Beyer article -Negligent reporting at his best

[asH]

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=101289&subs=0&arc=0



Beyer article- Negligent reporting at his best- firstly where’s the proof?

and secondly might his analysis or numbers be wrong- completely wrong

What his article fails to report is that Kathleen O’Connell did masterful job training and placing This One’s for Phil. After breaking maiden This One’s for Phil....

next 6 races after breaking maiden

*5th by 6 lengths to Big Drama, in the 100K Fla Stallion Dr. Fager, after a big middle move and finished 3 length in back of YOU LUCKIE MANN (Favorite in Beyers Gulfstream race- Sunshine Million Dash)

*1st in the mile Sea Cliff by 4.5 lengths 60K

* 2nd in the mile 70 28th running of the Foolish Pleasure 90K, made a middle move to the lead

*5th by 9 lengths to Big Drama again 4 lengths off 2nd horse, in the 400k Fla Stallion Reality

* 3rd by 2.5 in the 3rd running of the Arthur I Appleton 100k mile 1/16 turf, after leading throughout

**1st in 250K Sunshine Million- beat fav YOU LUCKIE MANN

It can be said before going into the race this versatile horse had talent and experience. Dropping back in distance, and running against a fav he was only 2 lengths off of after breaking his maiden. Surely his gained experience and success accounted for something more than some numbers can explain.

Appears to me Beyer is sharpening his knives early this year remember the bogus Big Brown article last year..Hari Cari is painless.

[cj]

Yes, I'm sure all that explains improving 15 lengths. I imagine the Washington Post will be calling you any day.

[JustRalph]

it's still a 117 ................

how many 117's do you see????

[Relwob Owner]

She did a 'masterful" job? that seems like a bit of an exaggeration......if she was so 'masterful', how come Dutrow was able to improve her so much?

As far as questioning Beyer, if you follow horse racing, you know that any article he writes about drugs is a much needed one-owning hoprses myself, it is almost impossible to have a chance if you dont use a "super trainer"-this is a problem that must be dealt with and i am glad he brought that horse up.

[DeanT]

Beyer's point is broad. It does not matter what happened this time, it happens almost every day with some folks. That's what he is getting at. It is systemic to modern racing.

If a lottery winner just happens to live next door to the head of the lottery corporation, it's fine and we pat that person on the back. If every friend of his on the block wins, someone will investigate the occurrence and write about it.

[fmazur]

I would question the 117 Beyer. Last year, same track(GP) almost same date Benny the Bull covered 6f in 1:08 2/5 and got a 115 Beyer. Based on that the 117 should have been more like 107/108. I would guess that Benny faced a tougher group.

[cj]

You are comparing a race from a year prior to determine the speed of the track this year?

[asH]

117 for the winner..how much did the second place horse get?

[cj]

117 for the winner..how much did the second place horse get?

If you know anything at all about making Beyer figures, you already know the answer. If you don't, why do you ask?

[the little guy]

Could we merge this thread with the " Thank you CJ " thread?

[fmazur]

CJ:

Out of curiosity, just what figure did you get for this race. Also how did it compare with the Benny the Bull figure from last Jan. 26th. Sometimes I think the Beyer guys just throw a bunch of number in a hat and then draw one out and then use that.

[Greyfox]

Andy Beyer is a columnist not a reporter. In no way can any of his columns be called "negligent reporting" as he is not reporting.
He is offering opinion.
I happen to think that he's the best Thoroughbred Racing Columnist in North America today. I don't always agree with him, but he gets me thinking.
That's what colulmnists are supposed to do: Make you think.
Bravo Andy. :jump: :jump:

[cj]

CJ:

Out of curiosity, just what figure did you get for this race. Also how did it compare with the Benny the Bull figure from last Jan. 26th. Sometimes I think the Beyer guys just throw a bunch of number in a hat and then draw one out and then use that.

I have a similar figure to Beyers. I don't remember what I had for Benny the Bull.

No doubt, I often disagree with some of the Beyers. I make money many times by doing so. However, I think for the most part they do a very good job at making figures. They certainly don't throw numbers in a hat. Most guys here have absolutely no idea how hard it can be to make figures for some races, and even some entire cards. In my opinion though, this was not one of those races.

[the little guy]

CJ:

Out of curiosity, just what figure did you get for this race. Also how did it compare with the Benny the Bull figure from last Jan. 26th. Sometimes I think the Beyer guys just throw a bunch of number in a hat and then draw one out and then use that.


Why make it that hard?

[asH]

If you know anything at all about making Beyer figures, you already know the answer. If you don't, why do you ask?


if you know I know, then you know why I ask... I'm assuming

would the race be better tailored to your rationale if the order of placement was reversed, with the second place horse getting 117 ? would that be logical enough for you ?

[asH]

Andy Beyer is a columnist not a reporter. In no way can any of his columns be called "negligent reporting" as he is not reporting.
He is offering opinion.
I happen to think that he's the best Thoroughbred Racing Columnist in North America today. I don't always agree with him, but he gets me thinking.
That's what colulmnists are supposed to do: Make you think.
Bravo Andy. :jump: :jump:

you need to get out more

[cj]

if you know I know, then you know why I ask... I'm assuming

would the race be better tailored to your rationale if the order of placement was reversed, with the second place horse getting 117 ? would that be logical enough for you ?


I seriously have no idea what your point is. "Better tailored to your rationale"...what the hell does that mean? I never said the result wasn't logical to me.

[classhandicapper]

Regardless of whether the 117 is correct or not, does anyone think This One's for Phil is as good a sprinter as Benny the Bull or that a sharp Benny the Bull wouldn't have won that race?

[the little guy]

you need to get out more


Other than yourself, who do you have on top?

[asH]

I seriously have no idea what your point is. "Better tailored to your rationale"...what the hell does that mean? I never said the result wasn't logical to me.

sorry, wish I could help, but I cant make it clearer than that without starting over (hint hint). If you dont get my point, forgetaboutit ..it wasnt for you

[asH]

addendum to post #20

or the merry men

[cj]

Regardless of whether the 117 is correct or not, does anyone think This One's for Phil is as good a sprinter as Benny the Bull or that a sharp Benny the Bull wouldn't have won that race?

I don't think that Benny the Bull would have won. It was a pretty slow race early, so he would have had a tough time making up the ground if you believe the 117.

[rjorio]

Len Friedman gives This Ones For Phil a 1 on the Rags scale for his winning effort and states the 117 Beyer is '' on the mark.''

[Charlie D]

Good point re: Pace CJ

Fr1 - nothing special, Fr 2 - nothing special

First 4 covered by 2 lengths at Fr1 and Fr2

#4 and #7 inferior, as you'd probably expect against the superior #11 fade in Fr3, but the previously inferior #9 does not

Conclusion


No real idea how Dutrow brought it about, but it looks on paper a legit performance by front two

[JeremyJet]

Len Friedman gives This Ones For Phil a 1 on the Rags scale for his winning effort and states the 117 Beyer is '' on the mark.''

Thanks for that info, but I personally didn't need conformation from the sheet camps to trust the number. This stuff isn't rocket science like some people make it out to be.

Respectfully,

JeremyJet

[JeremyJet]

sorry, wish I could help, but I cant make it clearer than that without starting over (hint hint). If you dont get my point, forgetaboutit ..it wasnt for you

No, I think the topic is well within CJ's scope. I just don't think you get it.

Respectfully,

JeremyJet

[cj]

Thanks for that info, but I personally didn't need conformation from the sheet camps to trust the number. This stuff isn't rocket science like some people make it out to be.

Respectfully,

JeremyJet

I wasn't trying to give that impression, but there are some races and race cards that are probably tougher than rocket sciece. Most, however, are not, and I don't think Saturday at Gulfstream was very difficult at all.

[classhandicapper]

I don't think that Benny the Bull would have won. It was a pretty slow race early, so he would have had a tough time making up the ground if you believe the 117.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Even if this figure is right, IMO it doesn't reflect the ability of these horses.

I think if Benny was on top of his game he would have jogged up to these horses under wraps on the turn and drew off in hand late stretch.

We all think of figures in the 112 - 117 range as being good enough to be competitive in a Grade 1 Stakes for older horses. In fact, a 117 is often good enough to be among the favorites for the Breeder's Cup Sprint.

However, when I look at the quality of these horses, I think a horse like True Quality (only a Grade 3 sprinter at this stage) would get the best of You Luckie Mann right now (and forget about what Fabulous Strike would do to him if they hooked up).

This Ones for Phil is a very nice 3YO for this time of year. So is YLM for that matter. But IMO this figure is inflating the perception of how well these horses actually ran even if it's accurate in terms of time.

I don't mean to be such a Devil's Advocate when we are all so concerned about illegal drug use, but I find it interesting how a fast Beyer figure is provoking this kind of reaction when Dutrow has been doing this kind of thing for years. Even if this figure is right and representative of the horse's true ability (and I'm wrong), I can picture a situation where allegations are being thrown out all over the place based on a figure that is wrong. That would be pretty messed up too.

[Zman179]

Andy Beyer is a columnist not a reporter. In no way can any of his columns be called "negligent reporting" as he is not reporting.
He is offering opinion.
I happen to think that he's the best Thoroughbred Racing Columnist in North America today. I don't always agree with him, but he gets me thinking.
That's what colulmnists are supposed to do: Make you think.
Bravo Andy. :jump: :jump:

Couldn't have said it any better myself. :ThmbUp:

[Imriledup]

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=101289&subs=0&arc=0



Beyer article- Negligent reporting at his best- firstly where’s the proof?

and secondly might his analysis or numbers be wrong- completely wrong

What his article fails to report is that Kathleen O’Connell did masterful job training and placing This One’s for Phil. After breaking maiden This One’s for Phil....

next 6 races after breaking maiden

*5th by 6 lengths to Big Drama, in the 100K Fla Stallion Dr. Fager, after a big middle move and finished 3 length in back of YOU LUCKIE MANN (Favorite in Beyers Gulfstream race- Sunshine Million Dash)

*1st in the mile Sea Cliff by 4.5 lengths 60K

* 2nd in the mile 70 28th running of the Foolish Pleasure 90K, made a middle move to the lead

*5th by 9 lengths to Big Drama again 4 lengths off 2nd horse, in the 400k Fla Stallion Reality

* 3rd by 2.5 in the 3rd running of the Arthur I Appleton 100k mile 1/16 turf, after leading throughout

**1st in 250K Sunshine Million- beat fav YOU LUCKIE MANN

It can be said before going into the race this versatile horse had talent and experience. Dropping back in distance, and running against a fav he was only 2 lengths off of after breaking his maiden. Surely his gained experience and success accounted for something more than some numbers can explain.

Appears to me Beyer is sharpening his knives early this year remember the bogus Big Brown article last year..Hari Cari is painless.

so, let me see if i have this straight. Your point is that racing media should never question or write about form reversals? Are you saying that we should all just turn our backs on the rampant drug issue and never talk about it? I have to applaud Andy for opening up his mouth to bring an issue to the forefront that the DRF would never write about.

[asH]

Noooooo, that’s not my point at all. This horse has been running competitive against the same type of horse he beat in the Sunshine, he was 2 lengths off of the horse he beat in the Sunshine Million after making a big middle move a race after he broke maiden. He has been on a steady diet of competitive races over a mile as a 2 year old. Six stakes races in a row after breaking maiden he’s healthy, he’s competitive, and versatile. When Dutrow got him he had 2 months and 18 days to add speed to this 2 year old’s repertoire, so where’s the stretch? Where is the smoking gun? Why single this one out to make a point about drugs in racing? If Beyers is accusing Dutrow of using drugs he should come out and accuse him, instead of negligent insinuations through crafted opinions based in his Beyer numbers; as if his numbers reflect the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Please don’t misunderstand I am not defending drugs or Dutrow, I’m defending the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but first you have to accuse him of a crime with real evidence, not crafted opinion.

[JustRalph]

Noooooo, that’s not my point at all. This horse has been running competitive against the same type of horse he beat in the Sunshine, he was 2 lengths off of the horse he beat in the Sunshine Million after making a big middle move a race after he broke maiden. He has been on a steady diet of competitive races over a mile as a 2 year old. Six stakes races in a row after breaking maiden he’s healthy, he’s competitive, and versatile. When Dutrow got him he had 2 months and 18 days to add speed to this 2 year old’s repertoire, so where’s the stretch? Where is the smoking gun? Why single this one out to make a point about drugs in racing? If Beyers is accusing Dutrow of using drugs he should come out and accuse him, instead of negligent insinuations through crafted opinions based in his Beyer numbers; as if his numbers reflect the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Please don’t misunderstand I am not defending drugs or Dutrow, I’m defending the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but first you have to accuse him of a crime with real evidence, not crafted opinion.


he gets paid for crafted opinion :bang:

What part of that don't you get?

[ralph_the_cat]

I would question the 117 Beyer. Last year, same track(GP) almost same date Benny the Bull covered 6f in 1:08 2/5 and got a 115 Beyer.

ding ding, you couldnt run 6 furlongs any faster, yet they give him a 115... this year they give a 1:09^ effort a 117...

