Street Sense BC Juvenile Beyer?

[depalma13]

Can someone explain this to me. It is one of the big concerns I have with Street Sense.

Dreaming of Anna 1:43 4/5 gets a 90 (1:43.81)

Street Sense 1:42 2/5 gets a 108 (1:42.59)

Circular Quay 1:44 2/5 gets a 90 (1:44.59)

These were consecutive races. Do you see the problem with this?

If Dreaming of Anna's number is correct, than Street Sense got a 102. If Street Sense's number is right than Dreaming of Anna got a 95/96.

Now I know it is easy to say Dreaming of Anna's number is wrong, but that means:

If she got a 95/96 equaling her turf and career best and the horses that ran behind her, Octave and Cotton Blossom both ran career bests, not just to that point, but up until today.

[the_fat_man]

Similar problems were encountered by those commenting on (ancient) works of philosophers (neo Platonists, medieval/early renaissance religious types tackling Aristotle, etc.)

While I greatly value the work of Proclus, Philoponus, Pappus, and others (notice, I've omitted Aquinas), they weren't exactly deep thinkers, and thus were reduced to ratiocinating on the work of others. (They did preserve work that would otherwise be lost however, and, the occasional screwup notwithstanding, their work was invaluable.)

And when they come upon inconsistencies in the MASTER's work, it SUCKED BEING THEM.

Now imagine, having to ponder INCONSISTENCIES in INCONSEQUENTIAL (even trivial) systems. Now, that's an intellectual life worth pursuing.

I think this calls for use of the PROTRACTOR (or some such other complicated device.)

[JustRalph]

Similar problems were encountered by those commenting on (ancient) works of philosophers (neo Platonists, medieval/early renaissance religious types tackling Aristotle, etc.)

While I greatly value the work of Proclus, Philoponus, Pappus, and others (notice, I've omitted Aquinas), they weren't exactly deep thinkers, and thus were reduced to ratiocinating on the work of others. (They did preserve work that would otherwise be lost however, and, the occasional screwup notwithstanding, their work was invaluable.)

And when they come upon inconsistencies in the MASTER's work, it SUCKED BEING THEM.

Now imagine, having to ponder INCONSISTENCIES in INCONSEQUENTIAL (even trivial) systems. Now, that's an intellectual life worth pursuing.

I think this calls for use of the PROTRACTOR (or some such other complicated device.)

Wow! Some post.......... sometimes I don't know how to take you Fatman?

But anybody who uses "Ratiocinating" in a sentence can't be all bad.........

I am guessing Bourbon? Maybe Scotch as your fav ? Fill us in.........

Btw, down south we just "Reckon" we don't ratiocinate.......... :lol:

[gIracing]

it's a reason I haven't looked at a beyer in about a year.

IMHO, the beyer is and has been used out of context for a while. The beyer was never supposed to be taken so dang literarly.

The beyer is for a horse like, hard spun, going a mile and a 8th for the first time against horses who have gone the distance and you want a general comparsion to how does hard spun compare.

I shouldn't have to look at two seperate horses, who hvae ran the exact two differences, and have to look at a beyer to tell me who had the better race.

A beyer is perfect for say a guy with a 2YO colt who just won his maiden by 6 lenghts and wants to know is this an ALLOWENCE calibur horse or a STAKES calibur horse.

Now, you can look at the beyer figures and see who DOESN'T belong in a race, but the problem lies when you start trying to make winning bets based off beyer figures.. that's not what it was ment to do.

[JPinMaryland]

And neo-platonism is to blame for all this? :confused: