View Full Version : Beyer on Dutrow, Wolfson, etc.
I certainly don't see any backpedaling. He allowed the other side to be told, but nowhere do I see him say he accepting the explanations. He does mention he Wolfson has no significant drug positives.
Now, to be fair, I don't think any of the "super trainers" mentioned have positives of the type most people suspect in these big move ups. They all have overages of drugs that are allowed, but I don't think too many have been "sidelined" for using powerful performance enhancers many speculate are behind the miracle turn arounds.
I read the article, the quotes weren't necessary. Quote and bold, what is the point of that?
I certainly don't see any backpedaling. He allowed the other side to be told, but nowhere do I see him say he accepting the explanations.
Wow, my typing sucked. Accepted, not accepting.
Two things that caught my suspicious eye were these:
His father, Louis Wolfson, was a fabulously successful conglomerate builder and wheeler-dealer until he went to prison for securities fraud.
Like almost all bodybuilders, he is obsessed with vitamins, supplements, and training regimens, and he said, "I apply a lot of those same things to the horses."
proximity
02-25-2009, 12:00 AM
wouldn't necessarily call it a total backpedal since mr beyer did sprinkle certain seeds throughout the article to keep the doubt and skepticism growing in the reader.
he let us know that the father went to prison for fraud (pedigree) and that the trainer himself was heavily involved in the hokey world of bodybuilding where he was undoubtedly exposed to the widespread use of performance enhancing drugs.
it would have been nice if he'd have given us mr mott's answer about why he had the wrong shoes on the horse!!
nijinski
02-25-2009, 01:04 AM
He "Beyer"forgot to mention that despite "Affirmeds"owner having spent time in jail,owning this horse was a life changing experience for him"Wolfson".
I also think "Big Brown had that affect on "Dutrow" and partners of IEAH.
The press loves the spin and the dirt.
While I have no doubt in my mind that while Dick Dutrow has his imperfections. He is a damn good trainer.
When the ice bucket soaks were not enough to keep sore horses running
their best many high profile trainers had a Vet on hand to assist them.
The backstretch is full of remedies that have been going back many decades.
I can't even fathom that Beyer is naive enough not to know this. But then
again he has to keep people interested in his articles and trust him.
As far as the future and testing of steroids.It would cost a huge sum of
money to get accurate handling and testing of specimens taken from horses
that are not flawed.There is alot more involved in blood chemistry testing no
less hormones and drugs than we may care to know or that can legally hold up.
I think we all need to trust that fact that a horse as calm as Big Brown was
amidst large crowds certainly does not point the agressiveness an animal would show with high levels of roids.
Just some thoughts
Imriledup
02-25-2009, 01:44 AM
Owners and vets and horses need to be accountable for this stuff. Not just a trainer getting a few months 'vacation' while training from the beach on the cellphone.
If a trainer gets fined/suspended, so should the owner of the positive horse. WIll a trainer be likely to cheat if he knows his owner can get the same punishment?
What about the horse getting suspended for the same length of time as the trainer? Trainer gets 60 days, so does the horse.
How about Vets? I believe that if a vet does work on a horse, his name should also appear in the program. If that horse comes back tainted, the vet gets some kind of punishment.
ralph_the_cat
02-28-2009, 05:36 PM
This Ones For Phil....
Dutrow just backed off the juice right?...
I mean, its not that the horse likes the sprinting distance or anything... :bang:
DeanT
02-28-2009, 05:52 PM
The horse was 100-1 in the Derby futures because no one believes "1st time whomever" anywhere in racing anymore.
It says more about the game than it does about Beyer.
ralph_the_cat
02-28-2009, 05:56 PM
uh? what do you mean by "1st time whomever" ...
its clear the horse should have been 100-1 if he was, he likes the sprint, not the route...
joanied
02-28-2009, 06:03 PM
Phil is a sprinter, and Dutrow will keep him to that task now...and if Dutrow juiced him for that last out, he would have kept it up...he ran a nice race in the FOY...just isn't anything more, IMO, than a nice useful sprinter.
