Bow down to my picks

[LemonSoupKid]

I did a whole write-up on this derby, which if you care to see I can post or send it to you. The gist of it however, is that these horses are the only ones that fit the profile of recent derby winners (I 'cap them in order):

Sweetnorthernsaint
Showing Up
Brother Derek
Pt. Determined
Bob and John

My two long shots are Jazil and Deputy Glitters. I'm playing the above 5 in an exacta box, the top 3 in a tri box, and a small win bet on Showing Up. A large win bet frontlines for me with Sweetnorthernsaint. I always bet more sparingly on this race however, then I drill the Preakness and Belmont (have won those 5 years going now - always a profit and substantial).

Obviously you'll notice who is left out. We'll see if I'm right.

LemonSoupKid

ps - did you see that Lemons Forever? I always bet any horse with Lemon in the name. 47-1! haha! Nice.

Just to add something extra, I'm sick and tired of seeing guys write off dosage as a "fraud" (Beyer said that, I like the guy, but that is a dumb comment). It was never meant to be a single handicapping utility. It supplements other aspects of the race and MOST IMPORTANTLY it points out the horses who are going to run towards historical quality in a classic race like the Derby. Simply put, the best races of all time have been run by horses with dosage profiles from 1-3, NOT 4 or above. No one ever said they couldn't win, but it takes unlikely circumstances for these horses to triumph (ie last year race falling apart and no one else running). If you doubt, look it up and check out the most dominating performances, and you'll see that those horses dosage is very classic. I just wanted to set this straight for people who write it off as being useless. It's no more useless than what one thinks about a horse who can "rate" or any other subjective measure that the pundits throw out there, and it actually can be tested. Cheers.

[Buckeye]

It would help your credibility if this was posted before the oaks.

It hurts it since it wasn't.

[Buckeye]

Can you narrow it down a bit from five possible winners (or is that 7)?

Thanks.

Also, pleaze post before 6pm tomorrow.

I'll take #8 to win the race but that depends on the odds.

:cool:

[Buckeye]

In other words, don't come in here and insult our collective intelligence (mine excluded!) by telling us what already happened.

Dosage was exposed in 1991.

Wake up Bo.

[LemonSoupKid]

Tell me how it was "exposed". That is usually done by creating something called an argument and reasonably attacking a position.

My pick is Sweetnorthersaint. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I thought my betting strategy was.

Wow, I wasn't claiming credibility or even legitimacy for the Lemons thing! It was "luck"! hahaa, just a random thing I do. You guys are reactionary as heck, wow.

LSKid

[Buckeye]

Good luck to you LemonSoupKid.

Strike the Gold was WAY over the Dosage limit in 91. Do I need to argue that?

Best of luck tomorrow.

[LemonSoupKid]

Good luck to you LemonSoupKid.

Strike the Gold was WAY over the Dosage limit in 91. Do I need to argue that?

Best of luck tomorrow.

Best of luck to you, as well.

This still has nothing to do with the argument. Notice that Strike the Gold had the 2nd worst Beyer of the last 15 years as well (Giacomo of course has that dubious title) for a Derby winner.

LSK

[PaceAdvantage]

Read the book "Fooled By Randomness" and then reevaluate your stance on the Dosage Index system.

[toetoe]

Speaking of dosage, what is the status of Mumia Abu Jamal? :D

[46zilzal]

Dosage suffers from the breeder's (and racing secretaries NEVER carding marathons at graded levels) NOT keeping up the stamina side of the equation, breeding for speed a precosiousness, so the minimum had to go up.

When there are few from the stout and professional categories to make up for the ad nauseum number in the brilliant and intermediate, the numbers HAVE to go up.

