View Full Version : Angles that worked for The Belmont
WinterTriangle
06-06-2010, 03:10 AM
K.I.S.S (keep it simple stupid)
I make up excel charts to score the TC races, and go over them afterwards to see which "factors" ended up being most important, so I can use the most potent factors over the years.
This year, I evaluated my columns. You didn't even need speed figures or pace figures or anything like that.
It is so simple it hurts :bang: (of course we don't always see this beforehand).
Anyway, here's what they were----all you needed for the superfecta was 3 angles:
1) had previous BELMONT winners in their pedigree:
FIRST DUDE (grandsire A.P. Indy)
FLY DOWN (grandsire A.P. Indy)
ICE BOX (grandsire A.P. Indy & damsire Tabasco Cat)
2) Ran ITM or worked sharp at Belmont:
Drosselmeyer & Fly Down
3) Trainer won the Belmont in past:
Game On Dude, Ice Box, Flydown, interactif
:)
There were a lot of other interesting factors to use, but those were the most potent and nothing else was really necessary.
I have charts for KY Derby, Preakness, Belmont, as well as other big stakes races. As well as a diagram of how the horses would run (speed, press, stalk, close) for each. Every year, they get better, because I review them and mark them up carefully, and find that there are potent factors, and non-potent factors, that are starting to show up. Hopefully this will be useful for the future.
WinterTriangle
06-06-2010, 03:48 AM
OR, you could have bypassed ALL THAT, and just used Dr. Steve Roman's Performance Figures. :D
He suggests anything over -50.
Going into the race, the only horses who had that (I ONLY counted the ones that got the figures while running on DIRT):
Game on Dude -59
Drosselmeyer -52
Fly Down -52
Ice Box -50
First Dude -49 (borderline)
the only other horses who got decent figures (on dirt) were MMfM and Stay Put with -45 and -40.
(when people look at that site and see Dave in Dixie got -66, I throw those out, as they aren't on DIRT, and this race was on dirt)
4 "angles" I listed in this topic, 2 were using pedigree handicapping, 1 was trainer handicapping, and 1 was horse's (working bullets.)
OR, you could have bypassed ALL THAT, and just used Dr. Steve Roman's Performance Figures. :D
He suggests anything over -50.
Going into the race, the only horses who had that (I ONLY counted the ones that got the figures while running on DIRT):
Game on Dude -59
Drosselmeyer -52
Fly Down -52
Ice Box -50
First Dude -49 (borderline)
the only other horses who got decent figures (on dirt) were MMfM and Stay Put with -45 and -40.
(when people look at that site and see Dave in Dixie got -66, I throw those out, as they aren't on DIRT, and this race was on dirt)
Stately Victor had -49?
What were the numbers for Stay Put and Interactif?
GARY Z
06-06-2010, 06:15 AM
tossed Ice Box as his best race was in the slop against Super Saver
who won due to a perfect ride by Borel/rail.Fifth race back for this
late "bloomer" was his win in a md.sp wt.
Without the Bs, I centered my bet around First Dude/Interactif/
and Stately Victor, but kept glancing back at Drosselmeyer
based on the fact that Smith was up/Kent off his last few works.And yes,
his fifth back was a md as well, but the odds were high enough to
warrant a bet considering his trainer/jock.
I did save on #7 with a win bet and caught the double, but honestly
needed the 7/11 exacta to score, although the double took care of my angst.
Incredible spectacle looking at the fans yesterday, and NYRA certainly
has good evidence to benchmark my thoughts of increasing purses
to gain larger and classier fields than MTH especially with the Saratoga
meet on the horizon.
skate
06-06-2010, 02:17 PM
Isn't -52 less than -50?
yes sir, in the North Pole:rolleyes:
WinterTriangle
06-06-2010, 02:22 PM
Isn't -52 less than -50?
:)
Higher negative is better. Horses like Gio Ponti, Big Brown have about -75, for comparison.
We didn't have any of those in the TC races overall
Stillriledup
06-06-2010, 05:01 PM
My favorite 'angle' is to bet the fastest horse. I know, its kind of a silly angle, but i find that it works pretty well on occasion!
CBedo
06-06-2010, 05:38 PM
After tearing up Belmont tickets, I always in hind sight remind myself that for the most part US horses don't get 1 1/2 miles, and that it's a war of attrition. You don't need a horse that has a super late kick, just one that doesn't decelerate as much as the rest of them!
letswastemoney
06-06-2010, 06:37 PM
Fly Down's 99 beyer in the Dwyer was higher than most of the field. Drosselmeyer had some solid, although not spectacular beyer figures as well. First Dude had the highest beyer figure, I think 103.
The slowest horses finished up the track for the most part (I believe Dave in Dixie looked slowest based on dirt beyer figure)
keithw84
06-06-2010, 07:53 PM
K.I.S.S (keep it simple stupid)
2) Ran ITM or worked sharp at Belmont:
Drosselmeyer & Fly Down
Very interesting. I will definitely consider these angles next year.
Just wanted to add that you missed Make Music For Me who also had some sharp works at Belmont.
bisket
06-06-2010, 08:23 PM
After tearing up Belmont tickets, I always in hind sight remind myself that for the most part US horses don't get 1 1/2 miles, and that it's a war of attrition. You don't need a horse that has a super late kick, just one that doesn't decelerate as much as the rest of them!
its worked for me for many years now :D
ezpace
06-06-2010, 08:29 PM
stake winners didn't see any all weather track their last few previous outs
easily seen on CJ's performance figs . BTW ,if you didn't look
his work was A-1 as usual
WinterTriangle
06-06-2010, 09:04 PM
Stately Victor had -49?
What were the numbers for Stay Put and Interactif?
Stay Put had -45, at 9F on dirt. ( borderline. )
Stately had a -26 (dismal) on dirt. His -49 was not earned on dirt, so that was a toss. He's definitely not a dirt horse.
Interactif had a -52, but also not on dirt, so I didn't count it as a point for him.
The PFs are, as you will see below, a very potent indicator for classic races, they were predictive this year for the BELMONT trifecta. I use 'em in TC, BC.
For comparison, -50's aren't that good though!!!!. That is just my cut-off factor. No horse is gonna win any kind of classic race without being close to -50. I will still use some at -48 or -49 but ONLY if it was at >9F on dirt for a dirt race.
Here's what the good horses PF's look like:
2003Pleasantly Perfect -982004Ghostzapper-98 006Street Sense-742006Street Sense-74Indian Blessing-73 Curlin-862008 RAVEN'S PASS -79200ZENYATTA-79
2009 LIFE IS SWEET-712002 Azeri-77 Jazil-74
GOLDIKOVA -842007War Pass-84 MIDNIGHT LUTE-72 YEARKENTUCKY DERBYPF1999Charismatic-482000Fusaichi Pegasus-572001Monarchos-752002
War Emblem-612003Funny Cide-602004Smarty Jones-632005Giacomo-482006
Barbaro-602007Street Sense-572008 Big Brown-682009 MINE THAT BIRD-42PREAKNESS SPFCharismatic-45 Red Bullet-60 Point Given-56 War Emblem-60
Funny Cide-75 Smarty Jones-77 Afleet Alex-72 Bernardini-67
Big Brown-57 RACHAEL ALEXANDRA-61BELMO Lemon Drop Kid-76
Commendable-57 Point Given-83 Sarava-55 Empire Maker-59
Birdstone-67 Afleet Alex-70 Jazil-74 Rags to Riches-47 Da' Tara-43 SUMMER BIRD-65 MTB -42
As you can see, MTB and Da'Tara were quite borderline.
But you are not gonna see a horse win these races with 30s or 20's or anything.
1999Daylami-1002004Better Talk Now-1012008 CONDUIT-105
Anyway as you can see, I just like playin' around with this stuff.
Robert Fischer
06-06-2010, 09:17 PM
K.I.S.S (keep it simple stupid)
Not really an angles player, although certain principles prove fruitful time and again. And for these "angles?" I like added distance or pace or anything challenging for the runners because it may amplify the smaller differences between individual horses.
-K.I.S.S.
For the Angles that worked in the Belmont, i use the literary device proprieTary the PTerodactylhttp://farm3.static.flickr.com/2275/2151049600_d954af4b0d.jpg
WinterTriangle
06-06-2010, 09:20 PM
Fly Down's 99 beyer in the Dwyer was higher than most of the field. Drosselmeyer had some solid
Dross had about a 94 BSF. I dont think classic distance races are about speed. Using BSFs I had trouble getting separation with some of these runners, although it did identify DROSS as being in top 5. Quite frankly, I would have played him 4th. I really did not want to "box" horses as it gets expensive.
Performance Figures are measuring something different.
Dr. Roman and Beyer have had their differences over the years. Roman actually has a sheet on it. Roman sees more similarities, Beyer doesn't.
I have no dog in the argument, as roman is a phD mathematician and beyer is a numbers guy, and I'm not either. :) I love it when the numbers guys start arguing with each other though. :)
Heres' the write up if you're interested:
A comparison of PF, BSF, TR, RPR, BRIS and ER speed figures:
http://www.chef-de-race.com/pfs/comparative_speed_figs.htm
An Evaluation of
Performance Figures (PFs) vs Beyer Speed Figures (BSFs)
in the 2001 Kentucky Derby
http://www.chef-de-race.com/pfs/bsf_vs_pf.htm
keithw84
06-06-2010, 11:50 PM
Could you explain how PFs are calculated? I understand they take fractional time into account, but what exactly does this mean?
For instance, take this year's Kentucky Oaks. If the head bob had gone the other way, would the PFs be different since the winner (Evening Jewel) had been close to the pace rather than coming from way off (Blind Luck)?
WinterTriangle
06-09-2010, 06:41 PM
Could you explain how PFs are calculated? I understand they take fractional time into account, but what exactly does this mean?
For instance, take this year's Kentucky Oaks. If the head bob had gone the other way, would the PFs be different since the winner (Evening Jewel) had been close to the pace rather than coming from way off (Blind Luck)?
Yes. If you like, although I can ask Dr. Roman your question specifically, although you can as well, and I'm sure that would yield a better explanation.
I like both his Performance Figures and his Pace Parameters for classic races. In the Belmont (and Derby), I was able to completely toss Stately Victor, for instance, as his pace parameters over dirt were dismal. Conversely, you could identify Pioneer of the Nile as a very major contender in last year's derby, and Street Sense as proabably being best in the 2007 Derby (PFs and Pace Parameters were better).
First let me say in advance that Roman is in no way a Beyer-basher. "BSFs have stood the test of time. They are certainly a profound improvement over raw time as a measure of performance. Nevertheless, the results do suggest that other approaches may be at least as accurate and equally useful...."
How are they calculated: "both BSFs and PFs convert the raw time of a race into a mathematically derived number taking into account variations in inherent track speed. The (PF) figures are based on a combination of fractional and final times converted into a single number. They represent performance integrated over the entire race. In that sense, they differ from conventional speed figures which rely on the final time. For this methodology, the entire pace line of a race is converted to a performance figure, and it is compared to the number for the class-par pace line or, occasionally, a projected pace line. All pars are adjusted for age, distance, sex, and time of year. Variants are then calculated in the normal way".
I do not know how he handles trip adjustments or wind speeds, etc. :confused:
So PFs incorporate a significant pace factor. The other difference would be obvious ---BSFs best scores are +numbers, while PF's best scores would be the most (negative) - numbers.
For classic races, I have just found using Roman's PFs (defined by Dr. Roman himself as "other approaches" above) to be a tad more predictive. I also like his Pace Parameters, as it tells me what is favorable or unfavorable to a and how his figures in each category defined inflates or deflates over different surfaces and distances.
2001 KY Derby finish itself:
The horses with the top four best BSFs finished 11th, 14th, 16th and 5th in the Derby - for an average of 11.5. Those with the top four best PFs finished 3rd, 4th, 1st and 14th - for an average of 5.5.
In the 47 prep races, there was a strong correlation between BSFs and PFs. But again, the PFs seemed to have a more positive correlation.
Best that you read the research yourself, as I'm really not a mathematician or statistical analyst (was hoping some of the types on here who are would comment. :) )
http://www.chef-de-race.com/pfs/bsf_vs_pf.htm
http://www.chef-de-race.com/pfs/performance_figures.htm
Bettowin
06-10-2010, 12:04 AM
I haven't seen anyone mention how the horses in the Belmont actually looked before the race. I had Ice Box, Game on Dude and Fly Down as possible winners on paper. Actually had bets made and saw Dross in the post parade and thought he REALLY looked great. When they went down the line I commented to the people at the table that Ice Box stood out so far and then the camera panned to Dross and I went WOW! He had "that" look and with a field with no real standouts I went back and made sure I had tickets with him on top and not just 2nd thru 4th.