[Imriledup]

Noooooo, that’s not my point at all. This horse has been running competitive against the same type of horse he beat in the Sunshine, he was 2 lengths off of the horse he beat in the Sunshine Million after making a big middle move a race after he broke maiden. He has been on a steady diet of competitive races over a mile as a 2 year old. Six stakes races in a row after breaking maiden he’s healthy, he’s competitive, and versatile. When Dutrow got him he had 2 months and 18 days to add speed to this 2 year old’s repertoire, so where’s the stretch? Where is the smoking gun? Why single this one out to make a point about drugs in racing? If Beyers is accusing Dutrow of using drugs he should come out and accuse him, instead of negligent insinuations through crafted opinions based in his Beyer numbers; as if his numbers reflect the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Please don’t misunderstand I am not defending drugs or Dutrow, I’m defending the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty, but first you have to accuse him of a crime with real evidence, not crafted opinion.


This has nothing to do with Dutrow and everything to do with cleaning up this game. If Rick Dutrow has to be wrongly accused than he's just going to be lying in the road when the clean-up-this-game truck rolls over him. He'll be a casualty unfortunately. Many years from now, with a clean game and only honest trainers with licenses, no one will remember the name Dutrow except for the fact that he took a bullet for this game and to clean it up.

If Richard Mandella or someone else who is considered to have a sparkling reputation had a moveup like this, no one would bat an eye. Dutrow has been guilty of stuff in the past and that's why guys like him are the first ones who be looked at when a horse goes into orbit first time under his care.

If Dutrow doesn't want to have articles written about him, he needs to have zero positives. Its not rocket science.

YOu are also missing the big picture. This issue needs to be written about, talked about and discussed. The racing higher ups need to know how the fans feel about cheating trainers. If a few guys, who have been guilty in the past, get wrongly accused on a horse that happened to be clean, than so be it. I want a clean game and i don't care how i get it. If a trainer who has been known to take an edge in the past and break racing rules gets wrongly accused of something, well, than, its just bad luck on his part. Just pretend that Beyer wrote an article about one of the horses's Dutrow has that has actually tested positive and pretend that this one's for Phil is not even part of the discussion.

Whether or not this particular horse had a banned substance is not really as important as the entire state of the game and this issue being brought up by a prominent columnist is the most important part of this entire situation.

[JustRalph]

ding ding, you couldnt run 6 furlongs any faster, yet they give him a 115... this year they give a 1:09^ effort a 117...

Ralph I don't know you, but this explains much about why you don't get it..............

You cannot compare the two numbers a year apart. Hell you can't do it a week apart.......... sometimes.

[ralph_the_cat]

Ralph I don't know you, but this explains much about why you don't get it..............

You cannot compare the two numbers a year apart. Hell you can't do it a week apart.......... sometimes.

Im not comparing how they got the numbers... Im just stating how insane Beyers system is... giving a sprinter like Benny a 115 and a horse like Phil a 117... you cant compare the information used to gather the numbers, but you can compare the numbers based on "if they earned that number"...

you're not getting my post.... you couldnt run any faster than what benny did last year... could you?.... did a horse run faster last year?...

But look at Phil... a horse could easily match that or run faster...

[Dahoss9698]

Im not comparing how they got the numbers... Im just stating how insane Beyers system is... giving a sprinter like Benny a 115 and a horse like Phil a 117... you cant compare the information used to gather the numbers, but you can compare the numbers based on "if they earned that number"...

The bolded sentence made me dizzy. I think if you are going to dismiss the number, you owe to at least yourself to understand how the number is made.

[ralph_the_cat]

The bolded sentence made me dizzy. I think if you are going to dismiss the number, you owe to at least yourself to understand how the number is made.

If that doesnt make sense to you, maybe we should give you an IEP...

[ralph_the_cat]

you guys are right... Beyers number are flawless and always accurate...

maybe this explains why you win so much... :D

[Dahoss9698]

You're not a lawyer by any chance are you?

[asH]

he gets paid for crafted opinion :bang:

What part of that don't you get?


Hey Ralphy boy
I know this is dificult for you but quote the whole sentence

negligent insinuations through crafted opinions based in his Beyer numbers...:bang:

thanks

[PaceAdvantage]

you guys are right... Beyers number are flawless and always accurate...

maybe this explains why you win so much... :DOh God!

[jonnielu]

This has nothing to do with Dutrow and everything to do with cleaning up this game. If Rick Dutrow has to be wrongly accused than he's just going to be lying in the road when the clean-up-this-game truck rolls over him. He'll be a casualty unfortunately. Many years from now, with a clean game and only honest trainers with licenses, no one will remember the name Dutrow except for the fact that he took a bullet for this game and to clean it up.

If Richard Mandella or someone else who is considered to have a sparkling reputation had a moveup like this, no one would bat an eye. Dutrow has been guilty of stuff in the past and that's why guys like him are the first ones who be looked at when a horse goes into orbit first time under his care.

If Dutrow doesn't want to have articles written about him, he needs to have zero positives. Its not rocket science.

YOu are also missing the big picture. This issue needs to be written about, talked about and discussed. The racing higher ups need to know how the fans feel about cheating trainers. If a few guys, who have been guilty in the past, get wrongly accused on a horse that happened to be clean, than so be it. I want a clean game and i don't care how i get it. If a trainer who has been known to take an edge in the past and break racing rules gets wrongly accused of something, well, than, its just bad luck on his part. Just pretend that Beyer wrote an article about one of the horses's Dutrow has that has actually tested positive and pretend that this one's for Phil is not even part of the discussion.

Whether or not this particular horse had a banned substance is not really as important as the entire state of the game and this issue being brought up by a prominent columnist is the most important part of this entire situation.

Apparently, the actual reality is just no longer important, if it flies in the face of what some fans have already chosen to believe. Even if the horse wasn't juiced, it would probably be good for the game if we pretended he was.

jdl

[asH]

Apparently, the actual reality is just no longer important, if it flies in the face of what some fans have already chosen to believe. Even if the horse wasn't juiced, it would probably be good for the game if we pretended he was.

jdl


if these were medievel times they would have burned him at the stake for being a witch...based on the word (117) of their go_d

it is amazing

another analogy - see the splinter in someone else’s eye (Dutrow) but cannot see the log in your own eye (accepting a purposely biased unfair article as word)

whats more amazing is that it was printed in the Form and Washington Post....

[Tom]

The thing is, it is not just the 117 that is the root of this. There is a pattern here, a suspicious pattern, that the 117 is just one dot to be connected.
Looking only at Dutrow's lifetime history of positives, one must wonder.
Were does he fit to the average trainer in terms of this?

Beyer is doing a service by bringing this out into the public arena.

[cj]

Here is a great post from DrugS from another board about Wolfson:

Here's a sampling of some of the major recent Wolfson form reversals involving both his horses and himself.

* Here's the form of It's a Birds back when Todd Pletcher trained him. He ran away with last weekends $1 million Sunshine Million Classic for Wolfson.

http://c3.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/51/l_7c4f3551bf3e4430a31847b6a677df06.jpg

As you can see ... the horse was pretty much non-competitive in small field allowance races and minor stakes. Pletcher tried him on all three different forms of surfaces and wasn't getting much from him.


* Here's the form of Ikigai, Rockerfeller, and Misque's Approval.

Ikigai dominated a Graded Stake at GP two Saturday's ago running a 113 Beyer. As you can see - he was a faint-hearted maiden for Pletcher. He was actually entered in a maiden claiming turf sprint the first time Wolfson got him.

Rockerfeller was a complete and utter bum with a 1-for-15 lifetime record before Wolfson got him. He consistantly ran Beyers in the 70's and had no talent at all. He was off the board in back-to-back N1X alw races at FG before being transformed into one of the nations best sprinters.

the old guy Miesque's Approval had been off the board in back to back claiming races for Bill Mott before being transfered to Wolfson. Just two starts - and less than 3 months later - he took the Sunshine Million Turf at 49/1. Two races after that he upset Artie Schiller in the Makers Mark. He capped the year with a lopsided blowout win in the Breeders Cup Mile.

http://c4.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/9/l_adcba1fc1d384b209e57a4bfc8916ef7.jpg


It seems alarming that Wolfson is all of a sudden turning your typical maidens, claimers, and allowance horses into elite stake horses ... but what is far more troubling to me is the dramatic form reversal that Wolfson has made with his trainer profile and trainer stats.

From a decade long span between 1996 through 2005 - Wolfson has year in and year out been very consistant. His win % was between 15-to-23% - and his yearly ROI had never once risen as high as $1.80 in any of those 10 years.

Basically, the guy was just your solid 20% trainer who placed horses in spots they could win - but who's horses typically were overbet.

From '96 to '05 he was 374-for-1,869 (20% wins) $1.54 ROI.

Now, the same consistant guy who shows a 23% loss on the betting dollar over an entire decade - and never once raises his ROI as high as $1.80 for 10 straight years does the following....

2006: 44-for-168 (26% wins) $2.89 ROI
2007: 52-for-191 (27% wins) $2.15 ROI
2008: 62-for-204 (30% wins) $1.98 ROI
2009: 4-for-23 (17% wins) $2.69 ROI

From '06 to '09 he is 162-for-586 (27% wins) $2.32 ROI

A solid seven percent spike in win percentage and an otherwordly $0.78 spike in ROI!!

You ought not be a genius to see that something happened precisely between 2005 and 2006 that shifted Marty Wolfson from a solid dependable trainer into an absolute super trainer who's stable yields huge win percentages and spectacular profits from a betting standpoint.

He's obviously one of the trainers out there who has a real edge right now. Is it something illegal? Who knows. Is it something detectable? .. who knows. It would be extremely irresponsible to pretend that he doesn't.

[cj]

The scary part to me, and what I think a lot of guys overlook, is that people like Dutrow BET, and they bet a lot. If they are cheating, and I think they are, they might also be cheating when it is "convenient", i.e. the price is right. Sure, I can try to guess when they will perform their next miracle, but even if I'm right, those guys betting are surely taking a lot of money out of the pools...your money and my money.

[PaceAdvantage]

I find it humorous that DrugS used a former Pletcher horse in his Wolfson example.

[cj]

Actually, two. Pletcher has pretty much become a non-factor in top level racing. I guess he has forgotten how to train, as evidenced by the fact Wolfson has completely turned around two of his horses.

[Tom]

Hey Drugs.....great post!
Thanks CJ for sharing....

[CryingForTheHorses]

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=101289&subs=0&arc=0



Beyer article- Negligent reporting at his best- firstly where’s the proof?

and secondly might his analysis or numbers be wrong- completely wrong

What his article fails to report is that Kathleen O’Connell did masterful job training and placing This One’s for Phil. After breaking maiden This One’s for Phil....

next 6 races after breaking maiden

*5th by 6 lengths to Big Drama, in the 100K Fla Stallion Dr. Fager, after a big middle move and finished 3 length in back of YOU LUCKIE MANN (Favorite in Beyers Gulfstream race- Sunshine Million Dash)

*1st in the mile Sea Cliff by 4.5 lengths 60K

* 2nd in the mile 70 28th running of the Foolish Pleasure 90K, made a middle move to the lead

*5th by 9 lengths to Big Drama again 4 lengths off 2nd horse, in the 400k Fla Stallion Reality

* 3rd by 2.5 in the 3rd running of the Arthur I Appleton 100k mile 1/16 turf, after leading throughout

**1st in 250K Sunshine Million- beat fav YOU LUCKIE MANN

It can be said before going into the race this versatile horse had talent and experience. Dropping back in distance, and running against a fav he was only 2 lengths off of after breaking his maiden. Surely his gained experience and success accounted for something more than some numbers can explain.

Appears to me Beyer is sharpening his knives early this year remember the bogus Big Brown article last year..Hari Cari is painless.

Well said!

[CryingForTheHorses]

She did a 'masterful" job? that seems like a bit of an exaggeration......if she was so 'masterful', how come Dutrow was able to improve her so much?

As far as questioning Beyer, if you follow horse racing, you know that any article he writes about drugs is a much needed one-owning hoprses myself, it is almost impossible to have a chance if you dont use a "super trainer"-this is a problem that must be dealt with and i am glad he brought that horse up.


This lady works very hard..ALL her horses are treated with the care and handling that not many outfits could match..Lot of you guys are forgetting Calder is a SAND track and in my opinion shouldnt even campare to most other tracks because they are not the same texture..I also think the beyer numbers are just a farse..I never look at beyers...I look at the speed rating and the track variant for the distance as I have since before beyers were put into place. How many times have you looked at a horse in and the very next time he was in,His beyer was changed...Please dont bash Kathleen Oconnell as you are also forgetting many stakewinners have come from her barn.

[Bubba X]

Well said!
I have a question for you.

Would you ever run a stakes winning 2 year old five times in 82 days?

[cj]

OK, lets keep this simple. The same exact article could have been written without alluding to figures.

[CryingForTheHorses]

I have a question for you.

Would you ever run a stakes winning 2 year old five times in 82 days?

