Bettor Bob from Las Vegas has a theory on Rachel v Z

[Stillriledup]

Bettor Bob from Las Vegas has a theory. (btw, Bob is a commentator on the Roger Stein radio show) Bob's theory is that Zenyatta had the tougher races because the betting public, on average, made her a higher price than Rachel. He said that Zenyatta's average win price was like 70 cents on the dollar while Rachel's average price was less, something like 47 cents per dollar. Bob's theory is that the public has stated, from their wagering dollars, that Rachel's fields are easier, because she's been a shorter win price, on average, than Zenyatta.

In my opinion, Bob's theory is decent enough and has some merit, but i think there's one thing he's not factoring in.

Lets say hypothetically, Rachel and Z faced exactly equal fields of competition. If that's true, and we don't know that it isn't, you can say Rachel is the better horse because the public bet more money on her than they did on Zenyatta vs exactly the same competition.

Bob's looking at it from the point of view of the money wagered on the rivals of each filly and saying that because there's more money on Z's rivals, that means the rivals are better.

It could be that people are betting on Z's rivals because they don't think she's invincible and not because they're betting on the rivals because they are good.

I'll admit that many times i tried to bet AGAINST Z not because i thought that her competition was so great, i was just betting against her because of her running style. People take shots against deep closers on occasion and it has nothing to do with people thinking that the horses who are running against Z are any good.

Think of this from a sportsbetting standpoint. For you guys who bet sports you know that sometimes you hate a team and just want to bet against them no matter who they play in their next game. This is what i believe happened to Zenyatta on occasion, bettors were betting against her and not necessarily betting ON her rivals. Bob's theory assumes people were betting on her rivals, which isnt' always the case.

[andymays]

The Bettor Bob theory is a new take on the matchup but I don’t buy it. Part of the reason is that Zenyattas victories were not as devastating as Rachels until the Breeders’ Cup. Because Rachel won in visually more impressive fashion that lowered her odds in her races. Zenyatta ran races that were much closer until the Breeders’ Cup and because of that more people thought she was a vulnerable favorite. Most here would have to admit that before the running of the Breeders' Cup race the odds on Zenyatta were way to low for most experienced bettors to take.

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/hands-down-its-zenyatta/

Excerpt:

Need some proof of how little regard the experts had for Zenyatta in the run up to the Classic? Despite being tabbed the pre-race wagering favorite, not one of the 11 media members whose selections were published by USA Today in its Breeders’ Cup preview picked Zenyatta to win. And east coast bias wasn’t in play. Joining writers from the New York Daily News, New York Post, Lexington Herald-Leader and Albany Times-Union in giving Zenyatta the thumbs down were the national correspondent of the Daily Racing Form, horse racing writers from the Associated Press and USA Today, an editor of the Thoroughbred Times, an on-air personality from HRTV and racing writers from the Los Angeles Daily News and San Diego Union-Tribune, in whose backyard Zenyatta ran all except one of her career races.

Want to bring in some more exulted names? Joe Drape of the New York Times did not pick Zenyatta, and neither did Steven Crist of the Daily Racing Form. The Washington Post’s Andy Beyer, inventor of the Beyer Speed Figure, the acknowledged statistical method for comparing racetrack performances under different race conditions? He labeled Zenyatta a throw out.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the show was on 12-5. Another interesting part of the show was having Donna Elordi on. She is a trainer barely making it and had a real bad experience with CARF. You want to know what’s wrong with California Racing then listen to her interview. We have people at all levels making decisions and doing things that are absolutely nonsensical.
PLEASE LISTEN TO THE 12/5/09 DONNA ELORDI 13 MINUTE INTERVIEW FROM 23:30-36:30 ON THE ROGER STEIN SHOW.

By the way the guy everyone loves to hate Jerry Jamgotchian has come to her rescue. Say what you will about the guy but he has been proven to be right all along when it comes to characterizing California racing.


http://www.rogerstein.com/radio/archive2.asp

[levinmpa]

I really enjoy the Roger Stein show, and "Bettor" Bob's take on things. Bob is all about probability, odds, and other gambling related numbers. And a pretty darn good handicapper as well. If he says a 5/2 morning line horse will go off at 6/5 he's usually right. I never miss a show. I always look forward to Roger ripping TVG.

[rwwupl]

From Andymays:-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe the show was on 12-5. Another interesting part of the show was having Donna Elordi on. She is a trainer barely making it and had a real bad experience with CARF. You want to know what’s wrong with California Racing then listen to her interview. We have people at all levels making decisions and doing things that are absolutely nonsensical.
PLEASE LISTEN TO THE 12/5/09 DONNA ELORDI 13 MINUTE INTERVIEW FROM 23:30-36:30 ON THE ROGER STEIN SHOW.

By the way the guy everyone loves to hate Jerry Jamgotchian has come to her rescue. Say what you will about the guy but he has been proven to be right all along when it comes to characterizing California racing.
http://www.rogerstein.com/radio/archive2.asp[/QUOTE]


Jerry Jamgotchian is a man who puts his money where his mouth is. His heart is bigger than both. Three cheers for J.J. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :)

[andymays]

I really enjoy the Roger Stein show, and "Bettor" Bob's take on things. Bob is all about probability, odds, and other gambling related numbers. And a pretty darn good handicapper as well. If he says a 5/2 morning line horse will go off at 6/5 he's usually right. I never miss a show. I always look forward to Roger ripping TVG.


I second your opinion. Outstanding show. Bettor Bob and Mr. Hardoon do a great job as well. :ThmbUp:

[levinmpa]

I know "Bettor" Bob, known as Bobby "G"(I won't use his last name), in Las Vegas was an oddsmaker for an offshore book at one time. He may still be. He specializes in making thoroughbred matchups and other propositions. He definitely knows what he's talking about when it comes to odds and such.

[andymays]

I know "Bettor" Bob, known as Bobby "G"(I won't use his last name), in Las Vegas was an oddsmaker for an offshore book at one time. He may still be. He specializes in making thoroughbred matchups and other propositions. He definitely knows what he's talking about when it comes to odds and such.


I believe he even weighs in here once in a while. He may be looking in right now. ;)

[tzipi]

Bettor Bob from Las Vegas has a theory. (btw, Bob is a commentator on the Roger Stein radio show) Bob's theory is that Zenyatta had the tougher races because the betting public, on average, made her a higher price than Rachel. He said that Zenyatta's average win price was like 70 cents on the dollar while Rachel's average price was less, something like 47 cents per dollar. Bob's theory is that the public has stated, from their wagering dollars, that Rachel's fields are easier, because she's been a shorter win price, on average, than Zenyatta.

In my opinion, Bob's theory is decent enough and has some merit, but i think there's one thing he's not factoring in.

Lets say hypothetically, Rachel and Z faced exactly equal fields of competition. If that's true, and we don't know that it isn't, you can say Rachel is the better horse because the public bet more money on her than they did on Zenyatta vs exactly the same competition.

Bob's looking at it from the point of view of the money wagered on the rivals of each filly and saying that because there's more money on Z's rivals, that means the rivals are better.

It could be that people are betting on Z's rivals because they don't think she's invincible and not because they're betting on the rivals because they are good.

I'll admit that many times i tried to bet AGAINST Z not because i thought that her competition was so great, i was just betting against her because of her running style. People take shots against deep closers on occasion and it has nothing to do with people thinking that the horses who are running against Z are any good.

Think of this from a sportsbetting standpoint. For you guys who bet sports you know that sometimes you hate a team and just want to bet against them no matter who they play in their next game. This is what i believe happened to Zenyatta on occasion, bettors were betting against her and not necessarily betting ON her rivals. Bob's theory assumes people were betting on her rivals, which isnt' always the case.

Thats a little crazy. Rachel was winning by huge open lengths,Zenyatta was not. Rachel was looked at as a freak. Zenyatta a very good horse who just was dominating her division.
Zenyatta faced the same rivals almost every race. So she faced better than the ones Rachel faced as a 3yo??
People were just trying to beat Zenyatta. She faced the same old girls. How could the fields and races be tougher?

[Show Me the Wire]

Because Life Is Sweet destroyed the females on B.C. day and Zenyatta routinely beat Life Is Sweet. R.A. did not face any horse of LIfe Is Sweet's caliber.

[garyoz]

Bettor Bob from Las Vegas has a theory. (btw, Bob is a commentator on the Roger Stein radio show) Bob's theory is that Zenyatta had the tougher races because the betting public, on average, made her a higher price than Rachel. He said that Zenyatta's average win price was like 70 cents on the dollar while Rachel's average price was less, something like 47 cents per dollar.


The Polytrack may require a risk premium if you are assuming an efficient market. Also that the assumption of equal fields is faulty. But still, an interesting take.

[FenceBored]

Listened to the show this morning. I got the impression he had his tongue firmly in his cheek during the whole discussion. I mean really, averaging the odds?:D

[NTamm1215]

Life Is Sweet couldn't warm up Summer Bird.

NT

[Show Me the Wire]

Life Is Sweet couldn't warm up Summer Bird.

NT


But Zenyatta lit him up.

[NTamm1215]

But Zenyatta lit him up.

So did Rachel.

Your assertion that Life Is Sweet is better than any horse RA faced this year is wrong.

NT

[Show Me the Wire]

According to whose standards? Oh yeah, Macho Again is a world beater :lol:

Macho Again would lose by ten lengths to Life Is Sweet.

[tzipi]

According to whose standards? Oh yeah, Macho Again is a world beater :lol:

Macho Again would lose by ten lengths to Life Is Sweet.

What were Macho Agains Beyers?

[Show Me the Wire]

What were Macho Agains Beyers?

Speed figure are meaningless, especially when it comes to class. The horse with the highest speed figure is not an automatic winner. Good Luck with that.

[NTamm1215]

According to whose standards? Oh yeah, Macho Again is a world beater :lol:

Macho Again would lose by ten lengths to Life Is Sweet.

Weren't we talking about Summer Bird?

NT

[Show Me the Wire]

Weren't we talking about Summer Bird?

NT

My original comment is R.A. never faced any horse as good as Life Is Sweet. Macho Again is one of the horses R.A. faced and he barely lost to R.A.

[tzipi]

Speed figure are meaningless, especially when it comes to class. The horse with the highest speed figure is not an automatic winner. Good Luck with that.

Wow! Just asked what the his Beyers were and you got all frustrated and bent. Well good luck with your frustration about Rachel or whoever :D

Well if anyone else could post Machos last 5 beyers,I would appreciate it :) Just want to see what the older horses beyers were this year. Need his.

[Show Me the Wire]

tzipzi:

Honest answer to your question. Not bent out of shape, speed figures are meaningless in this context.

Sorry I did not understand your posting as a request for his BSF.

[tzipi]

My original comment is R.A. never faced any horse as good as Life Is Sweet. Macho Again is one of the horses R.A. faced and he barely lost to R.A.

What were the fractions in that race?

[NTamm1215]

My original comment is R.A. never faced any horse as good as Life Is Sweet. Macho Again is one of the horses R.A. faced and he barely lost to R.A.

Right, and I told you that Summer Bird is better than Life Is Sweet, to which you made no reply, other than to say that Zenyatta beat him too, nothing to do with him being better/worse than Life Is Sweet.

I think you're badly overrating Life Is Sweet based on one performance.

NT

[Show Me the Wire]

What were the fractions in that race?

They were quick, I really don't remember off hand. But they were do able for R.A. as she had enough energy to outlast macho Again.

[tzipi]

tzipzi:

Honest answer to your question. Not bent out of shape, speed figures are meaningless in this context.

No,not an honest answer. Asked for the beyers of a horse and you go whatever yeah go by best beyers to pick the winner. Good luck with that. Jesus, you must be frutrated. Who said I pick the winner by top Beyer?? Thats dumb. Whatever.

[Show Me the Wire]

Right, and I told you that Summer Bird is better than Life Is Sweet, to which you made no reply, other than to say that Zenyatta beat him too, nothing to do with him being better/worse than Life Is Sweet.

I think you're badly overrating Life Is Sweet based on one performance.

NT

If we use Zenyatta as the common horse, Life Is Sweet is better.

[Show Me the Wire]

No,not an honest answer. Asked for the beyers of a horse and you go whatever yeah go by best beyers to pick the winner. Good luck with that. Jesus, you must be frutrated. Who said I pick the winner by top Beyer?? Thats dumb. Whatever.

I told you I didn't understand your post as a simple request. I understood it as a question relating BSF for comparison.

[tzipi]

I told you I didn't understand your post as a simple request. I understood it as a question relating BSF for comparison.

No. Asked what Macho Agains beyers were. Your answered showed something. Someone asked me in whatever form I would just answer if I knew them.
Hmm Life as Sweet should've been going against boys is she's a World Beater. She would be a shoe-in to win the OAks by crazy lengths,Preakness,Wood,Haskell,Goose,etc setting records almost everytime. Ha yup

[Stillriledup]

Tamm is right, Summer Bird is better than Life is Sweet. The reason Z beat SB is because A) SB doesnt like synthetics as much and B) he was tired from a long year C) Z beat him on Her racetrack in her state. Its pretty well known that horses who ship to California have a tough time acclimating. WHen Rachel faced SB, he was at full power, wasn't over the top and was racing on a surface he loves (slop) and she still trounced him.

[tzipi]

Tamm is right, Summer Bird is better than Life is Sweet. The reason Z beat SB is because A) SB doesnt like synthetics as much and B) he was tired from a long year C) Z beat him on Her racetrack in her state. Its pretty well known that horses who ship to California have a tough time acclimating. WHen Rachel faced SB, he was at full power, wasn't over the top and was racing on a surface he loves (slop) and she still trounced him.

Totally agree. Zenyatta should've travelled to face these horses some of the times too. But she didn't :confused:

[Show Me the Wire]

If you would have left out my quote:

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
According to whose standards? Oh yeah, Macho Again is a world beater

Macho Again would lose by ten lengths to Life Is Sweet.

when you posted your request, for his speed figures, there would have been no confusion. For clarity you just needed to post your question. without any reference to my prior post.

What my answer shows is I interpreted your post as that BSF would settle the question about the strength of competition. Nothing more and nothing less.

[Stillriledup]

If you would have left out my quote:

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
According to whose standards? Oh yeah, Macho Again is a world beater

Macho Again would lose by ten lengths to Life Is Sweet.

when you posted your request, for his speed figures, there would have been no confusion. For clarity you just needed to post your question. without any reference to my prior post.

What my answer shows is I interpreted your post as that BSF would settle the question about the strength of competition. Nothing more and nothing less.


If Life is sweet raced in the Woodward she would have been 15-1 or higher and been up the track.

[Show Me the Wire]

Tamm is right, Summer Bird is better than Life is Sweet. The reason Z beat SB is because A) SB doesnt like synthetics as much and B) he was tired from a long year C) Z beat him on Her racetrack in her state. Its pretty well known that horses who ship to California have a tough time acclimating. WHen Rachel faced SB, he was at full power, wasn't over the top and was racing on a surface he loves (slop) and she still trounced him.

I do not concurr with your analyais. Summer Bird did not have a long hard campaign. He was well rested. He also trained very well over the pro-ride surface. He lost to a better horse in Zenyatta.

[Show Me the Wire]

If Life is sweet raced in the Woodward she would have been 15-1 or higher and been up the track.


Opinions are what make racing so much fun. It would have been nice to score on such a nice overlay. R.A. would have been smoked by Coco Beach and would have no chance against Life Is Sweet.

Maybe LIfe Is Sweet and R.A. will both show up for the Apple Blossom. I doubt it though, if Lfe Is Sweet shows up R.A.'s connections would duck her, as they would not want to be embarrased by losing to the second stringer.

[Stillriledup]

I do not concurr with your analyais. Summer Bird did not have a long hard campaign. He was well rested. He also trained very well over the pro-ride surface. He lost to a better horse in Zenyatta.

Summer Bird didn't handle the surface at SA all that great in his pre BC preparation. He's better on Dirt.

[FenceBored]

If we use Zenyatta as the common horse, Life Is Sweet is better.

Zenyatta is not a common horse. You really need to give her more credit and stop hating on her.

[tzipi]

If you would have left out my quote:

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
According to whose standards? Oh yeah, Macho Again is a world beater

Macho Again would lose by ten lengths to Life Is Sweet.

when you posted your request, for his speed figures, there would have been no confusion. For clarity you just needed to post your question. without any reference to my prior post.

What my answer shows is I interpreted your post as that BSF would settle the question about the strength of competition. Nothing more and nothing less.

Asked for his beyers. That's all. You didn't post them you just gave an answer about what you think my betting habits are?? No Beyers. Didn't MA come up in the posts? So what's so wrong with asking for his beyers either way? Please.

"MA would lose to Life is Sweet by 10 lengths" HAH Wow!

[the_fat_man]

This YEAR will go down as one in which all the BEYER DIRT Darling PLUGS got FREE rides (in terms of reputation) because of injuries:

1) Quality Road : just when he's about to get his ass kicked in the DERBY (high BEYER and all) the feet act up. :rolleyes: And after NOT redeeming himself in the Travers and on the way to getting a SEVERE ASS KICKING in the Classic, he refuses to get in the gate. :rolleyes: The connections are in the process of negotiating a FAST SPEED track over at GP so that he can run FAST again.

2) Summer Bird -- makes a living out of good trips and beating NOTHING and basically plugs along in the BC. Then, when he has a chance to do something in Japan, down he goes too. :rolleyes: How in the world do people actually think this horse is something special? :lol:

3) I Want Revenge: nice race in the Gotham followed by perfect trip in the WOOD. Then down he goes just before he'd have been BENT OVER in the Derby. And, to add RIDICULOUS NONSENSE to the mix, BEYERLAND comes up with the SPIN of the CENTURY: that POTN's performance in the DERBY justified their low ratings of him:lol::lol::lol::lol: This is after he DESTROYED I Want Revenge out in Cali.

4) Friesan Fire: Perfect tripping FAST BEYER Darling, had all the BEYERITES using him in the DERBY but throwing out the SLOW horse (POTN), because, after all, it's all about playing SMART:lol::lol:, conveniently got hurt and then sucked wind upon retuning last week.

Who did I leave out? :rolleyes:

So much for comparing horses in terms of BEYERS. NOT exactly an exact science. :lol:

[NTamm1215]

Opinions are what make racing so much fun. It would have been nice to score on such a nice overlay. R.A. would have been smoked by Coco Beach and would have no chance against Life Is Sweet.

Maybe LIfe Is Sweet and R.A. will both show up for the Apple Blossom. I doubt it though, if Lfe Is Sweet shows up R.A.'s connections would duck her, as they would not want to be embarrased by losing to the second stringer.

This post shows that your opinion is completely ridiculous and you're just saying things for shock value. Cocoa Beach? The filly who lost to With Flying Colors at Belmont and won only an overnight stake all year would have smoked RA?

Life Is Sweet, a below average turf horse who specialized on one particular synthetic surface, will be nowhere near Oaklawn for the Apple Blossom because she'd get absolutely drowned by Rachel Alexandra. I think you may need to revisit Life is Sweet's past performances.

NT

[Jackal]

Everyone wants to accuse JJ of ducking zenyatta. How about when Zenyatta ducked rail trip in the gold cup. 750k in her backyard - Zenyattas connections are frightened of what a lot people would have called an allowance horse. Zenyatta's connections were ducking for 2 years. She never went after the largest purses in CA.

How can anyone say RA was ducking anything? She had already run 8 races by early September. Zenyatta only ran 2 races as a 3 year old. How can any Zenyatta fan say Rachel didn't get a well deserved rest?

Moreover, Rachel runs on real dirt. Why not rest her for next season? The BC will be at CD. At least RA didn't scratch because of a few clouds and a sealed track. She went out into the mud and trashed the field by over 20 lengths.

Horse of the year is just that - not the best horse on Nov 6.

[fmolf]

Not to mention that many people feel this was one of the wekest if not the weakest classic field ever.Unless of course you believe the talking heads on tvg! :lol:

[sandpit]

What were Macho Agains Beyers?

Those numbers came from the same guy that said Zenyatta was a toss out in the Classic.

[sandpit]

Z beat SB on Her racetrack in her state. Its pretty well known that horses who ship to California have a tough time acclimating. WHen Rachel faced SB, he was at full power, wasn't over the top and was racing on a surface he loves (slop) and she still trounced him.

Plenty of horses do have trouble shipping to CA, but it didn't seem to bother Henrythenavigator, Raven's Pass, Muhannak, Furthest Land, Vale of York, plus all the winners on the grass in the past 2 BCs.

[sandpit]

Opinions are what make racing so much fun. It would have been nice to score on such a nice overlay. R.A. would have been smoked by Coco Beach and would have no chance against Life Is Sweet.

Maybe LIfe Is Sweet and R.A. will both show up for the Apple Blossom. I doubt it though, if Lfe Is Sweet shows up R.A.'s connections would duck her, as they would not want to be embarrased by losing to the second stringer.

This certainly opens up a new can of worms for Jackson/Moss to consider.

[Jackal]

It's all to funny! Zenyattas fans are just like her. They duck irrefutable evidence that JM wasn't ducking for 2 years but 3 years. :lol:

[sandpit]

Zenyatta only ran 2 races as a 3 year old. How can any Zenyatta fan say Rachel didn't get a well deserved rest?

Moreover, Rachel runs on real dirt. Why not rest her for next season? The BC will be at CD. At least RA didn't scratch because of a few clouds and a sealed track. She went out into the mud and trashed the field by over 20 lengths.

Horse of the year is just that - not the best horse on Nov 6.

Zenyatta didn't make her racing debut until late November of her 3-year-old season. How many times should she have run the rest of the year?

What will be interesting to see next season is if Rachel runs on the Poly at Keeneland. She is a KY based horse for most of the year, and it makes sense to prep in the Spinster a month before the BC. Jackson can't come with the excuse about the surface, IMO, since she's already won over it.

[tzipi]

Zenyatta didn't make her racing debut until late November of her 3-year-old season. How many times should she have run the rest of the year?

What will be interesting to see next season is if Rachel runs on the Poly at Keeneland. She is a KY based horse for most of the year, and it makes sense to prep in the Spinster a month before the BC. Jackson can't come with the excuse about the surface, IMO, since she's already won over it.

Rachel ran a ton of times all over the place against girls,boys,and older horses.She was tired and there was no reason to travel all the way out there on that fake surface to run another hard race. Yup,if she breaks down,it's a Eight Belles thing again,with everyone saying geez,did they have to run her hard every race against hard company 99% of 3YO fillies DO NOT run in.
Hey, every top horse travelled all over this year to run in top races. Zenyatta didn't. Why?

[tzipi]

Those numbers came from the same guy that said Zenyatta was a toss out in the Classic.

I didn't see anyone list his numbers. I was one person who asked what his last 5 were because I was looking back at the winners of the top 2 Breeders Cup races(Classics)and could'nt find his. So explain? Did I miss a post?

[sandpit]

Rachel ran a ton of times all over the place against girls,boys,and older horses.She was tired and there was no reason to travel all the way out there on that fake surface to run another hard race. Yup,if she breaks down,it's a Eight Belles thing again,with everyone saying geez,did they have to run her hard every race against hard company 99% of 3YO fillies DO NOT run in.
Hey, every top horse travelled all over this year to run in top races. Zenyatta didn't. Why?

My point on Zenyatta was that she didn't debut until Thanksgiving week, so she didn't have a chance to run much at 3. When you consider how big she is, it's easy to see why they waited with her.

If I had campaigned RA the way she was this year, I probably would have skipped the BC as well, and not because of the surface.

In fairness to Zenyatta, she did travel to Churchill to run in a G1 on Oaks day, but in a fit of overcautiousness, she was scratched. Why they didn't leave CA afterwards I have no idea.

[sandpit]

I didn't see anyone list his numbers. I was one person who asked what his last 5 were because I was looking back at the winners of the top 2 Breeders Cup races(Classics)and could'nt find his. So explain? Did I miss a post?

Here they are in reverse chronological order, starting with the JCGC: 93, 109, 105, 100, 88. He got an 86 in the Clark a couple of weeks ago.

[tzipi]

Here they are in reverse chronological order, starting with the JCGC: 93, 109, 105, 100, 88. He got an 86 in the Clark a couple of weeks ago.

Thanks Sandpit. :) Yeah,I wish she ran at Churchill. Think it was being overcautious. I think they just took away from her all season long. I think she could've beaten better fields in CA(older males). But we will never know for sure.

[PaceAdvantage]

Macho Again would lose by ten lengths to Life Is Sweet.How about on real dirt...what do you think the margin would be?

[gm10]

How about on real dirt...what do you think the margin would be?

There is nothing more or less real about dirt than synthetics. Why can't you see that?

Macho Again is moderate. He probably would lose pretty badly against Life Is Sweet on any surface.

[Stillriledup]

There is nothing more or less real about dirt than synthetics. Why can't you see that?

Macho Again is moderate. He probably would lose pretty badly against Life Is Sweet on any surface.

:lol:

[FenceBored]

There is nothing more or less real about dirt than synthetics. Why can't you see that?


How about, because it's not true.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

Getting back to Bettor Bob's theory with the odds. It is an interesting idea and comes to the correct conclusion

[FenceBored]

Getting back to Bettor Bob's theory with the odds. It is an interesting idea and comes to the correct conclusion

:D Averaging odds is an interesting idea? I guess that means the Ky Derby had the toughest field of the year, since the favorite went off at $3.80/1?

[Steve R]

Speed figure are meaningless, especially when it comes to class. The horse with the highest speed figure is not an automatic winner. Good Luck with that.
If you are going to ignore speed figures then you also have to ignore the "who-beat-whom and by how much" argument. Speed figures are simply a mathematical expression of time adjusted for track speed and, in some cases, other factors. The Jockey Club Performance Rates published by the Thoroughbred Times are, and I quote from the TT website, "an objective measurement of racetrack performance developed by the Jockey Club Information Systems. Performance Rates assign a rate to horses based upon beaten lengths - who beat whom and by how much - with some adjustments made to standardize beaten distances to account for horses that are not pressed or eased in large fields. Time is not a factor in Performance Rates, which are based on every start by every horse in North America. Performance Rates are expressed in lengths around a theoretical mean of zero. The average Performance Rates of the best horses in a given year are generally about 30 lengths better than an average performance of the average horse".

Perhaps we should simply ignore all technical approaches to measuring Thoroughbred performance and stick with what really matters...your opinion.

In any case, Rachel Alexandra earned a Performance Rate of 38.05, over seven lengths better than the next horse and about 38 lengths better than the average Thoroughbred racing in 2009. See the bold type in the quotation above in case you are confused about what that means.

And to be perfectly honest, I'm tired of hearing about how spectacular Zenyatta is. Of the fillies and mares I've seen race over the last 40 years, she wouldn't make my top ten. Her BC Classic was no miracle performance as some would have us believe. It was an historically slow Classic against 3yo and older American-based males that had been thoroughly trashed all year by the turf media and on a bastard surface. What I find amazing is that her over-the-top advocates simply ignore that she was the freakin' favorite in the race and in terms of pace and position ran essentially the same way she had run all year long and on her home court. Raven's Pass' Classic last year was essentially a duplicate of Zenyatta's in terms of style and he had to beat the reigning (and future HotY) to do it. Not to mention he had never run on the surface before. Why didn't that win generate the same excitement?

As with Curlin last year, the hype outweighs the reality. Frankly, I wish they would take her to the farm already and prepare her for breeding so we can get past this crap and move on to other, more important, issues.

[gm10]

How about, because it's not true.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. That's why. I've seen the light. The reason why I'm a genius is because I AM a genius. I'm telling my wife.

[NTamm1215]

There is nothing more or less real about dirt than synthetics. Why can't you see that?

Macho Again is moderate. He probably would lose pretty badly against Life Is Sweet on any surface.

Life is Sweet, a bad dirt horse, moderate turf horse, and synthetic maven would beat Macho Again on any surface. That's absolutely ludicrous.

Was it her beyond perfect trip Ladies' Classic win that makes you feel that way. I shouldn't begrudge her the pace setup, though, as she deserved it, considering she's just not capable of running against the race flow like her stablemate Zenyatta. But, good God, the BCLC was served up on a platter to her.

NT

[FenceBored]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. That's why. I've seen the light. The reason why I'm a genius is because I AM a genius. I'm telling my wife.

Glad to help.

[gm10]

Life is Sweet, a bad dirt horse, moderate turf horse, and synthetic maven would beat Macho Again on any surface. That's absolutely ludicrous.

Was it her beyond perfect trip Ladies' Classic win that makes you feel that way. I shouldn't begrudge her the pace setup, though, as she deserved it, considering she's just not capable of running against the race flow like her stablemate Zenyatta. But, good God, the BCLC was served up on a platter to her.

NT

OK - my speed figures have always put her best efforts above Macho Again's. So I have to disagree.
She certainly beat a nice bunch in the Ladies' Classic, even if you think that was because of the pace scenario.

[Show Me the Wire]

Steve R:

I am confused; I don't remember pointing out an objective measure like the Jockey Club’s transitive method as a better measurement.

If you recall, I pontificated about trips, set-ups, tipping points, etc.

Yes, speed figures are an attempt to measure past performance on adjusted final time and that is their flaw. Time and distance are important, but there is more to the winning mix.

Winning is the result of trip or set-up, the competition faced and when time ran out (time). Speed figures are a reflection of the adjusted final time. Speed figures rarely measure all the cogent contributing factors of the trip or the set-up and the company of the race. The only time this convergence happens is the particular instance when the winner leads the field from gate to wire.


The leader is getting an unimpeded trip, while being quick enough to comfortably establish a large enough head start against inferior company (or competitor’s jockey mistake) that can’t be overcome prior to the finish, by the inferior company.

R.A. in the Woodward had the best combination, she was quick enough that no horse could press or push her, and she was able to build a big enough lead (get a sufficient head start) that no other horse was fast enough late to over take her prior to time running out.

If the company changed and there was a horse that could push her for a couple of more furlongs, so she had to run a couple of ticks faster, the advantage of her front-running head start would have been negated prior to the line. We know this because horses have a limited supply of energy for each race and if more energy is used early, there is less energy late.

What should impress you about Zenyatta, is what you said about her performances, no matter what happens up front she overcome any trip, lack of set-up, and company to win by running the specified distance faster. No competition, trip, lack of set-up had the ability to complete the distance of the race in a quicker unadjusted or adjusted final time.

Until speed figures can objectively measure all of the factors influencing the outcome, they are only a useful tool measuring, part of the equation, final time and distance. With the rub that final time and distance are a effected by the other above-mentioned factors.

Not taking into account the factors of trip, set-up, etc results in a flawed number for the Jockey Club’s method too.

[tzipi]

Getting back to Bettor Bob's theory with the odds. It is an interesting idea and comes to the correct conclusion

:D :lol: Ok,then some average horses were better than all time champions because of odds differences.
Zenyatta ran against the same field race after race. That's tougher races? Life is Sweet the toughest? Geez,cmon. Wow people are pissed about something they know and are making up insane stuff now.
People were looking to beat her and for a price because it was just the same race and maybe she'll lose and they'll win big. What else were they suppose to do in those same ol races?

[Stillriledup]

Getting back to Bettor Bob's theory with the odds. It is an interesting idea and comes to the correct conclusion

I would say Bob's idea is the correct conclusion only if you can prove that the mindset of the bettors, in all cases, was wagering ON the rivals of both horses and not wagering against the big favorite. Many times, in my experience, bettors would wager against a 1-5 type horse 'just because'. I've bet against Z on at least one occasion but have to admit, i didn't really 'like' the horses i was betting on. It wasn't like i looked at the PP's and said "ooh, here's one who can beat Z". No, it wasn't like that. I was just picking a warm body and hoping Z beat herself. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of Z's competition.

[Stillriledup]

Bumpers for Bob, maybe theyll talk about this some more on today's Roger Stein show?