Speed vs. Class?

[Cratos]

Reading the current posts about Zenyatta’s “slow” time in the Apple Blossom prompted me to ask: “What is a fast time and does it differs from a “class” winning time?”

That question consistently is overlooked in this current age of “speed figures” (a concept many uses, but only a few understand).

Therefore to answer the above question it comes down to the answer being that a fast time is a nebulous metric which trumped is by winning class. The reason being is that history will show that the classiest of race horses didn’t always win in a fast time and it was usually because of pace, environmental conditions, or a combination of the two.

I found it odd that some would demean the competition that Zenyatta ran against in the Apple Blossom and not do a historical search for what some of the former best horses had run against.

Medaglia d’Oro might be one of the best middle distance horses in the last 50 years, but during the TC races he couldn’t get past allowance and G3 type horses to win a TC race; however when he came back as a 4yo and 5yo he was nothing short of a stellar performer.

Secretariat during his brilliant and exceptional 1973 TC performances only had one competitor and that was Sham.

The conclusion here is that the great ones win with “class” and speed is a byproduct of class.

Therefore Zenyatta like Medaglia d’Oro, Secretariat, Dr. Fager, Go for Wand, Ruffian, and all of the other greats won because of their class and their speed was just a resultant.

[Charlie D]

The reason being is that history will show that the classiest of race horses didn’t always win in a fast time and it was usually because of pace, environmental conditions, or a combination of the two.



Fast overall times are a result of race dynamics, slow overall times are also the result of race dynamics.


History will show i think that the Top horses posted a fast overall time at one point or another in thier racing careers

Zenyatta, Sea the Stars , Zarkava, Rachel all have one or two fast overall times in thier cv's i believe.

[fast4522]

Class dominates the races, the class horse finds its stride provided its condition is par with its good races. The class horse overcomes problems that occur during the race where less class runners have "the excuse", and I believe the heart which can be measured in pounds and a very noticeable interest that can be seen by all who care to notice.

[Cratos]

Fast overall times are a result of race dynamics, slow overall times are also the result of race dynamics.


History will show i think that the Top horses posted a fast overall time at one point or another in thier racing careers

Zenyatta, Sea the Stars , Zarkava, Rachel all have one or two fast overall times in thier cv's i believe.

I don’t disagree with your response; however what I am saying is that to diminish a horse’s winning effort because of a “slow” time is not understanding the meaning of “class.”

[Charlie D]

To diminish a performance because of a slow time is not understanding what task was set in the first place.

If Zen is running against horses that can only run a 100 at best, then all Zen has to do to win is run 101, 102, 103.


When Zen is running against horses that can run 110 at best, Zen has to run 111, 112, 113 to win.



She is not racing against the clock, she is racing against other horses and it is thier abilities that dictate her performances.

[cj]

I can't remember a G1 race with a purse that big that featured one good horse and four total slugs. Whether you like Beyer or not, his figures are going to at least be in the ballpark. Not one of the other OLDER female horses could crack a 90 Beyer after nothing more than a moderate pace. That is a bad field any way you slice it,and I don't need to measure class to know this.

[horses4courses]

I can't remember a G1 race with a purse that big that featured one good horse and four total slugs. Whether you like Beyer or not, his figures are going to at least be in the ballpark. Not one of the other OLDER female horses could crack a 90 Beyer after nothing more than a moderate pace. That is a bad field any way you slice it,and I don't need to measure class to know this.

Zenyatta could have faced a tougher field in the AB.
Her opponents were far short of G1 class, that's for sure.

Much of the stronger opposition that was in a position to face her, thought the better of it, imo.

[Charlie D]

Poor feild, moderate pace = low speedfigure or rating for that particular performance.


It does not mean that horse is no good, it means horse just accomplished the task set..

[Igeteven]

Zenyatta could have faced a tougher field in the AB.
Her opponents were far short of G1 class, that's for sure.

Much of the stronger opposition that was in a position to face her, thought the better of it, imo.


My God what does this horse have to do, run for President, She proved beyond any reasonable doubt, she is a SUPER HORSE. So far, She is the horse of the 21st century.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[horses4courses]

My God what does this horse have to do, run for President, She proved beyond any reasonable doubt, she is a SUPER HORSE. So far, She is the horse of the 21st century.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

You miss my point entirely.
I'm a big fan of Z...I think she will beat all comers - fast pace, slow pace, plastic, dirt, or racing on Fruit Loops..........I was simply stating that the AB race did little to please her critics, and that it wasn't her fault.

[Igeteven]

You miss my point entirely.
I'm a big fan of Z...I think she will beat all comers - fast pace, slow pace, plastic, dirt, or racing on Fruit Loops..........I was simply stating that the AB race did little to please her critics, and that it wasn't her fault.

:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Fager Fan]

You miss my point entirely.
I'm a big fan of Z...I think she will beat all comers - fast pace, slow pace, plastic, dirt, or racing on Fruit Loops..........I was simply stating that the AB race did little to please her critics, and that it wasn't her fault.

I would point out that lots of horses have gone against weak competition or even very good competition and did it impressively.

In all seriousness, who's the last really top racehorse who earned a 95 Beyer in a win as an older horse?

[bks]

I would point out that lots of horses have gone against weak competition or even very good competition and did it impressively.

She did it impressively too, Fager. She cantored up alongside them and trotted home. Pretty impressive.

If a horse can run faster than she ran, which no one disputes, and if the horse won for fun under wraps, which no one disputes, what could it possibly matter that she didn't run fast?

[Steve R]

The denigration of speed expressed in this thread is, in a word, bullshit. Leave it to horseplayers to invoke some sort of anthropomorphic definition of "class" as a quality superior to speed. Of course, to horseplayers, winning is all that matters, which is why they often bring up consecutive wins or money earned, interesting but essentially insignificant metrics. Throughout racing's history, breeders have selected primarily for speed, one of the most heritable of all traits. If one were to select for height but wind up with short offspring, those offspring would be considered failures. Slow Thoroughbreds are similarly failures in the grand scheme of things, even those relatively successful within their lower level niche.

It's also interesting that world-class human track athletes are always talking about breaking speed records. It's not enough just to win. To win AND be the fastest is the goal of every serious track athlete. Why should the objective be any different for Thoroughbreds which have been designed for the very purpose of running fast while humans have not?

Then there is the silly idea that some horses run only as fast as they have to - another anthropomorphic absurdity. That occasionally might be true for some quality horses on or near the lead while dictating the circumstances. It can never be true for a deep closer except in the case of a good horse running against crap. It can't be true because the jockey (and certainly not the horse) that is 10 lengths behind at the top of the stretch can't know how fast the horses in front of him will finish. To believe that a horse can be 10 lengths behind at the quarter pole and that the jockey knows the horse on the lead absolutely will run the last quarter mile two seconds slower than his own is insanity. Thousand pound horses running 35-40 mph have an enormous amount of inertia to overcome. They generally don't just accelerate instantaneously at will. Since almost all competitive performances can be demonstrated to be very close to linear in terms of time vs distance, it is clear that the momentum established in the early running determines the the maximum speed available in the stretch. If a horse is in a competitive situation near the end and is not all out to the wire, the fix is in.

Then there is racing history to consider. The best horses continually achieved very fast times even when running against substandard competition. Dr. Fager, Forego, Secretaiat, Nashua, Swaps, etc, etc, were often within a second of the track record regardless of what they ran against. There are no slow horses among the all-time greats. Peppers Pride was not a great horse only because she was not fast enough, her undefeated win streak notwithstanding.

Of course, you have to understand I am not primarily a horseplayer. I owned, bred and raised horses for over 30 years and I am much more interested in the evolution of Thoroughbred speed than I am in which horse won the 3rd race at Keeneland. Also, these are the views of someone who thinks the most over-hyped horses of the last 25 years include Cigar, Curlin and Zenyatta while among the most under-appreciated are Spend a Buck, Ghostzapper and Formal Gold. To each his own.

[Dave Schwartz]

Classier horses run faster. Thus, a horse that cannot run fast is certainly lacking in class (whatever that is).

Speed is measurable.

How do you measure "class?" If you cannot measure it, then for all practical purposes it does not exist.

[ronsmac]

Her and Ghostzapper.

[Show Me the Wire]

Classier horses run faster. Thus, a horse that cannot run fast is certainly lacking in class (whatever that is).

Speed is measurable.

How do you measure "class?" If you cannot measure it, then for all practical purposes it does not exist.

Over a certain distance, to complete your thought. Distance is the most important factor. The classiest of horses carry their speed over a longer distance (amount of ground).

[Show Me the Wire]

Steve R.


Because thoroughbreds do not have any objectives besside survival.

The horse runs out of instinct and the good ones run to their training and not just out of instinct.

[PaceAdvantage]

Quality Road winning his last race. He did it rather easily, did he not? His competition was rather poor, was it not?

Yet, he ran a very fast time nonetheless...running easily...against overmatched foes...

Interesting.

[Charlie D]

Zen has also run fast when race dynamics dictated. If she had not there is no Classic glory and she is just an also ran like her opposition were.

[ghostyapper]

In all seriousness, who's the last really top racehorse who earned a 95 Beyer in a win as an older horse?

Once again I will say I LOVE THIS SPORT!!!
Take a look at zenyatta's 2 races and her beyer's heading into last years breeders cup (a race she was way too slow to win and didn't have "enough horsepower" as one writer eloquently put it)

Aug 9 - 99 winning by a head
Oct 10 - 97 winning by a length

Then comes November 7th and facing males for the first time and the best field of her career she magically runs a 112 and makes the males look similar to the girls she's been beating all year.

Fast forward to today and here come's the best part of the story!!! There are still misguided individuals that are STILL USING BEYER'S TO JUDGE ZENYATTA!! That's right!! :lol: :lol:

[Tom]

Quality Road winning his last race. He did it rather easily, did he not? His competition was rather poor, was it not?

Yet, he ran a very fast time nonetheless...running easily...against overmatched foes...

Interesting.

Eaxclty. I still say QR is not superhorse, not great classy horse at all. Lesser horse can throw out fast times and not be classy. Take away the two GP races and QR looks not nearly so super. We have seen super races from horse in the recent years and the horses turn out ot be.....also rans when it counts.

For me, Zenny's calss was the last race, where she got in trouble inside and made a late surge to not get beat., That was class. Afleet Alex, going to his kness and fighting back on. Class. Class is in the heat and the will, not the figs. RA, opening up on the filed inthe Woodwar at the of the stretch. Class. Forgo just getting there to win by a nose. What were his figs? Honest Pleasure gutting it out the last 100 yards to win th eBC. Class.

[Fager Fan]

Once again I will say I LOVE THIS SPORT!!!
Take a look at zenyatta's 2 races and her beyer's heading into last years breeders cup (a race she was way too slow to win and didn't have "enough horsepower" as one writer eloquently put it)

Aug 9 - 99 winning by a head
Oct 10 - 97 winning by a length

Then comes November 7th and facing males for the first time and the best field of her career she magically runs a 112 and makes the males look similar to the girls she's been beating all year.

Fast forward to today and here come's the best part of the story!!! There are still misguided individuals that are STILL USING BEYER'S TO JUDGE ZENYATTA!! That's right!! :lol: :lol:

Ghost, it doesn't pay to be too self-assured. I thought Zenyatta was a lock for the Classic, and reminded many people that the Beyers on synth are regularly low so don't be confused by those Beyers. I played her in the Classic, and I got teary-eyed when she won.

But this wasn't a low Beyer on synth. This was a low Beyer because she ran slow.

[Fager Fan]

Eaxclty. I still say QR is not superhorse, not great classy horse at all. Lesser horse can throw out fast times and not be classy. Take away the two GP races and QR looks not nearly so super. We have seen super races from horse in the recent years and the horses turn out ot be.....also rans when it counts.

For me, Zenny's calss was the last race, where she got in trouble inside and made a late surge to not get beat., That was class. Afleet Alex, going to his kness and fighting back on. Class. Class is in the heat and the will, not the figs. RA, opening up on the filed inthe Woodwar at the of the stretch. Class. Forgo just getting there to win by a nose. What were his figs? Honest Pleasure gutting it out the last 100 yards to win th eBC. Class.

You seem to forget that QR also ran a magnificent time in New York, because you keep claiming that the only times he's run fast were in Florida.

[horses4courses]

Ghost, it doesn't pay to be too self-assured. I thought Zenyatta was a lock for the Classic, and reminded many people that the Beyers on synth are regularly low so don't be confused by those Beyers. I played her in the Classic, and I got teary-eyed when she won.

But this wasn't a low Beyer on synth. This was a low Beyer because she ran slow.

Zenyatta won as she liked....her opposition ran slow because they are.....not Z's fault!!

[Fager Fan]

Zenyatta won as she liked....her opposition ran slow because they are.....not Z's fault!!

Tell yourself that all you want, but who made Zenyatta run slow in her first half or three-quarters? And who made her not run faster in the final 3 furlongs?

You all act as though her early slowness (and possible early and late slowness) is to be excused because, well, she's slow early.

[horses4courses]

Tell yourself that all you want, but who made Zenyatta run slow in her first half or three-quarters? And who made her not run faster in the final 3 furlongs?

You all act as though her early slowness (and possible early and late slowness) is to be excused because, well, she's slow early.

We'll see how slow she runs against top class opposition, when that time comes.
Do you seriously think a horse should go out to break the track record every time it races?

[Fager Fan]

We'll see how slow she runs against top class opposition, when that time comes.
Do you seriously think a horse should go out to break the track record every time it races?

I didn't ask for a track record. I ask for respectable times from what is supposed to be one of the all-time greats.

[46zilzal]

The measure of ANY horse is a pace that they cannot either set or overcome. She has never met that circumstance, pure and simple.

[JustRalph]

I can't remember a G1 race with a purse that big that featured one good horse and four total slugs. Whether you like Beyer or not, his figures are going to at least be in the ballpark. Not one of the other OLDER female horses could crack a 90 Beyer after nothing more than a moderate pace. That is a bad field any way you slice it,and I don't need to measure class to know this.

After reading your post I had a thought. In your mind Take that field and place it where it was at the top of the stretch, coming off the turn. Think about where Zenyatta was. Now try to figure out where Rachel would have been in that same field/Race, at the same point in the race that you now have in your head?

My only thought was How far ahead of the pack would Rachel had been, and could Zenyatta have gotten to her ? I think that ends up being Mike Smith's conundrum to solve............

Like somebody else said in another thread........ I don't think you can take much of value away from the Apple Blossom....... it was a free square.

[Charlie D]

She has posted respectable times as you can see here on both Tom and Ted screenshots

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=68299&page=5&pp=15


And if CJ put his numbers up for her his would show the same thing.

[Robert Goren]

I didn't ask for a track record. I ask for respectable times from what is supposed to be one of the all-time greats.All I ask is that she win. Until I see one of these "fast" horse beat her, I could care less about someones speed figures. JMO

[PaceAdvantage]

For me, Zenny's calss was the last race, where she got in trouble inside and made a late surge to not get beat., That was class.It's much easier to pull that kind of feat off when you're racing against the lower caliber of horses she was racing against that day. Let's not forget that.

[Charlie D]

Go look at the 2008 Apple Blossom and the 2010 Apple Blossom and you'll see a massive difference in the Fractions, Zens position and ultimately the final time.

Unlike some, Zen does not dictate her speed or final time figures, the other horses do.

[RXB]

It's also interesting that world-class human track athletes are always talking about breaking speed records. It's not enough just to win. To win AND be the fastest is the goal of every serious track athlete. Why should the objective be any different for Thoroughbreds which have been designed for the very purpose of running fast while humans have not?


Name the last human track athlete that broke a world record in a non-steeplechase event at 800 metres or longer in the Olympics. Hey, it's the Olympics, the best athletes are there, and they're all trying to peak for that race, right? Shouldn't they be running their fastest times?

For men, it's now been 34 years. (Alberto Juantorena, 800m, Montreal 1976.) For women, it's been 30 years. (Nadezhda Olizarenko, 800m, Moscow 1980.)

The true goal is to win the race, not to run the fastest final time.

[46zilzal]

It's much easier to pull that kind of feat off when you're racing against the lower caliber of horses she was racing against that day. Let's not forget that.
Throw a faster pace at her and she comes home faster. Just watch........

Her style is what makes her incredible....Deep closers don't continue winning ways that often because a ton of things have to go right unless you are monstrously the best.

For someone who claims to know pace, you do not articulate it very well.

QUOTE: Unlike some, Zen does not dictate her speed or final time figures, the other horses do.

Exactly so...

[PaceAdvantage]

Throw a faster pace at her and she comes home faster. Just watch........

Her style is what makes her incredible....Deep closers don't continue winning ways that often because a ton of things have to go right unless you are monstrously the best.

For someone who claims to know pace, you do not articulate it very well.Where did I write about pace in that last reply? WTF?

[thaskalos]

Zenyatta has to be the most visually impressive horse we have seen in many years. Her burst of speed as she turns for home is breathtaking. How many of the people who watched the BC Classic last year thought that she would actually win the race, as the horses were approached the final turn. It looked impossible. From the top of the turn to the wire, she makes ALL the other horses look like they are standing still.

[pandy]

Tniche.

. Also, these are the views of someone who thinks the most over-hyped horses of the last 25 years include Cigar, Curlin and Zenyatta while among the most under-appreciated are Spend a Buck, Ghostzapper and Formal Gold. To each his own.

I agree that Curlin was over-hyped but Cigar and Zenyatta are far better horses than Curlin. In fact, Cigar and Zenyatta are clearly two of the greatest horses of all time, the others you mentioned aren't. Ghostzapper ran a couple of fast races indicating that he may have been a great horse, but simply did not accomplish enough to be considered as one of the all time greats. That would be like saying Roger Maris was one of the greatest players of all time, but although he was a fine player, he had one of the greatest seasons of all time, and that's not good enough.

As far as time, Zenyatta is so far back in some of her races, that according to my energy and late kick calculations (from my computer program), she is actually too far back to win, especially in some of the races where the pace was slow. But she wins anyway. She is the only horse I've ever seen who can consistently come from miles back regardless of trip, pace, or competition.

[pandy]

Throw a faster pace at her and she comes home faster. Just watch........

Her style is what makes her incredible....Deep closers don't continue winning ways that often because a ton of things have to go right unless you are monstrously the best.
.

I totally agree. As I said in another post, she is actually too far back to win some of these races. In almost every other race where a deep closer overcomes a huge deficit, the pace is fast and things set up for a closer. With Zenyatta, it just doesn't matter, her closing kick is so unbelievable, she may well be the most powerful finisher in the history of the sport. The only other horse that I can think of that could finish like that at a mile and a quarter was Secretariat.

[thaskalos]

Tell yourself that all you want, but who made Zenyatta run slow in her first half or three-quarters? And who made her not run faster in the final 3 furlongs?

You all act as though her early slowness (and possible early and late slowness) is to be excused because, well, she's slow early. A confirmed stretch runner SHOULD be excused for trailing the field for a large part of the race. Her "early slowness" is not a weakness, but a different running style that has served this horse very well so far. We are talking classic distances here...we are not talking about 4.5 furlong races at Charles Town. The best horse has a great chance to show its superiority regardless of running style.

[BluegrassProf]

Pandy, I gots to ask: you throw back a 40 or two before hopping onto this thread, trying your darndest not to vomit up a lil' judgemental luv? :blush:

The Zenyatta/Curlin/Cigar/Maris comments (et al) simply have no other explanation outside deep, deep, shanty-singing, hugs-and-fisticuffs intoxication. None at all.

Good for you, I say! :ThmbUp:


On a more serious note: While anyone with two eyes to see can recognize Zenyatta's obvious, smack-in-the-face talent, I do find the hyperemotional rhetoric surrounding her career to be very similar to the affection that geektastic fanboys tend to lump on Star Wars. "It's the greatest ever because it's AWESOME." OK, great, I get that you heart Star Wars; I simply disagree, for lots of reasons.

There ya go. No one's changing minds. Best to, at very least, watch some other stuff - new movies and old movies alike - for a bit of perspective. ;)

[ghostyapper]

Ghost, it doesn't pay to be too self-assured. I thought Zenyatta was a lock for the Classic, and reminded many people that the Beyers on synth are regularly low so don't be confused by those Beyers. I played her in the Classic, and I got teary-eyed when she won.

But this wasn't a low Beyer on synth. This was a low Beyer because she ran slow.

And of course you were not a member here so we could confirm your "lock opinion" before the bc. How convenient. I know many of the other figure guys on here thought she was too slow. Just ask the dope who's now comparing horses to humans that are trying to break track records. :lol:

And you need to be the one that does not get confused with the poly beyers. The classic was on the same surface she had been earning those low beyers but again magically against better competition she was able to run a career best? Yea that's right keep evaluating her performances with beyers :lol:

[pandy]

Speed figures are an interesting way to compare horses from different generations but who they beat and at what distance is more important. When Zenyatta beat 10 GR1 winners in the classic, at the classic distance of 10 furlongs, that said a lot. The fact that the speed figure was high was a plus. Years ago there was a pacer, Cam Fella, "the pacing machine" that had a win streak of 28 in a row. He was one of the greatest standardbreds of all time, but he was a grinder and he never really impressed with blazing final times. Suddenly a speedball named Its Fritz emerged and many fans and writers thought that Its Fritz, who had brilliant fractions and final times, would beat Cam Fella. So they set up a match race (race is on youtube) at the Meadowlands, Its Fritz unleashed a torrid brush and blew by Cam Fella, appeared to open up an insurmountable lead, but Cam Fella grinded by in the stretch as usual, winning by only as much as was necessary. Cam Fella had that inherent, immense desire to win that all champions seem to have.

[arno]

Pandy

Great analogy!
What I remember most about the match race between Cam Fella and It's Fritz was the crowd. There were at least 20,000 at the Meadowlands on a weekday night. A Monday I believe.

[46zilzal]

The only other horse that I can think of that could finish like that at a mile and a quarter was Secretariat.
RUMBO almost every race when he was right...

[bks]

Steve R:
The denigration of speed expressed in this thread is in a word, bullshit

There are about 10 things wrong with what you wrote earlier, Steve, but I'm content at the moment only to take up the most relevant one to the thread topic. it's instructive for understanding what's wrong with the rest of what you wrote.

In order for your argument to sound reasonable, you have to not-so-subtly change the terms of discussion. See, no one is denigrating speed, only the ideas that a) speed figures in any one race provide an indication of current ability, and b) a horse's last speed figure (or any single speed figure) offers a reliable predictor of near-future performance.

Speed figures don't do either of these things well. Zenyatta's speed figure in the Apple Blossom, assuming she's sound and fit next time, likely means absolutely nothing with respect to how she'll run that time. Or do you want to state unequivocally that Zenyatta's lower figure indicates she's tailing off? Say it if that's what you believe.

I haven't heard anyone say speed isn't valuable, or that a horse can be great without running fast, but that's what you want to make it about. Those are straw men.

Zenyatta has of course run fast and -- you can bet it with me -- will run very fast again in the right circumstances [I'll be sure to let you know when those circumstances crop up before the race].

[Tom]

If we are going to use speed figs as a yardstick, must be that if we don't have figs we don't have class. What were Personnel Ensign's Beyers?

[bisket]

Eaxclty. I still say QR is not superhorse, not great classy horse at all. Lesser horse can throw out fast times and not be classy. Take away the two GP races and QR looks not nearly so super. We have seen super races from horse in the recent years and the horses turn out ot be.....also rans when it counts.

For me, Zenny's calss was the last race, where she got in trouble inside and made a late surge to not get beat., That was class. Afleet Alex, going to his kness and fighting back on. Class. Class is in the heat and the will, not the figs. RA, opening up on the filed inthe Woodwar at the of the stretch. Class. Forgo just getting there to win by a nose. What were his figs? Honest Pleasure gutting it out the last 100 yards to win th eBC. Class.
this is how i see races. speed handicappers think horses are running against the clock, and are color blind if they don't take into consideration what tom has just described. a person who takes CLASS into consideration UNDERSTANDS THAT A CLASSY HORSE IS RUNNING AGAINST OTHER HORSES NOT JUST THE CLOCK!!!!!!!!! most of your early speed type horses (rachel) are running against the clock, and this is why speed handicappers drool all over them. there speed can be measured because if they run this fig early, this is what she will run late. a horse like zenyatta drives speed handicappers up the wall because she doesn't run early at all. so theres no way to measure her ability by the way they look at races. woohoo!! which is why da bisket is relishing every moment of this :lol: zenyatta is ALWAYS running against the other horses and never competing against the clock. the most complete way to look at races is trust speed figs when it comes to early speed, but look at class when it comes to closers and tactical speed types. now when you have a horse like rachel though she has displayed class in races. she has dug down and not allowed horses to pass her in the stretch. so there things that aren't measurable with numbers for her also. yes quality roads class is in question because i've watched horses pass him in the stretch and know he has the ability to withstand the challenge. he's let horse run past him on a few occassions last year that i thought he was better than. pletcher has somehow or another done something with him because last winter i watched him dust a dam good horse in the stretch of the fla derby.

[46zilzal]

ALL horses run against the VARIABLE abilities form cycles and racing luck of the others.

[RXB]

this is how i see races. speed handicappers think horses are running against the clock, and are color blind if they don't take into consideration what tom has just described. a person who takes CLASS into consideration UNDERSTANDS THAT A CLASSY HORSE IS RUNNING AGAINST OTHER HORSES NOT JUST THE CLOCK!!!!!!!!! most of your early speed type horses (rachel) are running against the clock, and this is why speed handicappers drool all over them.

I agree partially, not totally. It's true that you can't entirely measure the strength of a race according to pace and speed figures, that's for sure. But of course, to beat good runners consistently you're going to have to be able run fast final times.

Also, speed/presser horses are not just running against the clock. Often, they are running next to other speed horses and use energy specifically to defeat those opponents.

[bisket]

speed figures are accurate in assessing how fast a race was run. they can't ASSESS THE ABILITIIES OF ALL HORSES THOUGH.

[Hanover1]

It amazes me that we always throw fancy theory and conjecture at a simple observation: Going just fast enough to win consistently is class....With all our dynamics, variables, pace figures, Beyers, ect... we still watch favorites win at about a 33% clip, give or take a few points at any given track, day, but it shakes out the same-Going just fast enough...........

[46zilzal]

It amazes me that we always throw fancy theory and conjecture at a simple observation: Going just fast enough to win consistently is class....With all our dynamics, variables, pace figures, Beyers, ect... we still watch favorites win at about a 33% clip, give or take a few points at any given track, day, but it shakes out the same-Going just fast enough...........
Horseplayers more than any other sports fans, try to complicate everything....Reductionists abound here who cannot see the forest for the trees; A RACE is no more than horse of a variable form cycle, with variable abilities running against one another......It is no more complicated than that

[Hanover1]

Horseplayers more than any other sports fans, try to complicate everything....Reductionists abound here who cannot see the forest for the trees; A RACE is no more than horse of a variable form cycle, with variable abilities running against one another......It is no more complicated than that
I fully understand, and agree with your statement, however it does smack of complications for those of us that cannot understand cycles. (I am aware of them myself, but its just a matter of understanding peak vs losing an edge.)

[5k-claim]

There is probably not more than a small handful of members of this forum who know less about Speed Figures and Class Figures than I do. I would like to say that fact is due entirely to negligence, but even on those occasions when I do try to make use of these figures, I do not usually have much luck.

So with that, I am going to stick with a theory that came to me one evening while watching Neil deGrasse Tyson on PBS 'dumb down' some science to the point where a layman such as myself could say "Huh?", without showing any of the actual algorithms or formulas behind the science that would have me immediately turn to saying "OK. Never mind."

If "dark matter" is that invisible 'something' that comprises the majority of our universe, and whose existence we have to infer because the universe does not behave as those structures that we can see and measure tell us it should, then maybe dark matter (and the even more elusive dark energy) are behind the success of some of these horses. I think that one horse in particular, who never loses, may be attracting some abnormal amount of DME (Dark Matter and Energy) as she enters the stretch that is somehow carrying her through space and time to the front of the field before reaching the wire, regardless of how fast or slow everyone is running. The additional dark matter could be pulling back the front runners and not allowing them to escape too far away from her, and the additional dark energy could be causing her rapid acceleration through the final 1/4.

Of course I am just the layman "idea guy" behind this. I will need to find some genius college kid to do the math, and figure out the whole dark energy thing. Once the kid has it all figured out, I will ask the DRF to squeeze in one more column on the PPs for this new DME Figure.

All of this is thrown out the window if the answer to the question of her success ends up being some Occam's razor variation on the idea that she is just simply a very classy mare. :)

[Hanover1]

There is probably not more than a small handful of members of this forum who know less about Speed Figures and Class Figures than I do. I would like to say that fact is due entirely to negligence, but even on those occasions when I do try to make use of these figures, I do not usually have much luck.

So with that, I am going to stick with a theory that came to me one evening while watching Neil deGrasse Tyson on PBS 'dumb down' some science to the point where a layman such as myself could say "Huh?", without showing any of the actual algorithms or formulas behind the science that would have me immediately turn to saying "OK. Never mind."

If "dark matter" is that invisible 'something' that comprises the majority of our universe, and whose existence we have to infer because the universe does not behave as those structures that we can see and measure tell us it should, then maybe dark matter (and the even more elusive dark energy) are behind the success of some of these horses. I think that one horse in particular, who never loses, may be attracting some abnormal amount of DME (Dark Matter and Energy) as she enters the stretch that is somehow carrying her through space and time to the front of the field before reaching the wire, regardless of how fast or slow everyone is running. The additional dark matter could be pulling back the front runners and not allowing them to escape too far away from her, and the additional dark energy could be causing her rapid acceleration through the final 1/4.

Of course I am just the layman "idea guy" behind this. I will need to find some genius college kid to do the math, and figure out the whole dark energy thing. Once the kid has it all figured out, I will ask the DRF to squeeze in one more column on the PPs for this new DME Figure.

All of this is thrown out the window if the answer to the question of her success ends up being some Occam's razor variation on the idea that she is just simply a very classy mare. :)
I need a drink...............

[Cratos]

Classier horses run faster. Thus, a horse that cannot run fast is certainly lacking in class (whatever that is).

Speed is measurable.

How do you measure "class?" If you cannot measure it, then for all practical purposes it does not exist.

Class is a nonparametric variable and those type variables are never measurable, but are determined. There might be many factors used to determine class, but the 4 most salient factors are (1) distance, (2) weight, (3) pace/speed, and (4) style. In other words class is a function of the other 4 variables. I will add that class is always post race determined.

The late Phil Bull, the creator of Timeform ratings and time figures put together the best methodology in my opinion for the practical application of determining class.

[Robert Goren]

I need a drink...............Make mine a double.......

[born2ride]

There is probably not more than a small handful of members of this forum who know less about Speed Figures and Class Figures than I do. I would like to say that fact is due entirely to negligence, but even on those occasions when I do try to make use of these figures, I do not usually have much luck.

So with that, I am going to stick with a theory that came to me one evening while watching Neil deGrasse Tyson on PBS 'dumb down' some science to the point where a layman such as myself could say "Huh?", without showing any of the actual algorithms or formulas behind the science that would have me immediately turn to saying "OK. Never mind."

If "dark matter" is that invisible 'something' that comprises the majority of our universe, and whose existence we have to infer because the universe does not behave as those structures that we can see and measure tell us it should, then maybe dark matter (and the even more elusive dark energy) are behind the success of some of these horses. I think that one horse in particular, who never loses, may be attracting some abnormal amount of DME (Dark Matter and Energy) as she enters the stretch that is somehow carrying her through space and time to the front of the field before reaching the wire, regardless of how fast or slow everyone is running. The additional dark matter could be pulling back the front runners and not allowing them to escape too far away from her, and the additional dark energy could be causing her rapid acceleration through the final 1/4.

Of course I am just the layman "idea guy" behind this. I will need to find some genius college kid to do the math, and figure out the whole dark energy thing. Once the kid has it all figured out, I will ask the DRF to squeeze in one more column on the PPs for this new DME Figure.

All of this is thrown out the window if the answer to the question of her success ends up being some Occam's razor variation on the idea that she is just simply a very classy mare. :)

Dark energy is like the opposite of gravity - it pulls things apart. If this is acting on Zenyatta, it would not help her accelerate faster to catch the front runners, it would increase the distance between her and the front runners. Dark matter compacts structures, so if this is acting on the front runners, it would not slow them down but condense their structures.

By your theory, we have Zenyatta being pulled backwards from the front runners while the front runners not being pulled or pushed in any direction by the dark matter or dark energy are having their physical bodies compacted. I don't know, but I'd say Zenyatta loses this race.

[Hanover1]

Dark energy is like the opposite of gravity - it pulls things apart. If this is acting on Zenyatta, it would not help her accelerate faster to catch the front runners, it would increase the distance between her and the front runners. Dark matter compacts structures, so if this is acting on the front runners, it would not slow them down but condense their structures.

By your theory, we have Zenyatta being pulled backwards from the front runners while the front runners not being pulled or pushed in any direction by the dark matter or dark energy are having their physical bodies compacted. I don't know, but I'd say Zenyatta loses this race.
I will mix you one as well........

[Show Me the Wire]

Actually she generates a stable worm hole, that is how she gets from last to first so quickly in such a slow time :cool:

[RXB]

I spent most of March betting on horses that needed a stable worm hole... :(

[Pick6]

What was Spectacular Bid's Beyer when he won the Woodward? Competition was about the same as the AB.

[5k-claim]

Dark energy is like the opposite of gravity - it pulls things apart. If this is acting on Zenyatta, it would not help her accelerate faster to catch the front runners, it would increase the distance between her and the front runners. Dark matter compacts structures, so if this is acting on the front runners, it would not slow them down but condense their structures.


That's cool. But I really just wanted something to work into my narrative.

I didn't go out and start spending my Nobel Prize money already... :)

[RXB]

What was Spectacular Bid's Beyer when he won the Woodward? Competition was about the same as the AB.

Yeah, not much difference between General Assembly & Coastal, compared to Just Jenda & War Echo. Good to see that logic continues to reign supreme here.

[ghostyapper]

Yeah, not much difference between General Assembly & Coastal, compared to Just Jenda & War Echo. Good to see that logic continues to reign supreme here.

I suggest you check out the chart for the 1980 woodward. No way was that field deeper/better than the one Z faced in the AB

[RXB]

Uh, Spectacular Bid won the Woodward in 1979, as a 3YO, not as a 4YO in 1980. Capiche?

Whoops, wait, I'm confusing the Woodward with the Marlboro. Silly me. My apologies to both of you.

[bisket]

bid won the woodward in a walkover. no one wanted to race him. seems zen is having similar problems, but not according to many posters on this forum. they're under the delusion that there is a plethora of horses just dying to put her in her place: a polytrack phenomena. it doesn't seem the actual people that own these horses waiting in the wings see things the same way when its time to actually lay it on the line...

[JohnGalt1]

Class dominates the races, the class horse finds its stride provided its condition is par with its good races. The class horse overcomes problems that occur during the race where less class runners have "the excuse", and I believe the heart which can be measured in pounds and a very noticeable interest that can be seen by all who care to notice.


To add to this--

A horse is of a class when running competitively against a class. Example finishing in the money consistantly at a certain level, but not running well at one or two levels above.

But I use class as one third of the equation. Pace/speed and form are equally important.

So to answer the initial question--Not speed OR class, but both.

[PhantomOnTour]

All I know is that the higher class horses on the grounds run the fastest times.

[46zilzal]

What was Spectacular Bid's Beyer when he won the Woodward? Competition was about the same as the AB.
Strangely his walk over was interesting in 2:02 2/5.

[Charlie D]

Without speed there is little ability and if there is little ability then there is no Graded purses coming your way.

[Hanover1]

bid won the woodward in a walkover. no one wanted to race him. seems zen is having similar problems, but not according to many posters on this forum. they're under the delusion that there is a plethora of horses just dying to put her in her place: a polytrack phenomena. it doesn't seem the actual people that own these horses waiting in the wings see things the same way when its time to actually lay it on the line...
Nobody wants any part of this mare. IMO, RA has a huge target on her back now, as bragging rights to defeat the reigning HOY seem more plausible than trying to outrun Zen at this time......

[Pick6]

Speed is winning a cheap 6F race in 1:09 flat, 5th race on the card.

Class is winning a stakes race at 6F in 1:09 flat, 8th race on the same card.

[Fager Fan]

Speed is winning a cheap 6F race in 1:09 flat, 5th race on the card.

Class is winning a stakes race at 6F in 1:09 flat, 8th race on the same card.

Gotta love how some of you really think the two don't go hand in hand. Anything to make an excuse for a mare who didn't need you to make one, I guess.

[chickenhead]

Class and speed don't have anything to do with one another, the way I define them.

You get together a group of relatively evenly matched horses, the one that has the knack for winning the close ones is the classy one. There are classy claimers and classy stakes horses. A lot of those classy claimers might have been classy low level stakes horses at one time -- they might lose a lot of their speed, but they keep that class.

Hangers, horses that don't like to win, horses that find excuses to lose, they lack class. There are lots of unclassy claimers and lots of unclassy stakes horses. They love getting beat half a length. They might be quite talented, they're just lacking that intangible bit.

In human sports terms its not much different, there are winners and those that seem to find ways to lose, and the winners aren't always the most gifted or talented.

Not to anthropomorphize, but like humans, it probably has something more to do with mental makeup than with physical talents.

[cj]

Speed is winning a cheap 6F race in 1:09 flat, 5th race on the card.

Class is winning a stakes race at 6F in 1:09 flat, 8th race on the same card.

When is the last time that has happened? Have an example?

[Pick6]

When is the last time that has happened? Have an example?
When I frequented the track this stuff happened fairly frequently.

That's why handicapping on times is futile. I always want to know the last 1/8 or 1/4 to find who is the class of the field.

[Pick6]

Gotta love how some of you really think the two don't go hand in hand. Anything to make an excuse for a mare who didn't need you to make one, I guess.
Excuse? How do you deduce that? Just a simple statement on how handicapping on final times is not really that smart.

[Charlie D]

As CJ states Pick 6 post some examples or give us dates so we can check out the Charts.

[Pick6]

As CJ states Pick 6 post some examples or give us dates so we can check out the Charts.
Right.

[Charlie D]

Pick 6

You can start by giving us details when and where this took place

Speed is winning a cheap 6F race in 1:09 flat, 5th race on the card.

Class is winning a stakes race at 6F in 1:09 flat, 8th race on the same card.

[Deepsix]

Here's the Bris discussion concerning "class"..... you may have a different definition~

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=classrate

[Charlie D]

I stopped reading when i reached


Final Time is NOT a factor used in calculating the ratings.

[Pick6]

Pick 6

You can start by giving us details when and where this took place
I gave up going frequently years ago. Many years ago. I would see a 25k claimer winning for fun in 1:09 and the feature race, either 6f or 6.5f winner around 1:09 too.

I don't think it's changed all that much. I just checked SA charts 4/11, 7th race $8k starter allowance running 1:08. I'm certain the wax was playing a little fast that day, but not that much.

[PhantomOnTour]

Speed is winning a cheap 6F race in 1:09 flat, 5th race on the card.

Class is winning a stakes race at 6F in 1:09 flat, 8th race on the same card.
Need to put the winner of that cheap Clm in R5 on my Horses To Watch list. He went as fast a Stks horses on the same card.

[Pick6]

I stopped reading when i reached
IMO final times are overrated. I will almost always prefer the horse with the best final 1/4 over the horse with the fastest time over the distance, assuming reasonable pace characteristics.

[Pick6]

Need to put the winner of that cheap Clm in R5 on my Horses To Watch list. He went as fast a Stks horses on the same card.
Nobody else ran 6f that day. And it was a starter alw. There was a 7f race $40K 3YO filles 1:10.1 split, so the track was certainly playing fast.

IIRC many years ago a claimer missed the 6f track record at SA by 2/5, and a decent field later that day actually ran slower. Of course this was years ago. But it just illustrated that final time can be quite misleading.

[Ejmenz]

I'm more impressed when a horse defeats a proven star, then when a horse turns in a super time.

Zenyatta pounding Ginger Punch in last years AB was more impressive then any fast time she could have produced throughout that year.

Bid was faster then Affirmed, but IMO Affirmed was a better horse.

Affirmed beat Alydar again and again, he won a triple crown and he beat Bid.

Bid ran very fast times and beat Coastal.

To answer your question, Bid was faster, Affirmed more classy.

Class Wins.

[Pick6]

Not saying Zenyatta is as good as Affirmed, but the comparison is reasonable.

I will never forget how Affirmed won the Jim Dandy. Looking done 4 lengths back with 1/16 to the finish, Affirmed won (over Sensitive Prince) by a neck.

Sometimes Affirmed won by daylight, but most of the time he would win by "enough".

Buckpasser was before my time, but I understand he won that way often as well.

[Charlie D]

Pick 6

The SA 7th seems out of synch with the 5.5f and 7f races run that day. It also seems out of synch with the 6f races run the day before.

Seems a very odd final time imho.

[Pick6]

Pick 6

The SA 7th seems out of synch with the 5.5f and 7f races run that day. It also seems out of synch with the 6f races run the day before.

Seems a very odd final time imho.
Guess that sums up my point. Putting a lot of weight into final times is probably not the smartest thing to do when 'capping. And that was the first day I picked at random.

[RXB]

Bid was faster then Affirmed, but IMO Affirmed was a better horse.

Affirmed beat Alydar again and again, he won a triple crown and he beat Bid.

Bid ran very fast times and beat Coastal.

To answer your question, Bid was faster, Affirmed more classy.

Class Wins.

Affirmed was a 4YO when he beat 3YO Spectacular Bid by a mere 3/4 length. Spectacular Bid improved significantly in the following months, as evidenced by his superb 4YO campaign.

[Charlie D]

Guess that sums up my point. Putting a lot of weight into final times is probably not the smartest thing to do when 'capping. And that was the first day I picked at random.

These things are not the morm are they and being that way, are a red flag for anyone with a bit of experience.

[Pick6]

Affirmed was a 4YO when he beat 3YO Spectacular Bid by a mere 3/4 length. Spectacular Bid improved significantly in the following months, as evidenced by his superb 4YO campaign.
Ah, the Affirmed/Bid debate surfaces again.

Bid's 4YO campaign was perfect, but I believe it's safe to assime he could have done basically the same thing with his ability in late '79. He won the Marlboro for fun in open company running 1:46 3/5 prior to his JCGC 2nd place finish.

IMO 1 1/2 miles was a bit long for Bid. I still give the nod to Affirmed at that distance. 1 1/4 miles, Bid draws closer, tough to split the two at that distance.

[Pick6]

These things are not the morm are they and being that way, are a red flag for anyone with a bit of experience.


And please don't try and bullshit me as i do know figures derived from final time are used by a few Professional punters in UK, they are also used by most major bookmakers too.
You asked for a race, the first day I picked at random and I showed it to you. You call it "not the norm" which validates my point that final times are not always a reliable indicator of future performance. I don't throw out final times, but is just a part of the handicapping process.

I don't care who you know.

[RXB]

In fact, horses tend to improve by a couple of lengths from fall of their 3YO season to spring of their 4YO season. Ask Ferdinand's connections if Alysheba improved between the '87 Breeders Cup and the '88 Santa Anita meet.

Spectacular Bid definitely made a significant move forward from his 3YO autumn form.

[Charlie D]

You asked for a race, the first day I picked at random and I showed it to you. You call it "not the norm" which validates my point that final times are not always a reliable indicator of future performance. I don't throw out final times, but is just a part of the handicapping process.

I don't care who you know.



You picked once race from the many run everyday and this validates your point.

Please stop talking like an idiot.



I'm still waiting for you to post the race details of you 1.09 races btw.

[Pick6]

The only thing that got Alysheba beat in the BC Classic was McCarron. He was on the best horse.

Not all horses improve with age. I think by fall of 79 Bid was a very, very good horse, and could have done all the things he did at 4 with that same ability. His 79 Marlboro may have been his most impressive race ever. He may ave improved a length or so from 3 to 4. But that does not mean he beats Affirmed at 1 1/2 miles. That distance was not Bid's cup of tea.

[Pick6]

You picked once race from the many run everyday and this validates your point.

please stop talking like an idiot.



I'm still waiting for you to post the race details of you 1.09 races.
No, I picked the only 6f race run on the first day I picked at random.

Final times can be deceiving. Simple. You already admitted to such.

And I already told you about me providing you charts from 20 years ago. Maybe if you kept records of this so well you'd be able to find this out yourself.

[Charlie D]

When I frequented the track this stuff happened fairly frequently.

That's why handicapping on times is futile. I always want to know the last 1/8 or 1/4 to find who is the class of the field.




Look at this statement, you seem to be telling us times are futile and then using them to "determine class of field"

Are you confused???

[Pick6]

Look at this statement, you seem to be telling us times are futile and then using them to "determine class of field"

Are you confused???
FINAL TIMES.

Repeat:

FINAL TIMES.

Not:

FINAL 1/4 TIMES.

[Pick6]

I picked another day at random: April 10, SA.
First race: chepaest horses on the grounds run 1:09.
Seventh race: 4YO-up NW2 conditioned horses run 1:08 1/5 split in 6.5F race.

Only 4 lengths separating the 2? I think not.

[Charlie D]

FINAL TIMES.

Repeat:

FINAL TIMES.

Not:

FINAL 1/4 TIMES.

How do you come up with thefinal quarter times please??

[Pick6]

How do you come up with thefinal quarter times please??
You can do better than that.

[Charlie D]

Answer the question

How do you come up with final quarter times.

[Pick6]

Answer the question

How do you come up with final quarter times.
lol

[Charlie D]

Looks like we have another PA poster unable to provide an answer to a simple question.

[Charlie D]

I picked another day at random: April 10, SA.
First race: chepaest horses on the grounds run 1:09.
Seventh race: 4YO-up NW2 conditioned horses run 1:08 1/5 split in 6.5F race.

Only 4 lengths separating the 2? I think not.


Only 4 lengths :)


For gawd sake bud are you for real, that is a massive advantage in a sprint

[thaskalos]

Guess that sums up my point. Putting a lot of weight into final times is probably not the smartest thing to do when 'capping. And that was the first day I picked at random. You are right. Relying on final times may not be the smartest thing to do. Do you have any better advice for us? I mean...we have to separate these horses somehow!! Do you think relying on last quarter times will do it??

[WinterTriangle]

The true goal is to win the race, not to run the fastest final time.

Seems like many here are obsessed with stopwatches and speed figures.

Then, you see topics where we are wondering why there are hardly any true classic distance races written on US tracks. And I want to laugh...or cry.

Pretty soon our thoroughbreds will evolve into glorified .......quarterhorses. Become throw a way commodities...breed for early precociousness and speed, drug 'em, race them early, make quick $$, cripple early......and start again with another. And make sure we have jockeys who whip mercilessly in the stretch so they can win by 20 lengths, when 1 length will do. And, make sure fans blame the track surface, instead of breeding and training practices, for breakdowns.:bang:

Slow and winning every race is preferable to crippled or euthanized. If Zen had gone to a speedball trainer she'd be in the latter category, and certainly not racing at 6 years old.

I'm so grateful to her connections, her trainer, and her jockey, who are obviously unwilling to "use her up" for no purpose but pleasure of those who are looking for a high beyer number and track records.

[Fager Fan]

You asked for a race, the first day I picked at random and I showed it to you. You call it "not the norm" which validates my point that final times are not always a reliable indicator of future performance. I don't throw out final times, but is just a part of the handicapping process.

I don't care who you know.

You didn't give an example of what you first said -- claimers going equal to or faster than stakes horses on the same card.

[Charlie D]

Slow and winning every race is preferable to crippled or euthanized. If Zen had gone to a speedball trainer she'd be in the latter category, and certainly not racing at 6 years old.




SLOW horses DO NOT win races like the Classic or the Arc or the Japan Cup etc etc, the slow horses are the also rans.


Why people are having trouble understanding this is a tad :confused: tbh.

[Gorgeous George]

Seems like many here are obsessed with stopwatches and speed figures.

Then, you see topics where we are wondering why there are hardly any true classic distance races written on US tracks. And I want to laugh...or cry.

Pretty soon our thoroughbreds will evolve into glorified .......quarterhorses. Become throw a way commodities...breed for early precociousness and speed, drug 'em, race them early, make quick $$, cripple early......and start again with another. And make sure we have jockeys who whip mercilessly in the stretch so they can win by 20 lengths, when 1 length will do. And, make sure fans blame the track surface, instead of breeding and training practices, for breakdowns.:bang:

Slow and winning every race is preferable to crippled or euthanized. If Zen had gone to a speedball trainer she'd be in the latter category, and certainly not racing at 6 years old.

I'm so grateful to her connections, her trainer, and her jockey, who are obviously unwilling to "use her up" for no purpose but pleasure of those who are looking for a high beyer number and track records.
i couldnt agree more, it was a pleasure to read the above

[Charlie D]

Sea the Stars 134 - FAST horse
Zarkava 131 - FAST horse
Zenyatta 131 - FAST horse
Rachel 131 - FAST horse
Quality Road - 131 FAST horse
Curlin 131 - FAST horse
Ravens Pass 131 - FAST horse



The SLOW horses run 100, 80, 70, 60 etc etc.


:bang:

[Tom]

Speed is relative.
Two guys were coming down a mountain trail in Alaska, when they spotted a huge grizzly coming up the trail. There was no way around him.

One guy sits down, opens his pack and start to put on his sneakers.
"You must be crazy," says the other guy. "You can't outrun a grizzly!"
"I don't have outrun the grizzly." he says. "I only have to outrun you."

[Gorgeous George]

I remember after the Arc last year reading some of the views by trainers and fans of different horses. The same excuse always came up 'he/she was over the top', 'they have had a hard/long season'. People tried to smudge Sea The Star's reputation by saying 'he never hammered a field'. Sea The Stars only ever done what was required, his jockey Kinane never used his whip to win by more lengths, why would he? The fact that he never asked a serious question of Sea The Stars in all his races is frightening and that annoys people because they wanted to know how good he is. This protection meant that Sea The Stars was able to win 6 grade 1's in 6 months.

[Charlie D]

Speed is relative.
Two guys were coming down a mountain trail in Alaska, when they spotted a huge grizzly coming up the trail. There was no way around him.

One guy sits down, opens his pack and start to put on his sneakers.
"You must be crazy," says the other guy. "You can't outrun a grizzly!"
"I don't have outrun the grizzly." he says. "I only have to outrun you."



:D

[classhandicapper]

Quality Road winning his last race. He did it rather easily, did he not? His competition was rather poor, was it not?

Yet, he ran a very fast time nonetheless...running easily...against overmatched foes...

Interesting.

There is the subtle difference I have been trying to explain to those that are blinded by numbers alone and those that don't believe that CLASS is a relevant alternative measure of ability WHEN FIGURES tend to BREAK DOWN.

Leaving aside the enormous accuracy issues associated with figures of any type, the most basic pace formula is:

The faster you go early, the faster your final time will be until you reach your breaking point. Then the faster you go early, the slower your final time will be because you will be exhausted.

That's the most basic way of expressing it.

The thing that makes the analysis difficult is that every horse has a different level of speed, stamina, racing reserve, running style and general ability etc...

They all have different breaking points!!!

So the same set of fractions will impact different horses (even within the same race) differently and you can't always tell beforehand how (especially with lightly raced and/or undefeated or close horses).

Now specific to closers like Zenyatta vs. speed horses like QR and RA.

Some superior speed horses will go out and set or force a lively pace while racing well within themselves automatically. When they do that, they tend to torch their inferior opposition, win by a huge margin, and go on to record a very fast final time. Since they tend to maximize their final time on their own, when they eventually face much tougher competition, their speed figures tend to decline because they get pushed outside that comfort zone achieved against very inferior competition.

Closers cannot do that. Their final time is dependent on the pace being set in front of them. A truly superior closer CANNOT run its best final time unless it gets an optimal pace in front of it to do so because they tend to just drop back in the field and time their moves in a similar way regardless of what's going on in front of them.

That is why a horse like Zenyatta will put up mid 90s Beyer figures in slow paced races against weak competition, but put up 108s and 112s when there are good horses in front of her. Those good horses are giving her a better pace setup to run a faster time and she has the reserves to take advantage of it because she's a monster.

Now I have to stress, closers also have limitations. If they are trying to get into contention against superior horses running fast up front, they will also torch themselves, hang badly, and run a slower final time. That just hasn't happened to Zenyatta yet. We still don't know where her bottom is.

The key is you don't know where a horse's bottom is until it moves into a race where the quality of competition reveals it. That usually happens quickly, but not always immediately.

On to class.....

When you consider the inevitable inaccuracies of pace figures, final time figures, formulas that try to combine them etc... and the unknown levels of ability that lightly raced and near undefeated horses often posses that haven't been revealed yet, you can see why it's easy to be lead astray by a single or even several fast or slow figures.

What Class handicapping is trying to do is overcome some of the accuracy issues with subjective and objective evaluations of the horses within a race based upon their performances at various class levels, the relative trips of the horses within the same race, and the overall record of the horse etc...

Classing has it own set of accuracy issues.

However, the weaknesses of class handicapping tend to be the strengths of numbers and the weaknesses of numbers tend to be the strengths of class handicapping!

That's why they compliment and strengthen each other if you have a good set of speed and pace figures, are a good class handicapper, and know where the strengths of each should be applied.

These days though, it's tougher to be a good class handicapper because it takes some extra work and knowledge while good pace and speed figures can be purchased.

[cj]

I don't think it's changed all that much. I just checked SA charts 4/11, 7th race $8k starter allowance running 1:08. I'm certain the wax was playing a little fast that day, but not that much.


Where is the stakes horse that ran about the same time that day? That is the example I asked for, a cheap claimer and a stakes horse running about the same time. It rarely ever happens, and when it does, it usually is a good indication that the claimer is very good or the stakes horse stinks.

You make it seem like an every day occurrence. It might happen a few times a year around the country.

[Ejmenz]

"Affirmed was a 4YO when he beat 3YO Spectacular Bid by a mere 3/4 length. Spectacular Bid improved significantly in the following months, as evidenced by his superb 4YO campaign".


I understand the 3yo vs 4yo argument.

It didn't help Riva Ridge, and it does not change the fact that Bid lost when the competition got stiff.

The Belmont and the Affirmed loses count a lot more IMO then Bid's times.

Bid was Dan Marino, Affirmed Joe Montana. Records vs Rings.

Spectacular Bid was the 2nd most talented horse I've ever seen, and the 4th best race horse I ever saw, he was supremely spectacular.

But they race to win, not to break records and there are three horses since 1970 who were better then him.

Those 4 horses hooked me on horse racing, I'll never see anything like it again.

[bisket]

bid improved from about the time he went to santa anita in the winter through the end of his 4 year old season. he held and still holds the 7 fur track record for dirt at santa anita. he was a sight to see during that period of time. i give bid a mulligan in his race against affirmed; he was still a pup.

[RXB]

"Affirmed was a 4YO when he beat 3YO Spectacular Bid by a mere 3/4 length. Spectacular Bid improved significantly in the following months, as evidenced by his superb 4YO campaign".

I understand the 3yo vs 4yo argument.

It didn't help Riva Ridge, and it does not change the fact that Bid lost when the competition got stiff.


Riva Ridge was nowhere near the class of Secretariat, or Bid/Affirmed for that matter, so that argument rings hollow.

How did 3YO Affirmed fare vs. 4YO Seattle Slew? Are you going to downgrade him because he "lost when the competition got stiff"?? (Not once, but twice.) When a great 3YO runs into a great 4YO, it doesn't usually turn out well for the 3YO.

[46zilzal]

If the pace scenario is correct, champs will get beat like Quiet Little Table nabbed Forego at Saratoga. Jim Dandy, Dark Star, Volponi, Arcangues, Concern etc etc.


The pace can defeat class as it has done historically.

[Hank]

Classier horses run faster. Thus, a horse that cannot run fast is certainly lacking in class (whatever that is).

Speed is measurable.

How do you measure "class?" If you cannot measure it, then for all practical purposes it does not exist.

Subtitute "courage" for "class". Can courage be measured?No, but I would submit that evidence of it's existence or lack there of is easy to discern.

[Dave Schwartz]

Without measurement how do you know how much of it to apply?

[Hank]

Without measurement how do you know how much of it to apply?

In terms of a weighted factor, I have no clue,however in assessing pace and outcome scenarios it can be subjectively factored in to help decide if an animal would be likely to survive a particular pace or stretch duel.

[Dave Schwartz]

This is called "anecdotal handicapping." IMHO, it is like "handicapping by rumor."

Of course, you have no idea whether or not your definition of "class" actually works or not. For all you know it may be costing you many dollars per year.

You have no way of measuring its impact on your handicapping.


I stand by my original statement: If you cannot measure it it has no value.

[bisket]

there are many things that can't be "measured". they have value if you know how to use them. just like all the things that can be measured also are worthless if they aren't analysed properly.

[Greyfox]

there are many things that can't be "measured". they have value if you know how to use them. just like all the things that can be measured also are worthless if they aren't analysed properly.

This is shaping up like the debate as to whether or not we can assign value to figure skating performances or diving at the Olympics with any reliability.

Dave is in the Thorndike camp:
"If something exists, it exists in some amount and can be measured."

The problem with "Class" is you know it when you see it at the track.
But quantifying it isn't easy. You could of course experiment with earnings per start if the horse has been competing in North America. That's an indirect objective measure.

[GaryG]

With the advent of speed/pace figures and computers handicapping has become much more numbers oriented than it was in the past. I have a program that assigns performance ratings on the basis of who beat whom and by how much. Does not consider speed or pace. They are reliable in some cases but certainly not in all. They do give an idea of where a horse fits. I use these numbers in conjunction with Quirin-style figs. You don't add them together or anything, just "look at them". Subjective, of course, but the approach suits my style.

[Fager Fan]

From Crist's blog:

Let's start with the Apple Blossom. Zenyatta's raw time of 1:50.71 can't be compared to previous runnings (which were at a mile and a sixteenth), but her figure of 95 was the lowest in 21 years of recorded Beyers for the race and far below what other past and future Hall of Famers such as Bayakoa (119), Paseana (114) and Azeri (112) earned in victory. Zenyatta herself earned a 104 winning the 2008 edition of the race.

[Hank]

This is called "anecdotal handicapping." IMHO, it is like "handicapping by rumor."

Of course, you have no idea whether or not your definition of "class" actually works or not. For all you know it may be costing you many dollars per year.

You have no way of measuring its impact on your handicapping.


I stand by my original statement: If you cannot measure it it has no value.

Given the red numbers on my ledger your probable right.;) In terms of measurable handicapping utility you are right of course,I was disputing the assertion that because something "can't be measured it does not exist"

[ghostyapper]

From Crist's blog:

Let's start with the Apple Blossom. Zenyatta's raw time of 1:50.71 can't be compared to previous runnings (which were at a mile and a sixteenth), but her figure of 95 was the lowest in 21 years of recorded Beyers for the race and far below what other past and future Hall of Famers such as Bayakoa (119), Paseana (114) and Azeri (112) earned in victory. Zenyatta herself earned a 104 winning the 2008 edition of the race.

Also from Crist's blog (the lost episode)

Obviously Zenyatta is capable of running faster (her previous 11 Beyers were all bigger, including two 108's and a 112 in the BC Classic.) As a deep closer who is ridden positionally (i.e. drop back to last regardless of the fractions), she is going to run weak final-time figures sometimes, especially when the pace is slow and the competition can be disdainfully dispatched with a single furlong of top effort.

[thaskalos]

Also from Crist's blog (the lost episode)

Obviously Zenyatta is capable of running faster (her previous 11 Beyers were all bigger, including two 108's and a 112 in the BC Classic.) As a deep closer who is ridden positionally (i.e. drop back to last regardless of the fractions), she is going to run weak final-time figures sometimes, especially when the pace is slow and the competition can be disdainfully dispatched with a single furlong of top effort. I wonder why Fager Fan omitted that part...

[Fager Fan]

I wonder why Fager Fan omitted that part...

Oh, because we all know that part? What we didn't know was the part I posted.

Here's the problem for Zenyatta. We know she can run faster than she did this past race, but can she run faster than a 112? Can she run faster than a 108 on dirt?

Can she put up the number that it might take to beat these 4 and whomever else makes a good showing this year?

Quality Road GP 06 Feb 1 1/8M 121
Understatement AQU 16 Jan 1 1/16M 115
Battle Plan GP 18 Feb 1 1/8M 109
Eskendereya AQU 03 Apr 1 1/8M 109

It's all conjecture, people, until she does it, which is why some of us remain firmly on the fence about how good she really is.

[Dave Schwartz]

hank,

You are right, of course.

Personally my struggle is with "form." Reducing it to a number or even a 1-2-3 rating: improve, stay the same, decline - it is very difficult.

Doesn't seem to stop me from working on it. :bang:


Dave

[thaskalos]

Oh, because we all know that part? What we didn't know was the part I posted.

Here's the problem for Zenyatta. We know she can run faster than she did this past race, but can she run faster than a 112? Can she run faster than a 108 on dirt?

Can she put up the number that it might take to beat these 4 and whomever else makes a good showing this year?

Quality Road GP 06 Feb 1 1/8M 121
Understatement AQU 16 Jan 1 1/16M 115
Battle Plan GP 18 Feb 1 1/8M 109
Eskendereya AQU 03 Apr 1 1/8M 109

It's all conjecture, people, until she does it, which is why some of us remain firmly on the fence about how good she really is. I submit that as long as a horse remains unbeaten, it deserves the benefit of the doubt. IMO, you cannot determine how good a horse is until it loses a race. You cannot measure heart with speed figures!!

[ghostyapper]

Oh, because we all know that part? What we didn't know was the part I posted.

Here's the problem for Zenyatta. We know she can run faster than she did this past race, but can she run faster than a 112? Can she run faster than a 108 on dirt?

Can she put up the number that it might take to beat these 4 and whomever else makes a good showing this year?

Quality Road GP 06 Feb 1 1/8M 121
Understatement AQU 16 Jan 1 1/16M 115
Battle Plan GP 18 Feb 1 1/8M 109
Eskendereya AQU 03 Apr 1 1/8M 109

It's all conjecture, people, until she does it, which is why some of us remain firmly on the fence about how good she really is.

Wow did you really just list understatement as a possible foe or that there is question who would win?

That right there tells you all you need to know about speed figures and those who BLINDLY follow them.

[LottaKash]

hank,

You are right, of course.

Personally my struggle is with "form." Reducing it to a number or even a 1-2-3 rating: improve, stay the same, decline - it is very difficult.

Doesn't seem to stop me from working on it. :bang:


Dave


Ah Dave, the "endless enigma"....:cool:

best,

[Dave Schwartz]

Ah Dave, the "endless enigma"

Kash,

Me or Form?

<G>

Dave

[LottaKash]

Kash,

Me or Form?

<G>

Dave

Dave, 50/50, me thinks....:cool:

You and Mark Cramer, still searching for the "Automatic" eh ?...:jump:

best,

[Dave Schwartz]

I have the "automatic." I just need to make it work. <G>

[Ejmenz]

Riva Ridge was nowhere near the class of Secretariat, or Bid/Affirmed for that matter, so that argument rings hollow.

How did 3YO Affirmed fare vs. 4YO Seattle Slew? Are you going to downgrade him because he "lost when the competition got stiff"?? (Not once, but twice.) When a great 3YO runs into a great 4YO, it doesn't usually turn out well for the 3YO.

The Riva Ridge argument may ring hollow, but it's more because of Secretariats brilliance then Ridge's lack of class, if memory serves only a muddy track kept Ridge from winning a TC. (my memory is slipping)

I would never downgrade Affirmed for losing to Slew twice, but I'll always consider Slew the better horse.

I would say the exact same thing for Bid, it's no disgrace to lose to Affirmed but I could never consider him a better horse then Affirmed.

To do that I'd have to look past the results of their match up, and I'd have to make an excuse for Bid not winning the TC while Affirmed performed when it mattered most.

Horses who had a chance to win a Triple Crown, and beat a TC champion.

Slew was 3-0 in those situations, Affirmed 1-2, Riva Ridge 0-2, Bid 0-2

Damn Slew was GREAT!!!!

[Greyfox]

I have the "automatic." I just need to make it work. <G>
An "automatic" that doesn't work....isn't "automatic."
Let's not BS the troops here.

[statik27]

Oh, because we all know that part? What we didn't know was the part I posted.

Here's the problem for Zenyatta. We know she can run faster than she did this past race, but can she run faster than a 112? Can she run faster than a 108 on dirt?

Can she put up the number that it might take to beat these 4 and whomever else makes a good showing this year?

Quality Road GP 06 Feb 1 1/8M 121
Understatement AQU 16 Jan 1 1/16M 115
Battle Plan GP 18 Feb 1 1/8M 109
Eskendereya AQU 03 Apr 1 1/8M 109

It's all conjecture, people, until she does it, which is why some of us remain firmly on the fence about how good she really is.

A racehorses job is to win, not post huge numbers. Its seems sometimes people forget that fact.

[Hanover1]

A racehorses job is to win, not post huge numbers. Its seems sometimes people forget that fact.
:ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Fager Fan]

A racehorses job is to win, not post huge numbers. Its seems sometimes people forget that fact.

Zenyatta isn't just any racehorse. She's a great who is being touted by some as the greatest filly or mare this country's seen. Now, in every case I can think of except this one, that has meant being extraordinarily fast. Some of us are just trying to reconcile these two seemingly contradictory facts about Zenyatta.

[thaskalos]

Zenyatta isn't just any racehorse. She's a great who is being touted by some as the greatest filly or mare this country's seen. Now, in every case I can think of except this one, that has meant being extraordinarily fast. Some of us are just trying to reconcile these two seemingly contradictory facts about Zenyatta. I have never seen an undefeated horse held up to this kind of criticism. If Zenyatta finishes the year undefeated and wins a second BC Classic, will you still judge her by the speed figures she posts?

[statik27]

Zenyatta isn't just any racehorse. She's a great who is being touted by some as the greatest filly or mare this country's seen. Now, in every case I can think of except this one, that has meant being extraordinarily fast. Some of us are just trying to reconcile these two seemingly contradictory facts about Zenyatta.

Don't know what to tell you fager. You know lots of things have been said on multiple threads that I agree with and don't agree with as far as this mare is concerned. Truth be told, I don't think she's the greatest mare ever, heavy old school hitters like Galorette and twilight tear make more sense I suppose. But this mare Zenyatta seems to be cut from a different cloth then most and honestly I couldn't tell you what it is, but I know you won't find it in the speed figures, thats just not the kind of horse she is.

Myself, I'm a trip handicapper, which means I watch a ton of races, hours of them every week. Time and time again you see horses compromised by the great equilizer, pace. Yet this mare seems to treat it with distain. The 5/16's pole to the wire is her home turf and no one in this game runs it like she does. I can't even name a deep closer ever thats been as dominate as she is. So like I said, I don't know what to tell you, she's just great, whether that means ever or not.

[thaskalos]

Don't know what to tell you fager. You know lots of things have been said on multiple threads that I agree with and don't agree with as far as this mare is concerned. Truth be told, I don't think she's the greatest mare ever, heavy old school hitters like Galorette and twilight tear make more sense I suppose. But this mare Zenyatta seems to be cut from a different cloth then most and honestly I couldn't tell you what it is, but I know you won't find it in the speed figures, thats just not the kind of horse she is.

Myself, I'm a trip handicapper, which means I watch a ton of races, hours of them every week. Time and time again you see horses compromised by the great equilizer, pace. Yet this mare seems to treat it with distain. The 5/16's pole to the wire is her home turf and no one in this game runs it like she does. I can't even name a deep closer ever thats been as dominate as she is. So like I said, I don't know what to tell you, she's just great, whether that means ever or not. Very well said...

[Dave Schwartz]

An "automatic" that doesn't work....isn't "automatic."
Let's not BS the troops here.

Foxie, I knew that of course.

Actually, it does work... it just does not work as well as I need it to.

That is, I need it to play about 3 horses per race, in almost every race, at almost every track, in almost every pool, and come within 1% of even. I am currently at 2.5%.


Dave

[FenceBored]

I have never seen an undefeated horse held up to this kind of criticism. If Zenyatta finishes the year undefeated and wins a second BC Classic, will you still judge her by the speed figures she posts?

You don't remember Peppers Pride? Just as speed figures don't tell the whole story an undefeated record doesn't tell the whole story either.

How do you compare a horse who goes undefeated against a bad crop and a horse who loses occasionally but is part of a strong crop? Race record alone would say the weak crop horse is better, but that's not necessarily so. Might be, might not be.

[Robert Goren]

You don't remember Peppers Pride? Just as speed figures don't tell the whole story an undefeated record doesn't tell the whole story either.

How do you compare a horse who goes undefeated against a bad crop and a horse who loses occasionally but is part of a strong crop? Race record alone would say the weak crop horse is better, but that's not necessarily so. Might be, might not be.Who decide if a crop is weak or strong? How do they decide?

[thaskalos]

You don't remember Peppers Pride? Just as speed figures don't tell the whole story an undefeated record doesn't tell the whole story either.

How do you compare a horse who goes undefeated against a bad crop and a horse who loses occasionally but is part of a strong crop? Race record alone would say the weak crop horse is better, but that's not necessarily so. Might be, might not be. How do you compare a horse that ran exclusively against Mew Mexico bred horses, and never ventured over more than a mile in distance, to a horse like Zenyatta, who has run exclusively in grade 1 stakes? Ok, let's say that Zenyatta is the undefeated horse that has beaten a bad crop. Who is the horse that loses only "occasionally but is part of a strong crop" in your example?

[thaskalos]

Foxie, I knew that of course.

Actually, it does work... it just does not work as well as I need it to.

That is, I need it to play about 3 horses per race, in almost every race, at almost every track, in almost every pool, and come within 1% of even. I am currently at 2.5%.


Dave What if it became a little more selective...would its results improve?

[FenceBored]

Who decide if a crop is weak or strong? How do they decide?

Times/speed figures?

Who talks a lot about the fillies Ruffian beat? Nobody. Everybody talks about her undefeated race record and her stakes record setting times. But, it's the times which validate her race record in the absence of talk about her opponents. If you're breaking records what difference does it make who's on the track with you?

[classhandicapper]

Also from Crist's blog (the lost episode)

Obviously Zenyatta is capable of running faster (her previous 11 Beyers were all bigger, including two 108's and a 112 in the BC Classic.) As a deep closer who is ridden positionally (i.e. drop back to last regardless of the fractions), she is going to run weak final-time figures sometimes, especially when the pace is slow and the competition can be disdainfully dispatched with a single furlong of top effort.

That's a much more concise way of saying the same things I said earlier.

[nearco]

Is Red Giant the best middle distance turf horse horse ever? Is he in the top 10?

[FenceBored]

How do you compare a horse that ran exclusively against Mew Mexico bred horses, and never ventured over more than a mile in distance, to a horse like Zenyatta, who has run exclusively in grade 1 stakes?


Who says I'm comparing them as horses? You said you've "never seen an undefeated horse held up to this kind of criticism." Well, you're doing it yourself in dissing Pepper's Pride. Apparantly, you don't think an undefeated record by itself is the mark of all-time greatness. So, we agree on that.

Ok, let's say that Zenyatta is the undefeated horse that has beaten a bad crop. Who is the horse that loses only "occasionally but is part of a strong crop" in your example?

I was thinking of Bold Ruler and the 1957 three year old males (Round Table, Gen. Duke, Gallant Man, Federal Hill) when I wrote the second part of that, but I wasn't thinking of any horse in particular for the first half.

[Dave Schwartz]

What if it became a little more selective...would its results improve?

That would be a logical assumption.

There are subsets of the plays that show as much as +11% in the win pool at higher odds over a 3,000+ race sample. Note that this is not a "back fit" but the results of a forward test with sterile data.


Dave

[classhandicapper]

Dave,

I've been reading some of your commentary on "Class" and I don't think you are quite understanding what class handicapping is.

If you saw a horse with a set of pace and speed figures of 100 and 100, you would know that it is faster than a horse with a 90 and 90.

Now let's say you saw a horse that missed by a neck in a Grade 1 race after dueling several other fast fit Grade 1 horses where several Grade 2 and Grade 3 horses finished up the track, but you had no idea what the fractions and final time were.

Wouldn't you be able to recognize that as a superior performance to a horse that just won a Grade 3 race by a length in a field that was mostly made of of recent ALW winners?

Now obviously, I'm giving you an extreme example because I am illustrating a point.

However, once you know the CLASS pecking order of horses at a track, you CAN measure both PACE and PERFORMANCE by making comparisons like these without knowing any of the fractions and times. And if you are informed and skilled, you can do it quite well.

What Class handicappers are doing is measuring ABILITY and PERFORMANCE in a non pace/speed figure way using a variety of techniques.

The advantage is that all aspects of ability are contained inside a single appraisal that does not have to cope with the inevitable inaccuracies of pace and speed figures and any attempt to combine them.

The disadvantage is that sometimes the abilities of the horses is not very clear yet (maidens and lightly raced horses for example) and sometimes form changes radically enough for so many horses within the same field errors can be made interpreting results.

My own opinion is that if you appraise performances both ways independently and have a lot of experience with both methods, you tend to recognize the strengths of weaknesses of each and get better results than either can achieve on its own.

For example:

You can look at Zenyatta and say she ran a mid 90s Beyer against a weak field. That's a pretty mediocre performance.

You can look at Zenyatta and say she's a multiple Grade 1 winner that has won Elite Grade 1 races like the Breeder's Cup against colts etc... and appears to retain her best form.

You can look at both and understand that she ran slow in that last race because she's a deep closer that was in weak field and her final times are dependent on what's going on in front of her and the ease in which she puts them away.

So it's fairly easy to tell that the Class appraisal is more appropriate in this case.

[thaskalos]

Who says I'm comparing them as horses? You said you've "never seen an undefeated horse held up to this kind of criticism." Well, you're doing it yourself in dissing Pepper's Pride. Apparantly, you don't think an undefeated record by itself is the mark of all-time greatness. So, we agree on that.



I was thinking of Bold Ruler and the 1957 three year old males (Round Table, Gen. Duke, Gallant Man, Federal Hill) when I wrote the second part of that, but I wasn't thinking of any horse in particular for the first half. It is unfair to compare today's horses with those of yester-year. Some of the past champions have achieved legendary status, and they are surrounded by a "mystique" that modern horses cannot compete with. It happens in other sports with rich traditions as well. For instance...Albert Pujols has been doing for years what no other man in baseball has EVER been able to do. Do you hear many people suggesting that he might be the best to ever play the game? Of course not...it would be considered blasphemy.

I am not saying that Zenyatta is on par with the greatest horses that have ever stepped on a racetrack. I am just saying that a horse's heart is not measured with speed figures...especially if the horse is a deep closer...

[46zilzal]

The "classier" horses do one thing and do it well: THEY respond, with resilience, to all pace pressures presented to them.

[GaryG]

I am just saying that a horse's heart is not measured with speed figures...especially if the horse is a deep closer...Or if his name is Affirmed or John Henry. Jim Quinn addressed this in a very much underrated book called Class of the Field. IMO his best book.

[thaskalos]

Or if his name is Affirmed or John Henry. Jim Quinn addressed this in a very much underrated book called Class of the Field. IMO his best book. I read the book, but I found the language that he uses in the first few chapters to be too "academic" and difficult to "plow" through. I agree with you though...it deserved more attention than it got.

[46zilzal]

Or if his name is Affirmed or John Henry. Jim Quinn addressed this in a very much underrated book called Class of the Field. IMO his best book.
Interesting book which had NO practical applications

[GaryG]

Interesting book which had NO practical applicationsMaybe not for YOU.....

[46zilzal]

Maybe not for YOU.....
I grant you the book improved my watching the races, but explain to me how he offers any practical way of implementing his observations?

Unless one had a replay of EVERY RACE OF EVERY HORSE, one could not do what he suggested.

[GaryG]

I grant you the book improved my watching the races, but explain to me how he offers any practical way of implementing his observations?

Unless one had a replay of EVERY RACE OF EVERY HORSE, one could not do what he suggested.I keep rather detailed trip notes on the tracks that I follow. If there is any question the races can all be viewed on the TwinSpires web site. I don't use it in a rigid manner, just put a + or ++ by a horse's figure. It helps to be able to upgrade a horse's performance by using info not in the pps.

[Dave Schwartz]

If you saw a horse with a set of pace and speed figures of 100 and 100, you would know that it is faster than a horse with a 90 and 90.

Now let's say you saw a horse that missed by a neck in a Grade 1 race after dueling several other fast fit Grade 1 horses where several Grade 2 and Grade 3 horses finished up the track, but you had no idea what the fractions and final time were.

Wouldn't you be able to recognize that as a superior performance to a horse that just won a Grade 3 race by a length in a field that was mostly made of of recent ALW winners?

Now obviously, I'm giving you an extreme example because I am illustrating a point.

However, once you know the CLASS pecking order of horses at a track, you CAN measure both PACE and PERFORMANCE by making comparisons like these without knowing any of the fractions and times. And if you are informed and skilled, you can do it quite well.

Classie,

I certainly understand that a 100 is better than a 90 and, thus "classier." And I certainly get that a horse that is competitive in a real graded stakes is likely to beat hell out of an allowance field.

Remember that I am a guy that builds class levels for a living. Some say they are pretty good.

My core belief is that you must be able to attach a number to a performance via a formula. IMHO, without that ability, it is just "anecdotal" as I stated earlier.

Now, anecdotal class is something that may work well for some people. However, IMHO, if there were an accurate class-performance rating the people who use the anecdotal variety would benefit from switching.

I have produced such numbers... the formula awards/subtracts points for performance. It takes into consideration class level of race, beaten lengths and finish position.

The performance of these formulas have not been near as good as speed. I have always thought that I could make a better formula with enough work.


In summary, I am not saying that "anecdotal" class has no value. I am saying that without measurement you have no idea whether your approach is a good, worthless or somewhere in between. I am also saying that without an number it is very difficult to improve upon it.


Dave

[Tom]

I keep rather detailed trip notes on the tracks that I follow. If there is any question the races can all be viewed on the TwinSpires web site. I don't use it in a rigid manner, just put a + or ++ by a horse's figure. It helps to be able to upgrade a horse's performance by using info not in the pps.

I am using the COTF method on this year's Derby preps. Lot of work, but actually, it is kind of fun doing.

[RXB]

The Riva Ridge argument may ring hollow, but it's more because of Secretariats brilliance then Ridge's lack of class, if memory serves only a muddy track kept Ridge from winning a TC. (my memory is slipping)

I would never downgrade Affirmed for losing to Slew twice, but I'll always consider Slew the better horse.

I would say the exact same thing for Bid, it's no disgrace to lose to Affirmed but I could never consider him a better horse then Affirmed.

To do that I'd have to look past the results of their match up, and I'd have to make an excuse for Bid not winning the TC while Affirmed performed when it mattered most.

Horses who had a chance to win a Triple Crown, and beat a TC champion.

Slew was 3-0 in those situations, Affirmed 1-2, Riva Ridge 0-2, Bid 0-2

Damn Slew was GREAT!!!!

What a surprise: the great horse who had the age advantage the only times he faced the other great horse has the best record in your faux comparison, the great horse who faced a great 4YO as a 3YO and then vice versa has the next best record, and the great horse who was disadvantaged age-wise when he faced a great horse has the poorest record.

I don't consider the Triple Crown as the be-all-end-all of a horse's career, so the fact that Spectacular Bid's timing of his poorest race was unfortunate from the perspective of the great unwashed means little to me, and doesn't make me believe that he was inferior to the other two.

Riva Ridge won 17/30. Nice horse but not at the level of those other four.

[PaceAdvantage]

Also from Crist's blog (the lost episode)

Obviously Zenyatta is capable of running faster (her previous 11 Beyers were all bigger, including two 108's and a 112 in the BC Classic.) As a deep closer who is ridden positionally (i.e. drop back to last regardless of the fractions), she is going to run weak final-time figures sometimes, especially when the pace is slow and the competition can be disdainfully dispatched with a single furlong of top effort.Compared to past champions like Bayakoa, it appears Zenyatta doesn't just run weak final-time figures sometimes...more like ALL THE TIME...if indeed you are going to slap the lofty label of "One of the All-Time Greats" on Zenyatta.

You can't have it both ways.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have never seen an undefeated horse held up to this kind of criticism. If Zenyatta finishes the year undefeated and wins a second BC Classic, will you still judge her by the speed figures she posts?Yes, because that's one of the few ways to accurately place her in the context of other greats who have come before her.

[Cratos]

Yes, because that's one of the few ways to accurately place her in the context of other greats who have come before her.

Please state why the speed figure methodology is one of the accurate ways of placing any horse in the comparative context of greatness against each other? Also please make it both mathematically and statistically simplified; and sound enough for all to understand.

[Charlie D]

Good question Cratos in my humble opinion and i look forward to reading the replies.

[Tom]

As a pretty near lifetime speed and pace figure guy, I have no delusions at all that figures determine class. Class and speed go together, but I see far too many "speed" horses fail to beat class. Zenyatta seems pretty immune to pace so far. And yes, I consider one of the greatest I have ever seen. I am FAR more awe struck watching her than Curlin. I put her more in the Cigar category.

What were Man o'War's Beyers?
War Admiral's
Kelso's?

If you can't give them figures, how can yo call them great? You had to look at other things.

And if YOU think a horse great, what the hell does anyone else's opinion matter?

The greatest horses I ever saw were Mountain Man, Strike the Anvil (15 in a row, I believe), Ambigu. When Big Red won the Belmont, the comment I made at the time was "He looks just like Ambigu!)

[Cratos]

As a pretty near lifetime speed and pace figure guy, I have no delusions at all that figures determine class. Class and speed go together, but I see far too many "speed" horses fail to beat class. Zenyatta seems pretty immune to pace so far. And yes, I consider one of the greatest I have ever seen. I am FAR more awe struck watching her than Curlin. I put her more in the Cigar category.

What were Man o'War's Beyers?
War Admiral's
Kelso's?

If you can't give them figures, how can yo call them great? You had to look at other things.

And if YOU think a horse great, what the hell does anyone else's opinion matter?

The greatest horses I ever saw were Mountain Man, Strike the Anvil (15 in a row, I believe), Ambigu. When Big Red won the Belmont, the comment I made at the time was "He looks just like Ambigu!)

During my visits to western New York I had a chance to see both Mountain Man and Strike the Anvil run and if I am correct there was a horse from Finger Lakes that won the Whitney, but I don't remember its name.

[Tom]

During my visits to western New York I had a chance to see both Mountain Man and Strike the Anvil run and if I am correct there was a horse from Finger Lakes that won the Whitney, but I don't remember its name.

D'oh!

How could I have forgotten Fio Rito!
FL horse of the ages!

Won the Whitney after breaking through the gate, backed that up by winning the Michigan Mile. Two graded stakes for a FL horse - he dominated FL racing like no one before of since. He was a big grey.
Mountain Man was a lot like Zenyatta. He didn't care who was in front of him, he came on and got it done.

[PaceAdvantage]

You can look at both and understand that she ran slow in that last race because she's a deep closer that was in weak field and her final times are dependent on what's going on in front of her and the ease in which she puts them away.I don't find this explanation all that satisfying. I don't believe it's that cut and dried.

[PaceAdvantage]

Please state why the speed figure methodology is one of the accurate ways of placing any horse in the comparative context of greatness against each other? Also please make it both mathematically and statistically simplified; and sound enough for all to understand.Is that a requirement? If so, why? I'm not a speed figure maker...never claimed I was. I can't go into charts and graphs and stats as to why. I'll let someone else better versed on the subject tackle that.

However, I can ask the following obvious questions:

Do you not agree that "better" horses run "faster?" Do you not agree that the best horses of the past 30-40 years consistently ran the highest speed figures (doesn't matter if you use Beyer, T-graph, Rags, Cramer, etc. etc.)

That is all the proof I really need.

Zenyatta isn't even close. Did someone say her lifetime best is a 112? And can we really blame Poly anymore, since she's run twice over dirt?

I love undefeated horses. I loved Hallowed Dreams. I gave her all the credit in the world. If you do a search, you'll probably find the posts where I defended her.

I would probably love Zenyatta more if people weren't so willing to crown her queen for the ages at this point.

[thaskalos]

PA, you had stated in previous posts that if Zenyatta were to beat some legitimate Grade 1 males on the dirt, you would be impressed. It now appears that this is no longer enough. She has to do it in very fast time as well...am i right?

[Show Me the Wire]

I would probably love Zenyatta more if people weren't so willing to crown her queen for the ages at this point.


I can emphatize with you. I felt the same way last year about how people wanted to crown Rachel queen of the ages after one season.

[Charlie D]

What was the Beyer for Azeri's AB 2003 win

[PaceAdvantage]

PA, you had stated in previous posts that if Zenyatta were to beat some legitimate Grade 1 males on the dirt, you would be impressed. It now appears that this is no longer enough. She has to do it in very fast time as well...am i right?No...by default, if she beats Grade 1 males on dirt, she will most likely earn a legitimate figure...if indeed she runs to the level of her competition...her 104 in 2008 and 95 in 2010 is by no means indicative that this will happen.

[PaceAdvantage]

What was the Beyer for Azeri's AB 2003 winAccording to an earlier reply, Bayakoa (119), Paseana (114) and Azeri (112)

[Charlie D]

According to an earlier reply, Bayakoa (119), Paseana (114) and Azeri (112)


112 for 2003??

http://xpressdogs.com/pro/columns.aspx?view=955&author=JohnnyD


During Azeri’s 2002 Horse of the Year campaign, she posted a 101 Beyer in the Hirsch at Del Mar while carrying 126 pounds. When Azeri also took the 2003 Hirsch, she earned a 100 Beyer while burdened with 127 pounds.




Wonder if people were knocking Azeri for not running 112, 113 etc in those races.

[46zilzal]

FINAL TIME. the REAL error in thinking about Races in the Beyer world, has NOTHING to do with a deep closer. They only overcome what is dealt to them and that's it.

Anyone who professes to understand pace should know that!

Even Beyer came to understand that it is not how fast a horse runs but HOW they run fast.

[PaceAdvantage]

FINAL TIME. the REAL error in thinking about Races, has NOTHING to do with a deep closer. They only overcome what is dealt to them and thats it.

Anyone who professes to understand pace should know that!So your contention is that every single race Zenyatta has been in to date has been a slow pace? All 16 of them?

Is that how you're explaining away the fact that this supposed "All-Time Great" has a lifetime best Beyer of 112?

[46zilzal]

So your contention is that every single race Zenyatta has been in to date has been a slow pace? All 16 of them?

How else to explain her lifetime best Beyer of 112?
This animal has yet to face a pace that she could not overcome and all the great closers have been weakened when meeting SLOW early paces not fast ones.

NOT this one.

[PaceAdvantage]

Back in 2008, she faced a 1:09 4/5 pace at Hollywood park and still only ran a 97 while only beating Tough Tiz's Sis by a half-length....this going 9 furlongs...

[PaceAdvantage]

I pray to the good Lord every single night that Rachel comes back healthy and as good as 2009. I don't think I even need an improved Rachel for 2010 in order to beat Zenyatta going 9f on the dirt.

Get her head on straight team Asmussen/Jackson. And don't let the Zenyatta hype mess with YOUR heads... :lol:

[46zilzal]

Back in 2008, she faced a 1:09 4/5 pace at Hollywood park and still only ran a 97 while only beating Tough Tiz's Sis by a half-length....this going 9 furlongs...
Shows how stupid final time handicapping and evaluation is when the REAL race dynamics, FOR MOST HORSES, are finished up mostly after the 2nd call.

This one is an aberration, a unique horse that falls outside the avenues of the vast majority of animals: a ONE run closer that just does enough each race to overcome whatever was dealt ahead of her. Nashua won a lot like this one but from closer up NEVER winning by much only by just enough,,,,Ferdinand did the same

Aldebaran, Silky, Cefis, Strike the Gold, Concern and many many others could not overcome the wide variety of paces thrown at them and GET THROUGH like she has done so far.

[Charlie D]

I pray to the good Lord every single night that Rachel comes back healthy and as good as 2009. I don't think I even need an improved Rachel for 2010 in order to beat Zenyatta going 9f on the dirt.

Get her head on straight team Asmussen/Jackson. And don't let the Zenyatta hype mess with YOUR heads... :lol:


Is not Rachel being hyped in a similar way PA.

[PaceAdvantage]

Shows how stupid final time handicapping and evaluation is when the REAL race dynamics, FOR MOST HORSES, are finished up mostly after the 2nd call.

This one is an aberration, a unique horse that falls outside the avenues of the vast majority of animals: a ONE run closers that just does enough each race to overcome whatever was dealt ahead of her.

Aldebaran, Silky, Cefis, Strike the Gold, Concern and many many others could not overcome the wide variety of paces thrown at them and GET THROUGH like she has done so far.But she was dealt, by all accounts, a pretty quick pace in that 2008 Vanity, yet still ran a slow final time (1:49 2/5)...she came home in :13 3/5....granted it was only her 6th career start....but for a closer like that, it seems pretty dreamy to get a 1:09 and change pace to run at....

[46zilzal]

But she was dealt, by all accounts, a pretty quick pace in that 2008 Vanity, yet still ran a slow final time (1:49 2/5)...she came home in :13 3/5....granted it was only her 6th career start....but for a closer like that, it seems pretty dreamy to get a 1:09 and change pace to run at....
Like Ferdinand, once they are by the competition, the ears go forward and they are done. Why run any faster than by the last horse you are running against?

This one is simply out of phase with the majority of horses with her 2nd and third fractions being MILES ahead of the tiring rivals and runs akin to a Rock of Gibraltar did on turf.

[PaceAdvantage]

Is not Rachel being hyped in a similar way PA.How so? Who on here is calling Rachel an all-time great?

I never dared to say Rachel was better than Ruffian nor was I ever stupid enough to claim she belonged up there with any of the other legitimate all-time greats of the past 40 years.

[Charlie D]

I didn't say anyone had PA, but it seems to me Rachel is being hyped by her supporters too.

[46zilzal]

I didn't say you had PA, but it seems to me Rachel is being hyped by her supporters too.
ANY horse based in the East has a built in three to one media coverage advantage over a horse from the West as we west coasters only learned the hard way and it takes a major sojourn on an Eastern track (or a surrogate a la Cougar II who destroyed the East coast best to give Ack Ack horse of the year in 1970) before they will recognize it. HISTORICAL REALITY both in the US and Canada.

[PaceAdvantage]

ANY horse based in the East has a built in three to one media coverage advantage over a horse from the West as we west coaster only learned the hard way and it takes a major sojourn on an Eastern track (or a surrogate a la Cougar II who destroyed the East coast best to give Ack Ack horse of the year in 1970) before they will recognize it. HISTORICAL REALITY both in the US and Canada.Oh come on...stop this nonsense...Zenyatta has entire racetrack media departments in her back pocket..she has Steve Crist writing favorable things about her...how can anyone at this point claim some silly East Coast bias?

And since when is Rachel based in the east? Steve Asmussen is NOT an east-coast trainer. He is not based in the east. Jess Jackson lives in California.

This is utter nonsense.

Zenyatta is THE Hollywood horse.

But this is WAY off topic...so we can stop this little discussion branch right here.

[46zilzal]

Oh come on...stop this nonsense...Zenyatta has entire racetrack media departments in her back pocket..she has Steve Crist writing favorable things about her...how can anyone at this point claim some silly East Coast bias?

And since when is Rachel based in the east? Steve Asmussen is NOT an east-coast trainer. He is not based in the east. Jess Jackson lives in California.

This is utter nonsense.

Zenyatta is THE Hollywood horse.

But this is WAY off topic...so we can stop this little discussion branch right here.
no historical perspective yet again. By actual count there are three to one DRF columnists in the East who RARELY look further west than Chicago unless an earth shaking event, such as her BC Classic, makes them look that way.

[thaskalos]

I pray to the good Lord every single night that Rachel comes back healthy and as good as 2009. I don't think I even need an improved Rachel for 2010 in order to beat Zenyatta going 9f on the dirt.

Get her head on straight team Asmussen/Jackson. And don't let the Zenyatta hype mess with YOUR heads... :lol: I am glad to see that you are not biased in the least...

[PaceAdvantage]

I am glad to see that you are not biased in the least...What are you talking about?

[chickenhead]

Like Ferdinand, once they are by the competition, the ears go forward and they are done. Why run any faster than by the last horse you are running against?

I'm not sure you know the race he's talking about, I think it was pretty clear she was tired at the end of it.

I think that Vanity was probably her worst race when you take everything into account, in that it taxed her without running well. I don't think theres any question she moved earlier than she should have. But it's certainly not settled that she can handle a fast pace, she dealt with it pretty poorly here.

26.04 22.55 22.98 24.41 13.54

[PaceAdvantage]

I can actually buy the argument that Zenyatta hasn't run any fast speed figures because she runs to the level of her competition.

Why can I buy this? Because that's been my criticism all along. She's run against nothing special. Even that supposedly fantastical Breeders' Cup Classic, allegedly filled with mega-stars. When you break that race down honestly and take into account all the warts associated with the other runners in the field...it wasn't anything mind blowing. Thus the 112 Beyer figure is understandable. A rather ordinary figure for a Grade 1 race filled with Grade 1 males, especially a race named the Breeders' Cup Classic.

And the argument that Poly is different, that Beyer figs are even less accurate over the fake stuff...that argument isn't holding up too well in the face of her two dirt races where she ran a 104 and a 95.

The moment she steps in the ring with Grade 1 males on the dirt, something's going to give...either she finally runs a figure over 115, or she gets beaten.

[thaskalos]

Will you at least admit that the males Zenyatta figures to face this year, will be much tougher than the ones Rachel faced last year?

[PaceAdvantage]

Will you at least admit that the males Zenyatta figures to face against this year, will be much tougher than the ones Rachel faced last year?Looking at the current NTRA poll, there's no way I can commit to such a theory at this present time...it seems to me that once you get beyond the rather erratic Quality Road and Summer Bird (who is surrounded by question marks after surgery), Zenyatta's toughest male competitor is likely to be a 3yo, and we all know we can count on them to remain healthy through the entire year... :rolleyes:

So no, I can't admit to that at this present time, and neither can you I would suspect, if you examine what's out there honestly.

To tell you what you WANT to hear: yes, if the Quality Road that last raced shows up, and/or Summer Bird can overcome his injury, and/or Eskendereya & Lookin at Lucky stay healthy, then sure, it will be tougher than the ones Rachel faced...but MUCH tougher? That's a lot of IFS to overcome.

[thaskalos]

PA, I have been a speed and pace handicapper most of my life, and the reason I am not a wealthy man is the fact that speed figures are not as useful as you think they are in determining the quality of ALL HORSES. After many years of hitting my head against the wall, I have accepted the fact that, for some horses, speed ratings do not apply as well as they apply for others. The extreme stretch runner is a curious animal. Its running style practically guarantees that its winning margins will be small, and consequently, its speed figures will not be huge. Huge speed figures are usually posted in "run-away" races, by horses who enjoy beneficial trips. That just can't happen to an extreme closer like Zenyatta ( Don't bring up Secretariat, for obvious reasons).

I know that it may sound insane, but in the case of the deep-deep closer, the smart horseplayer learns to trust his eyes more, and the speed figures less. When a horse explodes coming for home, the way Zenyatta did in the BC Classic, we know that we are watching a special horse, speed figures notwithstanding. Tell the truth...when you saw how far back she was as they approached the turn for home, did you think it was possible for her to win? She was toying with them!!!

Is Zenyatta capable of running a Beyer above 115? In my opinion...there is no doubt!!. And you will see it when the right situation presents itself. It's the nature of this horse to "fool-around" early, and then to unleash the kind of closing kick none of us have seen in decades.

[ghostyapper]

How so? Who on here is calling Rachel an all-time great?

I never dared to say Rachel was better than Ruffian nor was I ever stupid enough to claim she belonged up there with any of the other legitimate all-time greats of the past 40 years.

Are you seriously asking this question? Last year when rachel was running this place was a loony bin. Just take a look at some of the threads after her woodward where she narrowly beat a weak field. People were calling it the greatest performance ever. :lol:

[ghostyapper]

Why can I buy this? Because that's been my criticism all along. She's run against nothing special. Even that supposedly fantastical Breeders' Cup Classic, allegedly filled with mega-stars. When you break that race down honestly and take into account all the warts associated with the other runners in the field...it wasn't anything mind blowing. Thus the 112 Beyer figure is understandable. A rather ordinary figure for a Grade 1 race filled with Grade 1 males, especially a race named the Breeders' Cup Classic.


Another rachel lover who craps on the bc field and yet is impressed by what rachel did last year. Let me know whenever you want to compare that bc field to the male fields that rachel beat last year.

[Tom]

When is RA going to win a Breeder's Cup Classic?
Call when when does. And have the Beyer ready....:rolleyes::lol:

[FenceBored]

When is RA going to win a Breeder's Cup Classic?
Call when when does. And have the Beyer ready....:rolleyes::lol:

November 6th, 2010 (Beyer 118).

(I emailed myself from the future [I refused to tell me the super or the P6, though :bang:])

[ghostyapper]

November 6th, 2010 (Beyer 118).

(I emailed myself from the future [I refused to tell me the super or the P6, though :bang:])

Odds she is even saddled that day

55-1

[FenceBored]

Odds she is even saddled that day

55-1

:D Keep hope alive!

[Cratos]

Is that a requirement? If so, why? I'm not a speed figure maker...never claimed I was. I can't go into charts and graphs and stats as to why. I'll let someone else better versed on the subject tackle that.

However, I can ask the following obvious questions:

Do you not agree that "better" horses run "faster?" Do you not agree that the best horses of the past 30-40 years consistently ran the highest speed figures (doesn't matter if you use Beyer, T-graph, Rags, Cramer, etc. etc.)

That is all the proof I really need.

Zenyatta isn't even close. Did someone say her lifetime best is a 112? And can we really blame Poly anymore, since she's run twice over dirt?


I love undefeated horses. I loved Hallowed Dreams. I gave her all the credit in the world. If you do a search, you'll probably find the posts where I defended her.

I would probably love Zenyatta more if people weren't so willing to crown her queen for the ages at this point.

No, it is not a requirement because nor you or anyone else can support mathematically and statistically the following statement by you “Yes, because that's one of the few ways to accurately place her in the context of other greats who have come before her.”

Speed figures at their best are based on one entity, speed with an attempt to determine the universal set of greatness with respect to a horse’s performance.

Therefore that is a good place to start. Eric Servaried the late CBS news commentator once said: “the media makes celebrity and time makes greatness.”

Paraphrasing and moving forward, speed figures are celebrated and greatness is determined. I am quite sure you understand that greatness can never be quantitated because it is non-parametric.

Better horses consistently run faster simply because they are “better” and their final times are as good a measurement of those efforts as any speed figures.

By the way the genesis behind speed figures were not to determine that “better” horses ran faster, but to determine when an appeared inferior time was “better” when all extenuating factors was taken into consideration.

Furthermore the “better” horses ran the fastest times in any era not because a speed figure calculation said so, but because of their inherent class which gave them the ability to perform “better.”

One last point, Rachel Alexandra based on her historical performances is a very, very good horse and would be a good horse in any era. However I just happen to believe that Zenyatta is better (there goes that word again)

[Show Me the Wire]

Well said Cratos.

[PaceAdvantage]

Are you seriously asking this question? Last year when rachel was running this place was a loony bin. Just take a look at some of the threads after her woodward where she narrowly beat a weak field. People were calling it the greatest performance ever. :lol:Who? One or two people with 2 posts to their names? I await links....

[PaceAdvantage]

Well said Cratos.Really? I didn't get that he actually negated my theory that speed figures are "one of the few ways to accurately place her (or any horse) in the context of other greats who have come before her."

He used a lot of words, but I didn't read the part where he proved I was wrong.

[Show Me the Wire]

Really? I didn't get that he actually negated my theory that speed figures are "one of the few ways to accurately place her (or any horse) in the context of other greats who have come before her."

He used a lot of words, but I didn't read the part where he proved I was wrong.

Maybe this little nugget was lost in the translation.

"By the way the genesis behind speed figures were not to determine that “better” horses ran faster, but to determine when an appeared inferior time was “better” when all extenuating factors was taken into consideration."

[PaceAdvantage]

Maybe this little nugget was lost in the translation.

"By the way the genesis behind speed figures were not to determine that “better” horses ran faster, but to determine when an appeared inferior time was “better” when all extenuating factors was taken into consideration."And this somehow translates into "you can't use them effectively to compare horses who never raced against each other?" Isn't that the purpose of speed figures to begin with? To compare horses who have never raced against one another? That's one way we reveal "appeared inferior times"...horses shipping in from a "slow" track with superior speed figures.

Excuse my bluntness, but neither you or Cratos have done anything to dissuade me from my original premise.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by ghostyapper
Are you seriously asking this question? Last year when rachel was running this place was a loony bin. Just take a look at some of the threads after her woodward where she narrowly beat a weak field. People were calling it the greatest performance ever.

I was posting high on her bandwagon - it was a great performance. It was a great day for race fans.

I did the same thing when Zenny won the BC.

Here is a clue for everyone - these two horse DO NOT DEPEND on each other for their greatness. Both are doing stuff that is good for the game and good for us.

Enjoy them both.

If RA ever gets out of the stall again! :bang:



KIDDING!!!!!!;)

[ghostyapper]

Who? One or two people with 2 posts to their names? I await links....

Since you're the boss around here I'm sure if you really wanted to know you could come up with the link a lot quicker that me.

I'll tell you this though. There was 1 poster with more than 2 posts to their name and very well respected (at least by you) that compared the performance to Slew in the jcgc. :eek:

[ghostyapper]

And this somehow translates into "you can't use them effectively to compare horses who never raced against each other?" Isn't that the purpose of speed figures to begin with? To compare horses who have never raced against one another? That's one way we reveal "appeared inferior times"...horses shipping in from a "slow" track with superior speed figures.

Excuse my bluntness, but neither you or Cratos have done anything to dissuade me from my original premise.

Go ask Beyer if he created his figures to compare great horses from different era's.

I still don't understand how a guy that has admitted he doesn't use them to handicap but uses them to compare great horses from different era's :confused:

[Show Me the Wire]

And this somehow translates into "you can't use them effectively to compare horses who never raced against each other?" Isn't that the purpose of speed figures to begin with? To compare horses who have never raced against one another? That's one way we reveal "appeared inferior times"...horses shipping in from a "slow" track with superior speed figures.

Excuse my bluntness, but neither you or Cratos have done anything to dissuade me from my original premise.

Sure you can use them to compare horses that never raced each other. I am sure people used the figures to compare Rachel and Zardana in determining which horse would be the favorite.

Using figures for comparison, especially to effectively rate a slower timed race is not remotely the same as using speed figures to determine greatness of horses. Speed figures were not meant to be used in such a way.

A nuance, but a very important nuance.

[PaceAdvantage]

Since you're the boss around here I'm sure if you really wanted to know you could come up with the link a lot quicker that me.

I'll tell you this though. There was 1 poster with more than 2 posts to their name and very well respected (at least by you) that compared the performance to Slew in the jcgc. :eek:And I think I might have compared the performance to Holy Bull in the Travers. So?

I would never say Rachel was AS GOOD as Holy Bull, and I'm sure that poster (he goes by the little guy) would never say Rachel was AS GOOD as Seattle Slew (in fact, I know he would never say this, as that would be insane).

Comparing the performance in terms of courage under fire is perfectly acceptable. Why do you have such a problem with it?

[PaceAdvantage]

Go ask Beyer if he created his figures to compare great horses from different era's.

I still don't understand how a guy that has admitted he doesn't use them to handicap but uses them to compare great horses from different era's :confused:Beyer most certainly created his figures to compare horses who never raced against each other. That's the whole purpose of speed figures. To compare horses who have never raced against each other with some degree of accuracy (keeping in mind nothing is perfect).

Are not great horses from different eras also horses who have never raced against each other?

[cj]

The way Beyers are made, comparing them across different generations is going to be impossible. All they will tell you is how the best horses compared to claimers of the same era.

[ghostyapper]

Comparing the performance in terms of courage under fire is perfectly acceptable. Why do you have such a problem with it?

The same reason you had a problem with people being impressed with Zenyatta's stretch run in the santa margarita because of the competition.

To even bring up slew's race is ridiculous and you know it. The performance wasn't even as good as roses in may in the 04 whitney and who ever talks about that performance? Don't try to downplay how way over the top everyone treated that performance last year. Like I said it was a loony bin around here.

[PaceAdvantage]

Speed figures were not meant to be used in such a way.Says who? Do not the Rag and/or T-graph guys use them this way? Are they not heard to exclaim every so often "best figure ever for a 2yo, 3yo, etc.!"

Is this not using speed figures in a way to compare horses of different eras? Better tell those guys they're not allowed to use their figures like that...

Tell me..why did Beyer himself bother to go back and compute a figure for Secretariat's Belmont if he believes they are not meant to be used in such a way?

[PaceAdvantage]

The way Beyers are made, comparing them across different generations is going to be impossible. All they will tell you is how the best horses compared to claimers of the same era.Define generations...it's not too tough to find recent horses who were faster than Zenyatta...Beyer-wise...

[Charlie D]

I don't think Timeform ratings were initially meant to be used to compare horses from different era's, but they are by some.

[Show Me the Wire]

PA:


What does best figure mean, just that based on that particualar scale a specific horse ran the fastest race that season. It is not the same as saying that particular horse is the greatest to ever live.

Let's apply theory to the real world. According to your theory Rachel is a great horse and couldn't lose to Zardana according to speed figures. But in the real world of application one can't say Rachel is greater than Zardana, because Rachel lost to Zardana in a fair real world event.

cj summed it up nicely in his post.

[Charlie D]

http://www.chef-de-race.com/articles/timeform_highweights.htm



Zenyatta is currently rated 131 and Rachel 129 by Timeform


CJ can use his conversion to compare the above two horses to Cigar from the All - Time list

[ghostyapper]

Tell me..why did Beyer himself bother to go back and compute a figure for Secretariat's Belmont if he believes they are not meant to be used in such a way?

Him doing that means the figures are a good tool to compare all time greats from different generations? By the way what made him choose that race to assign a number?

Obviously before speed figures there was no way to judge historic performances so what made that one stand out?

[cj]

Define generations...it's not too tough to find recent horses who were faster than Zenyatta...Beyer-wise...

I definitely agree. I was just talking more about the "all time" arguments. Personally, I would never compare the numbers from more than 5 years apart.

Claimers today are racing for tons more than they did in the past, yet their figures on Beyer remains the same. Stakes horses, however, have shrunk. Just as easily stakes horses could have remained the same while claimers rose. Or, they both could rise, one more than the other. It is all in the methodology.

I think speed figures would be a great way to compare horses across generations, but that would have to be a goal of the figure maker at the start. In racing, figure makers mostly care about betting, not history.

[cj]

PA:


What does best figure mean, just that based on that particualar scale a specific horse ran the fastest race that season. It is not the same as saying that particular horse is the greatest to ever live.

Let's apply theory to the real world. According to your theory Rachel is a great horse and couldn't lose to Zardana according to speed figures. But in the real world of application one can't say Rachel is greater than Zardana, because Rachel lost to Zardana in a fair real world event.

cj summed it up nicely in his post.

You keep mentioning Zardana. Just because figures don't pick every winner doesn't mean they can't be used to compare overall ability. First off, nobody had figures for Zardana on real dirt. Second, great horses have lost to inferior horses since the advent of racing. It didn't make them "not great", and they certainly ran lower speed figures than the winner in that particular race.

The Orioles are 1-9 in baseball, the Yankees are the defending champs and 6-3. If they play tomorrow, the Orioles might win. So what?

[PaceAdvantage]

Let's apply theory to the real world. According to your theory Rachel is a great horse and couldn't lose to Zardana according to speed figures. But in the real world of application one can't say Rachel is greater than Zardana, because Rachel lost to Zardana in a fair real world event. I don't recall anyone disputing my statement that in an overwhelming majority of cases, the best horses historically have run the highest speed figures, and continue to do so. When you examine the biggest names of the last 20-25 years, they will invariably have run the highest speed figures among the whole population of horses.

Throw out names...then throw out their highest recorded Beyer. I don't have access to that kind of info unfortunately...maybe someone else does...

Easy Goer...Sunday Silence...Holy Bull...Paseana...Go for Wand...Skip Away...Cigar...Personal Ensign...Silverbulletday....Silver Charm....Winning Colors...Bayakoa...Sky Beauty...Inside Information...Heavenly Prize...Tiznow...Point Given...Azeri...Ghostzapper...Invasor...

Pretty nice spread of past champions to choose from...how many of those have a top Beyer of 112 or lower to their credit? Off the top of my head...I'll guess NONE...although I might be wrong on one or two...but I'll confidently go with NONE.

I've called Rachel a great 3yo filly in comparison with other 3yo fillies. I've never elevated her to the level of all-time great as others are doing with Zenyatta.

[PaceAdvantage]

I definitely agree. I was just talking more about the "all time" arguments. Personally, I would never compare the numbers from more than 5 years apart.

Claimers today are racing for tons more than they did in the past, yet their figures on Beyer remains the same. Stakes horses, however, have shrunk. Just as easily stakes horses could have remained the same while claimers rose. Or, they both could rise, one more than the other. It is all in the methodology.

I think speed figures would be a great way to compare horses across generations, but that would have to be a goal of the figure maker at the start. In racing, figure makers mostly care about betting, not history.So what you are saying is, the 120s we would see from some of the champions I've listed above would be significantly lower today? You've put a dent in my argument, but I'm not sure you've killed it... :lol:

[cj]

I'll play a little more devil's advocate.

It has to be painfully clear by now that figures on turf and rubber are not on the same scale as those on dirt. You just can't compare across surfaces.

Beyer has tried to make an adjustment, but it still comes up short. I looked at all the G1 route races over the last few years and adjusted for sex and age. Dirt average is 110. Synthetic routes are 106 (post adjustment, 102 before) and turf routes are 102. Zenyatta's 112 in the Classic would have been a 109 before the adjustment. I would argue that the 109 is actually closer to a 118 if the rubber races were on the same scale as dirt.

All that said, on dirt Zenyatta hasn't come close in her two attempts to displaying "all time great" speed. 104 and 95 wouldn't be enough to warm up Azeri.

[cj]

So what you are saying is, the 120s we would see from some of the champions I've listed above would be significantly lower today? You've put a dent in my argument, but I'm not sure you've killed it... :lol:

I'm just saying we don't really know since that was never meant to be a part of the process. I do think they would be lower, but still higher than what most horses are producing today.

[Charlie D]

Cj

Didn't you have a race of Zen's at 117 and if so how would that compare to say Curlin, Invasor, Ghostzapper, best fig on your numbers.

[cj]

Cj

Didn't you have a race of Zen's at 117 and if so how would that compare to say Curlin, Invasor, Ghostzapper, best fih o your numbers.

I never had her speed figure that high, but her overall performance figure did reach that once.

You can see a lot of the older numbers in my BC Archives and Derby Archives here (http://www.pacefigures.com).

[Charlie D]

Must be the OP figure i'm remembering.

[cj]

It was her race before the 2008 Distaff. The Oaklawn race was only about 105 speed figure and the pace was average to fast.

[pandy]

That's right, enjoy them both, it's been a long time since we had a great horse. In my opinion, the last great horse was Cigar, and he retired 12 years ago. Now we have two great mares, fantastic.

[Show Me the Wire]

You keep mentioning Zardana. Just because figures don't pick every winner doesn't mean they can't be used to compare overall ability. First off, nobody had figures for Zardana on real dirt. Second, great horses have lost to inferior horses since the advent of racing. It didn't make them "not great", and they certainly ran lower speed figures than the winner in that particular race.

The Orioles are 1-9 in baseball, the Yankees are the defending champs and 6-3. If they play tomorrow, the Orioles might win. So what?

I mention Zardana because she is the perfect example in the context we are discussing. From my understanding the argument is you can declare a horse great by speed figures. I believe that is a misstatement and bastardization of the measurement.

I have taken the position speed figures are meant to compare non-head to head performances. On that level it indicates that Rachel's prior overall ability has been better against her previous competition than Zardana. I absolutely have no disagreement with that concept. But the reality of the matter is we can't say Rachel is "greater" than Zardana, based solely the concept of speed figures. Rachel could prove her superiority or lack of, by racing Zardana a few more times.

BTW the baseball argument is not really aplicable, because last year's team is not comprised of the same individuals. The name may remain the same, but not the indivdual parts.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have taken the position speed figures are meant to compare non-head to head performances. On that level it indicates that Rachel's prior overall ability has been better against her previous competition than Zardana. I absolutely have no disagreement with that concept. But the reality of the matter is we can't say Rachel is "greater" than Zardana, based solely the concept of speed figures. Rachel could prove her superiority or lack of, by racing Zardana a few more times.As CJ rightly pointed out, there were no dirt Beyers available for Zardana. So how could we make the comparison you claim was made?

[Tom]

There are no Beyers for past champions, either - so how can we say Buckpasser was a great horse, or Kelso? Or Seabiscuit? I sure as hell think Kelso was a legend, but did I have to compare all the horses he beat to know it? Did anyone ever really look at Kelso's times? Do w have to cut out all of John Henry's truf races and only loook at his dirt routes to decide on his greatness?