Relwob Owner
02-28-2009, 06:34 PM
Owners and vets and horses need to be accountable for this stuff. Not just a trainer getting a few months 'vacation' while training from the beach on the cellphone.
If a trainer gets fined/suspended, so should the owner of the positive horse. WIll a trainer be likely to cheat if he knows his owner can get the same punishment?
What about the horse getting suspended for the same length of time as the trainer? Trainer gets 60 days, so does the horse.
How about Vets? I believe that if a vet does work on a horse, his name should also appear in the program. If that horse comes back tainted, the vet gets some kind of punishment.
I like the idea of suspending the horse.....I think somehow making the owner accountable is the only way to fix things-that seems like a great way to do it without shutting down the owner totally
Phil is a sprinter, and Dutrow will keep him to that task now...and if Dutrow juiced him for that last out, he would have kept it up...he ran a nice race in the FOY...just isn't anything more, IMO, than a nice useful sprinter.
The horse has already won a stakes routing, coming from off the pace to win by 4.
that was before Dutrow got him
Never seen a horse on the backstretch with a size three shoe . I'd like to bet on that one. Timp
joanied
03-01-2009, 09:54 AM
The horse has already won a stakes routing, coming from off the pace to win by 4.
ohoh....my bad :eek: Obviously, I didn't know that:blush:
rastajenk
03-01-2009, 10:00 AM
But as Tom Smith asks in Seabiscuit, "Against who?"
I still think the Beyer for Phil's last was mistakenly large, and to use that as a basis for a charge of cheating was an error on Andy's part.
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 10:54 AM
ohoh....my bad :eek: Obviously, I didn't know that:blush:
It was months back against a relatively weak group, they ran a half in 48+ and a mile in 1:41+... he proved a route was too much his next few starts when he stretched out a little further... winning a route in a 60k 2yo stakes is a little different than the Fountain of Youth... He's no super horse now just because hes with Dutrow...
It was months back against a relatively weak group, they ran a half in 48+ and a mile in 1:41+... he proved a route was too much his next few starts when he stretched out a little further... winning a route in a 60k 2yo stakes is a little different than the Fountain of Youth... He's no super horse now just because hes with Dutrow...
Your talk of raw times is laughable...they mean nothing by themselves, as I'm sure you know.
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 11:27 AM
Your talk of raw times is laughable...they mean nothing by themselves, as I'm sure you know.
Your talk of speed figures is laughable...they mean nothing by themselves, as I'm sure you know.
joanied
03-01-2009, 11:34 AM
It was months back against a relatively weak group, they ran a half in 48+ and a mile in 1:41+... he proved a route was too much his next few starts when he stretched out a little further... winning a route in a 60k 2yo stakes is a little different than the Fountain of Youth... He's no super horse now just because hes with Dutrow...
I see you & cj will argue all this...but IMO, that must have been a bunch of low end horses to run those slow fractions...and Phil had to be by far the best of that field...
as far as being a super horse because he's with Dutrow...maybe we should turn that around...rather than Dutrow making a horse into something 'super'....could it be a horse already is super (although not apparent yet) and just happens to be with Dutrow:)
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 11:51 AM
His Obsession with speed figures and Beyers makes everything I say laughable I guess... The times of that 2yo stakes race was pathetic when compared to the Fillies 2yo stake race that same day, it was nearly identical, with the boys going a hair faster in the opening quarter, which explains why the horse on the lead, 2nd, and 3rd all finished off the board, and Phil was able to close some to pick up the win after going 1/100ths of a second slower than the Fillies race thru 6F... and explains why a $62 horse was able to close from last to 3rd place and only finish 4-5 lengths behind the Phil... but no, I guess thats laughable to some... Phil going 0 for his next 3 route races makes sense...
so what did Phil earn yesterday, a 75? or something... so the horse dropped a bunch of figures when going the route distance with Dutrow compared to Kathleen O'Connell... dang, I knew it, O'Connell juices.... :lol:
I see you & cj will argue all this...but IMO, that must have been a bunch of low end horses to run those slow fractions...and Phil had to be by far the best of that field...
as far as being a super horse because he's with Dutrow...maybe we should turn that around...rather than Dutrow making a horse into something 'super'....could it be a horse already is super (although not apparent yet) and just happens to be with Dutrow:)
Here is the point....the horse ran pretty much exactly the same race figure wise, and performance wise, whether entered on dirt or grass, sprinting or routing. To suddenly say the horse is only a sprinter doesn't make a lot of sense.
Forgetting figures, the horse won a restricted stakes race sprinting, then stepped up to a G2 routing and ran an OK race, so suddenly he is just a sprinter?
As for the filly/colt thing, there is rarely any difference between the sexes speed wise at that age. Check out the Breeder's Cup results and see for yourself, and that is late in the 2yo season. In the early part of the year, it is practically nonexistent.
I went back and looked at the day in question, his route win at 2. First, the time for the colts was .31 seconds faster, significantly faster at any distance. That is between 1.5 and 2 lengths at a mile.
The pace was over a half second slower at the quarter, a half second faster at the half, and identical at the 6f. Oh, and TOFP had a tough trip, clipping heels early, and still won easily.
The kicker, and I did not know this when I posted about raw times, is that the track slowed between the filly and colt race. There was an intervening turf race, and as is common at Calder, something was done to the track to change its speed. It is clear looking at the early races and the late ones that something happened, which is why I always say quoting raw times is just silly.
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 02:15 PM
You act like a wrote a book on it for goodness sake, so now I will, I made a simple comment that his only route win was easy, thats a bit clear if you can read a PP line, the times werent the only reason, just one of them... If he didn't clip heals, the sob woulda got burnt up out on the front, much like yesterday, have you ever seen a horse that has trouble relaxing clip heals and have to sit just off the pace and still wins, it happens... and the clip wasnt too bad, just knocked the horse to his senses, which gave him a shot to sit just off the early pace... if he woulda been out front he woulda got caught up with the 3 horses who finished off the board IMO...
Saying Fillies and colts races are the same at the 2yo age is a bit off... based on the BC races especially... hell, the race after Phils on that Sept GP day, the 2yo fillies ran 7F in 1:26.38 while the boys went 124.74, even though you claim the track got slower for some reason... I dont know where you get the track got slower from either... thats laughable... the final race of the day had the fastest opening 1/4 of 21.44, and that was a MDN race after running stake races much of the day, and the 3 fastest opening 1/2s came in the 3 races AFTER Phils... I dont see how you can claim the track slowed down one bit... actually I think I see where you got that, just because the last race finished in 1:13 probably, which is slow, but considering it was the same horse who set the opening fraction of 21.44, its clear NO one else wanted that race, he was hanging on for dear life, which is why the slow time came about and no one there closed on him, not to mention it was a MDN race...
and when routing, .31 seconds isnt too much... if it was a sprint I would agree with you... but a route race, .31 seconds isnt much... look at the 7F race... the boys were over 1.5 seconds faster...
Phil getting away with (IMO) a easy race at the route distance in sept., based off a few things, time being one of them... and not being able to win his next 3 route races... only to switch back to a sprint and win a nice race.... I think hes a sprinter, the race just this past week helps prove that... suddenly you want to say throw out the Beyers, hes just a winner of a non-restricted sprint race.... boy you sound like me a few weeks ago, thats why I said he would be overmatched in this field... and said his best shot would be to stay at the sprint, but even at that, I doubt he'll win anything more than a modest GIII at BEST... Looking at his PPs, you have to be half dead not to see hes a sprinter... he has uncontrollable early speed for the route distance, I dont think he'll relax unless he clips heals or gets caught in traffic... his best chance at success is in a sprint... I dont know where you get off criticizing my analogy as laughable... when you were hooked on Beyers single 117 figure on Phil... I agree to disagree, but comparing times isnt "laughable" when you know what kind of times the track was putting out on those same days...
Dahoss9698
03-01-2009, 02:37 PM
It just keeps getting worse.
There is so much there that is off base I don't know where to start. I'll begin with the easiest one.
The horse hardly has "uncontrollable" early speed when routing. The horse had never once before yesterday been in front at the first call of a route race. He has actually rated very well nearly every time, at least with his old trainer.
In his first route race, he ran pretty even and won for fun as we have discussed. His pace and final numbers are very close. In the Foolish Pleasure, the horse rated back in 4th, then 3rd early behind a blazing fast pace for the race. He moved too early, jockey error most likely, and was run down late while holding on for second easily.
Next came the In Reality, where the jockey rated well back off a slower pace than the previous race while wide, giving the horse virtually no chance. You cannot do that with a horse with uncontrollable route speed.
The next race was the real clincher. The horse ran nice and relaxed on the turf, getting a 74 pace figure and a 78 speed figure on a surface where you have to go much slower to get a lower pace figure. Sure, he got run down by a couple horses probably better than he on turf, but again, no way was he some run off sprinter going long.
he has uncontrollable early speed for the route distance
I shouldn't laugh at that statement? Keep in mind, he did all this as a 2yo, a time when most horses don't rate at all.
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 03:40 PM
say what?... so much off based on what?... theres so much proof to most of what I stated.... and you getting "Fast Early Speed" confused with "Uncontrollable Early Speed" is laughable... a horse doesnt have to sit on top to have uncontollable speed... the horse runs better when hes relaxed early or somewhat-forced to relax... he cant seem to relax in route races.... a horse could sit in 4th and still have uncotrollable early speed, and not be able to relax... thats why so many of his races he stumbles, gets bumped, clips heals or pushed/forced wide in the early stages of a race, race after race... because he cant relax, he wants to go... whether hes in first or 5th, he has uncontrollable early speed... not to be confused with fast early speed...
uncontrollable early speed= lack of controling a horse early in a race...
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 03:42 PM
you're judging if a horse relaxed based on early figures.... too funny... as if a figure tells you everything... Again, My handicapping is outdated... Im sorry for the confusion... clearly Im wrong... I just watch the races to see if a horse is relaxed... that was sooo 1998...
classhandicapper
03-01-2009, 03:45 PM
I still haven't changed my opinion about that TOFP. I think that 116 Beyer overstated how well the horse ran that day. I also think he probably prefers sprinting. There isn't much evidence of that in the figures, but the horse has tended to tire in the stretch of his losing efforts going long and short. I thought he ran a very good 6F-6.5F again yesterday before tiring. I think it's at least possible he's one of those horses that's a little better sprinting but can carry his speed longer if he catches the right field. I made the point previously that some of the figure improvement that was assumed to be Dutrow magic may have been development that was hidden by being raced in routes and on turf where he was less than 100%. WE will learn more from here, but if I was Dutrow I would sprint him next. They could always try to stretch him out again later.
you're judging if a horse relaxed based on early figures.... too funny... as if a figure tells you everything... Again, My handicapping is outdated... Im sorry for the confusion... clearly Im wrong... I just watch the races to see if a horse is relaxed... that was sooo 1998...
Of course a figure doesn't tell you everything, but neither does visual observation. The two together tell you a lot though.
DrugS
03-01-2009, 04:33 PM
so what did Phil earn yesterday, a 75? or something...
I laughed.
I think the over/under on his figure yesterday would be a 96.
The only way he ran a 75 is if Us Treasury won the 2nd race with a 58.
I laughed.
I think the over/under on his figure yesterday would be a 96.
The only way he ran a 75 is if Us Treasury won the 2nd race with a 58.
He knows as much about figures as I do about the WNBA.
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 05:28 PM
He knows as much about figures as I do about the WNBA.
You know as much about horse racing as you do WNBA.
ralph_the_cat
03-01-2009, 05:34 PM
I laughed.
I think the over/under on his figure yesterday would be a 96.
The only way he ran a 75 is if Us Treasury won the 2nd race with a 58.
I havent a clue what he earned yesterday, nor will find out... nor will I even attempt to care... I saw a horse that got left in the dust... I dont care if he got a 75, a 45 or 105.... either way... he coulda done similar with Kathleen O'Connell... there was little improvement at the route distance from Kathleen to Dutrow... but I imagine you are waiting for Beyer to tell you what you should think...
the little guy
03-01-2009, 06:02 PM
He knows as much about figures as I do about the WNBA.
Don't knock the WNBA.
nijinski
03-01-2009, 06:21 PM
When ThisonesforPhil ran his big Beyer, it was off the longest layoff he had
since his two year old debut. Over two months.Maybe the freshening helped,
maybe not He may not be more than a miler and frankly this field had some
better quality.
There could be many reasons ,but I doubt roids. Dutrow knows he is is being
watched.
Don't knock the WNBA.
I'm not, I just don't know anything about it, so I don't really talk about it. Sort of like how Ralph shouldn't talk about figures.
PaceAdvantage
03-02-2009, 05:01 AM
Deja vu all over again I tells ya...
Here's some advice....
Ralph da Cat...stick with what you know. You don't know speed figures, so don't talk about it like you do. And don't knock others who are experts in the field. You just look foolish.
CJ will stick with what he knows, and that's pace and speed figures.
Everybody is happy.
DrugS
03-02-2009, 08:04 AM
Quality Road posted a 113 Beyer - two points lower than the 115 I expected him to get. Which means This One's For Phil gets a 94 and not a 96.
Even though he totally came apart in the final furlong, TOFP still ran a figure a point better than future book favorite Old Fashioned ran at the same distance in his 3yo debut.
You kind of have to wonder why the horse was taken away from the pony and given such a nice warm-up in the post parade.
When he worked 6fs in 1:11.40 in his final work before the FoY - Mike Welsch said he was aggressive and smoked the first five furlongs but tired in the stretch. Getting him on his toes in the pre-race probably wasn't the best idea.
I think TOFP is a horse that wants to have a target and not be one. When Notonthesamepage didn't break and got caught behind horses .. he pretty much was left on the lead. Quality Road, who set the pace at sprints in his only two career starts, really did run great to keep the pressure on TOFP through a razor sharp 21 3/5 second quarter mile. And he was the one who looked in his comfort zone and had something left in the final furlong of the mile.
classhandicapper
03-02-2009, 09:38 AM
In my estimation, Quality Road's race was about as good as you are going to see from a 3YO at this time of year. There was a lot of quality speed in that race and some of the horses that should have benefitted from the pace weren't bad either. To put away that field and draw off in excellent final time was pretty amazing. I'm not sure if he's going to be more than a miler that can stretch out a little, but I'm not sure it matters when you are that good.
eastie
03-02-2009, 11:02 AM
Don't knock the WNBA.
"and with the score at halftime 16-9 Eastman leads all scorers with 4 points. boy these gals sure do make it look difficult. Is having this minor skill worth being so unattractive ? That's for the FAN to decide! "
-overheard on Family Guy
joanied
03-02-2009, 11:34 AM
I knew you guys were going to rumble :jump: and to think this got started because I said I thought Phil would be a better sprinter...and, I'll stick with that...up to a mile....
but, hey...it's been great fun reading the posts:D
Indulto
03-02-2009, 02:58 PM
Deja vu all over again I tells ya...
Here's some advice....
Ralph da Cat...stick with what you know. You don't know speed figures, so don't talk about it like you do. And don't knock others who are experts in the field. You just look foolish.
CJ will stick with what he knows, and that's pace and speed figures.
Everybody is happy.Speed figures are a tool and at best an inconsistent guide. The winner of the FOY beat not one, but two horses with at least ten-point higher best/last Beyer ratings. Frankly, some of RTC's comments have been interesting and have prodded cj to share even more useful insights than usual.
I'm not a SHEETS user, but the ultimate SHEETS handicapper, Len Friedman, had the winner on top (or the bottom as he does it) based on the Ragozin numbers -- THIS TIME.
ralph_the_cat
03-02-2009, 04:16 PM
Deja vu all over again I tells ya...
Here's some advice....
Ralph da Cat...stick with what you know. You don't know speed figures, so don't talk about it like you do. And don't knock others who are experts in the field. You just look foolish.
CJ will stick with what he knows, and that's pace and speed figures.
Everybody is happy.
whats the hell are you talking about?... I never said anything about speed figures in the last couple days... I asked what Beyer gave phil this past weekend, because I didnt know... and by the way, your experts never answered... so I dont know where you get off this "dont talk about them like I do"... You're acting like a jerk...
ralph_the_cat
03-02-2009, 04:31 PM
Frankly, some of RTC's comments have been interesting.
well thanks... for some one as outspoken as I, it usually draws negative comments... but I know those that try to actually make sense of certain issues, tend to get more out of my posts than someone like Pace makes out, the guys that dont really care just type something stupid... They just seem to grasp on the negative issues... I havent even suggested too much about speed figures... and yet Im ridiculed about it...
whats the hell are you talking about?... I never said anything about speed figures in the last couple days... I asked what Beyer gave phil this past weekend, because I didnt know... and by the way, your experts never answered... so I dont know where you get off this "dont talk about them like I do"... You're acting like a jerk...
I posted the winner was given a 113 in another thread, and Drugs posted that Phil was given a 94 just a few posts before yours. How is that not answering?
You suggesting he would get a 75 or whatever it was just showed how little you know, or care, about speed figures, which is fine. Once you posted that, why bother continuing that line of discussion?
ralph_the_cat
03-02-2009, 08:09 PM
I posted the winner was given a 113 in another thread, and Drugs posted that Phil was given a 94 just a few posts before yours. How is that not answering?
You suggesting he would get a 75 or whatever it was just showed how little you know, or care, about speed figures, which is fine. Once you posted that, why bother continuing that line of discussion?
ya the next day Drugs mentioned it... yesterday, I was asking you guys what his Beyer was and joking around with it a bit... Suddenly I know little and we shouldnt discuss anything because of my post I attached below... wow... I didnt look to see if he got beat 8 lengths or 28 lengths... I just saw him hit a wall and was watching the lead horses while he dropped back... nor was I even aware of beyer giving the winning horse a 113, thats why i was asking... hell he coulda gave him an 80 somthing like he gave stardom bound a couple weeks ago:D , how the hell should I know without even glancing at the chart...
Suddenly Pace claims Im making a fool of myself... ?... lol....
but all the foolish things stated in this thread from other posters... even cjs, some of it was just bizzare....
you guys just seem like rude people, who tend to stick together too much...
Suddenly i need lectured by Pace not to talk about speed figures, while he pets cj on the head... lol... what a joke...
so what did Phil earn yesterday, a 75? or something... so the horse dropped a bunch of figures when going the route distance with Dutrow compared to Kathleen O'Connell... dang, I knew it, O'Connell juices.... :lol:
by the way cj, I like how you used the term "care", maybe I just dont "care" when mentioning speed figures... rather than "clueless"... theres a difference... Often enough, I just dont care...
joanied
03-02-2009, 08:54 PM
hey you guys....TIME OUT;)
Pace Cap'n
03-02-2009, 09:18 PM
hey you guys....TIME OUT;)
While we fix some popcorn...
by the way cj, I like how you used the term "care", maybe I just dont "care" when mentioning speed figures... rather than "clueless"... theres a difference... Often enough, I just dont care...
That is what I figured, and that is great. I've never once given anybody crap for not using figures, but I sure take a lot of it for discussing them, both the pros and cons. What kills me is when guys that don't understand figures start ripping on those that use them. Maybe I'm a little oversensitive to it after previous threads.
rastajenk
03-03-2009, 07:59 AM
Rather than turning this into a pointless punch-and-judy performance, I'd like to ask those that track such things how many of the others in Phil's Sunshine Millions race have run again since then, and how their more recent Beyers compare to their Sunshine numbers. We now know that Phil has a 20-something point dropoff; what about the rest?
Kelly Leak ran back at a mile on the turf and won with an 88. Southern Exchange was an also ran at Ocala Training Center going 1 1/16, but I don't know his Beyer. Player's List ran last in the Sam Davis at 171 to 1 going 1 1/16. Those are the only ones to run back outside of Phil. Two on a different surface, and all going long.
This game is never that simple!
racefinder2
03-03-2009, 04:52 PM
Could I throw something in here? And this is more of a side-light to the aforementioned 'move-up' trainers and this 'Phil' horse w the 'super fig'.
IMO, and this seems like a LT trend, is the speed figs
coming from GP, for F-running speed-horses are biased too high. Even at the longer distances. I dont want to mess with anyones 'religion' here...on fig-adjustments to off the pace runners or close-up types that cant last(outside of BL charts).
I sense the GP speed runners are getting figs that wont hold up on other tracks...this 'transporting of figs' from track to track is the biggest gamble -moreso than the art of making the figs themselves. I try to keep speed and figure hcpg 'compartmentalized' rather than make bad track-to-track assumptions.
Is GP a speed biased track? Or is this just my imagination? Im struggling to understand where a 2 pt difference in opinion supercedes something like a LT speed bias.
I noticed that a couple years ago too. Horses couldn't run back to their Gulstream figs if those were abnormal. I started handicapping them with suspect much like I did the old Keeneland numbers, Saratoga or Laurel/Pimlico when they ship to a new circuit.
It seemed more pronounced with hot trainers at Gulfstream. And if part of the horses form cycle I would think some would eventually run back to those numbers..but they rarely did.
I'll continue to do this until I see different, especially at short odds.
PaceAdvantage
03-05-2009, 08:11 PM
whats the hell are you talking about?... I never said anything about speed figures in the last couple days... I asked what Beyer gave phil this past weekend, because I didnt know... and by the way, your experts never answered... so I dont know where you get off this "dont talk about them like I do"... You're acting like a jerk...I see you are dismissing my rather sage advice. Oh well. All anyone has to do is perform a cursory glance at your recent posts concerning speed figures to realize my advice is something you should seriously consider taking.
But, it's a free country.
kid4rilla
03-05-2009, 10:16 PM
It doesn't seem to me that artificially souping up the performance of horses would ever be much of a concern to any racing administrators. The show goes on and the horses light up the track with their improving performance, they presumably heal quicker and get back in the gates faster. Maybe some milk shake can create the next TC winner that everybody is hoping for to get racing a few spots higher on Sportscenter. Track brass surely do not lose too much sleep over the soundness of the stock on the backside.
The "damaging" of the game has no effect on the large/long-time players who will play regardless. How many dyed in the wool horseplayers out of 100 who say they are going to quit actually do? The efforts to attract new fans/players to racing is geared to the entertainment aspect, not at all to the integrity of the sport. If they thought the fairness of the game meant anything to the patrons, wouldn't they try to reduce the takeout to make it possible to win instead of the speedy fleecing that is done to players now? If you are worried about the fairness of the game as it applies to your ability to handicap a race.....no one running the show cares, because you'll be back tomorrow playing the early pick 3.
Baseball never policed steriod use heavy because they just didn't really care. The product on the field improved, bombs were flying everywhere, McGwire and Sosa were forearm bumping and uppercutting each other. Did you ever really think they weren't juicing? Did you really care unless you were concerned about how their numbers stacked up to the players of old? Hell, I wish they'd start an All-Steroids baseball league.
As I understand it, if it wasn't for the Kentucky Derby weekend Churchill Downs would not operate in the black. And no one I know who attends the Derby is considering not going to see the spectacle because the trainers aren't being policed well enough. 85% of the patrons who attend on big days think that all the entries are "sponged" or "milkshaked" anyway and have since they were kids.
85% of the patrons who attend on big days think that all the entries are "sponged" or "milkshaked" anyway and have since they were kids.
I like your post and this part especially...my non-racing friends assume racing is "crooked" and accept it as part of the game. I don't do much to convince them otherwise because there's no reason to defend the game right now.
And they accept they will lose just about everytime because of the high take and the state of the game (unless they're with me... :D) They will not take the game seriously other than minimal handicapping and only go on big days or a day or two during the summer to enjoy it. Might as well go to the casino because you're odds are just as good if not better not to mention poker
The kids love going to the track. But they are taught that everyone who gambles on it loses--for the most part. And that their friend (me) is delirious...
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.