Nyquist and the numbers?

[Capper Al]

Was it pen and paper cappers that made Nyquist the favorite? It might be. I would have picked Nyquist by pen and paper methods, but not by crunching my numbers. The trackman had him but not BRIS Prime. Two out of three times when the trackman disagrees with BRIS Prime my program sides with BRIS, using BRIS data might have something to do with this. I reviewed my data to see if there was a way to get Nyquist and really didn't find a way without twisting the app. We kid P&P cappers a lot here, but sometimes they have the edge.

[PaceAdvantage]

So that seals it then. Let's all switch to be Pen & Paper handicappers. I'm down with it. :ThmbUp:

[cordep17]

replays with a good form, like the ones you get from Brisnet for free, that tell you pertinent trainer stats with figures you can trust not to blatantly lie to you have always done me fairly well.

Replays showed Mor Spirit was basically Majesto who just got good quicker. Not bad, but a serious threat?

Replays showed that Gunrunner would find a trip that he's been comfortable taking every race of his career

Replays showed Creator and Suddenbreakingnews were the best deep closers and that Exaggerator might be a flight ahead of the back group with as good of a kick if not better than those 2 named.

Finally, replays showed Nyquist was in a lot of ways this year's American Pharoah. The horse who you continued to ask how much more he could do with the most favorable running style of all.

[Capper Al]

So that seals it then. Let's all switch to be Pen & Paper handicappers. I'm down with it. :ThmbUp:

We win some. We lose some. Just would have liked to have the Derby in the win some column.

[classhandicapper]

I think competent comparative class handicapping revealed he was clearly the best horse. It was numbers that gave some people doubts about him.

I thought he was the best horse and said so a few times. I used him on a few tickets with horses I thought were good value, but I did not cash. I could not key on him at 2-1 from a value perspective.

[Tom]

I had no problem with his numbers. He looked like the best horse on figs.
I questioned his only having one route race under his belt, and that he drifted out in the stretch last race. On class, I thought there was nothing close to him.

[Robert Fischer]

The numbers are fine, but doesn't take a brain surgeon to see that the great numbers of the :20: (can't even think of his name at the moment) aren't worth anything if he can't set a strong pace and hold it for 10 furlongs in a derby atmosphere. (something that an 8.5f prep and a very-hot SAD meltdown-excuse didn't stamp as more than a long shot)

and the numbers of exaggerator didn't mean a thing, if Nyquist was going to get a clean 1st run.

Nyquist was the OBVIOUS favorite, and the race ran to form.
Not because of his record, but because it was clear that he had the highest percentage chance to win.

2-1? (i don't know the final odds) was not a good bet, but the highest percentage winner won.

If you wanted to force an angle you either bet the :20: (wire to wire threat)
or Exaggerator (ran just as good as Nyquist in the san whatever in a race that Nyquist dominated tactically while Exaggerator chased wide)
or Mohaymen (favored vs Nyquist and then had a bad trip in fla derby)

it turned out very similar to 2015

'gun runner' ran just like 'firing line'
nyquist ran like AP

race ran almost perfectly to form with almost no trips.

only interesting stuff was horses closing past the stalkers for minor placings

[Capper Al]

Now that I think a little more about this; the public might have done well the last couple of years, but over the long run the public hasn't done too well with the favorites in the Derby.

[raybo]

I had Nyquist ranked 2nd in my "Class" rating ("basically" it's money won in dirt routes only) behind Brody's Cause, he ranked 3rd in my "PFV" method (Power Form Velocity) behind Mohaymen and Destin, and 2nd in my "still in work" "Weighted Factors" method behind Mohaymen. So, if you didn't like Mohaymen and Destin then Nyquist ranked #1 in all 3 rankings methods. But, at low odds, in a 20 horse field of young 3 year olds, you couldn't bet him, and for me , that's all that counts.

Nyquist also ranked 2nd in my "Class/Distance" method behind Lani, so most would have moved him to 1st ranking in that method (I certainly would have).

[fiznow]

Was it pen and paper cappers that made Nyquist the favorite? It might be. I would have picked Nyquist by pen and paper methods, but not by crunching my numbers. The trackman had him but not BRIS Prime. Two out of three times when the trackman disagrees with BRIS Prime my program sides with BRIS, using BRIS data might have something to do with this. I reviewed my data to see if there was a way to get Nyquist and really didn't find a way without twisting the app. We kid P&P cappers a lot here, but sometimes they have the edge.

Everything but his speed figures made him look like a favorite imo.

[Capper Al]

I had the top two finishers flipped-flopped. But the odds were too low for me too. On paper, I still think Nyquist look the best.

[Wickel]

The Derby replay will show that Mike Smith pulled another "Palace Malice," turning in a scorching 45-and-change half mile that took the starch out of him. And all this after breaking slowly. And the replay will also show that Mohaymen did not break alertly under Junior Alvarado, was shuffled back, then had no where to run first time down the stretch. When he got clear at the top of the lane, he came running, but it was too late. Replays will show that Alvarado needs to be replaced, and if so, Mohaymen romps in the Travers.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

7 for 7 lifetime
6 Graded Stakes wins
2YO Champion
4 G1 Graded Stakes wins
Put away the supposed Derby favorite handily in his final prep before the Derby.
All of these items towered over the rest of the field.

The biggest nick on Nyquist were his times and his figures.

He was undoubtedly the deserving favorite. My whole problem was 2/1. Regardless of the outcome of the race, 2/1 was an underlay. For crap's sake, he was 8/5 (2nd choice) in a 10 horse field in which it was considered a duel..... and 8 tomato cans.

He did have distance questions as well, although they were likely overplayed. EVERY horse in the Derby has distance questions until they actually prove they can run well at 10F or more.

[Nitro]

7 for 7 lifetime
6 Graded Stakes wins
2YO Champion
4 G1 Graded Stakes wins
Put away the supposed Derby favorite handily in his final prep before the Derby.
All of these items towered over the rest of the field.

The biggest nick on Nyquist were his times and his figures.

He was undoubtedly the deserving favorite. My whole problem was 2/1. Regardless of the outcome of the race, 2/1 was an underlay. For crap's sake, he was 8/5 (2nd choice) in a 10 horse field in which it was considered a duel..... and 8 tomato cans.

He did have distance questions as well, although they were likely overplayed. EVERY horse in the Derby has distance questions until they actually prove they can run well at 10F or more. All of which was pointed out well before the Derby! But many here were just looking for a price.

And on top of all this it won on 4 different racing surfaces with various running styles.

Nyquist is maturing very nicely. Who knows just how fast he can run? Will we ever know? Because all he ever wants to do is just win the race. Isn’t that all that really matters?

You don’t need "numbers" to define CLASS.
.
.

[classhandicapper]

7 for 7 lifetime
6 Graded Stakes wins
2YO Champion
4 G1 Graded Stakes wins
Put away the supposed Derby favorite handily in his final prep before the Derby.
All of these items towered over the rest of the field.

The biggest nick on Nyquist were his times and his figures.

He was undoubtedly the deserving favorite. My whole problem was 2/1. Regardless of the outcome of the race, 2/1 was an underlay. For crap's sake, he was 8/5 (2nd choice) in a 10 horse field in which it was considered a duel..... and 8 tomato cans.

He did have distance questions as well, although they were likely overplayed. EVERY horse in the Derby has distance questions until they actually prove they can run well at 10F or more.

That sums it up perfectly.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

All of which was pointed out well before the Derby! But many here were just looking for a price.

And on top of all this it won on 4 different racing surfaces with various running styles.

Nyquist is maturing very nicely. Who knows just how fast he can run? Will we ever know? Because all he ever wants to do is just win the race. Isn’t that all that really matters?

You don’t need "numbers" to define CLASS.

I looked for a price. 2/1 was absurd.

And is always absurd in a 20 horse field.

[Tom]

Sorry to spoil a good rant, but he did have the numbers. There no question he was in top of the field. The top two finishers and Exaggerator had the figs. Danzig Candy had the fig but ran too early.

One could have hit the exacta and never looked at any past performances.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Sorry to spoil a good rant, but he did have the numbers. There no question he was in top of the field. The top two finishers and Exaggerator had the figs. Danzig Candy had the fig but ran too early.

One could have hit the exacta and never looked at any past performances.

A guy walking in off the street could have hit the $30 Exacta. Chalk/Chalk.

I still can't believe the love for Danzing Candy. He was a speed/fade as easy as anything in the race.

Do people still believe that speed will win the Derby?

[Speed Figure]

For me there was no question that Nyquist was by far the top class horse by a lot in the field, but he was not the top numbers horse on my numbers. Exaggerator had the best derby prep race for me. This is how they look going into the Preakness.

[Capper Al]

7 for 7 lifetime
6 Graded Stakes wins
2YO Champion
4 G1 Graded Stakes wins
Put away the supposed Derby favorite handily in his final prep before the Derby.
All of these items towered over the rest of the field.

The biggest nick on Nyquist were his times and his figures.

He was undoubtedly the deserving favorite. My whole problem was 2/1. Regardless of the outcome of the race, 2/1 was an underlay. For crap's sake, he was 8/5 (2nd choice) in a 10 horse field in which it was considered a duel..... and 8 tomato cans.

He did have distance questions as well, although they were likely overplayed. EVERY horse in the Derby has distance questions until they actually prove they can run well at 10F or more.

That's why the Pen and Paper cappers made him the deserving favorite.

[Saratoga_Mike]

That's why the Pen and Paper cappers made him the deserving favorite.

...whereas quant-driven models didn't use him?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

That's why the Pen and Paper cappers made him the deserving favorite.

And who was/were your losing favorite(s)?

I tried to beat Nyquist with the :2::11::14:

All that according to my Pen and Paper caveman tactics.

[raybo]

Maybe Al meant "uneducated" pen and paper handicappers? :confused:

Lots of people look at the wins/starts records of horses, and when a horse is undefeated, they think that's the best horse, automatically. In this particular case, they were right. But, in other races, sometimes that very good win record just isn't enough. So, a pen and paper player that looked at that simplistic "perceived" class, certainly would have favored Nyquist, whereas, a non-pen and paper player would have used other factors in their analysis, and maybe Nyquist just didn't look unbeatable, based on those other factors. I have 20 rankings methods in my program, and only 3 of those had Nyquist ranked in the top 3. So, in my view, Nyquist was beatable, and his price sucked also, which made it a no-brainer to bet against him.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Maybe Al meant "uneducated" pen and paper handicappers? :confused:

Lots of people look at the wins/starts records of horses, and when a horse is undefeated, they think that's the best horse, automatically. In this particular case, they were right. But, in other races, sometimes that very good win record just isn't enough. So, a pen and paper player that looked at that simplistic "perceived" class, certainly would have favored Nyquist, whereas, a non-pen and paper player would have used other factors in their analysis, and maybe Nyquist just didn't look unbeatable, based on those other factors. I have 20 rankings methods in my program, and only 3 of those had Nyquist ranked in the top 3. So, in my view, Nyquist was beatable, and his price sucked also, which made it a no-brainer to bet against him.

Being undefeated is one thing, nearly winning more Graded Stakes races than the entire 20 horse field combined is another.

4 G1 wins prior to the Derby. FOUR. Pen, paper, mathematics. Doesn't matter. He was the class of the race. Period.

My fault was thinking that some other horses would go with the crap :20: horse who went out in fractions that I fully predicted and expected. I failed miserably in that nobody went with him. Nobody.

[Tom]

How many Gr1 HORSES has he beaten?

[Lemon Drop Husker]

How many Gr1 HORSES has he beaten?

Who?

Nyquist?

[raybo]

Being undefeated is one thing, nearly winning more Graded Stakes races than the entire 20 horse field combined is another.

4 G1 wins prior to the Derby. FOUR. Pen, paper, mathematics. Doesn't matter. He was the class of the race. Period.

My fault was thinking that some other horses would go with the crap :20: horse who went out in fractions that I fully predicted and expected. I failed miserably in that nobody went with him. Nobody.

My statement about him being undefeated was too simplistic. He could have had more wins than the others, even if he had losses, and the player that focus on his wins/starts stat would have still thought he was the best horse in the race, automatically, and again, in this case, they were right. But, in other races they might be wrong (and frequently are) because other factors override that one. The "obvious class" mindset works sometimes, and other times it fails miserably, especially in the long run where price plays such a large role.

[CincyHorseplayer]

My statement about him being undefeated was too simplistic. He could have had more wins than the others, even if he had losses, and the player that focus on his wins/starts stat would have still thought he was the best horse in the race, automatically, and again, in this case, they were right. But, in other races they might be wrong (and frequently are) because other factors override that one. The "obvious class" mindset works sometimes, and other times it fails miserably, especially in the long run where price plays such a large role.

Take Big Blue Kitten in the race before for instance. Class edge from hell but a deep marathon closer off a layoff in a 9f race. 9 ball side pocket Ray. Good point. :cool:

[Capper Al]

The numbers had Exaggerator again in the Preakness. The P&P cappers lost this one.

[cordep17]

The numbers had Exaggerator again in the Preakness. The P&P cappers lost this one.

what a weird way to interpret

[cj]

The numbers had Exaggerator again in the Preakness. The P&P cappers lost this one.

How do "numbers" pick a horse. Just curious how "they" picked Exaggerator this time and last time.

[Speed Figure]

what a weird way to interpret
He lives in his own little handicapping world..:lol:

[raybo]

The numbers had Exaggerator again in the Preakness. The P&P cappers lost this one.

Which "numbers" are you referring to Al? Certainly not the pace and speed figure "numbers". What "numbers" did Exaggerator have that beat Nyquist's "numbers" before the Derby and the Preakness? And, are you saying that none of the P&P cappers use those "numbers" too? Yes, Nyquist was a bad "bet" in the Preakness, because of his low odds, but he definitely had the "numbers" to win the race, the best "numbers" in the field as a matter of fact, he just happened to run the wrong "numbers", at the wrong time, in the Preakness, and got beat by a stronger finishing horse that day.

Now, in the Belmont, the published "numbers", at least the very best "numbers" (as qualified by many of the better players on this forum), might be a bit in error, due to the over-compensation, IMO, by pace and trip/pressure in the Preakness. If indeed Nyquist's pace battle and trip/pressure, in the Preakness, were as tough as most think, then that harrowing battle and the resulting high speed figure given him versus that of Exaggerator and Cherry Wine could result in another low priced horse who finishes up the track in the Belmont. And lots of torn up tickets, again.

Now, let's hear you say your "numbers" are better than CJ's/TFUS'. I know that's what you want to say, and the reason for your post. So, go ahead, and let's see what that gets you.

[Tom]

What about the P&P players who wrote down the numbers?

[Capper Al]

Like most Derbies, the crowd is moved by the news coverage. I can only speak to my system which had Exaggerator both times. But with Nyquist, the crowd did have something to go on. He was undefeated until now.

[PaceAdvantage]

What about the P&P players who wrote down the numbers?Dude, you just blew my mind.

[raybo]

What about the P&P players who wrote down the numbers?

LOL - that's a good one! :ThmbUp:

[raybo]

Like most Derbies, the crowd is moved by the news coverage. I can only speak to my system which had Exaggerator both times. But with Nyquist, the crowd did have something to go on. He was undefeated until now.

It wasn't all about the news coverage, the horse had the best numbers going into the Preakness, meaning everything except late pace, and if he doesn't get embroiled in a significant early pace battle he probably wins the thing, even with lower late pace numbers. More often than not, higher early numbers win versus higher late numbers, on the dirt, especially in the slop.

[Capper Al]

He lives in his own little handicapping world..:lol:

And that's were one has to be to be profitable.

[Capper Al]

What about the P&P players who wrote down the numbers?

Writing down numbers and adding up a few verse dozens if not hundreds of calculations by a software program. I hoped they used different color ink for fun.

[burnsy]

How do "numbers" pick a horse. Just curious how "they" picked Exaggerator this time and last time.

They don't. People that can look at the PP's, figure out the expected pace and weigh out the value of the odds.....pick winners or better yet, winning combinations. The numbers are just one fraction (part) of the equation.

That's why I don't rely on numbers that much. I rely on my wits...but that's just me. I'm pretty much pencil and paper, born and raised.

[Capper Al]

Putting together an image of what the coming race might look like is a gift that some have. A few of my old track buddies, were form readers and did better well.