[jorge jaramillo]

Hi folks, this is what my handicapping software is giving for the kentucky derby, the same program that gave me GIACOMO as the second best last year, of course i was so embarrassed when i saw Shirreffs's horse as one of the real contenders that i thought i went wrong with the parameters of the program, believed or not i didnt have the guts to enter last year's picks at this site but now i'm facing the demons at the windows like Mitchell use to say in one of his books, any ways here they are if anyone here want to trust my software:


LPE 2LF 2LPE

POINT DETERMINED 402 203 773

BROTHER DEREK 401 204 797

BOB AND JOHN 392 196 762

SINISTER MINISTER 391 159 768

A.P WARRIOR 390 195 772

FLASHY BULL 388 195 729

JAZIL 387 205 761

BARBARO 381 190 758

SHARP HUMOR 378 195 760

SWEETNORTHERNSAINT 376 213 741

KEYED ENTRY 355 171 720

STORM TREASURE 353 189 747

SEASIDE RETREAT 351 194 716

DEPUTY GLITTERS 350 202 704

BLUEGRASS CAT 347 202 706

STEPPENWOLFER 347 191 710

CAUSE TO BELIEVE 347 192 745

LAWYER RON 343 192 701

SHOWING UP 339 185 742

PRIVATE VOW 338 179 677

LPE = Last Performance Evaluation.
2LF = Last Fraction for the last 2 races in one number.
2LPE = Performance evaluation for the last 2 races combined in one nunber.
NOTE: Last derby S.P.E.C.T.R.U.M has this number for the first 3 picks as follows;

BELLAMY ROAD 405 195 789

GIACOMO 404 202 787

AFLEET ALEX 395 209 783

I HOPE MY S.P.E.C.T.R.U.M WONT LET ME DOWN THIS TIME.

[jorge jaramillo]

The program also shows the improvement factors to all horses running since their next-to last-race with positive numbers thus reflecting the willingness of the horse to go the distance as well as their form and negative numbers showing the opposite; horses going the wrong way if trying longer distances which is the case with the kentucky derby:


POINT DETERMINED............+31

BOB AND JOHN...................+22

SINISTER MINISTER...........+14

JAZIL.................................+13

SWEETNORTHERNSAINT......+11

A. P. WARRIOR....................+8

FLASHY BULL......................+6

BARBARO............................+5

SHARP HUMOR.....................-4

DEPUTY GLITTERS................-4

PRIVATE VOW......................-4

BLUEGRASS CAT.................-10

SEASIDE RETREAT..............-14

STEPPENWOLFER................-14

LAWYER RON......................-15

STORM TREASURE...............-41

CAUSE TO BELIEVE.............-50

SHOWING UP......................-64

This parameters are telling us that all horses with ++
numbers have better chance to be in the money for this distance than any horse showing negatives, the bigger the
better of course.
COMMENTS: IF SPEED IS GOING TO COLLAPSE AS A GIVEN FOR THIS RACE IS A GOOD IDEA TO FOCUS IN THE BEST CLOSERS AND THEY ARE FROM BEST TO WORSE: SWEETNORTHERNSAINT(213), JAZIL(205),
POINT DETERMINED(204), BROTHER DEREK(203).
Thanks and good luck to all of you.

[LemonSoupKid]

Read the book "Fooled By Randomness" and then reevaluate your stance on the Dosage Index system.

Ok, according to what I've said, what is wrong with it? Again, as a single measure it is as useful as the handicapper is. It has pointed to the best performances in Classic races, however, as evidenced by history and even the last 15 years. If you're going to dawg what I've said, point it out! The trend is that if you have high dosage the odds are you won't run as good as past winners have run with lower dosages. It's a simple concept.

LSKid

[toetoe]

Not sure what "as useful as the handicapper" means, but I will say that as a sample set, the Derby is in its infancy. Isn't it much more sensible to figure which horse is in raging form, or about to be? Granted, none has gone 10 furlongs, but horses try new distances/surfaces all the time.

To sum up: esoteric breeding calculation plus sample size of 131 = little to hang your hat on. :)

[the little guy]

Read the book "Fooled By Randomness" and then reevaluate your stance on the Dosage Index system.

Excellent book.