Track Record or not ?

[karlskorner]

Interesting article by Steve Crist on the running of the Whitney

http://www.drf.com/news/article/87120.html

More interesting the blog comments by Steve Davidowitz and others at the end of the article. Even more interesting as suggested did the Track Super "goose" the track prior to the running of the Whitney. As I have said in the past the Track Super is either your best friend or worst enemy.

[ezrabrooks]

Interesting article by Steve Crist on the running of the Whitney

http://www.drf.com/news/article/87120.html

More interesting the blog comments by Steve Davidowitz and others at the end of the article. Even more interesting as suggested did the Track Super "goose" the track prior to the running of the Whitney. As I have said in the past the Track Super is either your best friend or worst enemy.

If the track was "goosed"..does that make LR's run even more impressive, since he did run down WB?

Ez

[Horsefan]

Disclaimer- I don't understand times but this whole thing intrigues me, I also checked out the above article and the forum.

I have been doing alot of research on this and have come up with some interesting ideas-

Tri Jet 1:47 (1974)

Left Bank 1:47.04 (2002)

Ginger Punch 1:49.19 (2007) won by 6 lengths 1 1/8 miles

Lawyer Ron 1:46.64 (2007) also 1 1/8 miles



First things first- I can't fathom them not having two systems working at once to time these races independently. But I guess that's not important now.

Ginger Punch's raw Beyer figure was 114 and they take -10 from that (can someone please explain why to me, I don't get that) to get her final Beyer of 104. That is a norm for her (last starts were 104 and 103)

Lawyer Ron's raw Beyer was an out of this world 138. Take -10 and his final Beyer would be a ghostzappin 128. His last three Beyers were 108, 109 and 106.

Wanderin Boy would have had a final Beyer of 120, his regular is 107.

Diamond Stripes would have had a final Beyer of 117, his regular is 104-106.

Many on other forums are really going at it and timing the video replays and claiming to get the same result, or very near it. Others swore that they got 1:48.24 and 1:48.31 on the video replay.

Even some of the big whigs (racing publications/free lance) are writing in on the forums giving advice to NYRA about how to resolve this. At first I heard that they figured the race to be off by a full second, probably from the early part. One minute they had Steven Davidowitz saying that he clocked it at 1:48.24 and than the last I heard he had it at 1:46.71.

Someone else wrote in that Lawyer Ron was wide on two turns and took a awkward step before the 1/2 mile pole (didn't seem to bother him) and no matter what he put in a real exceptional performance.

I am just interested how this will all play out and how and when they will remedy it. I wasn't a Lawyer Ron fan before (Little Horsefan is) but next time I'll be pulling for him:)

[kenwoodallpromos]

All you need to know is 3 dirt 6f races were run in less than 1:10 that day. LR has always shown stamina for routes.
If you want to know how fast the track was running, figure out the final times for the place horses.

[cj]

It has been proven rather conclusively that the time is, in fact, correct. I also don't think anything drastic was done to the track. The big difference in final times between the Go For Wand and the Whitney is mostly due to the crawling pace of the former race.

[OTM Al]

Crist is a pretty good writer (and I've told him so personally), so I am surprised he dashed off the story before checking the facts.

[PaceAdvantage]

The time is legit. Some horses sprout wings....Secretariat never ran another Belmont Stakes-type figure....(and no, I'm not comparing Lawyer Ron to Secretariat, but then again, Secretariat had a lot of trouble going 9 furlongs for whatever reason)

And is my memory correct in thinking it had rained briefly just before the Whitney? Perhaps that also had something to do with a surface change....

[PaceAdvantage]

Ginger Punch's raw Beyer figure was 114 and they take -10 from that (can someone please explain why to me, I don't get that) to get her final Beyer of 104. That is a norm for her (last starts were 104 and 103)

I suggest you purchase a couple of Andy Beyer books if you'd like to learn more.

[ghostyapper]

Well if the time is legit then I think they are gonna have to up that beyer from 116 to whatever they originally came up with, I think it was a 128.

I remember them doing this with congaree in the 2003 cigar mile. The initial figure was like a 126 or something and they thought it was too high so they just lowered it. Seems pretty subjective to me.

It didn't rain all day saturday.

[ghostyapper]

D

Ginger Punch's raw Beyer figure was 114 and they take -10 from that (can someone please explain why to me, I don't get that) to get her final Beyer of 104. That is a norm for her (last starts were 104 and 103)



-10 is the track variant they came up with for that day

[Good4Now]

When Brass Hat set a new Track Record at CD closing weekend the Louisville Courier Journal had a very interesting interview with the track super.
His take was the humidity allowed for a higher moisture level to remain in the surface with a noticable effect on times.

Seems my morning weather check for SAR showed mist for 3 hours in the time after training and before the races began.

I just thought LR went into a parallel time zone and came back again. A Borges kind of thing.

[PaceAdvantage]

It didn't rain all day saturday.

It didn't rain once during the day Saturday? Oh well...must have my days mixed up....

[Ron]

It didn't rain once during the day Saturday? Oh well...must have my days mixed up....

It rained hard from 8:45 to 9:15 Saturday morning, then probably drizzled until 10 or so. I was on the horse simulator in the museum from 9:15 to 10:00 so I'm not positive.

[Good4Now]

me thinks you might approve his request to change the moniker to THUNDERBIRD

[ghostyapper]

It rained saturday but it didn't rain during any of the races.

[kenwoodallpromos]

When Brass Hat set a new Track Record at CD closing weekend the Louisville Courier Journal had a very interesting interview with the track super.
His take was the humidity allowed for a higher moisture level to remain in the surface with a noticable effect on times.

Seems my morning weather check for SAR showed mist for 3 hours in the time after training and before the races began.

I just thought LR went into a parallel time zone and came back again. A Borges kind of thing.
Training was not unusually fast, so all sounds reasonable.

[PaceAdvantage]

It's official:

Lawyer Ron's Whitney Time Deemed Accurate (http://feeds.bloodhorse.com/~r/Bloodhorse/AllNews/~3/139176371/viewstory.asp)
The winning time of 1:46.64 for Lawyer Ron in the July 28 Whitney Handicap (gr. I) has been confirmed as the nine-furlong, main-track record at Saratoga Race Course.http://feeds.bloodhorse.com/~r/Bloodhorse/AllNews/~4/139176371

[KingChas]

It's official:

Poor horse gets no respect..shoulda named him Lawyer Rod... :rolleyes:

[karlskorner]

Now that the Track Record is settled still leaves open the question as suggested in the articles blogs, was the track "goosed". "fixed" or "adjusted" ala last years BREEDERS CUP ? A TRACK RECORD is worth at at least another 25/50k in the breeding shed, regardless who won the race.

[ezrabrooks]

Beyer gives LR a 116? Is that right? I wonder what their reasoning was, as the raw number had to be a lot higher.

Didn't see in anything in the DRF confirming the correct time of the Whitney. I guess they (DRF) are still looking at it..

Ez

[The Judge]

the other horses how is it that they all decided to wake-up and run the race of their lives at the same time ?

[ezrabrooks]

the other horses how is it that they all decided to wake-up and run the race of their lives at the same time ?

Follow the leader?

Ez

[PaceAdvantage]

A lot of folks like to theorize that competitive races bring out the best in runners. A lot of people theorize that a horse could have gone "much faster" if pushed....you see this a lot when a dominating horse lays over a field and wins by 10 or 15 lengths....I don't personally subscribe to this theory all that much, but there is probably SOME truth to it....

Which leads me to this point:

Everyone pre-race was talking about how competitive the Whitney was on paper. The final odds on the tote were something that is rarely seen in a Grade 1 race other than the Kentucky Derby....favorite went off at something like 4-1 and a bunch of other horses were at 5-1. This race WAS super competitive on paper.

So, you have a super competitive, evenly matched race. What do you think that is going to do? Do you think it is going to push man and horse to their limits in order to win such a competitive event? Do you think it's going to bring out some otherwise unforeseen efforts from some of the participants?

Only serves to reason that an ultra competitive event would lead to some pretty heady performances. I mean, that's what we all believe, correct? The more competitive a race, the more the participants are going to have to call upon all they have to win.....

Perhaps what we witnessed in the Whitney was a "perfect storm" of sorts....ultra competitive race (no doubt there) pushing the participants to run the races of their lives. Is that so hard to fathom?

I certainly hope not, because it's what I LIVE for as a FAN of the sport....

[Tom]

The fact that you had the winner doesn't hurt, either! ;):jump:

[46zilzal]

22.91 third fraction? In a nine furlong contest

Think about it as Secretariat never did that.

Very few sprinters can do that.

[Tom]

BRIS gave LR a 114 and Ginger Punch a 110.

[bigmack]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/8_1_07_19_07_10.jpg

Whatever happened to The Form saying on its website Sunday that the final Whitney time was "so completely out of whack with the other races on the Saratoga card that there is serious doubt about whether the clocking was accurate."?

[ezrabrooks]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/8_1_07_19_07_10.jpg

Whatever happened to The Form saying on its website Sunday that the final Whitney time was "so completely out of whack with the other races on the Saratoga card that there is serious doubt about whether the clocking was accurate."?

They are waiting for Crist to get the egg off his face..

Ez

[bigmack]

They are waiting for Crist to get the egg off his face..

And/or ponytail.

[46zilzal]

In Secretariat's then WORLD RECORD 9 furlong dash of 1:45 2/5, he went 45 4/5, then fractions of 23 2/5, 23 4/5 and finished in 12 2/5.

A world's record by a champion.

Now we are supposed to believe Lawyer Ron (a moderately effective horse) ran a faster fraction than the best of of the last 70 years?

I have a bridge for you to buy as well.

[46zilzal]

Even more outrageous is that Lawyer Ron was to have gained 1.5 lengths on the pace setter in that third fraction, putting HIS time in the 22.40 range.

Ridiculous that no one is challenging this. As ridiculous as not giving Red the Preakness record.

Time it yourself.
http://tekkenking.unblog.fr/tag/galop-usa/

[ryesteve]

Even more outrageous is that Lawyer Ron was to have gained 1.5 lengths on the pace setter in that third fraction
The chart I saw has him a length and a half back at both calls

[ryesteve]

Ridiculous that no one is challenging this
"Both the teletimer operator and New York Racing Association placing judge Stephen Foster hand-timed the race, as is normal procedure, and their results verified the teletimer result.
On July 30, the race was re-timed off the video recording of the Whitney before media representatives Jack Kelly of Equibase; Jerry Bossert, New York Daily News racing writer and president of the New York Turf Writers Association; and Mike Welch of Daily Racing Form. The race was hand-timed by Welch and Foster. Their timings were again consistent with the original teletimer result."

That looks like a challenge to me. What more would you want them to do?

[46zilzal]

correcto, but somehow the entire field went through a worm hole.
I timed the race crudely off a video and the final time is close. I would just question the splits.

[ryesteve]

I timed the race crudely off a video and the final time is close.
Ditto... off that videolink, the field hit the wire the first time at 2:06, and Lawyer Ron crossed the line at 0:19, which comes out to 1:47. No smoking gun.

[foregoforever]

I timed both the Whitney and Go For Wand off my TIVO capture and got very close to the official times. I also timed the 3/4 split in the Whitney, which coincided with the 3/8 pole, and was also very close to the official number. ABC's camera angles shifted throughout the race, but they had a pretty good straight-on view of the 3/8 pole.

I couldn't get a decent read on the 1/2 split, which corresponds to the 5/8 pole, as ABC's shot was at an angle. They weren't using the regular pan shot at that point, which should have provided a good view. I'm curious whether NYRA's re-timing included the splits.

There was some speculation early that they goosed the track between races, but that seems silly to me. I left Saratoga Saturday morning so I wasn't at the race, but I assume it was the usual water truck and furrowing between races. I don't see how you could goose that much with just those two devices even if you wanted to.

What amuses me about all this is that often there are problems coming up with a variant because there were no other similar races on the card that day. If memory serves, this often happens with the Wood Memorial, and it's been suggested that NYRA card another 2-turn dirt race on that day just to give the fig makers some help. This time, they had an absolutely identical race just before the Whitney, with horses of well-established class, and it still doesn't make any sense.

Go figure, so to speak.

[bigmack]

Of LR's pedigree, who's Langfuhr and better yet who's Donation?

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/8_1_07_21_52_33.jpg

[karlskorner]

Lenghty discussion over on Derby List about the 123/116 figure given to Lawyer Ron.

From an article by Dick Jeradi:

Beyer and Hopkins pointed to a similar situation in the 2005 Whitney. The raw data suggested that the winner, Commentator, got a 122. Saint Liam was inches behind. Hopkins accepted the data at face value.

"and it was probably wrong" he said.

Commentator has not been close to that figure since then. And Saint Liam the 2005 Horse of the Year and a really good runner, was simply not a 123 horse.

This time, Hopkins chose to try and make sense of a situation that was not at all clear-cut. Thus the projection of 116 for Lawyer Ron for the 2007 Whitney.

"We made the mistake once of going with what it appeared to be, knowing that it"s probably wrong" Hopkins said. "This time, I'm not doing that"

[kenwoodallpromos]

Among the Top Ten Leading Sires in
2006 with 14 Stakes Winners & 13
more Stakes-Placed. Sire of 2007
G1W Lawyer Ron and Jambalaya.
_____________________________
Funny thing is, I never see on any sire information what the final times are, just wins!!
\Do track records help sire fees?

[ponypro]

Im not positive but I mentioned to someone at the simulcast that the track was "sealed" for the first time that day before the race. Did anyone else notice that??

[OTM Al]

Yes. Frontrunners were doing well early, but then it seemed to revert back to the wide sweeping closing moves that had been happening early in the week after they ran over the track a couple times

[Indulto]

With apologies to Jim Croce:


If I could put time in a bottle
The next thing that I’d try to do
Is to spend every day near a mutual teller
And own some fast racehorses too

If I could make races end sooner
If chemicals could make bets come true
I’d cash every day with my thoroughbred’s trainer
Who knew what those bottles could do

Cause there always seems to be enough time
For traces of magic to dissipate.
Once you mask them
I’ve looked around enough to know
It seldom pays to participate
Without them

So when I see a track record broken
With fractions too good to be true
By a horse, on the pace, running wide around turns
Then re-breaking in midstretch too

Then I must have seen a classic horse,
Another Secretariat,
If you could breed one
But skeptics say ‘twas a classic case
Of performance enhancement,
If they’d ever seen one.


http://www.ziplo.com/time.html (http://www.ziplo.com/time.html)

[46zilzal]

I still vote for the third quarter worm hole theory

[Robert Fischer]

I gave Diamond Stripes a 110 "winning" beyer for his effort. I think that horse was predictable and formful.

In Wanderin boy's last 11 starts(including whitney), He had the lead 1st call 7 times record 5wins 2places.

Lawyer Ron's beyer being 5.75? lengths forward of Diamond Stripes = 116 beyer.


thats how i did it. then i fudged the variant.


lawyer ron had a brilliant finish off of a relaxed stride in the last race at Monmouth as well . (cc lopez/gotcha gold steal 8furlongs)

you could give Diamond Stripes a 112 if you want to make it higher.

regardless he ran a brilliant plain and simple. 116 126 doesn't matter , as long as you acknowledge the great race. Worth watching his finish several times in the last two races

[46zilzal]

In the world of yin and yang, the Whitney is the yang to the Blue Grass yin.

[ghostyapper]

Lenghty discussion over on Derby List about the 123/116 figure given to Lawyer Ron.

From an article by Dick Jeradi:

Beyer and Hopkins pointed to a similar situation in the 2005 Whitney. The raw data suggested that the winner, Commentator, got a 122. Saint Liam was inches behind. Hopkins accepted the data at face value.

"and it was probably wrong" he said.

Commentator has not been close to that figure since then. And Saint Liam the 2005 Horse of the Year and a really good runner, was simply not a 123 horse.

This time, Hopkins chose to try and make sense of a situation that was not at all clear-cut. Thus the projection of 116 for Lawyer Ron for the 2007 Whitney.

"We made the mistake once of going with what it appeared to be, knowing that it"s probably wrong" Hopkins said. "This time, I'm not doing that"

I don't buy that justification for the 116 at all. Did Commentator break the track record? If the final time is legit, I don't see how they CANNOT give him a 128 or whatever figure they originally came up with.

[ryesteve]

I don't buy that justification for the 116 at all. Did Commentator break the track record? If the final time is legit, I don't see how they CANNOT give him a 128 or whatever figure they originally came up with.
Because if it means every horse in the race ran a fig 10-15 higher than usual, then it obviously makes no sense.

[ghostyapper]

Because if it means every horse in the race ran a fig 10-15 higher than usual, then it obviously makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense. Every other distance race on the card was slow and he broke a track record. If it means every other horse in the race ran a lifetime best then so be it. You can't ignore the facts.

[ryesteve]

Every other distance race on the card was slow and he broke a track record.The speed of the track can change from race to race. I know you know that.


If it means every other horse in the race ran a lifetime best then so be it. You can't ignore the facts.If you're watching a Mets game, and every guy in the lineup (yes, even Castillo) hits 2 or 3 homeruns, do you assume the balls were juiced, or do you shrug and say, "Every guy had a lifetime best game on the same day... you can't ignore the facts"

[ghostyapper]

The speed of the track can change from race to race. I know you know that.

If the speed of the track can change that dramatically from race to race (seems like the race after had the same slow track with maidens going 6 in 1.11) then what is the point of even making speed figures?

What is your proof that the track was much faster for the whitney? Because the final time was fast? Doesn't seem like a smoking gun to me.

[ryesteve]

then what is the point of even making speed figures?If you're going to accept figures that make absolutely no sense, what is the point of even making speed figures?

What is your proof that the track was much faster for the whitney? Because the final time was fast? Doesn't seem like a smoking gun to me.Would you need "proof" that the ball was juiced after you just saw the Mets hit 25 homeruns in one game?
How can you ever prove it one way or the other? All you can do is look at the evidence and decide what is most likely. If every horse in a race runs a fig that is out of line with every other fig they ran before and after, it's far easier to accept a problem with the variant than it is to assume that all the planets aligned and every horse ran out of his skin on this one day in their lives.

If Secretariat won the Belmont by a length and a half, do you think people would still be talking about "2:24"? It was his margin of victory that lent credence to the time and vaulted it into the realm of the supernatural. If the entire field had been right behind him, the time would've been meaningless.

[The Judge]

It makes sense to wait because it can always be corrected after the next race, its the smart thing to do. If one of these horses comes back and runs another record breaker the Beyers can be adjusted for the Lawyer Ron race.

Yeah I know they all are going to "bounce" next out.

[njcurveball]

It makes perfect sense. Every other distance race on the card was slow and he broke a track record. If it means every other horse in the race ran a lifetime best then so be it. You can't ignore the facts.


This is the biggest problem with speed figures today, everyone trying to project and verify the perfect figure for each race.

Horses are herd animals and will try harder to keep up with the pack than outrun it. Only one horse needs to run exceptionally fast to have all the others do the same.

[ghostyapper]

If you're going to accept figures that make absolutely no sense, what is the point of even making speed figures?


The thing that makes no sense is using a scientific method to arrive at a raw figure and then when that raw figure does not agree with your preconceived notion of the ability of the runners, you adjust it to some random number that is "in line" with what the runners have run in previous races.

[classhandicapper]

Horses are herd animals and will try harder to keep up with the pack than outrun it. Only one horse needs to run exceptionally fast to have all the others do the same.

I used to not put a lot weight on this notion, but I seem to see (or notice) more cases of horses running good figures while being outrun and well beaten from the start that don't/can't duplicate them when drawn into weaker and slower fields where they should be able to win based on that figure.

On the flip side, if they compete right from the start against superior horses, they will usually collapse from the tougher pace and improve on that effort if dropped in against weaker.

It's as if as long as they are near in the back of the pack they can be dragged to a better figure by superior horses.

[kenwoodallpromos]

This is the biggest problem with speed figures today, everyone trying to project and verify ****the perfect figure**** for each race.

Horses are herd animals and will try harder to keep up with the pack than outrun it. Only one horse needs to run exceptionally fast to have all the others do the same.
_________________
If you are trying to handicap based on speed figures being accurate to within 15 points, or trying to use figures for any other finish position other than 1, you need to find better angles to use with what you already are using because you are relying too much on final race figures.
As I have said prior, all non-winners get a final time, then get the final time gets converted to lengths behind, then figure makers try to convert that to figures, then you try to convert lengths back and/or figures back into time. Or in this case, try to judge the "accuracy" of comparitave potential track record times of LR vs. and old record when you have no idea what the track conditions, composition, wind, pace, rabbit, running styles of leaders, jockey or trainer intent of other racers, drug composition in the blood of the old record holder, equiptment used, or any of many other variables.
As I said, stud fees and purses are only valued by the win, not the time.
Now some want to try to judge the relative quality of the winners of all the other dirt races on the card? WOW!
All I know is, all dirt winners that day where the purses were over $62k ran damn fast!!
Did they slow the track down again between the 10th and 11th race???LOL!!
___
"11th Race - Saratoga - Saturday, July 28th, 2007
Conditions: Maiden Special Weight, $56,000, State Bred Open 3 yo's & up, 6F, Dirt.
Off Time: 6:21 Start: 11 went. Good for all. Won driving. Track: Fast Weather: Clear 76o
Fractions: :221, :453, :58, 1:11 (:22.24, :45.68, :58.00, 1:11.09)"

[ryesteve]

The thing that makes no sense is using a scientific method to arrive at a raw figure and then when that raw figure does not agree with your preconceived notion of the ability of the runners, you adjust it to some random number that is "in line" with what the runners have run in previous races.
Part of that "scientific method" involves making the variant... which doesn't necessarily imply taking a simple average from an arbitrary standard. The best sets of figs are computed off variants which are derived from projections in the first place, so the "preconceived notion of the ability of the runners" that you seem to have a problem with, is already part of the process to begin with.

[Tom]

The thing that makes no sense is using a scientific method to arrive at a raw figure and then when that raw figure does not agree with your preconceived notion of the ability of the runners, you adjust it to some random number that is "in line" with what the runners have run in previous races.

You assume way to much to make any sense of your arguement.
First of all, it is NOT just a preconceived notion, it is a historical record they are looking at. Does this sequence not bother you? 67 65 71 69 98 ???

It is a red flag, and scientific methods use red flags to identify possible sources of variation. Maybe the track was suped, maybe there was a wind, maybe, maybe, maybe. It is not known why the race went that fast. Maybe all the horses DID run that fast. You cannot say for sure until they run back. Beyer Associates flag races like this and look at horses coming back to see if the figs seem legit or not. I have seen them goback and adjsut an entire month's worth of sprint ratings at a track when they revised thier track to track adjustment. It's called quality control.

If you want pure, never touched by human figures, use the DRF SR.

But this whole disussion is silly...is anyone going bet LR back if he got a 123 and not bet him him if he got a 116?

[ghostyapper]

Part of that "scientific method" involves making the variant... which doesn't necessarily imply taking a simple average from an arbitrary standard. The best sets of figs are computed off variants which are derived from projections in the first place, so the "preconceived notion of the ability of the runners" that you seem to have a problem with, is already part of the process to begin with.

The variant is computed from comparing each race's times to the par times for each class of runner. The simple DRF track variant (which is not used in beyers),was 7 not signaling a fast track for a day where 4 g1 races were run.

[cj]

The variant is computed from comparing each race's times to the par times for each class of runner. The simple DRF track variant (which is not used in beyers),was 7 not signaling a fast track for a day where 4 g1 races were run.

The variant on BC day was also 7, and nearly everyone was saying how fast the track was.

You have a few things to consider when making a variant. One is the time of the race, another is the time of the other races on the day. There is also the history of the horses in the race, in addition to the fractions of the race. Most times they all line up and the race makes sense. Other times, one or more of the above doesn't fit.

In this case, the pace was normal for the final time, even a little slow. What didn't add up was the time of the race in relation to the other races when considering the history of the horses. This is always a tricky situation.

The first route was the first race of the day, run many hours before the two G1s, so comparing that one is dubious at best. The two G1s make an interesting comparison. The mistake a lot of people are making is looking at the gap between the two. The key was the extremely pedestrian pace set in the Go For Wand. There was no way those horses were ever going to finish with a fast final time. So those projecting a 100 for the winner Ginger Punch are probably overestimating things.

It is very likely the horse was not able to run above a 95, and possibly lower, given the conditions. If you then compare that with the time of the Whitney, the picture is much clearer.

[ryesteve]

The variant is computed from comparing each race's times to the par times for each class of runner. The simple DRF track variant (which is not used in beyers),was 7 not signaling a fast track for a day where 4 g1 races were run.
How does any of this relate to what you were responding to? Why even bring up the the DRFTV, which is an average, when the whole point of this discussion is that lumping in this race with the average is not appropriate?

Have you actually ever read any of Beyer's books? If you did, and you came away with the notion that computing a good variant is a purely brainless, mechanical process, you need to go back and look again.

[ghostyapper]

How does any of this relate to what you were responding to? Why even bring up the the DRFTV, which is an average, when the whole point of this discussion is that lumping in this race with the average is not appropriate?

Have you actually ever read any of Beyer's books? If you did, and you came away with the notion that computing a good variant is a purely brainless, mechanical process, you need to go back and look again.

I apologize I got off topic. I suppose it would have been much more relevant if I brought up the mets or yankees or any other baseball team in trying to prove my point. :bang:

My objection is not the human element that goes into making the variant. My objection is coming up with a variant and then bumping down a race because you think the figure is too high compared to the variant

[ghostyapper]

The variant on BC day was also 7, and nearly everyone was saying how fast the track was..

The variant for last year's whitney day was 8 and I don't recall anyone saying how fast the track was

It is very likely the horse was not able to run above a 95, and possibly lower, given the conditions. If you then compare that with the time of the Whitney, the picture is much clearer.

Both of her last races were a 103 or better. She was working great and is in peak form yet you believe its very likely she ran lower than a 95?

[ryesteve]

I apologize I got off topic. I suppose it would have been much more relevant if I brought up the mets or yankees or any other baseball team in trying to prove my point.You're having a tough time grasping this, so I thought an appropriate analogy would help. Little could I imagine that you'd also have a tough time grasping the concept of an analogy.


My objection is not the human element that goes into making the variant. My objection is coming up with a variant and then bumping down a race because you think the figure is too high compared to the variantHow is "the human element" not the same thing as adjusting an out-of-whack fig? If a human doesn't do that, who will? Either you DO think a variant should be a purely mechanical process, or you have no reason to argue against the kind of adjustment that was applied to this race, unless your viewpoint is that there is a plausible explanation for inflated figs every horse would have had to have run. Like I said, revisit Beyer.

[GaryG]

Horses have been setting track records on "fast" tracks forever. This should be a non-issue. What do you do, put an asterisk by the time if the track was faster than normal? Should track records be adjusted by the variant, Beyer's or someone else's? As to the strength of the race, only time will tell.

[46zilzal]

I really don't think final time is the larger issue. An entire field running a sprint fraction in the third quarter of a race?

[Tee]

The leader clicked off the 3rd fraction in 23 flat. It was a half length back to second, another length to 3rd, to 4th etc etc.

Yeah the entire field ran a sprint fraction. :lol:


I really don't think final time is the larger issue. An entire field
running a sprint fraction in the third quarter of a race?

[cj]

Both of her last races were a 103 or better. She was working great and is in peak form yet you believe its very likely she ran lower than a 95?

Yes, it is very likely. Imagine the world's best milers running their best time. They will do it setting a brisk, but not suicidal pace, and finishing strongly. Now, imagine two weeks later, all the runners decide to walk the first lap. Sure, they have more energy left to finish the last three laps, but which day will they run the fastest final time?

This happens all the time in turf racing. It happens on dirt too, just not nearly as often. The jockey certainly didn't care what the final time was. He tracked a horse he knew he could beat with no other horse even close, put the horse away turning for home, and flew home. The pace ensured the final time would be slow.

[kenwoodallpromos]

"The leader clicked off the 3rd fraction in 23 flat. It was a half length back to second, another length to 3rd, to 4th etc etc.

Yeah the entire field ran a sprint fraction."

[Tee]

Race pace or leader winner/leader pace?

Wanderin Boy set the fractions including hitting the 3/4 mark in 1:10:1, which included the last 1/4 in 23:0. At that point in the race second place was held by Fairbanks who was a half length back & the eventual winner Lawyer Ron was another length behind him etc etc.

[classhandicapper]

I think this is one of those situations where comparative handicapping can be helpful.

I think most people would concede it's at least possible that the very fast time of the Whitney was aided by:

1. A slightly faster track than earlier in the card

2. A gust of wind

3. A pace that was moderate and energy saving early without being so slow as to cause a slower time.

4. A combination of things

Of course that doesn't mean it was, but it's possible.

I think at least some people might concede that the Go For Wand final time might have been negatively impacted by the very slow pace.

I am willing to concede that it's not entirely clear to me how much of this figure issue is related to track speed, pace, gusts of wind, the actual performances of the horses etc...

However, I am willing to look Lawyer Ron's performance based on his margin of victory over that field and the trip he had and confidently say it was a big effort but nothing super spectacular. It was a very solid Grade 1 performance. That Whitney field was extremely deep in quality, but it wasn't extremely high in quality. Most of the horses had routinely been beaten in Grade 1 races. Several of the contenders had done their best racing in Grade 3 races earning Grade 3 figures. Few if any of the horses had ever earned figures that made you think they were really solid Grade 1 horses even if they raced well in one in the past. Most of these horses were very seasoned and unlikely to improve drmatically. That kind of info is telling you something.

I think figure makers are sometimes forced to assign numbers in situations that are so complex, it's difficult to determine conclusively what contributed to the various final times. That's OK. Sometimes you can look at the result of a race and not understand what really happened unless you look at the fractions and final time. It works both ways.

The key is to know that something flukey might have happened that day. It's probably best to keep that in mind that when you look at any of the figures assigned for the Go for Wand and Whitney because there's probably going to be a fairly wide range assigned.