Yup...Get it when its hot...Horses are like roses,They "wilt" with time.16 days is plenty of time as long as the horse was up to it.These 100 dollar a day trainers love that 3 week rule... To many horses are overtrained. The closer your run date makes you the fittest horse in the race. A horse that waits and waits with just breezes doesnt have the same response as a "dead fit" horse.
Calder is a showcase for 2yo's,Lots of money for Fl Breds.

[Bubba X]

Yup...Get it when its hot...Horses are like roses,They "wilt" with time.16 days is plenty of time as long as the horse was up to it.These 100 dollar a day trainers love that 3 week rule... To many horses are overtrained. The closer your run date makes you the fittest horse in the race. A horse that waits and waits with just breezes doesnt have the same response as a "dead fit" horse.
Calder is a showcase for 2yo's,Lots of money for Fl Breds.Thanks for answering. I'm not sure I agree but that's ok. I'm also not sure this horse is anywhere as good going long as he is sprinting. I guess we'll find out soon enough. Speaking of OConnell, is Danny Scocca still around?

[Niko]

The scary part to me, and what I think a lot of guys overlook, is that people like Dutrow BET, and they bet a lot. If they are cheating, and I think they are, they might also be cheating when it is "convenient", i.e. the price is right. Sure, I can try to guess when they will perform their next miracle, but even if I'm right, those guys betting are surely taking a lot of money out of the pools...your money and my money.

Exactly CJ, this is one part that really irks me. Not only do they get the purse money, they get to take money out of the bettors pockets too. But this is gambling and horse racing so it's ok because it's been going on forever.

In the drug issue of Horseracing magazine a trainer even alluded to not making it so blantantly obvious.

It's up to the handicapper to take his best guess and I'm not even close to that good of a handicapper. I can only assume that in the big races they're a go and it's paid off--but I still don't like it. If one of these trainers is in the race I bet on them at "good" odds or stay out of the race unless I really like something. Tough to beat both them and the favorites.

[jonnielu]

..I also think the beyer numbers are just a farse..I never look at beyers....

Very well said. Farce may be being kind.

jdl

[Indulto]

The scary part to me, and what I think a lot of guys overlook, is that people like Dutrow BET, and they bet a lot. If they are cheating, and I think they are, they might also be cheating when it is "convenient", i.e. the price is right. Sure, I can try to guess when they will perform their next miracle, but even if I'm right, those guys betting are surely taking a lot of money out of the pools...your money and my money.OK, lets keep this simple. The same exact article could have been written without alluding to figures.Excellent points, cj.

When horsemen become horse bettors, the insider information advantage is overwhelming (wonder if he qualified for a rebate on that wager? ;)) Don't forget his long shot Suburban H. winner, either.

IF Beyer really were interested in journalistic credit for that article, he himself would have provided competing figures for the horses in question, and avoided a lot of sarcasm as well as the suggestion he is (once again?) promoting awareness of his own product.

[Cangamble]

I'll guarantee the Bris and TSN figures give this horse the same 15-20 length improvement.
Those who say they don't trust Beyer figures, fine, they might be plus or minus 2 to 3 lengths any time, not usually more than that because the way they are made are 90%+ objective.
As for this situation, many of the best handicapping books state that a horse may improve as much as 5 to 6 lengths going from two to three (though this one only had less than 3 months off).
So the 117 might really be a 109, but it might be a 117. Still, it was an improvement of around 20 lengths.

Do I think Dutrow juices...YES. I think any trainer hitting at 18% plus over 100 plus starts is probably using something undetectable or something that isn't being tested.

Dutrow shouldn't have questioned the Beyer, but stuck to how he improved the horse. Questioning the Beyer in this case shows that Dutrow can't be as sharp as he wants us to think he is.

[point given]

Very well said. Farce may be being kind.

jdl

Farse, farce, more like luke warm farts :lol:

[jonnielu]

Those who say they don't trust Beyer figures, fine, they might be plus or minus 2 to 3 lengths any time, not usually more than that

Good enough for horseshoes.

jdl

[Indulto]

I'll guarantee the Bris and TSN figures give this horse the same 15-20 length improvement.
Those who say they don't trust Beyer figures, fine, they might be plus or minus 2 to 3 lengths any time, not usually more than that because the way they are made are 90%+ objective.
As for this situation, many of the best handicapping books state that a horse may improve as much as 5 to 6 lengths going from two to three (though this one only had less than 3 months off).
So the 117 might really be a 109, but it might be a 117. Still, it was an improvement of around 20 lengths.

Do I think Dutrow juices...YES. I think any trainer hitting at 18% plus over 100 plus starts is probably using something undetectable or something that isn't being tested.

Dutrow shouldn't have questioned the Beyer, but stuck to how he improved the horse. Questioning the Beyer in this case shows that Dutrow can't be as sharp as he wants us to think he is.CG,
I think he played it just right by discrediting Beyer's numbers. Hell, the guy literally declared war on him, and Dutrow isn't known for either shyness or stupidity, just a lot of nerve and a big mouth. It won't be as easy to get rid of him as it was Blagojevich.

There's a long line of horsemen including jockey's agents who use either or both sheets products. If Betfair decides to introduce Timeform ratings for U.S. races through TVG, it might indirectly effect Beyer's personal Pick Six wagers. ;)

[toetoe]

Two off the top of my head:

Steve Crist;

Nick Kling.

Sorry, that sounds like an East Coast bias. :blush:

[Cangamble]

Seriously, does anyone think that Brisnet is going to give that horse a much lower rating comparatively than the DRF Beyer has?

[Indulto]

Two off the top of my head:

Steve Crist;

Nick Kling.

Sorry, that sounds like an East Coast bias. :blush:Mr. Toed,
Better than Beyer at what -- journalism, selections, figure-making, entertainment? :confused:

[Indulto]

Seriously, does anyone think that Brisnet is going to give that horse a much lower rating comparatively than the DRF Beyer has?http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/editorial/news/article.cgi?id=13907
From Equidaily:

HANDICAPPING INSIGHTS
by Dick Powell JANUARY 30, 2009… when THIS ONES FOR PHIL (Untuttable) romped in Saturday's Sunshine Millions Dash by 2 1/4 lengths in 1:09.10 on a track that had been playing slow in his first start for Rick Dutrow, Jr., the alarms were sounded. Gasoline was added to the blaze of suspicion when he earned gigantic Speed figures by all measurements -- a BRIS Speed rating of 111 compared to a previous career best of 92. Clearly, the rumored Dutrow magic had to be at work.

Formerly trained by Katie O'Connell, who raced him going two turns in his last four starts despite having a very speedy pedigree, This Ones for Phil was coming off a 77-day layoff and was now dropping back to six furlongs. In a race restricted for Florida- and California-breds, he was not impossible to have even if O'Connell were still training him.

Now with Dutrow, This Ones for Phil had eight workouts since changing hands and looked fit and ready. Regardless of how you feel about Dutrow, he wins an amazing 32 percent with horses making their first start for him while showing a healthy positive ROI of 0.40. For a handicapper, this is a potent stat. …

… Dutrow had the horse for 77 days and sports an impressive 32 percent strike rate when horses make their first start for him. This Ones for Phil went off at a generous 11-1 odds. While he had not run this fast in his juvenile season, he still was an open company stakes winner. It's not like Dutrow claimed him the week before and he ran this kind of race after a few days in the barn. Where's the love?

… To show you how my weekend went, I was tapped out way before This Ones for Phil raced on Saturday and didn't play at all on Sunday.

The fact is, there's a lot of vet work, perfectly legal, that takes place between races. And, even if you knew what was being done it wouldn't help you as a handicapper. I can't tell you how many times I have heard about a horse receiving a throat operation and the horse runs poorly even though it allegedly has had its breathing problems fixed. Sometimes, you are better off not knowing as there is an element of sausage-making to the training of horses and if you really knew how many ailments they have you would never play them.

But, in Dutrow's case, we know his record in that spot and could have acted accordingly. …Also from Equidaily:

Beyer audio frm Byk show
http://www.thoroughbredracingradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_events&task=view_detail&agid=431&year=2009&month=01&day=28&Itemid=35 (http://www.thoroughbredracingradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_events&task=view_detail&agid=431&year=2009&month=01&day=28&Itemid=35)

Wolfson audio from Byk show:
http://www.thoroughbredracingradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_events&task=view_detail&agid=432&year=2009&month=01&day=29&Itemid=35

[JustRalph]

Isn't Miesque Approval the horse that won the Breeders Cup race and Jerry Bailey basically called the trainer a Juicer on the NBC broadcast and made some comment along the lines of "that's not the same Miesque Approval that I road"

[PaceAdvantage]

I think any trainer hitting at 18% plus over 100 plus starts is probably using something undetectable or something that isn't being tested.Wow. One guy wrote anyone above 30% is a cheater (which I disagreed with, and then was challenged to name an over 30% guy whom I "trust")

Now we're lowering the bar to 18%? Come on people. There are "black swans" out there you know. There are going to be trainers who win at an 18%+ clip and even a 30%+ clip who are NOT cheating. I know, I know, hard to believe.

Does this mean I believe there is no cheating in racing. Absolutely not.

But to say every trainer who wins at an 18%+ clip over an extended period of time is cheating is foolish.

[asH]

sniff, sniff...something's burning

[asH]

Letters to the Editor

By DRF Readers

Debate detracts from greater story of a horse on the rise

I was very disappointed to see Mr. Richard Dutrow's response to Andrew Beyer's Jan. 28 column in the Racing Form ("Dutrow expresses ire over column," Jan. 31).

Reading his comments, it seems as though he is lost in the forest and can't see the trees. When This Ones for Phil was purchased for six figures two and half months ago, he was already a stakes winner on the dirt and stakes-placed on the turf, with earnings of almost $100,000. (Considering the cut in the purses at Calder this past meeting, that was a feat in itself.)

Mr. Dutrow should have considered himself lucky, having a proven and still-upcoming young horse added to the barn. As the horse is now a maturing 3-year-old, it didn't seem like a total shock that he ran a terrific race on Sunshine Millions Day. The fact that he returned only a $25.40 public mutuel attested to that fact, too. He certainly had a dream trip (as noted by Dutrow himself) and a brilliant ride from Edgar Prado.

It is a shame that the focus now seems to be on Dutrow and not a nice up-and-coming horse. Calder continuously has showcased many such stars (Big Drama, In Summation, Blazing Sword, and Chatter Chatter, to name a few). I also think that it is a shame the two and a half months that had passed since This Ones for Phil left my barn was not enough time to have the name and colors of the new owner, Paul Pompa Jr., in the program. Time would be better devoted to the horse, This Ones for Phil, and his new owner in the risky business of horse racing, where any race can be the last - and all the knocking be put aside.

Kathleen O'Connell - Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

[Judge Gallivan]

Seriously, does anyone think that Brisnet is going to give that horse a much lower rating comparatively than the DRF Beyer has?

Ragozin have him improving about 10 lengths from his 2-year-old top, and Thorograph about 8 lengths.

[Judge Gallivan]

Both figuremakers call it a suspicious move up on their respective boards.

[jonnielu]

Both figuremakers call it a suspicious move up on their respective boards.

And, it is quite obvious that only the figuremakers understand race horse ability and how to express it. Too bad that they won't fill in the trainors. If the trainors only knew just a little something about race horse ability like the figuremakers do.... they wouldn't have to be cheating.

jdl

[Charlie D]

We also wormed him, did his teeth, and put about 50 pounds on him


Former trainer does not seem pleased with the above comments, but if the above is correct , it could account for the 8-10 length improvement the guys at Rags and TG are seeing


Question is though , did RD also use roids to help put on the 50lbs

[ralph_the_cat]

Brisnet Figures...

have his win at 111... he ran a career best as a 2 yo of 92 in sept(4.5 months ago) going a mile, his last two 6 furlong races were in aug and july(more than 5 months ago), where he ran an 82 and an 89 in his 3rd and fourth start of his career... brisnet figures are nearly always higher than Beyers, just like every pp line for Phils... except, his last race, where beyer gave him a 117 and bris gave him a 111... Normally how much higher are Bris figures than Beyers?... typically when we see a bris figure of 111, wouldnt the beyers be something less than 106?... 101 maybe...

just one of a hundred reasons I still swear by Bris PPs...

[ralph_the_cat]

Beyer-Bris
117-111
76-86
75-85
66-83
79-92
71-82
81-89
33-64
43-75<--another reason Beyers is messed up-4th by 3 finish given a 43 in MDN50k...

[Charlie D]

Beyer-Bris
117-111
76-86
75-85
66-83
79-92
71-82
81-89
33-64
43-75<--another reason Beyers is messed up-4th by 3 finish given a 43 in MDN50k...

Comparing one set of figs to another set is like comparing apples and oranges

Beyers pars may be different to someone else's, his BL may be different, his TV may be different

[ralph_the_cat]

Bull... we're comparing the consistency... Beyers is rarely, if ever, higher than Bris, but in the race in question hes higher...

[Charlie D]

Bull... we're comparing the consistency... Beyers is rarely, if ever, higher than Bris, but in the race in question hes higher





I think it is you that talks bull


Look at what you posted, the numbers are different everywhere, why?? because the Methodology is different

[Dahoss9698]

I think it is you that talks bull




You think???

:lol:

[ralph_the_cat]

Look at what you posted, the numbers are different everywhere, why?? because the Methodology is different

wow, this one flew over you two...

[Cangamble]

I think it is you that talks bull


Look at what you posted, the numbers are different everywhere, why?? because the Methodology is different
The methodology is pretty much time and class comparison. Anyone who does their own variants understands that there might be a difference of 2-3 lengths tops usually between Bris, Beyer, and their own end variant for the day. Once in a while it is 4-5 lengths, but that is rare.
Beyer and Bris equate the difference between each number in consistent lengths. They have different scales, but on a given day, or given race, the formula runs true.
On an average day, a Beyer of 117 translates to approximately 96 on my figures (where 1 point equals one length), but it also translates to a 109 approximately on TSN numbers (TSN and BRIS are sister companies that use different scales).
I don't have my Brisnet equivalence, but I'm sure it is closer to TSN's.

[Charlie D]

Here's My fig for Phill - 111

It's TOTALLY different Beyers, why?? because the Methodology is different



This does not mean i think Beyers number is wrong


If i alter one thing by X amount i get 113, if i alter it again i probably get 117

[ralph_the_cat]

Here's My fig for Phill - 111

It's TOTALLY different Beyers, why?? because the Methodology is different



This does not mean i think Beyers number is wrong


If i alter one thing by X amount i get 113

What are your numbers from Phils last 2 or 3 starts?...

[Charlie D]

What are your numbers from Phils last 2 or 3 starts?...


Don't do figs for every race and if i had em, they would be irrelevant as they are not comparable to Beyers as the Methodology is different


Jeez, talk about :bang:

[Charlie D]

There is only one constant here

Rags, TG, Beyer, Bris have all recorded improvement on previous recordings


Whose numbers you use don't matter

[ralph_the_cat]

There is only one constant here

Rags, TG, Beyer, Bris have all recorded improvement on previous recordings


Whose numbers you use don't matter

boy the first smart thing you said today....

...but Beyers has the biggest improvement... :bang:

[Cangamble]

How is your methodology different than Beyers?

[Charlie D]

How is your methodology different than Beyers?

CG


My SF methodology is based on Mordin's from Mordin on Time. not Beyers and there is the difference

[Charlie D]

boy the first smart thing you said today....

...but Beyers has the biggest improvement... :bang:

Well, at least i'm not showing sign of being a numpty like some

Beyers is DIFFERENT, showing BIGGEST for a reason and THAT reason is contained in HIS methodology


OK, done now, as this is becoming very boring

[Cangamble]

CG


My SF methodology is based on Mordin's from Mordin on Time. not Beyers and there is the difference
Without being familiar with Mordin, and doing a quick Google, it seems that Mordin is also into relative final times. So the methodology appears very similar to me. Just because different scales might be used, doesn't mean the methodology is different.

[cj]

Bull... we're comparing the consistency... Beyers is rarely, if ever, higher than Bris, but in the race in question hes higher...

That is totally untrue. BRIS is lower at the higher end of the scale, and higher at the lower end. They use a tighter scale than Beyer.


A 111 BRIS is equal to 114 Beyer.

BRIS Beyer
115 121
100 96
85 71
70 47

[Charlie D]

CG

Of course it does

They may be measuring overall time, but the way they construct and compile is different, hence the Methodology differs

the result is

Beyer 117, CD 111, Bris 111, , CG 109, Bill from down road 98 and so on

[ralph_the_cat]

That is totally untrue. BRIS is lower at the higher end of the scale, and higher at the lower end. They use a tighter scale than Beyer.


A 111 BRIS is equal to 114 Beyer.

BRIS Beyer
115 121
100 96
85 71
70 47


this week 111 is equal to 117... the numbers for phil...

[Cangamble]

BRIS Speed Ratings have a progressive scale compared to beaten lengths. At 6 furlongs, one length equals 1.66 points; at 7 furlongs = 1.42 points; at 8 furlongs = 1.26 points; 9 furlongs = 1.12 points; and at 10 furlongs one length = 1 point.
************************************************** ********************
Beyer Speed Figures appear exclusively in Daily Racing Form. Every performance by every horse in North America is assigned a Beyer number which reflects the time of the race and the inherent speed of the track over which it was run, permitting easy comparisons of efforts at different distances. A horse who earns a 90 has run faster than one who runs an 80. In this system of numbers, 2 1/2 points are roughly equal to one length in sprints, and 2 points to one length in routes


Just by extrapolating, it looks to me like a 105 Beyer equals a 105 Bris. It is around this point that any higher ratings will cause Beyer numbers to be higher than Bris numbers. Anything lower of course means the Beyer number will be less than the Bris number.

[Charlie D]

BRIS Speed Ratings have a progressive scale compared to beaten lengths. At 6 furlongs, one length equals 1.66 points; at 7 furlongs = 1.42 points; at 8 furlongs = 1.26 points; 9 furlongs = 1.12 points; and at 10 furlongs one length = 1 point.
************************************************** ********************
Beyer Speed Figures appear exclusively in Daily Racing Form. Every performance by every horse in North America is assigned a Beyer number which reflects the time of the race and the inherent speed of the track over which it was run, permitting easy comparisons of efforts at different distances. A horse who earns a 90 has run faster than one who runs an 80. In this system of numbers, 2 1/2 points are roughly equal to one length in sprints, and 2 points to one length in routes




There you go, just one portion (the way BL are treated ) differs between Beyer and Bris, this will result in different numbers alone, add in more of these differences (par, DV etc ) and you end up with BSF 117 compared to Bris 111


Totally different Methodology's

[Cangamble]

There you go, just one portion (the way BL are treated ) differs between Beyer and Bris, this will result in different numbers alone, add in more of these differences (par, DV etc ) and you end up with BSF 117 compared to Bris 111


Totally different Methodology's
Fundamentals when it comes to making Bris speed numbers, my speed numbers, and Beyer numbers are almost identical if not identical.
Scales are different, and subjectivity regarding what a 5000 NW 3 should run compared to a 20k claimer 3 yr. old filly might differ somewhat.

[Charlie D]

It only takes one difference and the Method differs. The more differences there are, the less comparable the become

2+2 make 4, alter that to 3+2 and you get 5


4 and 5 are close together , but not the same

[ralph_the_cat]

Totally different Methodology's

No one said the methodology is the same or similar for that matter...

I brought up that Beyers Methodology lacks consistency and is one extreme to the next...

looks at CJs info... stating bris 111 is equal to 114.... through this info

BRIS Beyer
115 121
100 96
85 71
70 47

Yet, Phils first start he runs
75 bris-43 Beyer.... ?????
recent start
111bris- 117 Beyer...?

yes, Beyer has a greater range than bris, but that doesnt explain the great swings from one extreme to the next that Beyer has... we know the methodology is different for krist sake... that doesnt make it right,

If you havent seen the insane numbers Beyer puts out at times, then "what ever dude"... lets just ignore one another....

[ralph_the_cat]

It only takes one difference and the Method differs. The more differences there are, the less comparable the become

2+2 make 4, alter that to 3+2 and you get 5


4 and 5 are close together , but not the same

SO I ask you this, at the end of the day do you find Beyers numbers to be the most consistent and helpful when handicapping?

[Charlie D]

No one said the methodology is the same or similar for that matter...

You used two different Methodolgy's to try and show inconsistency in the Beyers.

Apples and oranges as i stated,

[Charlie D]

SO I ask you this, at the end of the day do you find Beyers numbers to be the most consistent and helpful when handicapping?


Your better off asking someone who uses them

[toussaud]

what no one is talking about, is the fact that all of hte top 5 finishers in the race ran the race of their life by 5-15 beyer speed figures. am I the only one that thinks that is BS?

TOFP ovbiously did regardless, but I find it extremely odd that adjusting the speed figures by say, 10-15 points, puts not only This one for phil closer to a more likely beyer, but puts all the other horses where they normally run.

[Imriledup]

Apparently, the actual reality is just no longer important, if it flies in the face of what some fans have already chosen to believe. Even if the horse wasn't juiced, it would probably be good for the game if we pretended he was.

jdl

The reality is that there are too many cheaters in the game. Whether Dutrow is one of them is anyone's guess. Beyer's article brought this sensitive issue out to be discussed by the industry. I'm sick and tired of having to handicap chemists instead of horses. I'll pretend anything in order to get this game cleaned up. If Dutrow has to be wrongly accused in order for this game to get cleaner, than i'm willing to toss him under the bus for the good of the sport.

[rjorio]

For anyone interested,Thorograph gave This Ones For Phil a negative 4,a fast fig indeed.

[Charlie D]

The reality is that there are too many cheaters in the game. Whether Dutrow is one of them is anyone's guess. Beyer's article brought this sensitive issue out to be discussed by the industry. I'm sick and tired of having to handicap chemists instead of horses. I'll pretend anything in order to get this game cleaned up. If Dutrow has to be wrongly accused in order for this game to get cleaner, than i'm willing to toss him under the bus for the good of the sport.



Reality is, breaking the rules turns handicapping into a random number game, the reality is, the honest owner/trainer may as well not bother trying , the reality is, the people who use illegal methods to obtain Black Type are decieving future breeders


Eventually it probably all falls down and you have no horse racing game left, except for the addicts betting and cheater racing against cheater

[cj]

No one said the methodology is the same or similar for that matter...

I brought up that Beyers Methodology lacks consistency and is one extreme to the next...

looks at CJs info... stating bris 111 is equal to 114.... through this info

BRIS Beyer
115 121
100 96
85 71
70 47
Yet, Phils first start he runs
75 bris-43 Beyer.... ?????
recent start
111bris- 117 Beyer...?
yes, Beyer has a greater range than bris, but that doesnt explain the great swings from one extreme to the next that Beyer has... we know the methodology is different for krist sake... that doesnt make it right,
If you havent seen the insane numbers Beyer puts out at times, then "what ever dude"... lets just ignore one another....


BRIS puts out way, way more "insane numbers than Beyer does. BRIS does them totally by computer, while Beyer uses some human judgment. I have no doubt there are mistakes in the Beyers, and I attempt to take advantage of those I find, but there are way, way, way, way, way, way, way more bad numbers in the BRIS files.

And, no matter how many times Ralph says it, this isn't a "bad" figure. Every figure maker I've seen, myself included, has this race very fast. It was a pretty easy day to do numbers for in my opinion.

[ralph_the_cat]

CJ, curious as to your opinion on Cool Coal Mans performance this week at GP... 28th maybe... Whats the Bris and Beyers numbers on that race?...

I find his effort just as big, maybe bigger, running 6.5F in 1:15.6, hell at the 6F mark he was at 1:09.36, just .26 off Phils time and still moving with a half a furlong left... so whats the numbers?... surely it should be around 117... 2 huge performances this past week, has to be close to one another... no?... Has Cool Coal Man ever ran close to a 117 Beyer?... no.... he sure as hell put in as big of effort as Phils this week...

When awarding a horse a 117, its clear you are saying the horse is freakish, due to the fact horses like Curlin havent earned more than a Beyer of 117 since his '07 BC-Classic win... and has BB ever earned more than a 117?...


and for the guys who claim bris 105 is equal to beyer 105, and from that point on Beyer numbers begin to seperate more... thats not true, its a crap shoot once you hit around 105 or so... could go either way when you get that high... there's no science to it... remember its Methodology... hehe

I clicked on Curlins PPs I have, to look at Beyer numbers vs. Bris Numbers once they hit above 105...
looking at his wins...

.......Bris vs. Beyer
JClub-'08 117 vs. 111
JClub-'07 117 vs. 114
BCup-'07 121 vs. 119
HAsk-'07 105 vs. 107
Wood-'07 106 vs. 107

see crap shoot... once you hit 105

anything below 104, 103, Bris 999 out of 1000 times is a higher number than Beyers...

and before anyone dare says, you cant compare BB, Curlins, etc numbers because they were at a different track and a different distance... then tell Andy Beyer himself to shut up... hes comparing "Phils last efforts" to this weekends performance... his last 3 races were OVER a mile, not too mention one on the turf... so he goes against logic.... if we cant compare lifetime bests or from week to week, whats the point...

[Dahoss9698]

Ralph, you are completely clueless about what you are trying to talk about. Learn how the numbers are made.

[cj]

Ralph, saying it is a crapshoot above 105 is just plain wrong, as is a lot of the stuff you say about figure making in this thread. Pointing out one horse doesn't mean squat. I have checked the differences amongst THOUSANDS of horses, and what I said is true.

There has been a change in all the figures over the last few years, at least the last decade, where horses bred in the US are capable of running bigger figures sprinting than they are routing. It is also true younger horses run much bigger figures short than they do going long. It could be breeding, it could be training, but to be honest, I don't care why. The point is that what Curlin did at 9f and 10f means nothing compared to what some other horse did at 6f.

As for Cool Coal Man, he didn't run as well figure wise as the 3yo did. The pace in the race was slow, the final time good, but not as good as the race from last Saturday. I don't know what the BRIS rating was, but the Beyer is 106.

If you are trying to tell me there are differences between BRIS and Beyer when place on the same scale, well, no shit. What a discovery! They aren't made the same. If you want to guess which are more accurate, it isn't even close. Beyer crushes BRIS. The "computer" makes a lot more mistakes than the humans. Beyers do get bet a little more heavily, but Beyer still wins ROI wise.

What I find hilarious is you are basing your defense of Dutrow on the Beyer figure being suspect when every single figure maker I know of, include TG, The Sheets, Beyers, BRIS, PaceFigures, etc. make the number huge. There are many times figures disagree, and of course somebody has to be right in that case and somebody wrong. But it is very, very rare for all the numbers guys to agree and be wrong.

[Cangamble]

CJ, one of my gripes with Beyer numbers is when two races the same distance the same day the same track and one or two races apart when there was no weather change, you sometimes see a filly win in 1:12:1 receive a lower Beyer than a boy who won in 1:12:2

I've seen that happen a few times. What is the rationale?

[098poi]

CJ, one of my gripes with Beyer numbers is when two races the same distance the same day the same track and one or two races apart when there was no weather change, you sometimes see a filly win in 1:12:1 receive a lower Beyer than a boy who won in 1:12:2

I've seen that happen a few times. What is the rationale?

I may get myself into trouble here but what the heck. I think with Beyers an important factor most people miss is the starting point is the condition of the race. A MSW at track A should win in X time, and a 40K claiming race should be won in Y time. From what "should" be run at that condition the numbers are adjusted up or down. 2 performances with the same Beyer number in theory mean the same or similar performance, but 2 exact same times from different races and different conditions do not mean the same performance. Whew! (I am not speaking for CJ)

[Cangamble]

I may get myself into trouble here but what the heck. I think with Beyers an important factor most people miss is the starting point is the condition of the race. A MSW at track A should win in X time, and a 40K claiming race should be won in Y time. From what "should" be run at that condition the numbers are adjusted up or down. 2 performances with the same Beyer number in theory mean the same or similar performance, but 2 exact same times from different races and different conditions do not mean the same performance. Whew! (I am not speaking for CJ)
This is not how pure track variants are supposed to be made. Lets say there are only two dirt races one day, no weather changes, both at 6 furlongs. One is a 5000 open claimer run in 1:10, the other is a 20000 open claimer run in 1:10. Both should receive the same Beyer. And the way I would calculate the Beyer that day is by averaging the two races, where the 5000 claimer was expected to be a 66 Beyer, and the 20,000 claimer was supposed to be a 78 Beyer. I would give them both around a 72 Beyer.
I would adjust the variant depending on how horses ran off those two races. Maybe the 5000 claimer ran as good as a 20,000 claimer that day instead of somewhere in between.
Of course, almost always, you have more than 2 ratable races when it comes to making a speed figure.

[098poi]

This is not how pure track variants are supposed to be made. Lets say there are only two dirt races one day, no weather changes, both at 6 furlongs. One is a 5000 open claimer run in 1:10, the other is a 20000 open claimer run in 1:10. Both should receive the same Beyer. And the way I would calculate the Beyer that day is by averaging the two races, where the 5000 claimer was expected to be a 66 Beyer, and the 20,000 claimer was supposed to be a 78 Beyer. I would give them both around a 72 Beyer.
I would adjust the variant depending on how horses ran off those two races. Maybe the 5000 claimer ran as good as a 20,000 claimer that day instead of somewhere in between.
Of course, almost always, you have more than 2 ratable races when it comes to making a speed figure.

I don't know if that statement is accurate. But I may have to defer to those with more in depth knowledge on creating Beyers.

[ralph_the_cat]

Ralph, saying it is a crapshoot above 105 is just plain wrong, as is a lot of the stuff you say about figure making in this thread. Pointing out one horse doesn't mean squat. I have checked the differences amongst THOUSANDS of horses, and what I said is true.

There has been a change in all the figures over the last few years, at least the last decade, where horses bred in the US are capable of running bigger figures sprinting than they are routing. It is also true younger horses run much bigger figures short than they do going long. It could be breeding, it could be training, but to be honest, I don't care why. The point is that what Curlin did at 9f and 10f means nothing compared to what some other horse did at 6f.

As for Cool Coal Man, he didn't run as well figure wise as the 3yo did. The pace in the race was slow, the final time good, but not as good as the race from last Saturday. I don't know what the BRIS rating was, but the Beyer is 106.

If you are trying to tell me there are differences between BRIS and Beyer when place on the same scale, well, no shit. What a discovery! They aren't made the same. If you want to guess which are more accurate, it isn't even close. Beyer crushes BRIS. The "computer" makes a lot more mistakes than the humans. Beyers do get bet a little more heavily, but Beyer still wins ROI wise.

What I find hilarious is you are basing your defense of Dutrow on the Beyer figure being suspect when every single figure maker I know of, include TG, The Sheets, Beyers, BRIS, PaceFigures, etc. make the number huge. There are many times figures disagree, and of course somebody has to be right in that case and somebody wrong. But it is very, very rare for all the numbers guys to agree and be wrong.

Hey CJ, You and some of your buddies made the point of comparing Brisnet to Beyer... how Beyers should equal XXX for brisnet, which is totally wrong... and it is a crap shoot above 105... someone on here said when bris hits 105 beyers numbers begin to increase more than bris figures... which is flat out wrong... they used this to justify the figure was still ok, since bris was 111, Beyer is suppose to be higher... not true, Bris has given out 111 and while Beyer gives out 107 etc... that doesnt justify anything...

I wouldnt go as far as saying everything I said is wrong, when not one thing you said in comparing bris to beyers has been remotely accurate, I heard you're the smart one on figures around here, Im just trying to make sense of the info you put up, theres flaws all over it...

[ralph_the_cat]

Ralph, you are completely clueless about what you are trying to talk about. Learn how the numbers are made.

you're too funny, you don't talk about anything remotely close to the subject... :D

[cj]

Hey CJ, You and some of your buddies made the point of comparing Brisnet to Beyer... how Beyers should equal XXX for brisnet, which is totally wrong... and it is a crap shoot above 105... someone on here said when bris hits 105 beyers numbers begin to increase more than bris figures... which is flat out wrong... they used this to justify the figure was still ok, since bris was 111, Beyer is suppose to be higher... not true, Bris has given out 111 and while Beyer gives out 107 etc... that doesnt justify anything...

I wouldnt go as far as saying everything I said is wrong, when not one thing you said in comparing bris to beyers has been remotely accurate, I heard you're the smart one on figures around here, Im just trying to make sense of the info you put up, theres flaws all over it...

What I have said is right. As I said, I have a database comparing thousands and thousands of horses. Just because you say it is wrong doesn't make it so. I'm done with you.

Cangamble,


I agree, there are times the Beyers use human judgment when times are the same. Are they right every time? Of course not, but they are right probably more than 60-70% of the time.

One problem to consider is that you can't always trust the timers. Second, even if the timing is accurate, sometimes the gate is placed in different places for the same distances, causing different times. The thing to do is actually investigate when you get figures that make no sense doing it the "computer" way. BRIS doesn't, and they get some outlandish numbers from time to time.

I would also say on the turf, and to a lesser extent the synthetics these days, that Beyer is not making pure speed ratings, but more "class" ratings. When the pace is so slow that a decent final time is impossible to achieve, the rating will be "boosted" to what it could have been. There are a lot of problems with that method, but I'm just telling you it is happening, not that I agree with it.

For example, if in the 1500 meters world class competitiors are rated on the Beyer scale, the winner would usually get a 115 or so. Today, I race against one of them and he decides to just do a light jog for the first 1200 meters, while I run next to him, then he takes off and dusts me by 100 meters in painfully slow time. The Beyer guys might still give him a 115 and greatly inflate my figure. This is what they sometimes do in turf and synthetic routes, and even an occasional dirt route. It is probably accurate for some, but can greatly overate some horses in the field.

[ralph_the_cat]

What I find hilarious is you are basing your defense of Dutrow on the Beyer figure being suspect when every single figure maker I know of, include TG, The Sheets, Beyers, BRIS, PaceFigures, etc.

I find it hilarious you think that, because I never said anything remotely close to that, get a clue CJ, I just said Beyer's number made the biggest jump... which is a FACT... which tells me not to believe hes even capable of improving that number in his next start, matching it would be a challenge...

Pretty remarkable Beyer only gave Cool Coal Man a 106 and Phil a 117...

Based off their last start, Phil will Destroy Cool Coal Man then...

I dont care how right you think the math is, point being, I dont have faith in Beyers methodology at times, this is a perfect example... He gives the horse the biggest improvement and then writes an article whinning about it... Im not the only one, theres guys who swear by Beyer, and theres guys that question beyer numbers, if you question beyer numbers, you're surely questioning this one... but by year end, he should run an honest 117 :)

he's a 2 year old stakes winner with an 11% trainer, Dutrow will have some fun with him in 2009....

I beat this dead horse enough... your closing thoughts are welcome CJ, just dont call me an idiot... ;)

[cj]

I seriously doubt I called you an idiot.

Beyer jumping from a 81 to a 117 is pretty dam close to BRIS going from a 91 to a 111. It is about the equivalent of going from 82 to 114. If you want to quibble over a few points, so be it. The point is ALL figure makers I know of had the same basic improvement.

[Cangamble]

CJ, assuming the clock is wrong is a dangerous way to do speed figures. Might as well make for individual races only then. I do agree that gates are placed at different spots sometimes, but usually not the same day for the same distance.

[cj]

There are times the clock malfunctions. See the recent Retama thread. I didn't say I ever assume it malfunctions, but I know it is a possibility. That is what replays and a stopwatch can determine. It isn't very hard to time a race off of replays.

[classhandicapper]

I'm going to say the same things again.

Obviously, I don't want to dismiss the importance of finding out who is cheating etc... Guys like Dutrow and Wolfson are very suspicious because of the consistency and degree of their move ups. So Beyer did a service by writing the article.

However, I think people are still equating this 117 to meaning this horse ran at a Grade 1 older horse level. The 117 is being taken literally. IMHO that is not true. I don't care if every figure maker on earth gives it a 117 (or the functional eqivalent), there are times when horses run very fast races for their class (and vice versa) and it's not indicative of their ability.

On some occasions it's just an incorrect figure related to starting gate position, steady wind, a gust of wind, track maintenance between races, changes in the moisture level in the track, the sun baking on some sections of the track and not others while moving across the sky, the pace, a bad interpretation of the result by the figure maker etc....

Even though the race in question looks like "it could" fit in perfectly with the rest of the day, that doesn't mean everyone is right.

Also, sometimes it's simply the development of the race at a level that is more difficult to measure. The figure may be right, but it's not indicative of ability. The conditions were just perfect in that race, on that track, for those horses to produce a fast (or slow time). I see instances of that all the time that don't seem to make sense.

IMHO, if the horses from that minor stake were to compete against legitimate Grade 1 older sprinters that routinely put up PAR figures for that class, they would get killed. Now there's no doubt in my mind that these 3YOs ran a fast race for the class and are superior to the average minor stake winning 3YO at this time of year. But IMO the perception of how much this horse moved up is directly related to the difference between the numbers he earned before and after Dutrow got him. I don't believe that's an accurate perception. It overstates the case because this is not a real 117 horse even if he ran that fast. IMO if he ever runs a 117 again it will be later this year when he develops into real one. It would not shock me if both the top two horses drop back to figures around 105-110 next time out unless they get perfect conditions again. Something in that range or even lower is the kind of horses that IMO they really are.

[cj]

Even if they run 105-110, that is still a huge step up over what the horse had done prior.

[Charlie D]

What i found interesting was the Fr1+Fr2+Fr3 comparison with the F&M winner


She ran similar Fr1+Fr2, but would have been crushed by Phil in Fr3 , a horse she probably would have crushed on previous from what i can gather

[JustRalph]

What i found interesting was the Fr1+Fr2+Fr3 comparison with the F&M winner


She ran similar Fr1+Fr2, but would have been crushed by Phil in Fr3 , a horse she probably would have crushed on previous from what i can gather

I find that very interesting, because it looked to me like he did it very within himself..........

[classhandicapper]

Even if they run 105-110, that is still a huge step up over what the horse had done prior.

I agree, but it moves more into the realm of possibility because these are early year 3YOs that sometimes do improve a lot on their own. I'm playing devil's advocate on this because I think the really big figure is what provoked the article. We all know Dutrow has been doing things like this with cheaper horses for a long time. ;)

[jotb]

This is not how pure track variants are supposed to be made. Lets say there are only two dirt races one day, no weather changes, both at 6 furlongs. One is a 5000 open claimer run in 1:10, the other is a 20000 open claimer run in 1:10. Both should receive the same Beyer. And the way I would calculate the Beyer that day is by averaging the two races, where the 5000 claimer was expected to be a 66 Beyer, and the 20,000 claimer was supposed to be a 78 Beyer. I would give them both around a 72 Beyer.
I would adjust the variant depending on how horses ran off those two races. Maybe the 5000 claimer ran as good as a 20,000 claimer that day instead of somewhere in between.
Of course, almost always, you have more than 2 ratable races when it comes to making a speed figure.

Hello Cangamble:

The both races had the same time according to you and the only dirt races on the same day in your example. You proceed by averaging the two races using the expected Beyer condition pars. The Beyer's 66 and 78 for the 2 race conditions mean an average time. Right? These condition pars help you to create a variant for the day. Right? Once you have the variant you can then proceed to adjust the raw times for the both race. Correct? The end result in your example is the 5K race was stronger on this day and the 20k was not as strong. Right or wrong?

Supposely, condition pars are average time's for each race condition. Of course many race conditions are not used that much each year. You would think from your example that a 5k race is used more than a 20k race. Here's a question. If Beyer uses condition pars and this 5k race ran 2 times in 2009, (since we just started the year), 14 times in 2008 and 13 times in 2007, does he use the total amount of races since 2007 or only uses this year and last? I would think a very large sampling of 5k races the more accurate the par would be. Then again, I guess you can only go back so far, because there can be dramatic changes to the tracks racing surface. The synthetic surfaces (Polytracks, cushion and pro-ride) since installed is one major change. Besides the poly other tracks do make changes to the surface. Recently, Penn put down 8000 tons of silt and sand for the new track cushion, forming a depth of about 3 1/2 inches. The limestone base had repairs as well. Anyway, such drastic changes can and will influence times for each race condition. Can you continue to lump the same race condition to have a large sampling? Where is the cutoff point?

I really don't know how Andy Beyer overcomes these obstacles and maybe this is why sometimes the numbers just don't make sense. According to you, Beyer uses condition pars. How many times the race condition for THIS ONES FOR PHIL been used? This particuliar race is used once every other year. It's either held at GP or SA. HIGH RESOLVE ran on the same day as THIS ONES FOR PHIL. This race condition for HIGH RESOLVE runs the same day every year either at GP or SA. Can you or someone please tell me what the par for both these race conditions is? It's a given that the track had to be playing slow and the time of the race was extremely fast in order to arrive at the 117 figure. For sure the 117 figure has to be well over the par for the race. What is the average time for This Ones For Phil's race and High Resolve's race? There were 4 other dirt races on the card. Two were at 7.0F, one at 8.0F and one at 9.0F. The two 7.0F races were MSW's each gender and same age. The mile race was a 4UP10KNW2L and the 9.0F was the 4UP O.B.S. Millions classic. I'm really confused with this and I'm just trying to understand how figure makers arrived at their speed figures for the whole day on the dirt. Do you or anyone have a breakdown for the day?

Thank you,
Joe

[cj]

For the most part, Beyer isn't using "condition pars" to make figures. He is using the history of the horses in the races regardless of class.

[Cangamble]

Joe, once you start using speed figures, as CJ points out, you can use the numbers of the horses going into the race as at least a partial way to figure out what the horse should run.

In my example, if the winner of the 5k race was a 78 Beyer horse going in on recent form, and the winner of the 20k race was a 80 horse going into the race, most people who make speed figures would take this into account, and if these were the only two races on the card, both would end up with a 78 or 79.

When there isn't enough information, par times are the best way to go, but once you have back data, the back data can be used as the par times.

Also, those who make their own variant know what a mile and a sixteenth or 7 furlong race would go at relative to 6 furlong races on the same day at various tracks. So all these races can be lumped in to come with a track variant for a specific day, making the average more reliable.

[cj]

This is another of the great move ups in the history of racing, courtesy of DrugS once again:

http://c2.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/33/l_b8dfaae8224c4900afbcabd3523f2011.jpg

This horse has yet to be heard from since. Apparently, all that great horsemanship that improved this horse so much from that lowly Todd Pletcher was only able to last for one race.

[Tom]

jotb.....check out "My $50,000 Year at the Track" by Andy - it gives a real nice explanation of how he projects variants.

[cj]

Interview with Steve Byk (http://www.thoroughbredracingradionetwork.com/index.php?option=com_events&task=view_detail&agid=431&year=2009&month=01&day=28&Itemid=35)

Second hour, Beyer talks about the article.

[Niko]

Former trainer does not seem pleased with the above comments, but if the above is correct , it could account for the 8-10 length improvement the guys at Rags and TG are seeing


Question is though , did RD also use roids to help put on the 50lbs


So the super trainers are the only ones that worm their horses and fix their teeth....really

the other vets don't know how to do it or the owners on the better horses trained by Pletcher, O'Connel etc won't foot the bill.....really

and that alone often leads to a big pop in numbers....really

[Cangamble]

So the super trainers are the only ones that worm their horses and fix their teeth....really

the other vets don't know how to do it or the owners on the better horses trained by Pletcher, O'Connel etc won't foot the bill.....really

and that alone often leads to a big pop in numbers....really
The super trainers are the only ones who feed horses twice a day too:D

[Charlie D]

So the super trainers are the only ones that worm their horses and fix their teeth....really

the other vets don't know how to do it or the owners on the better horses trained by Pletcher, O'Connel etc won't foot the bill.....really

and that alone often leads to a big pop in numbers....really


Don't know if super trainers are the only ones who do X, don't know if other vets know how to do Y as i'm not privvy to every trainers, vets MO


The worming, fixing of teeth alone was not the reasons given by Richard Dutrow and to me a person is innocent until proven otherwise, can you prove otherwise in this case???

[ralph_the_cat]

This is another of the great move ups in the history of racing, courtesy of DrugS once again:

http://c2.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/33/l_b8dfaae8224c4900afbcabd3523f2011.jpg

This horse has yet to be heard from since. Apparently, all that great horsemanship that improved this horse so much from that lowly Todd Pletcher was only able to last for one race.

Pretty weird to me... once again, the only thing that sticks out as a big difference is the Beyers... nothing else... if there werent extremely low Beyers and then extremely high Beyers, then we wouldnt be making a fuss...

The horse wins a MSW by 9 lengths...then runs 5th by 6 in a G III... ?... after running in a grade III would you expect the horse to run huge in a 1X?... the horse had an obvious problem and comes off a 7 month layoff to take the lead at the stretch of a N2L mile race that finished in 1:36!!!!!!.... because of one bad race and then a move to CRC with a high Beyer... it's "one of the best move-ups"... that race Feb 22nd was huge, the horse was able to sit close up running 22'4, 45 FLAT and 1:09'2 to take over the lead off a 7 month layoff! why couldnt he run the same at CRC.... Beyer makes it seem big, But Beyer numbers can't read between the lines...

[098poi]

What were the odds on that horses last race?

[ralph_the_cat]

What were the odds on that horses last race?

i was thinking the same.... would be nice too know...

[Dahoss9698]

Pretty weird to me... once again, the only thing that sticks out as a big difference is the Beyers... nothing else... if there werent extremely low Beyers and then extremely high Beyers, then we wouldnt be making a fuss...

The horse wins a MSW by 9 lengths...then runs 5th by 6 in a G III... ?... after running in a grade III would you expect the horse to run huge in a 1X?... the horse had an obvious problem and comes off a 7 month layoff to take the lead at the stretch of a N2L mile race that finished in 1:36!!!!!!.... because of one bad race and then a move to CRC with a high Beyer... it's "one of the best move-ups"... that race Feb 22nd was huge, the horse was able to sit close up running 22'4, 45 FLAT and 1:09'2 to take over the lead off a 7 month layoff! why couldnt he run the same at CRC.... Beyer makes it seem big, But Beyer numbers can't read between the lines...

Your last line is great, seeing as how your whole post is based on your incorrect interpretations of what was going on "between the lines". Please, for all our sake, please try and understand how the number is made and what it represents. I understand it's easier to argue your point if you remain uneducatd about the numbers. But, you would save yourself a lot of time and energy.

[ralph_the_cat]

Your last line is great, seeing as how your whole post is based on your incorrect interpretations of what was going on "between the lines". Please, for all our sake, please try and understand how the number is made and what it represents. I understand it's easier to argue your point if you remain uneducatd about the numbers. But, you would save yourself a lot of time and energy.

LOL, you're a funny man/woman, you love following me around, commenting on my posts with no direction at all... please, try and make sense in the near future... you havent made a valid point in any response to any of my posts... :D

[proximity]

cj, can you post your ratings for the horse so we can more realistically compare motovato's bashford manor effort to the calder race? should be much tighter than 41 points, right?

on the other hand one could say this is exactly how modern juice works. horse ran his usual 45, 110 fractions (his speed) but didn't decelerate at all with his final 1/8 in 12 2/5 seconds.

[PaceAdvantage]

LOL, you're a funny man/woman, you love following me around, commenting on my posts with no direction at all... please, try and make sense in the near future... you havent made a valid point in any response to any of my posts... :DWhat is it about his post that made no sense to you? It made plenty of sense to me. It should make sense to you as well.

I think about 4 or 5 others have posted similar comments to you throughout this thread. I suppose they are all just babbling gibberish.

[ralph_the_cat]

What is it about his post that made no sense to you? It made plenty of sense to me. It should make sense to you as well.

I think about 4 or 5 others have posted similar comments to you throughout this thread. I suppose they are all just babbling gibberish.

no, maybe 2-3...

.."Please, for all our sake, please try and understand how the number is made and what it represents. I understand it's easier to argue your point if you remain uneducatd about the numbers"...

what does understanding the number have to do with my opinion of how the horse was capable of running big based on his previous efforts, rather than because of his previous Beyer... Even if I didnt have a clue about how the numbers were made, whats that have to do with suggesting the horse was capable of running big based off everything "but" the numbers...

everyone of his posts is directed at me for "not understanding Beyer numbers"... THAT doesnt make any sense... My post was purely about dropping the Beyer numbers and evaluating the horse PP lines, rather than Beyer... why someone would even bring up me not understanding Beyer numbers is beyond me and doesnt make sense...

[the little guy]

There's nothing like criticizing something you don't understand.....and being proud of it.

[Relwob Owner]

Andy Beyer is a columnist not a reporter. In no way can any of his columns be called "negligent reporting" as he is not reporting.
He is offering opinion.
I happen to think that he's the best Thoroughbred Racing Columnist in North America today. I don't always agree with him, but he gets me thinking.
That's what colulmnists are supposed to do: Make you think.
Bravo Andy. :jump: :jump:

Thank you. Thank you-my thoughts exactly and well put.

Beyer took a huge risk with this article....It is high time someone in the media who has some sort of influence said something about this-I was nauseated at the coverage last year of Big Brown by TVG and Frank Lyons in particular who made Dutrow out to be some sort of saint.....this year, they portray Patick Bianconne as a "comeback story" and gloss over the fact that he was caught by cobra venom

As far as his figures goes, I have been using them for the last 20 years and while not perfect, they make the most sense of any....funny that Dutrow and his crew deflect by questioning Beyer's figs...the fig isnt the point, the time and the class level is-that horse improved an incredible amount and someone had to question why

[Relwob Owner]

Don't know if super trainers are the only ones who do X, don't know if other vets know how to do Y as i'm not privvy to every trainers, vets MO


The worming, fixing of teeth alone was not the reasons given by Richard Dutrow and to me a person is innocent until proven otherwise, can you prove otherwise in this case???

It HAS been proven otherwise-check out Dutrow's history of violations. There is always some excuse for it....he showed his true colors and lack of class during Big Brown's run and was the first trainer whose actions resulted in many people rooting AGAINST his triple crown horse.

Beyer's next article should get away from how trainers violate rules and focus on what to do about it.......one idea-suspend the owner too-that would clean things up

[Charlie D]

It HAS been proven otherwise-check out Dutrow's history of violations. There is always some excuse for it....he showed his true colors and lack of class during Big Brown's run and was the first trainer whose actions resulted in many people rooting AGAINST his triple crown horse.

Beyer's next article should get away from how trainers violate rules and focus on what to do about it.......one idea-suspend the owner too-that would clean things up






The past violations are somewhat irrelevant imo, they however, are making people jump to conclusions in this case and that was what Beyer's article was all about

[cj]

cj, can you post your ratings for the horse so we can more realistically compare motovato's bashford manor effort to the calder race? should be much tighter than 41 points, right?

on the other hand one could say this is exactly how modern juice works. horse ran his usual 45, 110 fractions (his speed) but didn't decelerate at all with his final 1/8 in 12 2/5 seconds.

Here is what I have:

8 Motovato 3yo c Ky 5-2 E 84/3 64

GP 03/20/08 8.0 | 88 81 83 45 | 26| | 51
GP 02/22/08 8.0 | 95 84 95 75 | 66| | 84
================================================== ====================
CD 07/07/07 6.0 | 86 87 85 74 | 69| | 83
Del 05/05/07 4.5 | 65 61 65 61 | 59| > | 71*


I think he went off at 4 to 5.

For his big race, his number would have looked like this:


Crc 04/25/08 7.0 | 101 113 101 113 | 119| | 109

[PaceAdvantage]

Beyer took a huge risk with this article....It is high time someone in the media who has some sort of influence said something about this-Where you been Relwob Owner? Beyer has been writing articles like this for a while now...

[jonnielu]

The reality is that there are too many cheaters in the game. Whether Dutrow is one of them is anyone's guess. Beyer's article brought this sensitive issue out to be discussed by the industry. I'm sick and tired of having to handicap chemists instead of horses. I'll pretend anything in order to get this game cleaned up. If Dutrow has to be wrongly accused in order for this game to get cleaner, than i'm willing to toss him under the bus for the good of the sport.

Right, it is good for the game to wrongly accuse.... it works wonders. Very plain to see.... Beyer has been at it for 30 years. Just look at how the game is elevated today.

It makes sense that if the high Beyer doesn't win, somebody has to be cheating.

jdl

[jonnielu]

Reality is, breaking the rules turns handicapping into a random number game, the reality is, the honest owner/trainer may as well not bother trying , the reality is, the people who use illegal methods to obtain Black Type are decieving future breeders


Eventually it probably all falls down and you have no horse racing game left, except for the addicts betting and cheater racing against cheater

That is just too funny. Like saying that every speed figure maker would have the winner 9 times out of ten, if it weren't for the cheating.

Who would chose real, when such fantasy is so readily available, it is just a bonus that everyone can be right all of the time.

Nevermind that we may well have as many as 6 horses in a 10 horse field of relatively equal ability, as far as anyone could measure.

jdl

[jotb]

jotb.....check out "My $50,000 Year at the Track" by Andy - it gives a real nice explanation of how he projects variants.

Thanks Tom.

[jotb]

For the most part, Beyer isn't using "condition pars" to make figures. He is using the history of the horses in the races regardless of class.

Hello CJ.

So, I take it that Beyer uses condition pars on occasion. Thanks CJ.

Joe

[PaceAdvantage]

It makes sense that if the high Beyer doesn't win, somebody has to be cheating.As someone said to me recently, who the hell woke you up jonnielu?

It sucks when a figure maker gets so much attention and so much validation within the industry, doesn't it? I betcha the other fig makers get a little jealous at times...anyhoo...

Nobody said that if the top Beyer doesn't win, somebody must be cheating. This was a highly exceptional case that was illustrated. It's a simple point to grasp.

[PaceAdvantage]

Nevermind that we may well have as many as 6 horses in a 10 horse field of relatively equal ability, as far as anyone could measure. Yup, all those five and six horse photo finishes I see on a day in and day out basis really brings this point home I tells ya.

[jotb]

Joe, once you start using speed figures, as CJ points out, you can use the numbers of the horses going into the race as at least a partial way to figure out what the horse should run.

In my example, if the winner of the 5k race was a 78 Beyer horse going in on recent form, and the winner of the 20k race was a 80 horse going into the race, most people who make speed figures would take this into account, and if these were the only two races on the card, both would end up with a 78 or 79.

When there isn't enough information, par times are the best way to go, but once you have back data, the back data can be used as the par times.

Also, those who make their own variant know what a mile and a sixteenth or 7 furlong race would go at relative to 6 furlong races on the same day at various tracks. So all these races can be lumped in to come with a track variant for a specific day, making the average more reliable.

In order to create a variant for each day, you have to take the times of races on that day and compare them to something in the past. You can use the horses history like CJ said or par times when there's not enough info like you said. I guess condition pars can be used as well. I guess there's flaws in every one of these methods. Condition pars could create a problem because of the sampling size. I guess there's several ways you can go when it come to par times. Do you use track record times or do you take all the races at a specific distance within a specific timeframe and retrieve an average time for this distance breaking it down to gender and age?

Joe

[ezrabrooks]

Yup, all those five and six horse photo finishes I see on a day in and day out basis really brings this point home I tells ya.

Yes...that is the point..

Ez

[Charlie D]

That is just too funny. Like saying that every speed figure maker would have the winner 9 times out of ten, if it weren't for the cheating.

Who would chose real, when such fantasy is so readily available, it is just a bonus that everyone can be right all of the time.

Nevermind that we may well have as many as 6 horses in a 10 horse field of relatively equal ability, as far as anyone could measure.

jdl


What's funny Jonnie about my post, please explain instead of rambling on as usual

[cj]

Hello CJ.

So, I take it that Beyer uses condition pars on occasion. Thanks CJ.

Joe

Sure, if necessary. Sometimes that is all you have if the horses are all taking big drops, or are lightly raced, or trying a new surface, etc. But even then, if there are enough other races to make a good variant, the race won't be used.

[PaceAdvantage]

Yes...that is the point..

EzBut that's not the point jonilu was making, and I was responding to...

[ezrabrooks]

But that's not the point jonilu was making, and I was responding to...

Oh..my mistake. I confused myself as to who was on first.

Ez

[jonnielu]

As someone said to me recently, who the hell woke you up jonnielu?

It sucks when a figure maker gets so much attention and so much validation within the industry, doesn't it? I betcha the other fig makers get a little jealous at times...anyhoo...

Nobody said that if the top Beyer doesn't win, somebody must be cheating. This was a highly exceptional case that was illustrated. It's a simple point to grasp.

My ratings aren't speed figures, and Beyer has been saying that for 30 years. The figure is never brought into question, although there are many inconsistencies. Of course the inconsistencies are laid off by the idea that horse racing itself is very inconsistent, or the track surface is very inconsistent.

How many look for consistencies in this game in the first place? The time of a race is very inconsistent, yet it is looked to for consistency, with many assumptions as to where the inconsistencies come from.

Some on this thread have offered that the figure is correct give or take 5 or 6 lengths, so if Phil's figure coming in and going out were off that much, and could acceptably be, what's the problem?

Most here are talking as if they can figure out the winner 7 times out of ten with Beyer speed ratings, if it weren't for the cheating. Sorry, I don't buy the idea.

How many stakes at GP so far have been won by the high Beyer?

jdl

[jonnielu]

What's funny Jonnie about my post, please explain instead of rambling on as usual

You are assuming that the figure is always an accurate representation of ability.

jdl

[Charlie D]

You are assuming that the figure is always an accurate representation of ability.

jdl


My post you found funny made no reference to any figure


Please explain what's so funny

[classhandicapper]

You are assuming that the figure is always an accurate representation of ability.

jdl


I'm actually with Jonnielu on this one.

In general, speed figure makers start with the assumption that their fgures are accurate and also represent the ability of the horses well. I would argue that VERY often neither is true. In fact, I would offer the many discussions on these forums we have every year about high profile races where there are disagreements about how fast a race actually was or how easy/tough a trip was etc....

I think knowing whether a horse actually moved up (and by how much) is as complex and subjective as the handicapping process itself. I don't think speed figures alone are a very good way to go about making that determination (even though some figure makers might disagree).

In this case, we can probably all agree the horse improved a lot, but IMHO the horse didn't move up nearly as much as the speed figure suggests. On the off chance I am actually right, then perhaps the natural improvement of a young horse, time off, and the correcting of some minor issues by a superior trainer could account for it. :lol: I think that's the point some people are trying to make about this horse. IMO, it's the cumulative evidence that's more damning than this specific horse.

[Charlie D]

I'm actually with Jonnielu on this one.


Really, you like Jonnie assume too much


My post was about breaking the rules and it's consequences, so what Jonnie posted is BS, but lets not let that get in way

[Indulto]

... On the off chance I am actually right, then perhaps the natural improvement of a young horse, time off, and the correcting of some minor issues by a superior trainer could account for it. :lol: I think that's the point some people are trying to make about this horse. IMO, it's the cumulative evidence that's more damning than this specific horse.:lol:
An accurate assessment. Figure-making may not be rocket science, but some figures seem to come from outer space.;)

[Charlie D]

The people who are saying the Beyer is wrong, can they point out where the Beyer compilers mistake is made


Thanks in advance

[Tom]

How many stakes at GP so far have been won by the high Beyer?

jdl

All of them.
Think about it.

[jonnielu]

My post you found funny made no reference to any figure


Please explain what's so funny

Who is breaking the rules, and how you figure as much is funny to me. Dutrow nust have some talent, if he can cheat his ass off and do it in a fish bowl at the same time.

jdl

[jonnielu]

The people who are saying the Beyer is wrong, can they point out where the Beyer compilers mistake is made


Thanks in advance

It is generally in the assumptions that are made with relation to the variance in time.

I won't point out specifics because observing figuremakers for 30 years has been very entertaining.

jdl

[jonnielu]

All of them.
Think about it.

Sorry, The high Beyer going in?

[Charlie D]

Who is breaking the rules, and how you figure as much is funny to me. Dutrow nust have some talent, if he can cheat his ass off and do it in a fish bowl at the same time.

jdl




Read and try to understand what was written, before trying to be a smart arse - OK


breaking the rules turns handicapping into a random number game

[Charlie D]

It is generally in the assumptions that are made with relation to the variance in time.

I won't point out specifics because observing figuremakers for 30 years has been very entertaining.

jdl


Point out the specifics as what you wrote does not show where the Beyer compilers mistake was made

[Cangamble]

In order to create a variant for each day, you have to take the times of races on that day and compare them to something in the past. You can use the horses history like CJ said or par times when there's not enough info like you said. I guess condition pars can be used as well. I guess there's flaws in every one of these methods. Condition pars could create a problem because of the sampling size. I guess there's several ways you can go when it come to par times. Do you use track record times or do you take all the races at a specific distance within a specific timeframe and retrieve an average time for this distance breaking it down to gender and age?

Joe
I have a class chart with par times, I also get to know the differences between distances at the tracks I rate. I try to find 5-8 ratable races on a card in order to do my numbers. The most reliable are older open males, so I give them more emphasis if there is a lot of variation in a given day. I usually avoid 2 year old races, and for the next month 3 year old races, if I can.
Yes, gender matters too.

I fine tune based on how horses run back off particular days. I usually find I'm not off originally at all most of the time, but maybe 20% of the time I'm off by one or two lengths either way.

[Cangamble]

You are assuming that the figure is always an accurate representation of ability.

jdl
The figure is an accurate representation of past ability.

[jonnielu]

Read and try to understand what was written, before trying to be a smart arse - OK

Not trying to be a smart arse, but when was it much else. Seriously, at what point in it's history has handicapping been an exacting science? And, do you honestly believe that a world of manipulation is not open to the trainer without cheating.

jdl

[Charlie D]

Ok Jonnie, your not being a smart arse, but read what i wrote and stop assuming this and that please

[classhandicapper]

The people who are saying the Beyer is wrong, can they point out where the Beyer compilers mistake is made


Thanks in advance

I never claimed that the Beyer was wrong, but in the other thread on this issue I laid out another possible interpretation of the result that would lead to a lower Beyer figure that would also make some sense given the PPs of the horses (perhaps even more sense).

When a figure doesn't make any sense based on the speed of the track for the rest of the day, Beyer (and some other figure makers) have no problem breaking the race out from the rest of the day and assigning a figure that does make sense based on the assumption that the track changed speed or some other factor contributed to a very fast/slow time. In this particular instance, it seemed like a relatively easy day to make figures. It was also possible to think this was an extremely fast race. So rather than lower the figure, the assumption was made that this was an extremely fast race. That assumption could be right, but it doesn't have to be.

I personally think it's almost absurd to think that "This Ones for Phil" and "You Luckie Mann" are good enough as January 3YOs to compete at the "ELITE" Grade 1 older horse level like the Breeder's Cup. But that's exactly what figures of 117 and 112 are saying if you take them literally.

My opinion is that either that figure is wrong, it's not refelective of their ability, or a little of both.

I'd rather not get too detailed about "not reflective of their ability" because it gets into other subjective areas of trip and class that will take us on another tangent. For argument's sake though, if the figure was 105 for TOFP and 100 for TLM, I think people would feel less certain in their convictions.

All that raises my main point.

Speed figures are not etched in stone in terms of accuracy or in terms of measuring performance accurately. So using them to make claims that a trainer may have done something illegal is full of potential error.

[classhandicapper]

:lol:
An accurate assessment. Figure-making may not be rocket science, but some figures seem to come from outer space.;)

I may be totally off on this race, but I think the greater points I am making are valid. Single figures can't be taken too literally because the process is not perfect and final times are impacted by things other than track speed.

[rjorio]

The top three figure makers[BEYER ,RAGS,AND THOROGRAPH] all agree.The question is not if but how this performance was achieved.

[cj]

I may be totally off on this race, but I think the greater points I am making are valid. Single figures can't be taken too literally because the process is not perfect and final times are impacted by things other than track speed.

As you mentioned before, it isn't this one single horse that draws suspicion, it is the entire body of work of a few of these trainers.

[jonnielu]

As you mentioned before, it isn't this one single horse that draws suspicion, it is the entire body of work of a few of these trainers.

So then, it is the degree of consistency that is suspicious.

jdl

[asH]

ok since no one has figured it out yet, (I believe because of tunnel vision)here are some facts.

out of the 30 top beyers at GP from 2008-09 for 6 furlongs, 10 have been in 2009...the 4 top beyers #'s for both years at 6 furlongs have been given this year from Jan3-24

jan24-117, jan3-115, jan17-113, jan29-109, jan9-96

[cj]

So then, it is the degree of consistency that is suspicious.

jdl

What?

[classhandicapper]

The top three figure makers[BEYER ,RAGS,AND THOROGRAPH] all agree.The question is not if but how this performance was achieved.

So "if" the top 3-4 horses all come back to run slower figures next time out and the rest of the field (all the synthetic horses and shippers) come back and pair or run faster next time out on their home tracks etc... we are to conclude that the top 3-4 bounced and the rest of the horses prove the figure?

I am really hoping those top 4 horses run back on dirt at 6F within a reasonable time frame so we can see how fast they run coming out of this race.

If I could get the right price I might bet that none of them run as fast next time out even though they are all lightly raced improving 3YOs.

[Greyfox]

ok since no one has figured it out yet, (I believe because of tunnel vision)here are some facts.

out of the 30 top beyers at GP from 2008-09 for 6 furlongs, 10 have been in 2009...the 4 top beyers #'s for both years at 6 furlongs have been given this year from Jan3-24

jan24-117, jan3-115, jan17-113, jan29-109, jan9-96

Interesting point. Have the track "technicians" done something to the surface to make the times faster? Or are the fields better?

[Cangamble]

Interesting point. Have the track "technicians" done something to the surface to make the times faster? Or are the fields better?
...or is there a drug that is undetectable or not being tested for that is enhancing the performance tremendously of certain horses under certain conditions?

[Relwob Owner]

This thread has gone from debating Dutrow juicing horses to debating Beyer's figures........

Getting back to the topic-how can anyone defend Dutrow? He has been found guilty before, he improves a horse a ton so how can that not be questioned?

He is a crude, arrogant and disrespectful human being who has violated the rules before and will keep doing it until some sort of permanent punishment is issued. He had a chance to shine with Big Brown and all he did was bring himself and the game down. Many of my friends who arent even into horse racing told me they rooted against Big Brown because his trainer was a prick....he is a disgrace to those of us who love this great sport and the "innocent until proven guilty" defense is absurd-he has been guilty before and one of these days, he will get himself out of the sport with his self destructive ways.

[Bubba X]

This thread has gone from debating Dutrow juicing horses to debating Beyer's figures........

Getting back to the topic-how can anyone defend Dutrow? He has been found guilty before, he improves a horse a ton so how can that not be questioned?

He is a crude, arrogant and disrespectful human being who has violated the rules before and will keep doing it until some sort of permanent punishment is issued. He had a chance to shine with Big Brown and all he did was bring himself and the game down. Many of my friends who arent even into horse racing told me they rooted against Big Brown because his trainer was a prick....he is a disgrace to those of us who love this great sport and the "innocent until proven guilty" defense is absurd-he has been guilty before and one of these days, he will get himself out of the sport with his self destructive ways.

That's a bit much, imo. To be honest, the guy has an interesting life story. Maybe he figures that with what he had to deal with, he can live with the modest penalties racing has deemed his transgressions to be worthy of.

[Relwob Owner]

That's a bit much, imo. To be honest, the guy has an interesting life story. Maybe he figures that with what he had to deal with, he can live with the modest penalties racing has deemed his transgressions to be worthy of.


I know it was a harsh post but I would challenge anyone to bring a legitimate objection to any specific part of it. Is having a tough life an excuse for poor behavior? Are you saying that people who have had tough lives have an excuse to break the rules? As far as his having an interesting life story, I would say that there are far more interesting people in our sport who have overcome similar tough challenges and have not handled themselves the way Dutrow has.....

[toetoe]

Bubba,

I apologize if I sound like a broken record, but you are describing a fairly common type of big-time trainer to me. Stephens, Whittingham, Frankel, Asmussen, Catalano, Norman, etc. --- didn't they all do whatever they could escape with ? If the personality component were even relevant, I submit that Stephens, Whittingham, Frankel and thousands more would qualify as deceitful and/or detestable human beings much or all of the time. Why does Dutrow Doutros Galli get especially pilloried ?

[PaceAdvantage]

Many of my friends who arent even into horse racing told me they rooted against Big Brown because his trainer was a prick....he is a disgrace to those of us who love this great sport and the "innocent until proven guilty" defense is absurd-he has been guilty before and one of these days, he will get himself out of the sport with his self destructive ways.Lots of trainers have been guilty before...including Bill Mott...

In any event, I have a question. Your friends who weren't into horse racing...how did they know Dutrow was a prick? The way he was presented on TV during the Triple Crown certainly wasn't as a prick...they kept harping about how he built himself up from sleeping in the barn to where he is today...his overcoming of addition, etc. etc.

How did your non-horse friends know he was a prick?

[Relwob Owner]

Lots of trainers have been guilty before...including Bill Mott...

In any event, I have a question. Your friends who weren't into horse racing...how did they know Dutrow was a prick? The way he was presented on TV during the Triple Crown certainly wasn't as a prick...they kept harping about how he built himself up from sleeping in the barn to where he is today...his overcoming of addition, etc. etc.

How did your non-horse friends know he was a prick?


From his arrogant quotes before the races about how his horse couldnt lose and from his quotes demeaning the other horses in the races.

They were also guys who liked Smarty Jones and they didnt like the comments he made where he took a cut at him and his connections before the Belmont.....you are right that the media did try to portray him as positively as they could, but he just couldnt help himself from opening his mouth and saying unpleasant things.

[PaceAdvantage]

From his arrogant quotes before the races about how his horse couldnt lose and from his quotes demeaning the other horses in the races.How did they know this wasn't the norm in racing?

I found Dutrow's "call it as I see it" demeanor a refreshing change from the same-old same-old trainer interviews of years past. I've said as much many times on here and I'll say it again.

If I were a non-horse fan, and I saw Dutrow being interviewed, I don't see why I wouldn't like him...especially the way he was being portrayed by NBC.

[Relwob Owner]

How did they know this wasn't the norm in racing?

I found Dutrow's "call it as I see it" demeanor a refreshing change from the same-old same-old trainer interviews of years past. I've said as much many times on here and I'll say it again.

If I were a non-horse fan, and I saw Dutrow being interviewed, I don't see why I wouldn't like him...especially the way he was being portrayed by NBC.

I appreciate candor as well. However, from my point of view, you are mistaking "calling it as you see it" with being classless and showing a lack of respect towards the other competitors. Since everyone I know knows I am into horse racing, I get a lot of opinions from people around Derby time from people who only pay attention to the Triple Crown. You can be sure that none of Dutrow's comments were described as "refreshing".

[PaceAdvantage]

So fans of the Triple Crown enjoy the same commentary from trainers year in and year out? The Lukas/Pletcher "team-speak" if you will?

Maybe I just got tired of seeing Zafzger yelling into Mrs. Genter's ear and longed for a change...along came Dutrow and I was finally awoken from my slumber.

[asH]

Interesting point. Have the track "technicians" done something to the surface to make the times faster? Or are the fields better?

In reading some good and potentially interesting posts I find that there are many instances where claimed handicappers would rather wane off topic, submit to name calling, or nonsensical rational rather than finding understanding based in logic to increase knowledge and profit (for me that is the test of a good thread)...I find it interesting how human nature is so similar in most beings (myself included)...but , unlike the multitude I have found better odds swimming upstream. carry on - carry on

24Jan09, 3Jan09, 26Jan08, 17Jan09, 29Jan09, 5Jan08, 15Feb08, 23Jan08, 9Mar08

This Ones for Phil 21/4 You Luckie Mann 51/4 Kelly Leak 3/4 P Untuttable 117 11.70 Prado E S Dutrow Richard E Jr
Notonthesamepage 81/4 You Luckie Mann 41/4 Bee Cee Cee 3/4P Catienus 115 4.70 Trujillo E Ward Wesley A
Benny the Bull 41/2 Santana Strings 3/4 Mach Ride noM Lucky Lionel 115 *1.00 Prado E S Dutrow Richard E Jr
Ikigai 21/4 Rollers 31/4 Black Seventeen 11/4P Whywhywhy 113 7.70 Bridgmohan J V Wolfson Martin D
Elusive Heat 131/4 Cassidys Pride nk Fools in Love 11/2P Elusive Quality 109 *0.10 Garcia A McLaughlin Kiaran P
Noonmark 2 Mach Ride 23/4 Finallymadeit 1/2P Unbridled's Song 105 5.30 Douglas R R Asmussen Steven M
Lucky Island 21/4 Knights Cross 2 El Poco Diablo 41/2 P Lucky Roberto 104 3.00 Trujillo E McLaughlin Kiaran P
Blue Pepsi Lodge 33/4 Lucky Frolic 13/4 Husker Nation 3 P Pioneering 102 *0.80 Trujillo E Ziadie Kirk
Deadly Dealer no Forefathers 13/4 Tuffertiger 1P Concerto 100 3.10 Velazquez J R Pletcher Todd A

[asH]

Cant it too be concluded in light of beyer's recent column that his quest to focus attention on notable trainers makes his claims clearer to correlate if notable trainers had high beyer numbers.

understand I'm not concluding this idea as true, but as beyer used his numbers to explain hanky panky at the banky, so to can a beyer pattern (see above)that appears inexplicable can too be used to cast shadows on his wholesome intentions.

again I am not a proponent of abusing horses with drugs or otherwise (including whips..chop-chop!). I believe in facts and truth.

[asH]

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=101289&subs=0&arc=0
Columnists | Posted 1/26/2009, 5:58 pmhttp://www.drf.com/global/img/btn_print.gif (javascript:PrintThisPage();)
Latest supertrainer feat raises suspicion

By Andrew Beyer
.......
Thoroughbred racing has become less a test of horses than it is a competition among trainers. The most successful have been dubbed "supertrainers" because they achieve results almost without precedent. They compile winning percentages that dwarf the records of horsemen enshrined in the Hall of Fame. They acquire horses and transform them in ways that history's greatest trainers never dreamed of. Accordingly, bettors disregard the normal logic of handicapping when they evaluate horses saddled by Rick Dutrow in New York, Bruce Levine or Jason Servis in New Jersey, Marty Wolfson in south Florida, Kirk Ziadie and Jamie Ness at Tampa Bay Downs, Jeff Mullins in California and countless other miracle workers.
Wolfson pulled off an amazing feat when he saddled a pair of modestly bred 2-year-olds, one colt and one filly, in stakes races Oct. 18 at Calder. Both delivered explosive performances to win by more than 10 lengths, and the two of them ran what were arguably the two fastest races by any of the nation's 2-year-olds in 2008.....

[jonnielu]

Cant it too be concluded in light of beyer's recent column that his quest to focus attention on notable trainers makes his claims clearer to correlate if notable trainers had high beyer numbers.

understand I'm not concluding this idea as true, but as beyer used his numbers to explain hanky panky at the banky, so to can a beyer pattern (see above)that appears inexplicable can too be used to cast shadows on his wholesome intentions.

again I am not a proponent of abusing horses with drugs or otherwise (including whips..chop-chop!). I believe in facts and truth.

It may only appear inexplicable because the rating does not reflect ability, nor does it supply any insight to the racing surface.

24Jan09, 3Jan09, 26Jan08, 17Jan09, 29Jan09, 5Jan08, 15Feb08, 23Jan08, 9Mar08

322 - This Ones for Phil 21/4 255 - You Luckie Mann 51/4 Kelly Leak 3/4 P Untuttable 117 11.70 Prado E S Dutrow Richard E Jr
301 - Notonthesamepage 81/4 265 - You Luckie Mann 41/4 Bee Cee Cee 3/4P Catienus 115 4.70 Trujillo E Ward Wesley A
?? - Benny the Bull 41/2 Santana Strings 3/4 Mach Ride noM Lucky Lionel 115 *1.00 Prado E S Dutrow Richard E Jr
291 - Ikigai 21/4 Rollers 31/4 299 - Black Seventeen 11/4P Whywhywhy 113 7.70 Bridgmohan J V Wolfson Martin D
257 - Elusive Heat 131/4 310 - Cassidys Pride nk Fools in Love 11/2P Elusive Quality 109 *0.10 Garcia A McLaughlin Kiaran P
235 - Noonmark 2 234 - Mach Ride 23/4 228 - Finallymadeit 1/2P Unbridled's Song 105 5.30 Douglas R R Asmussen Steven M
320 - Lucky Island 21/4 248 - Knights Cross 2 232 - El Poco Diablo 41/2 P Lucky Roberto 104 3.00 Trujillo E McLaughlin Kiaran P
315 - Blue Pepsi Lodge 33/4 318 - Lucky Frolic 13/4 280 - Husker Nation 3 P Pioneering 102 *0.80 Trujillo E Ziadie Kirk
319 - Deadly Dealer no 458 - Forefathers 13/4 277 - Tuffertiger 1P Concerto 100 3.10 Velazquez J R Pletcher Todd A

If one did have a rating, that did reflect ability, it might be seen that TOFP did nothing outside the norm at GP.

jdl

[PaceAdvantage]

jonni, isn't there any way you can post some picks in the selections section and just put us all to shame? Seriously...take me to school...post some picks.

[Cangamble]

jonni, isn't there any way you can post some picks in the selections section and just put us all to shame? Seriously...take me to school...post some picks.
Jonni hits at 42% with an average mutuel of $11.37. And if you don't believe me, just ask him.:lol::lol::lol::lol: