Indyann breaks down

[point given]

Very sad , she was in front and inside of Indian Blessing in midstretch at Santa Anita and broke down badly. Goodbye girl , you deserved a full life.
I'm bummed.:(

The race before this Garrett Gomez was in front in a turf route and the horse tried to jump the rail coming out of the turn into the stretch. the horse was said to be ok but gomez was taken to the hospital.

[jfb]

Goodbye girl, you deserved a full life..

I could see Russell pulling her up, but could not tell how serious it was. I take it that she did not survive.

I share your sadness for her, for Greg Gilchrist and for those who cared for her."

[BUD]

F__ she did not make it?

Unreal!

[netbet]

According to Bloodhorse (http://racing.bloodhorse.com/article/48567.htm), she was placed in a splint and returned to the barn for an examination. Anyone know for sure?

[Greyfox]

The race before this Garrett Gomez was in front in a turf route and the horse tried to jump the rail coming out of the turn into the stretch. the horse was said to be ok but gomez was taken to the hospital.

I'm suspicious as to why #1 Back at You tried to jump the rail.
It looked as though something "spooked" that colt.
With today's high tech stuff, would it be possible to shine a laser beam at a horses eye and cause it to bolt like that? It was a very strange move by the horse.

[jfb]

According to Bloodhorse (http://racing.bloodhorse.com/article/48567.htm), she was placed in a splint and returned to the barn for an examination. Anyone know for sure?

according to DRF:

"Indian Blessing and Indyanne were side by side when Indyanne broke down. Indyanne suffered a fractured sesamoid in her left foreleg, track officials said. A winner of 5 of 8 starts and $449,870, Indyanne was undergoing further evaluation by a private veterinarian late Saturday afternoon, track officials said."

Come on babe, pull through!

[joanied]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/48567/indian-blessing-claims-marred-la-brea

I couldn't wait:jump: for this race....I wanted Indian Blessing to win, and win she did...but Indyanne is another favorite of everyone's...love that little filly, so I so bummed :( about this...I'm thinking since she went back to the barn...maybe she'll be OK? God, I hope so.

As soon as anyone finds out how she's doing, please post.
Come on Indyanne...pull through, please, please, please:ThmbUp:

[Endsweep24]

SHe fractured a sesmoid if it is a non displaced Sesmoid fracture she will be fine. But if it looks like a bomb went off it can get a little sticky.

[jfb]

Following the examination, Gilchrist was optimistic.

“It looks like she’s going to be saved,” he said. “The good part is the outside sesamoid is perfect and she tore very few ligaments. Her chance for recovery is 65-35 to be just fine as a broodmare. She’ll have surgery in the next three days. This could have been a lot worse.’”

“She was running good," Baze said. "Turning for home, she switched leads and then went wrong in her left front."

[cj]

Isn't that three breakdowns in two days of racing? Maybe the CHRB should mandate they race on cotton balls now.

[Marshall Bennett]

Yeah , had it happened on a dirt track it would probably be shutdown .

[JustRalph]

I was wondering when somebody was going to bring it up.

I watched the replay of that horse jumping the rail on my DVR about ten times in slow motion. It looked to me like he turned his head and looked right up at the judges stand or the crowd right behind him......... it is very easy to see in slow motion that he saw something that spooked him..........

[Greyfox]

I was wondering when somebody was going to bring it up.

I watched the replay of that horse jumping the rail on my DVR about ten times in slow motion. It looked to me like he turned his head and looked right up at the judges stand or the crowd right behind him......... it is very easy to see in slow motion that he saw something that spooked him..........

I presume you are talking about # 1 Back at You?
There was a big Pick 6 today and he was on his way. To win? Maybe.

[JustRalph]

I presume you are talking about # 1 Back at You?
There was a big Pick 6 today and he was on his way. To win? Maybe.

Yep, back at you. I think he had every chance to win, he looked like he was going on to me. It would have been a good stretch run no matter what.

[Greyfox]

Yep, back at you. I think he had every chance to win, he looked like he was going on to me. It would have been a good stretch run no matter what.

We agree! :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[bigmack]

Iit is very easy to see in slow motion that he saw something that spooked him..........
Don't know about that. It looked more like a bad step from an untidy turn.

http://vimeo.com/2649433

[point given]

Following the examination, Gilchrist was optimistic.

“It looks like she’s going to be saved,” he said. “The good part is the outside sesamoid is perfect and she tore very few ligaments. Her chance for recovery is 65-35 to be just fine as a broodmare. She’ll have surgery in the next three days. This could have been a lot worse.’”

“She was running good," Baze said. "Turning for home, she switched leads and then went wrong in her left front."

TG she will make it, i thought it looked pretty bad when she was being pulled up and feared the worst as Baffert in his interview after the race was very somber and said it was very sad that he couldn't enjoy the win , or some such. I'', m so glad that she may make it and live a full life.

Someone referred to some other breakdowns at SA. did they occur on the rail in the stretch run ?

[mountainman]

Don't know about that. It looked more like a bad step from an untidy turn.

http://vimeo.com/2649433

When an exceptional horse breaks down, it's always resultant of one bad step. Big name horses never get sore, never develop chronic ailments, and, most importantly, their connections never (ever ever ever) run them when they are less than 100%. Trainers entrusted with upper -echelon horses always put the animal's welfare first, and never (ever ever ever) get greedy. So when a Ruffian , a Go For Wand or a Graustark breaks down, you can rest assured that it's the first bad step the horse ever took.

[bigmack]

So when a Ruffian , a Go For Wand or a Graustark breaks down, you can rest assured that it's the first bad step the horse ever took.
Thusfar, we've had speculation @ the surFACE (2 breakdowns cj)

A "looked to me like he turned his head and looked right up at the judges stand"
One speculative: "Did they occur on the rail in the stretch run?" (No, by the way)
A couple of missteps & 1 clever:
So when a Ruffian , a Go For Wand or a Graustark breaks down, you can rest assured that it's the first bad step the horse ever took.

Have you reason to make such a statement of such an event?

[strapper]

Sure hope they can save 'Indy'. Beautiful and talented racemare.

[Greyfox]

Don't know about that. It looked more like a bad step from an untidy turn.

http://vimeo.com/2649433

Indyann took a bad step.

Back at You tried to jump the fence. He was spooked.

[supercap]

When an exceptional horse breaks down, it's always resultant of one bad step. Big name horses never get sore, never develop chronic ailments, and, most importantly, their connections never (ever ever ever) run them when they are less than 100%. Trainers entrusted with upper -echelon horses always put the animal's welfare first, and never (ever ever ever) get greedy. So when a Ruffian , a Go For Wand or a Graustark breaks down, you can rest assured that it's the first bad step the horse ever took.

Are you for real"big name horses never get sore ? or chronic ailments? " If you believe this , you need to get on the backstretch more often. I can name 2 off the top of my head: Serenas Song and Lure, Serena was the most unsound sore animal I ever saw on the racetrack, as for Lure chronic arthritis made him barely mobile most of his carrer. I think more appropriate is that Great horses run through thier pain and soreness while the chicken S@@t horses dont. As for owners and trainers not running horses unless they are 100% , that is a pipedream!

[rrpic6]

Are you for real"big name horses never get sore ? or chronic ailments? " If you believe this , you need to get on the backstretch more often. I can name 2 off the top of my head: Serenas Song and Lure, Serena was the most unsound sore animal I ever saw on the racetrack, as for Lure chronic arthritis made him barely mobile most of his carrer. I think more appropriate is that Great horses run through thier pain and soreness while the chicken S@@t horses dont. As for owners and trainers not running horses unless they are 100% , that is a pipedream!

I'm assuming Mountainman's post was entirely sarcastic. Since he's the host for Mountaineer's Simulcast shows, he certainly has spent many an hour on the backside. Not to put words in his mouth, but he might be trying to defend the times when cheap claimers at Mountaineer break down, and all the blame that follows.

RR

[Marshall Bennett]

I was wondering when somebody was going to bring it up.

I watched the replay of that horse jumping the rail on my DVR about ten times in slow motion. It looked to me like he turned his head and looked right up at the judges stand or the crowd right behind him......... it is very easy to see in slow motion that he saw something that spooked him..........
I zoomed in with my 50" in slow motion and saw the same thing .

[mountainman]

Are you for real"big name horses never get sore ? or chronic ailments? " If you believe this , you need to get on the backstretch more often. I can name 2 off the top of my head: Serenas Song and Lure, Serena was the most unsound sore animal I ever saw on the racetrack, as for Lure chronic arthritis made him barely mobile most of his carrer. I think more appropriate is that Great horses run through thier pain and soreness while the chicken S@@t horses dont. As for owners and trainers not running horses unless they are 100% , that is a pipedream!

Methinks you have misinterpreted my post sir.

[mountainman]

I'm assuming Mountainman's post was entirely sarcastic. Since he's the host for Mountaineer's Simulcast shows, he certainly has spent many an hour on the backside. Not to put words in his mouth, but he might be trying to defend the times when cheap claimers at Mountaineer break down, and all the blame that follows.

RR

Spot on. And thanks for getting it. Nothing steams me more than the connections invariably getting a pass when major stakes horses break down.

[supercap]

poor taste... Ask Larry Jones about his free pass on Eight Belles!

