or slow. She would make a brilliantly fast first move on the turn that other horses could not match to get into contention. Then she had enough reserve stamina and speed to outrun even fresh horses late after that brilliant move on the turn.

I think that's the critical point about closers and class.

The classy closers are actually fairly fast. Closing for them is a running style not a matter of lacking a good level of speed also. That's why they can keep winning. What's going on in front of them matters a lot less to them than it does to the even paced closer.
Exactly

[PIC6SIX]

Class as I understand it is the ability of a horse to move with the pace of or off the pace of the race then at the will of the jockey move into contention for the lead, then look its competition in the eye and pass with ease to the wire. Class horses like Cigar can have a high cruising speed and can move at the will of the jockey with ease.

[classhandicapper]

I disagree; closers lose because of lack of early acceleration and race distance; Forego was a contradiction to that assertion.

We are saying the same thing.

I am making a distinction that I don't think many people grasp in that there is a difference between a horse that closes because he utterly lacks the speed to keep up with much faster horses and the closer that is fast as all hell, but runs from behind early.

Forego was like Zenyatta.

If we held a controlled experiment and asked either Zenyatta or Forego to run as fast as they could for 3F, they would both be able to absolutely dazzle us with their speed once they got rolling. On the contrary, most deep closers run that way because they are slow slugs hoping to pick up the pieces when the faster horses with less stamina tire.

[pandy]

We are saying the same thing.

I am making a distinction that I don't think many people grasp in that there is a difference between a horse that closes because he utterly lacks the speed to keep up with much faster horses and the closer that is fast as all hell, but runs from behind early.

Forego was like Zenyatta.

If we held a controlled experiment and asked either Zenyatta or Forego to run as fast as they could for 3F, they would both be able to absolutely dazzle us with their speed once they got rolling. On the contrary, most deep closers run that way because they are slow slugs hoping to pick up the pieces when the faster horses with less stamina tire.

That's right. Zenyatta ran her last quarter in the 2009 BC classic in :23.1 and had to alter course, in the Hirsch at Del Mar that summer, she came home in :22.2 and he ran her last sixteenth in a sensational 5.2 seconds. What's even more remarkable, these were not fast surfaces.

Take it from someone who competed in track events in high school, it is a zillion times harder to record fast final quarters than early. This is proven by the fact that horses competing in cheap claiming races can go :21.4 to the quarter and we've even seen common claimers go to the half in under :45 seconds. Running fast splits at the end of a route race, entirely different story. Zenyatta, Forego, Silky Sullivan, these were extremely fast horses.