[mountainman]

poor taste... Ask Larry Jones about his free pass on Eight Belles!
So since it (finally) dawns on you that I'm even more cynical than you are, and thus you can't continue to lecture me on the "realities" of the game, my post was in poor taste?? In addition, you still miss the point. Larry Jones took heat-and undeservedly so- for running a filly in the ky derby, but nobody so much as implied that Eight Belles may have had soundness issues going in. So, in that sense, Jones was indeed issued the standard trainer's pass.

[WinterTriangle]

Indyanne won't race again.

I think mountain is correct, many say she was running sore .... running a filly against males has to take it's toll.....she ran against older males in the Sausilito---- that was quite a race, the pace was crazy and she kept battling one male after another ----and still managed 2nd.

She had also never run a race longer than 6F, so Gilchrest was "wondering" about La Brea.

There ARE people who sit a racetracks and watch training workouts and they know if a horse is sore. I wouldn't know, but I trust them. I'm all for *challenging* a great horse......IF that horse is in the best condition of it's life and can take it on. The average bettor wouldn't know that status.

When's the last time any of you sat all day, day after day, at a track and just watched workouts and took notes? Until then, I trust the ones who do. sorry.

[Marshall Bennett]

Amazing how Monday morning quarterbacks surface following a breakdown .

[supercap]

So since it (finally) dawns on you that I'm even more cynical than you are, and thus you can't continue to lecture me on the "realities" of the game, my post was in poor taste?? In addition, you still miss the point. Larry Jones took heat-and undeservedly so- for running a filly in the ky derby, but nobody so much as implied that Eight Belles may have had soundness issues going in. So, in that sense, Jones was indeed issued the standard trainer's pass.

Poor Taste!!!!

[joanied]

Following the examination, Gilchrist was optimistic.

“It looks like she’s going to be saved,” he said. “The good part is the outside sesamoid is perfect and she tore very few ligaments. Her chance for recovery is 65-35 to be just fine as a broodmare. She’ll have surgery in the next three days. This could have been a lot worse.’”

“She was running good," Baze said. "Turning for home, she switched leads and then went wrong in her left front."

Thank goodness...that's very good news, and let's all keep our fingers crossed for Indyanne...
pull through surgery and get better...she out to make a hell of a nice broodmare...sure will miss her on the track...but, all that matters is she pulls through and is OK.

[bigmack]

Back at You tried to jump the fence. He was spooked.It's odd the jock didn't steer him off from being so tight on the rail and then he jumped off causing Back at You to jump as well.
pkjPw35XQ88

Nothing steams me more than the connections invariably getting a pass when major stakes horses break down.

That may very well be, but it certainly is in bad taste to jettison innuendo in this case as a result of your resentment.

[Greyfox]

I've watched the Back at You incident a dozen times and still haven't figured it out. It didn't appear to be a bad step. Gomez would never have jumped on purpose into that traffic. I still think it was spooked somehow.

[JeremyJet]

So since it (finally) dawns on you that I'm even more cynical than you are, and thus you can't continue to lecture me on the "realities" of the game, my post was in poor taste?? In addition, you still miss the point. Larry Jones took heat-and undeservedly so- for running a filly in the ky derby, but nobody so much as implied that Eight Belles may have had soundness issues going in. So, in that sense, Jones was indeed issued the standard trainer's pass.

Jerry Brown was critical of EIGHT BELLES' connections going in to the Derby. His comments:

EIGHT BELLES—is the best three-year old filly in the country, and at the same level as Rags To Riches was at this point in her career. She gets five pounds, worth one point on the Thoro-Graph scale, so on any of her last four she’ll be right in the thick of this. The negatives here are that she’s already done an awful lot of developing, has run nine times since September, and is coming off four huge efforts, all of which will eventually take its toll. Bearing in (“BI”) last time might be a sign that “eventually” is imminent, but with lots of good figures, at a decent price, this one has to be used.

Regards,

JeremyJet

[Donnie]

Big--
Thanks for the slow-mo!
Between the 2:13 and 2:15 mark of the video, Back at You turns his head sharply, and although others say it appears he looks right up at the steward, considering a horse's eyes are on the sides of their heads, he appears to be actually cranking around to get a better look at Flashmans Papers. Rafael also said in the post race interview that it appeared to him that BAY was spooked by them as they engaged him. I would imagine he had his sights set on that horse as they were in passing gear. He would have the best view in the house as to what might have happened. Blinkers may have made all the difference. But then again, he very likely would have shutdown as blinkers would probably have made the appearance of another horse seem even more abrupt. Spinning out of the turn, as they appeared to be doing, FP probably seemed to have come from out of nowhere anyway.

[cj]

Jerry Brown was critical of EIGHT BELLES' connections going in to the Derby. His comments:

EIGHT BELLES—is the best three-year old filly in the country, and at the same level as Rags To Riches was at this point in her career. She gets five pounds, worth one point on the Thoro-Graph scale, so on any of her last four she’ll be right in the thick of this. The negatives here are that she’s already done an awful lot of developing, has run nine times since September, and is coming off four huge efforts, all of which will eventually take its toll. Bearing in (“BI”) last time might be a sign that “eventually” is imminent, but with lots of good figures, at a decent price, this one has to be used.

Regards,

JeremyJet

If every horse that TG said ran too fast was rested, we'd have 4 horse fields and have to run on Saturdays and Sundays only. Personally, I think this foolish "bounce" stuff is a really bad thing for horsemen to buy into. Maybe that is why Bobby Frankel scratch 8 out of every 10 horses he enters.

[applebee]

I've watched the Back at You incident a dozen times and still haven't figured it out. It didn't appear to be a bad step. Gomez would never have jumped on purpose into that traffic. I still think it was spooked somehow.
for me it looks like Back At You jumped Kelly Leeks shadow

[classhandicapper]

If every horse that TG said ran too fast was rested, we'd have 4 horse fields and have to run on Saturdays and Sundays only. Personally, I think this foolish "bounce" stuff is a really bad thing for horsemen to buy into. Maybe that is why Bobby Frankel scratch 8 out of every 10 horses he enters.

I agree.

I remember reading about form cycles in those $2 handicapping books that focused on "earn ability" etc.. when I was a teenager decades ago. It's not news to anyone that horses eventually feel the wear and tear of a long hard campaign and go off form. This whole bounce theory nonsense has does enormous harm to racing. Most of the time, when people refer to horses boucing, all they are observing is fluctuations in figures related to pace, bias, trip, surface preferences etc... that have nothing to do with the stress of a previous race. A lot of the rest of the time it's mean reversion from a randomly good day. Yet all this handicapping ignorance has lead many of our trainers to run their horses less frequently, which in turn gives us all these short fields in stakes etc... Every study I have ever seen or done suggests that the faster a sharp horse comes back off a good figure or win, the higher the probability that it will win. Sure, every once in a great while a horse will actually bounce off an especially stressful effort, but in the grand scheme of things I have never seen a greater amount of handicapping ignorance or overrated nonsense than among those that promote aspects of bounce theory for practially every fluctuation of figures.

[onefast99]

Indyanne won't race again.

I think mountain is correct, many say she was running sore .... running a filly against males has to take it's toll.....she ran against older males in the Sausilito---- that was quite a race, the pace was crazy and she kept battling one male after another ----and still managed 2nd.

She had also never run a race longer than 6F, so Gilchrest was "wondering" about La Brea.

There ARE people who sit a racetracks and watch training workouts and they know if a horse is sore. I wouldn't know, but I trust them. I'm all for *challenging* a great horse......IF that horse is in the best condition of it's life and can take it on. The average bettor wouldn't know that status.

When's the last time any of you sat all day, day after day, at a track and just watched workouts and took notes? Until then, I trust the ones who do. sorry.
I ran a filly last year at GP and she beat the males on the turf. Cameback to win a Stakes at Monmouth a month later. They can handle their own vs the fellas, but putting one in the Kentucky derby is a bit much. Thats why I think they did the ladies day this year for the breeders cup races. That to me was a good thing.

[the little guy]

I ran a filly last year at GP and she beat the males on the turf. Cameback to win a Stakes at Monmouth a month later. They can handle their own vs the fellas, but putting one in the Kentucky derby is a bit much. Thats why I think they did the ladies day this year for the breeders cup races. That to me was a good thing.


Tell that to Winning Colors.

[onefast99]

Are you for real"big name horses never get sore ? or chronic ailments? " If you believe this , you need to get on the backstretch more often. I can name 2 off the top of my head: Serenas Song and Lure, Serena was the most unsound sore animal I ever saw on the racetrack, as for Lure chronic arthritis made him barely mobile most of his carrer. I think more appropriate is that Great horses run through thier pain and soreness while the chicken S@@t horses dont. As for owners and trainers not running horses unless they are 100% , that is a pipedream!
It doesnt matter if its the Green Monkey or a 5k claimer each and every horse goes thru some sort of ailments in their racing careers. I understand Mountaineer is a track where they run a lot more 5k claimers then allowance or stakes races maybe the person mountainman should talk to is the track vet. If he cant see a horse who is lame or sick then he should be replaced by someone who can.

[JeremyJet]

If every horse that TG said ran too fast was rested, we'd have 4 horse fields and have to run on Saturdays and Sundays only. Personally, I think this foolish "bounce" stuff is a really bad thing for horsemen to buy into. Maybe that is why Bobby Frankel scratch 8 out of every 10 horses he enters.

Why the sour grapes, CJ? You have something against sheet methodology?

Regards,

JeremyJet

[cj]

Why the sour grapes, CJ? You have something against sheet methodology?

Regards,

JeremyJet

The only thing I have against the sheets is as a bettor, not as a figure maker if that is what you are implying. I think the whole "bounce" thing is totally fraudulent and has kept more horses in the barn than most other factors combined. This keeps field sizes down and races less competitive. There are tons of reasons why a top figure horse doesn't run its "A" race, the least of which is usually the mythical bounce.

[JeremyJet]

I agree.

I remember reading about form cycles in those $2 handicapping books that focused on "earn ability" etc.. when I was a teenager decades ago. It's not news to anyone that horses eventually feel the wear and tear of a long hard campaign and go off form. This whole bounce theory nonsense has does enormous harm to racing. Most of the time, when people refer to horses boucing, all they are observing is fluctuations in figures related to pace, bias, trip, surface preferences etc... that have nothing to do with the stress of a previous race. A lot of the rest of the time it's mean reversion from a randomly good day. Yet all this handicapping ignorance has lead many of our trainers to run their horses less frequently, which in turn gives us all these short fields in stakes etc... Every study I have ever seen or done suggests that the faster a sharp horse comes back off a good figure or win, the higher the probability that it will win. Sure, every once in a great while a horse will actually bounce off an especially stressful effort, but in the grand scheme of things I have never seen a greater amount of handicapping ignorance or overrated nonsense than among those that promote aspects of bounce theory for practially every fluctuation of figures.

:D

Getting a grasp on the bounce theory requires useing quality speed figures. :p

Regards,

JeremyJet

[cj]

Tell that to Winning Colors.

Zarkava, a 3 year old filly, really struggled destroying older male horses in the most prestigious race in the world.

[the little guy]

Why the sour grapes, CJ? You have something against sheet methodology?

Regards,

JeremyJet


Why is it sour grapes to poke holes in the very thin membrane that is the bounce theory?

But, hey, I won't do it here.....I do it enough to Jerry. It's just too easy. But, Class Handicapper pretty much summed it up perfectly.

[the little guy]

Zarkava, a 3 year old filly, really struggled destroying older male horses in the most prestigious race in the world.

Come on, everyone knows she was retired after the Arc because she was physically destroyed by blowing away the colts she faced.

[the little guy]

:D

Getting a grasp on the bounce theory requires useing quality speed figures. :p

Regards,

JeremyJet


Getting a grasp on reality sometimes requires using quality medication.

[JeremyJet]

The only thing I have against the sheets is as a bettor, not as a figure maker if that is what you are implying. I think the whole "bounce" thing is totally fraudulent and has kept more horses in the barn than most other factors combined. This keeps field sizes down and races less competitive. There are tons of reasons why a top figure horse doesn't run its "A" race, the least of which is usually the mythical bounce.

Well, maybe you can save Ian some money because he uses Thoro-Graph and The Sheets. I suspect he subscribes to the bounce theory.

Regards,

JeremyJet

[cj]

Well, maybe you can save Ian some money because he uses Thoro-Graph and The Sheets. I suspect he subscribes to the bounce theory.

Regards,

JeremyJet

While I don't agree with some of the methods TG uses to make figures, I have never said they aren't a quality product.

Ian has posted Tampa the past week. Did he mention bounce? I honestly don't know, and he can certainly do what he likes which is what makes this game great. I don't think he would use mine on his site if he didn't think they were very good, but hey, I could be wrong. I do recall him mentioning my figures were his starting point in handicapping, but I might be wrong on that part too.

Again though, my statement had nothing to do with the quality of the TG figures. I thought I made that clear, but you obviously keep wanting to ignore that.

[JeremyJet]

Zarkava, a 3 year old filly, really struggled destroying older male horses in the most prestigious race in the world.

It's interesting to note just how lightly raced she was. The Arc was only her 5th start of the year.

Regards,

JeremyJet

[the little guy]

It's interesting to note just how lightly raced she was. The Arc was only her 5th start of the year.

Regards,

JeremyJet


You figure the Aga Khan is a big sheet devotee?

[JeremyJet]

You figure the Aga Khan is a big sheet devotee?

CJ,

Tell your girlfriend to back off. :cool:

Regards,

JeremyJet

[bigmack]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/12_28_08_16_31_28.png

[onefast99]

Tell that to Winning Colors.
9 out of 38 in the money 3 that won it. With too many other big purses out there today(less prestigious)why not run against the other fillies and have a much better chance to win.

[big frank]

Great job by Baze to stop on her right away... It reminds me of Mike Smith on Holy Bull ,,,,, i feel a lesser rider would have rode for another couple of seconds and that makes a Huge difference...

[cj]

She raced 5 times in 6 months, and all were huge races. She also raced twice as a 2yo. There is no racing of note in the winter in Europe.

[cj]

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/12_28_08_16_31_28.png

Hey Mack,

How'd you get that picture of me? That is pretty much my hairstyle since the Air Force bid me adieu!

[the little guy]

CJ,

Tell your girlfriend to back off. :cool:

Regards,

JeremyJet

That's about the expected response from somebody who believes in the bounce theory.

[JeremyJet]

She raced 5 times in 6 months, and all were huge races. She also raced twice as a 2yo. There is no racing of note in the winter in Europe.

They weren't all huge efforts. Here's her Timeform Ratings:

09/09/07 90
07/10/07 118+
---------------
13/04/08 109+
11/05/08 119+
08/06/08 124+
14/09/08 121+
05/10/08 130+

Regards,

JeremyJet

[toetoe]

Quickly, as I gotta bounce.

Cj, thanks for voicing my sentiments as to the "need for a new surface" --- I can't talk about that boondoggle without bitterness creeping into my postage. What can I tell ya ? I'm so superficial. :blush:

Back at you --- ALL of you.

[supercap]

It's odd the jock didn't steer him off from being so tight on the rail and then he jumped off causing Back at You to jump as well.
pkjPw35XQ88



That may very well be, but it certainly is in bad taste to jettison innuendo in this case as a result of your resentment.
I take it from your incessant banter , you agree with my assessment. Resentment over what????

[JeremyJet]

Cj,

Why do you graph your numbers if you think the "whole "bounce" thing is totally fraudulent"?

Regards,

JeremyJet

[bigmack]

I take it from your incessant banter , you agree with my assessment. Resentment over what????
Scratch (http://www.fancygens.com/gens/scratcher/show.swf?baseURL=http://www.fancygens.com/gens/scratcher/&clickURL=http://www.fancygens.com/&clickLABEL=Get%20Your%20Own%20Scratch&flashLABEL=fancygens%20-%20FREE%20STUFF!!!&txt=Incessant%20banter%20-%20How%20dare%20you%3F%0D%0DI%20once%20threw%20a%2 0shoe%20at%20someone%20who%20said%20something%20si milar.%20%20So%20you%20have%20to%20ask%20yourself% 20-%20Do%20you%20think%20you%20could%20dodge%20a%20fa st%20moving%20shoe%3F%20%20Well,%20do%20ya%3F%0D%0 D%0D%0D&cl1=16777215&cl2=0&cl3=13382451)

[bigmack]

Gomez, en route to his third consecutive national money title, lost several upper front teeth, suffered a gash on his left knee that didn't require sutures, and a swollen left hand after the 2-year-old colt Back At You veered in during the stretch run of the Eddie Logan Stakes Dec. 27. Back At You hit the rail, unseating Gomez.

Gomez, who turns 37 on New Year’s Day, was excused from his seven mounts, but remained on his five scheduled mounts for Dec. 29. Anderson was confident Gomez could honor those assignments.

“There’s better than a good chance he could ride tomorrow,” Anderson said. “Amazing as it seems, there was even a small chance he could have ridden today. He’s tougher than I don’t-know-what.”

http://news.bloodhorse.com/article/48573.htm?id=48573&source=rss

Who among us would go back to work a couple days after having several front teeth knocked out?

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/toothless.jpg
Lola "Sweet Tooth" Gunderson
Professional Handicapper
Beloit, WI

[Greyfox]

Who among us would go back to work a couple days after having several front teeth knocked out?

Not me.

[supercap]

Scratch (http://www.fancygens.com/gens/scratcher/show.swf?baseURL=http://www.fancygens.com/gens/scratcher/&clickURL=http://www.fancygens.com/&clickLABEL=Get%20Your%20Own%20Scratch&flashLABEL=fancygens%20-%20FREE%20STUFF!!!&txt=Incessant%20banter%20-%20How%20dare%20you%3F%0D%0DI%20once%20threw%20a%2 0shoe%20at%20someone%20who%20said%20something%20si milar.%20%20So%20you%20have%20to%20ask%20yourself% 20-%20Do%20you%20think%20you%20could%20dodge%20a%20fa st%20moving%20shoe%3F%20%20Well,%20do%20ya%3F%0D%0 D%0D%0D&cl1=16777215&cl2=0&cl3=13382451)
maybe

[mountainman]

Jerry Brown was critical of EIGHT BELLES' connections going in to the Derby. His comments:

EIGHT BELLES—is the best three-year old filly in the country, and at the same level as Rags To Riches was at this point in her career. She gets five pounds, worth one point on the Thoro-Graph scale, so on any of her last four she’ll be right in the thick of this. The negatives here are that she’s already done an awful lot of developing, has run nine times since September, and is coming off four huge efforts, all of which will eventually take its toll. Bearing in (“BI”) last time might be a sign that “eventually” is imminent, but with lots of good figures, at a decent price, this one has to be used.

Regards,

JeremyJet

While this analysis is no doubt prescient, I was lamenting the POST-race failure of pundits and prominent handicappers to even address the possibility that the filly had infirmities going in. Thanks for the response.

[the little guy]

While this analysis is no doubt prescient, I was lamenting the POST-race failure of pundits and prominent handicappers to even address the possibility that the filly had infirmities going in. Thanks for the response.


Many, if not most, horses have infirmities going into races. To selectively go after the connections of Eight Belles simply because she broke down is exactly the kind of sensational journalism that hinders credibility. There was a great deal of discussion about the state of the industry after this incident, and more than a few credible people discussed this responsibly. How exactly do the specifics in this case supercede the overall situation?

[mountainman]

I agree.

I remember reading about form cycles in those $2 handicapping books that focused on "earn ability" etc.. when I was a teenager decades ago. It's not news to anyone that horses eventually feel the wear and tear of a long hard campaign and go off form. This whole bounce theory nonsense has does enormous harm to racing. Most of the time, when people refer to horses boucing, all they are observing is fluctuations in figures related to pace, bias, trip, surface preferences etc... that have nothing to do with the stress of a previous race. A lot of the rest of the time it's mean reversion from a randomly good day. Yet all this handicapping ignorance has lead many of our trainers to run their horses less frequently, which in turn gives us all these short fields in stakes etc... Every study I have ever seen or done suggests that the faster a sharp horse comes back off a good figure or win, the higher the probability that it will win. Sure, every once in a great while a horse will actually bounce off an especially stressful effort, but in the grand scheme of things I have never seen a greater amount of handicapping ignorance or overrated nonsense than among those that promote aspects of bounce theory for practially every fluctuation of figures.

Many handicappers well versed in the situational factors that can influence performance nonetheless believe in form cycles, the bounce included. I do think that the term "bounce" has been stretched and misused. I once did some analysis for drf and was issued a booklet of guidelines admonishing handicappers to employ the word only in its pure( and original )sense-in reference, that is, to a horse regressing second time off-the-shelf, in particular, when the comeback race was strenuous.

In a broader context, to deny thoroughbred form cycles is to view potential performance as strictly a function of fitness, and that's probably a mistake. Why else would research indicate that animals peak in the 4th or 5th start following layoffs? Or so many horses indeed regress on the heels of grueling comeback efforts? Or trainers so often state that a horse is "going into this race better than he(she) did the last one?" Handicappers too quick to attribute figure fluctuations to a horse having "good" days and "bad" days neglect an important piece of the puzzle-soundess. Horses aren't numbers on a page. They are flesh and blood creatures with infirmities that flare up, get treated, and sometimes subside for a period. All of this impacts performance in a not always unpredictable manner. In other words, just because a handicapper is unaware of certain reasons that thoroughbreds fire big or not at all, doesn't mean that the effort was random.

[RichieP]

Getting a grasp on reality sometimes requires using quality medication.

Some will get the job done rather quickly!
:eek:

[supercap]

Many handicappers well versed in the situational factors that can influence performance nonetheless believe in form cycles, the bounce included. I do think that the term "bounce" has been stretched and misused. I once did some analysis for drf and was issued a booklet of guidelines admonishing handicappers to employ the word only in its pure( and original )sense-in reference, that is, to a horse regressing second time off-the-shelf, in particular, when the comeback race was strenuous.

In a broader context, to deny thoroughbred form cycles is to view potential performance as strictly a function of fitness, and that's probably a mistake. Why else would research indicate that animals peak in the 4th or 5th start following layoffs? Or so many horses indeed regress on the heels of grueling comeback efforts? Or trainers so often state that a horse is "going into this race better than he(she) did the last one?" Handicappers too quick to attribute figure fluctuations to a horse having "good" days and "bad" days neglect an important piece of the puzzle-soundess. Horses aren't numbers on a page. They are flesh and blood creatures with infirmities that flare up, get treated, and sometimes subside for a period. All of this impacts performance in a not always unpredictable manner. In other words, just because a handicapper is unaware of certain reasons that thoroughbreds fire big or not at all, doesn't mean that the effort was random.
Maybe if we can see what kind of vet work is done to a horse before every race we could get more predictable results. Much like horses going into a sale have to divulge what has been done to them. Good in theory dont think it can happen.

[onefast99]

Maybe if we can see what kind of vet work is done to a horse before every race we could get more predictable results. Much like horses going into a sale have to divulge what has been done to them. Good in theory dont think it can happen.
At least release information when a llewellyn is done, or a horse is gelded. These are some minor things that could make a huge difference in using the horse or not.

[mountainman]

Many, if not most, horses have infirmities going into races. To selectively go after the connections of Eight Belles simply because she broke down is exactly the kind of sensational journalism that hinders credibility. There was a great deal of discussion about the state of the industry after this incident, and more than a few credible people discussed this responsibly. How exactly do the specifics in this case supercede the overall situation?

Nobody is suggesting that anyone should "go after" the connections of Eight Belles, or even that the filly was sore going in. But handicappers-and pundits- have traditionally, in the wake of prominent breakdowns, been too quick to accept the trainer's version, that being, of course, that the horse never took a bad step before the catastrophe. I'm not sure what the "state of the industry" has to do with this discussion, but I will say that good journalism customarily starts with a skeptical attitude, especially when quoted parties have axes to grind and reputations to protect. When you ask how the specifics in this case supercede the overall "situation" (whatever THAT is), what you really mean is that, without proof, it would be irresponsible for any writer to imply that Eight Belles-or any other big-name horse that breaks down-was sent out despite being sore. And you might be correct, but only to a point. Most breakdowns aren't freak occurences. Horses develop problems. The problems get worse. Profit- minded connections continue to campaign the horse(which is, like it or not, a money-making tool). Finally, the horse goes down. Where is the simple acknowledgement of this unfortunate truth?
Horseplayers, in particular, should not be naive enough to believe that owners and trainers always act in the best interest of big-name thoroughbreds.

[the little guy]

Nobody is suggesting that anyone should "go after" the connections of Eight Belles, or even that the filly was sore going in. But handicappers-and pundits- have traditionally, in the wake of prominent breakdowns, been too quick to accept the trainer's version, that being, of course, that the horse never took a bad step before the catastrophe. I'm not sure what the "state of the industry" has to do with this discussion, but I will say that good journalism customarily starts with a skeptical attitude, especially when quoted parties have axes to grind and reputations to protect. When you ask how the specifics in this case supercede the overall "situation" (whatever THAT is), what you really mean is that, without proof, it would be irresponsible for any writer to imply that Eight Belles-or any other big-name horse that breaks down-was sent out despite being sore. And you might be correct, but only to a point. Most breakdowns aren't freak occurences. Horses develop problems. The problems get worse. Profit- minded connections continue to campaign the horse(which is, like it or not, a money-making tool). Finally, the horse goes down. Where is the simple acknowledgement of this unfortunate truth?
Horseplayers, in particular, should not be naive enough to believe that owners and trainers always act in the best interest of big-name thoroughbreds.


I think you are suggesting with some of your comments in this thread that Eight Belles had issues going into the Derby. Hey, they all do, so this is hardly a stretch. However, I think in this specific situation, journalistically it was near impossible to handle the situation in a responsible manner while pointing fingers. It is very hard to walk the fine line between what happens on a daily basis and what happened in this specific situation.

However, I definitely agree that, in general, it can be surprising how much leeway trainers often get with their post race comments. Especially the treatment some get that others do not. I am surprised more people aren't a lot more skeptical, but I am ( fortunately or unfortunately ) not in a position to give my specific personal opinions about a lot of what I read in this game. However, in my position at NYRA, one thing I have done is to stop the repetition of trainer's pre-race opinions over the airways. This decision is something that I firmly believe will overall serve the public's best interests.

[Robert Fischer]

what you really mean is that, without proof, it would be irresponsible for any writer to imply that Eight Belles-or any other big-name horse that breaks down-was sent out despite being sore.

did you (or anyone?) have a message board post or article previous to post time declaring that Eight Belles was sore and shouldn't race?

I happened to pick her and big brown as the two contenders in this site's pre-derby thread. http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=520829&#post520829

[onefast99]

did you (or anyone?) have a message board post or article previous to post time declaring that Eight Belles was sore and shouldn't race?

I happened to pick her and big brown as the two contenders in this site's pre-derby thread. http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=520829&#post520829
Good call.

[onefast99]

Horseplayers, in particular, should not be naive enough to believe that owners and trainers always act in the best interest of big-name thoroughbreds.[/QUOTE]
You bring up an interesting topic, owners and trainers who are in a big stakes race for the first time may just overlook what could potentially be a big problem running under the amount of stress bigger races have associated with them. We had a trainer who babied one of our horses by putting him in races where he knew he didnt have to put out 100% to win the race. He was claimed from us and the next race out the new owner-trainer ran him in a stakes race and he pulled up lame, never to have run again.

[Tom]

Horseplayers, in particular, should not be naive enough to believe that owners and trainers always act in the best interest of big-name thoroughbreds.

I never thought that at all - just the opposite.
Two words : Lady's Secret.

[JeremyJet]

did you (or anyone?) have a message board post or article previous to post time declaring that Eight Belles was sore and shouldn't race?

I happened to pick her and big brown as the two contenders in this site's pre-derby thread. http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=520829&#post520829

Geez. Nice job, Robert! I would have liked to read your analysis of the race.

Due to his ouchy feet, and the fact that he bore-in in the Florida Derby, BIG BROWN was the horse most people had reservations about in regards to soundness issues.

Regards,

JeremyJet

[mountainman]

did you (or anyone?) have a message board post or article previous to post time declaring that Eight Belles was sore and shouldn't race?

I happened to pick her and big brown as the two contenders in this site's pre-derby thread. http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=520829&#post520829

No. And I'm blaming anyone for the Eight Belles breakdown. I was simply observing how curious it is that, according to postrace comments by their respective trainers, no exceptional horse that has broken down ever took one bad step before snapping it off. Graustark, Hoist the Flag, Ruffian, Go For Wand, Barbaro etc etc....all sound as a bell of brass before that one fateful stride. Yeah right. And we accept this why? Because the trainers say so?

[onefast99]

No. And I'm blaming anyone for the Eight Belles breakdown. I was simply observing how curious it is that, according to postrace comments by their respective trainers, no exceptional horse that has broken down ever took one bad step before snapping it off. Graustark, Hoist the Flag, Ruffian, Go For Wand, Barbaro etc etc....all sound as a bell of brass before that one fateful stride. Yeah right. And we accept this why? Because the trainers say so?
Has there ever been a trainer who was sued by an owner for putting a horse in a race that had issues and the horse brokedown? And the owner won the case?

[toetoe]

(Jerry Mathers voice): "Hey, Wally ? Is my banter cessant ? It is, isn't it ?"

Wally: "Aw chee. Sure it is, Beav."

The producers wish to thank Mr. Robert Fischer for his (cough cough) breakdown of Kentucky Derby contenders.

[onefast99]

(Jerry Mathers voice): "Hey, Wally ? Is my banter cessant ? It is, isn't it ?"

Wally: "Aw chee. Sure it is, Beav."

The producers wish to thank Mr. Robert Fischer for his (cough cough) breakdown of Kentucky Derby contenders.
Actually winningponies did give a nice breakdown of the race looks like he had the first 2 finishers also.

[Marshall Bennett]

Has there ever been a trainer who was sued by an owner for putting a horse in a race that had issues and the horse brokedown? And the owner won the case?
Don't know but doubt it . When trainers ( average trainers in particular ) have to hire attorneys when their horses breakdown , the game will be all but dead ..IMO . Happens to frequently . Besides , negligence would be what the case would likely hinge on , and that would be tough to prove , again IMO .

[onefast99]

Don't know but doubt it . When trainers ( average trainers in particular ) have to hire attorneys when their horses breakdown , the game will be all but dead ..IMO . Happens to frequently . Besides , negligence would be what the case would likely hinge on , and that would be tough to prove , again IMO .
I looked up some case law, there are quite a few. Seems one particular case the owner sued the vet and the trainer but due to the statute of limitations the vet was the only one held liable.

[Charlie D]

Horseplayers, in particular, should not be naive enough to believe that owners and trainers always act in the best interest of big-name thoroughbred

Those connections not acting in the thoroughbreds best interests are probably contributing to the High attrition rate


Maybe the blame Dirt, switch to synthetic is a knee jerk reaction

[cj]

Here in Oklahoma City, there is a decent sized track that is doing pretty well. Even so, the AA hockey team gets more coverage than the track, and that is a sport that is competing with an NBA team and two D1 colleges with big time sports programs.

Trainers aren't ever really questioned because there is very little media in the sport that is worth a damn. Why would any decent writer cover this sport? Those that do cover the sport well (Beyer, Crist) have other interests in the game that keep them around.

Smell the coffee guys, not many people give a rats ass about horse racing.

[supercap]

I looked up some case law, there are quite a few. Seems one particular case the owner sued the vet and the trainer but due to the statute of limitations the vet was the only one held liable.

I would think the first time an owner sues a trainer and the backstretch world finds out about it , you would be hard pressed to get someone else to train for you. You would have to sign indemnification papers for every horse!!

[onefast99]

I would think the first time an owner sues a trainer and the backstretch world finds out about it , you would be hard pressed to get someone else to train for you. You would have to sign indemnification papers for every horse!!
Not if the trainer said lets race him, my wife needs to go shopping and the vet tells you give him 30 days off, then its real easy! See how fast they point the finger at one another.

[onefast99]

Here in Oklahoma City, there is a decent sized track that is doing pretty well. Even so, the AA hockey team gets more coverage than the track, and that is a sport that is competing with an NBA team and two D1 colleges with big time sports programs.

Trainers aren't ever really questioned because there is very little media in the sport that is worth a damn. Why would any decent writer cover this sport? Those that do cover the sport well (Beyer, Crist) have other interests in the game that keep them around.

Smell the coffee guys, not many people give a rats ass about horse racing.
You are correct until the big stakes races roll in and the media circus begins. And less we forget until the first sign of spring horse racing after the breeders cup takes a backseat to just about everything else.

[supercap]

Not if the trainer said lets race him, my wife needs to go shopping and the vet tells you give him 30 days off, then its real easy! See how fast they point the finger at one another.
Sounds familiar to a situation a freind of mine had with a trainer in Fla. Trainer calls him up and says " horse looks great , lets claim him!" meanwhile trainer is shopping with the old lady at the mall!!!! horse was a real dud. But all they see is DAY RATE!

[supercap]

You are correct until the big stakes races roll in and the media circus begins. Every year someone asks at least 20 idiotic questions to the Kentucky Derby trainers. Some of them handle it well while others give a 10 minute reply which has nothing to do wth the original question.
Unfortunately if you ask sensible questions you will stump them. If they were not training horses , my guess stuffing bags somewhere!

[onefast99]

Sounds familiar to a situation a freind of mine had with a trainer in Fla. Trainer calls him up and says " horse looks great , lets claim him!" meanwhile trainer is shopping with the old lady at the mall!!!! horse was a real dud. But all they see is DAY RATE!
You live and learn in this game my number one thing that my trainer cant have is his wife doing the monthly bills. It amazes me how some things mysteriously appear on a bill then the tranier gets temporary amnesia and then all of a sudden they remember and correct the bill, but a month later it appears again! :bang:

[Robert Fischer]

No. And I'm blaming anyone for the Eight Belles breakdown. I was simply observing how curious it is that, according to postrace comments by their respective trainers, no exceptional horse that has broken down ever took one bad step before snapping it off. Graustark, Hoist the Flag, Ruffian, Go For Wand, Barbaro etc etc....all sound as a bell of brass before that one fateful stride. Yeah right. And we accept this why? Because the trainers say so?

those are fair questions

i sped-read the topic a little bit, and thought that there was some outcry about pre-race soreness, which surprised me because I had tried to look for problems in all the horses...

with barbaro he had that break through the gate incident. Bad luck like that is possible that it would be enough to cause a potential problem.

with belles , i don't really know. Maybe she wasn't the stoutest built horse, and 10furlongs against the men was too much stress, maybe she got tired and stepped wrong, maybe she did have a history of taking some bad steps... i don't know

[Robert Fischer]

I would have liked to read your analysis of the race.

nothing too exciting

Brown- i felt that winning a g3 level 9f race at gulfstream from the 12 post was a racing "feat" with that short run-up(11.5seconds?).

With eight belles it was more a case of their being very few contenders, and her looking better on video than the other mostly weak contenders.

[onefast99]

nothing too exciting

Brown- i felt that winning a g3 level 9f race at gulfstream from the 12 post was a racing "feat" with that short run-up(11.5seconds?).

With eight belles it was more a case of their being very few contenders, and her looking better on video than the other mostly weak contenders.
You still picked them and that is pretty good handicapping as I never had eight belles in my top 4.

[jfb]

Indyanne who was pulled up in the stretch of Saturday's Grade 1 Santa Monica Handicap with a sesamoid injury, will not require surgery and could be sent to Kentucky in early January to be bred, trainer Greg Gilchrist said on Sunday.

Indyanne was fighting for the lead when she broke down. Gilchrist said the 3-year-old filly did not suffer injuries as severe as originally thought, which negated the need for surgery. Indyanne will be confined to stall rest until her condition improves, Gilchrist said.

[point given]

Indyanne who was pulled up in the stretch of Saturday's Grade 1 Santa Monica Handicap with a sesamoid injury, will not require surgery and could be sent to Kentucky in early January to be bred, trainer Greg Gilchrist said on Sunday.

Indyanne was fighting for the lead when she broke down. Gilchrist said the 3-year-old filly did not suffer injuries as severe as originally thought, which negated the need for surgery. Indyanne will be confined to stall rest until her condition improves, Gilchrist said.

Great news, thanks

[joanied]

Indyanne who was pulled up in the stretch of Saturday's Grade 1 Santa Monica Handicap with a sesamoid injury, will not require surgery and could be sent to Kentucky in early January to be bred, trainer Greg Gilchrist said on Sunday.

Indyanne was fighting for the lead when she broke down. Gilchrist said the 3-year-old filly did not suffer injuries as severe as originally thought, which negated the need for surgery. Indyanne will be confined to stall rest until her condition improves, Gilchrist said.

:jump: :jump: :jump: I was so happy when I read that Indyanne is going to be fine for a new career as a broodmare...awesome :ThmbUp: news to say the least, and I can imagine how happy Gilchrist is, no doubt it's a hard blow to deal with, loosing such a great race horse as she is, but it could have been another total nightmare for him...I came here to see if this good news was already posted...so thank you for posting it, jfb...

I read through most posts concerning breakdowns...and the so called 'bad step'...some interesting comments...I ain't gonna get involved, but it's been fun reading through them all.

[joanied]

Maybe if we can see what kind of vet work is done to a horse before every race we could get more predictable results. Much like horses going into a sale have to divulge what has been done to them. Good in theory dont think it can happen.

I also think that every horse, on his/her race day, needs a visit from the vet and a good going over...the little check they do now is obviously not enough...but I also doubt it'll ever happen.

[JustRalph]

Here in Oklahoma City, there is a decent sized track that is doing pretty well. Even so, the AA hockey team gets more coverage than the track, and that is a sport that is competing with an NBA team and two D1 colleges with big time sports programs.

Trainers aren't ever really questioned because there is very little media in the sport that is worth a damn. Why would any decent writer cover this sport? Those that do cover the sport well (Beyer, Crist) have other interests in the game that keep them around.

Smell the coffee guys, not many people give a rats ass about horse racing.

This is exactly why there are so many shitty jocks out there. Nobody gives a shit when they suck..............no press to paint them in the appropriate light when they blow it.

[JustRalph]

You still picked them and that is pretty good handicapping as I never had eight belles in my top 4.

check out this thread..........

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45933&highlight=equisim+derby

comments on 8 belles in first two posts and more in the thread

[onefast99]

check out this thread..........

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45933&highlight=equisim+derby

comments on 8 belles in first two posts and more in the thread
How is this system doing for you thus far in 2008?

[JustRalph]

How is this system doing for you thus far in 2008?

It's not a system, it's a piece of software. It has been around for years. I recently stopped using it because it won't run on Vista. The "Simulator portion" of the application runs very accurate simulations of races, that count on consistent performance and allows the user to pick the pacelines. It was very good in its time. Still works well, but is limited due to the author not adding to it in the last three years or more.

I will probably drag it out around Triple Crown time, just because it does so well in the Derby etc. It is a fun addition..............but I use Jcapper nowadays.

Equisim paid for itself thousands of times over. Literally.

[classhandicapper]

:D

Getting a grasp on the bounce theory requires useing quality speed figures. :p

Regards,

JeremyJet

I have used both Thorograph and Ragozin Sheets in addition to Logic Dictates, CJ's figures, Beyers, and made my own pace and speeed figures for a very long time etc...

I have no problem with TG or Sheets figures, but I am a more comprehensive handicapper than most pattern readers. Long ago I realized that while there may be some validity to the figure projections pattern readers like to make, way more often than not pattern readers come to the right conclusion for the wrong reason. That causes them to wildly overestimate the probability of "legitimate bounces" - especially in some specific instances. But if people refuse to believe in the impact of pace other than extreme ones, speed/closer biases, aspects of trip other than ground loss, quality of competition etc... on figures, it's hard to have a meeting of the minds on what accounts for these figure fluctuations in many cases.

[onefast99]

It's not a system, it's a piece of software. It has been around for years. I recently stopped using it because it won't run on Vista. The "Simulator portion" of the application runs very accurate simulations of races, that count on consistent performance and allows the user to pick the pacelines. It was very good in its time. Still works well, but is limited due to the author not adding to it in the last three years or more.

I will probably drag it out around Triple Crown time, just because it does so well in the Derby etc. It is a fun addition..............but I use Jcapper nowadays.

Equisim paid for itself thousands of times over. Literally.
Thanks for the info. Please post in large font when you have your derby picks ready!!!

[cj]

Cj,

Why do you graph your numbers if you think the "whole "bounce" thing is totally fraudulent"?

Regards,

JeremyJet

I missed this earlier. I graph the numbers so I can see easily at a glance if a horse has certain distance or surface preferences. I not only graph them, but code the numbers with BOLD and COLOR. In the example below, it is painfully obvious Bribon prefers a mile to sprinting:

4 Bribon 5yo g Fr 6-1 EP 102/5 104

Aqu 11/07/08 8.0 | 106 104 98 104 | 107| | 104*
Bel 10/03/08 6.0 | 100 100 97 86 | 80| | 90
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bel 06/25/08 8.0 | 113 115 113 115 | 115| > | 114*
Bel 05/23/08 7.0 | 89 110 87 105 | 114| + | 102
GP 03/10/08 6.5 | 92 99 79 68 | 62| | 70
GP 02/21/08 6.0 | 105 83 96 82 | 74| | 84
GP 01/19/08 6.0 | 96 97 85 86 | 86| | 88
Aqu 11/01/07 6.0 | 85 92 75 92 | 101| | 92*
Bel 10/08/07 8.0 | 118 104 117 99 | 90| > | 106
Bel 09/14/07 8.0 | 104 103 103 100 | 98| | 102

[bigmack]

I graph the numbers so I can see easily at a glance if a horse has certain distance or surface preferences. I not only graph them, but code the numbers with BOLD and COLOR.
Sound figs, as yours, can become more accountable to a glancing handicapper with chart comments for each paceline. Is that a proprietary no-no for you cats to use?

[cj]

Those that use the program can include the chart comment if they like, which I certainly do. I'm also working so people can make their own notes if they like and show them.

[George Sands]

I'm not sure that any book has done as much to promote bounce theory as "Beyer on Speed." Beyer was preaching to the unconverted in chapter two.

[JustRalph]

when I first started playing (2001) I read about the bounce theory and bought right into it. It took me a while to realize it was bullshit. New players who read all the pertinent books probably buy into it still................

[George Sands]

when I first started playing (2001) I read about the bounce theory and bought right into it. It took me a while to realize it was bullshit

I certainly respect your opinion, Ralph, even though I disagree with it 100%. Regardless, my point was that when it comes to making fun of bounce theory, there is plenty of room to poke fun at Beyer for his role in making it popular.

[JeremyJet]

I missed this earlier. I graph the numbers so I can see easily at a glance if a horse has certain distance or surface preferences. I not only graph them, but code the numbers with BOLD and COLOR. In the example below, it is painfully obvious Bribon prefers a mile to sprinting:

Cj,

Can you post this horses lifetime past performances?

Regards,

JeremyJet

[JeremyJet]

when I first started playing (2001) I read about the bounce theory and bought right into it. It took me a while to realize it was bullshit. New players who read all the pertinent books probably buy into it still................

:rolleyes:

Regards,

JeremyJet

[JustRalph]

I certainly respect your opinion, Ralph, even though I disagree with it 100%. Regardless, my point was that when it comes to making fun of bounce theory, there is plenty of room to poke fun at Beyer for his role in making it popular.

I just think there are a other reasons for a "bounce"

I don't think the plain bounce theory is enough most of the time. Too many other factors...........

we can agree to disagree. That's why it's a horse race, right?

[George Sands]

Ian has posted Tampa the past week. Did he mention bounce? I honestly don't know, and he can certainly do what he likes which is what makes this game great.

Ian certainly believed in bouncing back when he posted (superbly) about it on the Thoro-Graph board. And a gentleman on Ian's website (brilliant handicapper, beyond brilliant on grass) spoke so much about bounce theory (he believed in it) that it would take months to post it all here.

[cj]

Cj,

Can you post this horses lifetime past performances?

Regards,

JeremyJet

I could, but it wouldn't change anything. He had two other starts on dirt, one a 2nd place finish at a mile with a 103 figure on my numbers, the other a 2nd at 6.5f with a 98 figure. All the other races were on turf, most not in this country.

Why?

[JeremyJet]

I could, but it wouldn't change anything. He had two other starts on dirt, one a 2nd place finish at a mile with a 103 figure on my numbers, the other a 2nd at 6.5f with a 98 figure. All the other races were on turf, most not in this country.

Why?

No problem, Cj. I just wanted to compare numbers.

Regards,

JeremyJet

[Premier Turf Club]

Ian certainly believed in bouncing back when he posted (superbly) about it on the Thoro-Graph board. And a gentleman on Ian's website (brilliant handicapper, beyond brilliant on grass) spoke so much about bounce theory (he believed in it) that it would take months to post it all here.

Ian still believes in bouncing, especially when it comes to cheap/older horses. CH is right in some instances there are other explanations but over the last few years I have spent enough time around some good horsemen to know that there are times where a "bounce" is the most logical explanation. I don't believe it as literally as Len or Jerry might but I absolutely use probability patterns in my handicapping. Basically what I do is assign a horse an "effective top" and then some pattern grade A thru F that reflects their ability to run that top (or in the case of developing horses, even better).

That being said, in order for the pattern / bounce theory to work at all you need very good figures to begin with which is why I am a big believer in the service that CJ, Ragozin and TG provide. :)

The guy GS is referring to is Chris Larmey who goes by the name Derby1592. He is by far the best sheet reader I have ever known personally. He only plays casually but makes money every year doing this with no rebate.

[classhandicapper]

Ian still believes in bouncing, especially when it comes to cheap/older horses. CH is right in some instances there are other explanations but over the last few years I have spent enough time around some good horsemen to know that there are times where a "bounce" is the most logical explanation. I don't believe it as literally as Len or Jerry might but I absolutely use probability patterns in my handicapping. Basically what I do is assign a horse an "effective top" and then some pattern grade A thru F that reflects their ability to run that top (or in the case of developing horses, even better).

That being said, in order for the pattern / bounce theory to work at all you need very good figures to begin with which is why I am a big believer in the service that CJ, Ragozin and TG provide. :)

The guy GS is referring to is Chris Larmey who goes by the name Derby1592. He is by far the best sheet reader I have ever known personally. He only plays casually but makes money every year doing this with no rebate.

Over the years, I learned a few things about horse development by reading the analysis of major stakes races done on the TG and RAGs boards.

However, both camps market their figures in a way that suggests that "their product is all you need" and that almost everything is in the figures. That puts them in the position of having to make selections based almost exclusively on figures and figure patterns.

IMO that's actually kind of a silly position to put yourself in because so few serious horseplayers actually believe that figures and figure patterns are all you need. Yet at the price they are charging for figures, they are appealing to serious horseplayers. :confused:

Many of their customers are looking at lots of other things and actually believe that pace, bias, quality of competition, trip, and other less tangible aspects of ability routinely have an impact on race results and figures despite the marketing.

I can't speak for either Len or Jerry, but based on his selections I suspect that Len is actually a much more comprehensive thinker than he lets on.

To me, the whole trick is to recognize the difference between fluctuations in figures that result from actually being knocked out by a fast race and those that result from other things, including randomness. If you classify almost all downward moves off a fast race as "being knocked out" like they do, you wind up with a very exaggerated view of how likely it is for a horse who "legitimately earned a top figure" to bounce because of being knocked out.

Proponents of bounce theory are constantly throwing out legitimate big figure horses expecting them to bounce and they wind up repeating WAY WAY more often than they are expecting.

I sometimes believe it would be possible to put together a winning strategy based exclusively on "anti bounce theory" because these days so many people overestimate the probabilities that a horse won't repeat a huge effort "in some specific circumstances".

All that said, I think Len is a great handicapper and I hope to pick up some more insights from him in his area of expertise over time.

[classhandicapper]

I'm not sure that any book has done as much to promote bounce theory as "Beyer on Speed." Beyer was preaching to the unconverted in chapter two.

George,

This is true to some degree.

He acknowledged that there are some figure patterns and horses that are unlikely to repeat a fast race, but he's also a huge proponent of bias, trip and to a lesser degree pace and their impact on figures. So there are simply an enormous number of situations that one camp would classify as a bounce that he would disagree strongly about and give another explanation.

[George Sands]

However, both camps market their figures in a way that suggests that "their product is all you need" and that almost everything is in the figures. That puts them in the position of having to make selections based almost exclusively on figures and figure patterns.

Thoro-Graph: Sire stats, dam-side stats, jockey stats, bias notes, trouble notes, Race Shapes (pace figures), trainer stats done by percentage, trainer stats done in terms of speed figures, ground loss from previous races for projecting today's ground loss, etc.:)

[Robert Fischer]

good trainer and jockey stats on Thoro-Graph :ThmbUp:

[George Sands]

George,

This is true to some degree.

He acknowledged that there are some figure patterns and horses that are unlikely to repeat a fast race, but he's also a huge proponent of bias, trip and to a lesser degree pace and their impact on figures. So there are simply an enormous number of situations that one camp would classify as a bounce that he would disagree strongly about and give another explanation.

On the subject of a DRF computer study that appears in the book, Beyer wrote:

"And it confirms Ragozin's central tenet that a peak performance is apt to be followed by a decline."

This is from someone who had ridiculed sheet theory for years. However, I agree with your point about Beyer classifying more races as non-bounces. But my point was based on the influence of the person doing the writing. Beyer has a big audience (by racing's standards), and in this book he was admitting that he had been wrong. Ragozin even praised him for this in his own book.

[classhandicapper]

Thoro-Graph: Sire stats, dam-side stats, jockey stats, bias notes, trouble notes, Race Shapes (pace figures), trainer stats done by percentage, trainer stats done in terms of speed figures, ground loss from previous races for projecting today's ground loss, etc.:)

I agree that other valuable information is available at TG. In fact I sometimes think the other info is more valuable than the figures these days. But there are huge gaps in the area of trip, pace, bias etc.... that are commonly used by handicappers that are borderline taboo there.

If I said that horse "A" was part of a fast competitive pace chasing a higher quality horse and would have tired badly but he got carried by a big speed bias and the fact that the rail path was best, I would get laughed out of town (and often have). ;)

If I said that horse "B" got 4 TG points subtracted from his speed figure because of the huge amount of ground he lost on both turns, but horses with that trip were running very well all that day, yet the rail didn't seem dead either, I might get barred. (and probably did) ;)

[cj]

A horse runs these figures on TG, spaced a month apart, most recent first:

4, 7, 8, 6, 7, 5

Obviously, the likelihood of this horse running better than four next time are slim. I would say the chances of a repeat are 1 in 6, and a regression 5 in 6. It has nothing to do with "bouncing", but the fact the horse probably just had ideal circumstances when he ran his 4.

I am not saying a horse never regresses from a tough race or series of races, but the amount of times it is simply attributed to a bounce is ridiculous. Nothing beats knowing everything you can about how the figures are earned, and I think using the term "bounce" is a lazy way out.

[George Sands]

I agree that other valuable information is available at TG. In fact I sometimes think the other info is more valuable than the figures these days. But there are huge gaps in the area of trip, pace, bias etc.... that are commonly used by handicappers that are borderline taboo there.

If I said that horse "A" was part of a fast competitive pace chasing a higher quality horse and would have tired badly but he got carried by a big speed bias and the fact that the rail path was best, I would get laughed out of town (and often have). ;)

If I said that horse "B" got 4 TG points subtracted from his speed figure because of the huge amount of ground he lost on both turns, but horses with that trip were running very well all that day, yet the rail didn't seem dead either, I might get barred. (and probably did) ;)

CH,

First of all, I don't trust somebody until he has been banned from the Thoro-Graph board at least once. So you are, as you know, better than fine in my book.

I use TG every day and I think the numbers are terrific, but I'm always happy to argue the point with you because I like the way you look at things.

Regarding your third paragraph: You didn't get banned for making that point once. You got banned for making it 847 times. And no, I do not think you should have been banned. Now, if you want to make the point an 848th time, and do it here, I would love that because it would be mad fun. I will take JB's side, since it deserves to be represented. You take your side again. Nobody gets banned (except possibly me if Indulto chimes in).

[the little guy]

I think Jerry once called me out on his board after I said publically people who believed in bounce were lazy.

Are you sure you are ready to fill the big shoes of Jerry Brown?

[George Sands]

Are you sure you are ready to fill the big shoes of Jerry Brown?

Want to have some real fun? Seriously? Ask him.

By the way, he did "call you out" on your bounce comment, but only after calling you his friend.

Myself, I've been waiting for an opportunity to call you out for the speed-figures-are-of-little-use-on-turf comments that you made in that "Six Secrets" book.

[the little guy]

I could probably qualify that thought with a larger discussion....if I didn't have a boatload of replays to watch.

I think they are less reliable than dirt figures as they are more dependant on pace and you need to analyze a lot more variables in turf racing than dirt racing and thus they are less significant in turf racing. I guess you could say that while I think it is always important to understand as well as possible how a figure is earned, that process is much more complicated in turf racing.

[George Sands]

A horse runs these figures on TG, spaced a month apart, most recent first:

4, 7, 8, 6, 7, 5

Obviously, the likelihood of this horse running better than four next time are slim. I would say the chances of a repeat are 1 in 6, and a regression 5 in 6. It has nothing to do with "bouncing", but the fact the horse probably just had ideal circumstances when he ran his 4.

I am not saying a horse never regresses from a tough race or series of races, but the amount of times it is simply attributed to a bounce is ridiculous. Nothing beats knowing everything you can about how the figures are earned, and I think using the term "bounce" is a lazy way out.


This horse just ran a one-point new top and is getting 30 days rest. Even with all the in-between numbers and the reaction to the 5 and the 6, his chances of running another new top are, to my mind, better than you have them here. But getting to your main point:

I'm not a sheet purist to the extent Brown and Friedman are. I handicap by placing Thoro-Graph and pace figures side by side, and then marrying them to what I see on videotape. The result of this is that in effect I'm often looking at patterns that are less jagged (less "bouncy") than the ones Brown and Friedman are looking at. CH and I have discussed this at great length. We agree on general approach, but I don't believe in taking it as far as he does. Thus, I will often see bounces where he (and you?) sees biases, etc.

In any event, Brown and Friedman have hit on an approach that works extraordinarily well for them in practice--in the trenches. It has stood the test of time. It would take all the chutzpah I could muster, and then some, for me to tell them that what they are doing is "lazy," and that they should shelve their approach and start watching videotapes the way TLG, CH, and I do--especially given that their approach has allowed them to make very nice livings selling their work at fairly hefty prices.

[sevenall]

A horse runs these figures on TG, spaced a month apart, most recent first:

4, 7, 8, 6, 7, 5

Obviously, the likelihood of this horse running better than four next time are slim. I would say the chances of a repeat are 1 in 6, and a regression 5 in 6. It has nothing to do with "bouncing", but the fact the horse probably just had ideal circumstances when he ran his 4.

I am not saying a horse never regresses from a tough race or series of races, but the amount of times it is simply attributed to a bounce is ridiculous. Nothing beats knowing everything you can about how the figures are earned, and I think using the term "bounce" is a lazy way out.

Although, if this was the entire race record of a 3-year old...I might look for him to improve (with a better than 1 in 6 chance) after he slightly improved on his lifetime "5".

Your point is spot on though CJ. The "bounce" really depends on the circumstances of the race (pace, trip, layoff, etc).

[classhandicapper]

CH,

First of all, I don't trust somebody until he has been banned from the Thoro-Graph board at least once. So you are, as you know, better than fine in my book.

I use TG every day and I think the numbers are terrific, but I'm always happy to argue the point with you because I like the way you look at things.

Regarding your third paragraph: You didn't get banned for making that point once. You got banned for making it 847 times. And no, I do not think you should have been banned. Now, if you want to make the point an 848th time, and do it here, I would love that because it would be mad fun. I will take JB's side, since it deserves to be represented. You take your side again. Nobody gets banned (except possibly me if Indulto chimes in).


847 was enough. ;)

I guess getting banned twice under two different IDs rates pretty high. :D

Seriously though, it's impossible for me to discuss races intelligently from my perspective without bringing up some aspects of trip, pace, figure fluctuation, quality of competition etc.... that call into question some aspects of Sheet and TG methodology. I see others bring the same things up all the time too, but it's core to my play/handicapping and unavoidable in almost every race. I never really understood why that should be more of an issue with me specifically other than I refused to go along with the cult leader and bow before him when I disagreed. ;) I very rarley called a figure into question - just what it meant, how it was earned, how to use it etc...

I belong on this and CJ's board anyway. It's all for the best. I hope all is well with you.

[Tom]

Lot of banning for talking horses over there, huh?
Sounds like a moderator not so sure of himself that he can't take opposing viewpoints.

[George Sands]

Lot of banning for talking horses over there, huh?

No. CH is the only person I can think of who was banned there over the way he talked horses. Most of the people who got banned there were banned over their involvement in the Thoro-Graph-Ragozin bloodfeud. A similar number of people have been banned from both boards for this reason. It's a joke, really, because someone will get banned from the Thoro-Graph board and just trot over to the Ragozin board and make the same posts there. Or vice versa. And almost everybody who reads one board reads the other. Chuckles the Clown did manage to get banned from both boards (as well as this one, I believe), but he, thank God, is like few others.

The thing about CH's case is that he was banned once, and then he came back soon after with a different nickname, and the moderator knew it almost right away but continued to allow CH to post. But then they clashed again over the same issue. The Thoro-Graph board is different from this one in that every time a post gets made over there, a different one falls off the bottom of the board. I believe that the moderator did not like CH's pace/bias posts knocking actual sheet posts off the board. Keep in mind that those sheet posts were largely from paying customers. I don't believe CH was ever much of a customer. He was, however, a friendly and polite poster, as well as a knowledgable one. So I think he should get another nickname and go back there.

[jfb]

I thought the thread was about Indyanne...

[Indulto]

I thought the thread was about Indyanne...Since you didn't provide any new information about Indyanne in your own post, why do you object to the conversation's progressing to related subjects? Sometimes the most fascinating threads take a course all their own.

Several former TG board posters are relating their experiences in an environment moderated much differently from this one. I, for one, find it very interesting and hope that exchange continues.

[maryforney]

I visited Indy at the barn yesterday morning, and posted a photo on my blog. I was happy to see her looking comfy, and eating up her hay. But, as Greg Gilchrist said, she won't be out of the woods for at least 5 or 6 weeks. I learned that the real danger comes from horses "foundering" in the leg on the opposite side of an injury, that is taking too much weight. Still keeping my fingers crossed for her.

[point given]

I visited Indy at the barn yesterday morning, and posted a photo on my blog. I was happy to see her looking comfy, and eating up her hay. But, as Greg Gilchrist said, she won't be out of the woods for at least 5 or 6 weeks. I learned that the real danger comes from horses "foundering" in the leg on the opposite side of an injury, that is taking too much weight. Still keeping my fingers crossed for her.
Thanks for the update. Your photo of her has her eye looking very weird and ghostly. Hope she continues to mend well with no complications. :ThmbUp:

[jfb]

the conversation's progressing to related subjects? Sometimes the most fascinating threads take a course all their own.

What do handicapping approaches have to do with a horse breaking down?

[JustRalph]

Mary, that is one damn nice blog you got going there.

Kudo's! :ThmbUp:

[joanied]

Mary,

Thanks for the update and photo...excellent :jump: news, and Indyanne looks really good...calm and comfortable...I'd bet she's a wonderful 'patient' and will recover to be a broodmare...let's all hope that founder won't show it's ugly head!!

[onefast99]

I visited Indy at the barn yesterday morning, and posted a photo on my blog. I was happy to see her looking comfy, and eating up her hay. But, as Greg Gilchrist said, she won't be out of the woods for at least 5 or 6 weeks. I learned that the real danger comes from horses "foundering" in the leg on the opposite side of an injury, that is taking too much weight. Still keeping my fingers crossed for her.
Hopefully some of the studies done on Barbaro will result in this horse getting the correct therapy to keep her from foundering. The natural physics of a horse must be duplicated to prevent this, I believe the laminae are the first to be affected. Thank you for the information.

[classhandicapper]

The thing about CH's case is that he was banned once, and then he came back soon after with a different nickname, and the moderator knew it almost right away but continued to allow CH to post. But then they clashed again over the same issue. The Thoro-Graph board is different from this one in that every time a post gets made over there, a different one falls off the bottom of the board. I believe that the moderator did not like CH's pace/bias posts knocking actual sheet posts off the board. Keep in mind that those sheet posts were largely from paying customers. I don't believe CH was ever much of a customer. He was, however, a friendly and polite poster, as well as a knowledgable one. So I think he should get another nickname and go back there.

The problem the second time was that one of the attack dogs on that board started responding to some of my posts in a very insulting and often extremely ignorant way about the points I was making. In turn, I responded in a polite way trying to explain what I meant. It eventually turned into a more extended discussion on multiple threads that I never intended. The biggest joke of all is that a few days after instigating the trouble and causing my banning, he disappeared and hasn't posted much if at all since (most likely because he was/is still losing his shirt as a result of the ignorance I was trying to remedy) .

Really, I don't miss posting there.

I have no desire to debate anyone on racing or figures when they occasionally resort to deleting my posts when I make a point too well. Nor do I like the idea of attacks dogs insulting and trying to discredit me.

I have nothing to sell or promote and don't really care who wins market share among figure makers etc... I just like sharing ideas, expressing my opinions, and learning. That's not the place for me.

I was an occasional customer. I'd buy TG on days when I knew my betting volume was likely to justify the incremental cost. I haven't bought them since the second banning. I buy RAGs on those days instead. Len disagrees with a lot of what I say, but he and his customers have "respectfully" disagreed with me when we've discussed some things. So I'd rather give my money to him.

Both are fine products though.

[Indulto]

The problem the second time was that one of the attack dogs on that board started responding to some of my posts in a very insulting and often extremely ignorant way about the points I was making. In turn, I responded in a polite way trying to explain what I meant. It eventually turned into a more extended discussion on multiple threads that I never intended. The biggest joke of all is that a few days after instigating the trouble and causing my banning, he disappeared and hasn't posted much if at all since (most likely because he was/is still losing his shirt as a result of the ignorance I was trying to remedy) .

Really, I don't miss posting there.

I have no desire to debate anyone on racing or figures when they occasionally resort to deleting my posts when I make a point too well. Nor do I like the idea of attacks dogs insulting and trying to discredit me.

I have nothing to sell or promote and don't really care who wins market share among figure makers etc... I just like sharing ideas, expressing my opinions, and learning. That's not the place for me.

I was an occasional customer. I'd buy TG on days when I knew my betting volume was likely to justify the incremental cost. I haven't bought them since the second banning. I buy RAGs on those days instead. Len disagrees with a lot of what I say, but he and his customers have "respectfully" disagreed with me when we've discussed some things. So I'd rather give my money to him.

Both are fine products though.CH,
I wasn't aware of your return and re-ban. When I first started reading TG to try and learn the history of the feud, I noticed you right away as the only poster there willing to stand up to the owner/moderator on his own board. I subsequently met someone at Hollywood Park in a chance encounter who was a real fan of yours. The revelation that we both had similar reactions/attractions to the craziness between the vendors sparked a friendship that has unfortunately since atrophied with distance and time.

I still check out the SHEETS board occasionally to read Friedman's wisdom and catch a familiar name, but when the feud-inspired controversy disappeared, so did the hilarity that once made it so entertaining.

[PaceAdvantage]

Since maryforney has kindly brought this thread back to the topic at hand, I'd respectfully request that the Sheets discussion be taken to a new thread...

Thanks!

[onefast99]

Mary,

Thanks for the update and photo...excellent :jump: news, and Indyanne looks really good...calm and comfortable...I'd bet she's a wonderful 'patient' and will recover to be a broodmare...let's all hope that founder won't show it's ugly head!!
She will make a good broodmare.

[joanied]

She will make a good broodmare.

Yes, she :ThmbUp: will....and looks like Indian Charlie is becoming a good broodmare sire.
I'm sure her owners will be certain any possibility of founder is long gone before they have her bred...like, wait til next year, because although most maiden mares don't carry heavy, it'll still put a lot of extra weight on her feet.

[joanied]

Since maryforney has kindly brought this thread back to the topic at hand, I'd respectfully request that the Sheets discussion be taken to a new thread...

Thanks!

Glad someone :ThmbUp: said that...sometimes a thread will take on a life of it's own....but I have been wondering how Indyanne's breakdown has anything to do with what this thread has become...
in fact, I always thought any discussion on handicapping, sheets ect should be in the section FOR handicapping...maybe I'm wrong about that.
:) :) :)