Sometimes body language and how a horse looks prior to the race works and there are times it doesn't but I do know I am getting better at it:) To me it's a tool that gives one quite an edge over today's crowd who mostly play off PP's and numbers. This year I told myself no more second guessing and when I see a horse that stands out on looks and fits to not hold back. The first payoff came in the Arkansas Derby with Line of David and then again with Dross so I will keep plugging away:)
Is anyone else factoring body language and pre-race looks more and more?
Market Mover
06-10-2010, 12:18 AM
After tearing up Belmont tickets, I always in hind sight remind myself that for the most part US horses don't get 1 1/2 miles, and that it's a war of attrition. You don't need a horse that has a super late kick, just one that doesn't decelerate as much as the rest of them!
Exactly. It was a staggerfest at the end...and Drosselmeyer "staggered less..."
WinterTriangle
06-10-2010, 12:29 AM
Is anyone else factoring body language and pre-race looks more and more?
I dislike placing a wager until I see the post parade.
Last 4 horses I can remember that looked spectacular (to me) before a race were:
Ice Box before the FL Derby
Victor's Cry in the Shoemaker Mile
Custom for Carlos in the Count Fleet at Oaklawn
Flawless in MSW at BEL
But try as I might, I couldn't see that separation in the Belmont. :bang: Perhaps it was the network, I dunno.
Kudos to you for seeing it though. :ThmbUp:
Greyfox
06-10-2010, 12:52 AM
I like both his Performance Figures and his Pace Parameters for classic races.
First let me say in advance that Roman is in no way a Beyer-basher. "BSFs have stood the test of time. They are certainly a profound improvement over raw time as a measure of performance. Nevertheless, the results do suggest that other approaches may be at least as accurate and equally useful...."
How are they calculated: "both BSFs and PFs convert the raw time of a race into a mathematically derived number taking into account variations in inherent track speed. The (PF) figures are based on a combination of fractional and final times converted into a single number. They represent performance integrated over the entire race.
:) )
http://www.chef-de-race.com/pfs/bsf_vs_pf.htm
http://www.chef-de-race.com/pfs/performance_figures.htm
Dr. Roman obviously has done his homework.
In my own play I combine fractional and final times into a single number as well. Integrated handicapping has been "the way and the light" for me.
Bettowin
06-10-2010, 12:59 AM
I dislike placing a wager until I see the post parade.
Last 4 horses I can remember that looked spectacular (to me) before a race were:
Ice Box before the FL Derby
Victor's Cry in the Shoemaker Mile
Custom for Carlos in the Count Fleet at Oaklawn
Flawless in MSW at BEL
But try as I might, I couldn't see that separation in the Belmont. :bang: Perhaps it was the network, I dunno.
Kudos to you for seeing it though. :ThmbUp:
I forgot to mention Summer Bird last year at Oaklawn. Not because he might win that day but because he looked like what I thought a REAL classic racehorse should look. I didn't bet him much in the Belmont but he really got me to thinking that I might be catching on:) Or maybe it was just the field that day. FWIW, each time I saw Dublin in person I thought he looked great but he just couldn't win so it's not all great but I do find I am catching horses that I would otherwise leave out and get beat.
Can't wait for Oaklawn next year.
PS - You left out Zenyatta:) LOL
WinterTriangle
06-10-2010, 06:48 AM
each time I saw Dublin in person I thought he looked great
Damn straight! I've seen him 3 times in person and every time he inspired ooohs and ahhhhs in the paddocks from onlookers. filled out, and he looks so strong. I've observed him and what he looks at, he's what some term "an intelligent horse", too.
After watching him race, he's physically capable of doing damage, but then I took to realizing his problems are in his head, not his body, and that's not something you see right away.
Dr. Roman obviously has done his homework.
In my own play I combine fractional and final times into a single number as well. Integrated handicapping has been "the way and the light" for me.
Same here.
bisket
06-11-2010, 04:20 PM
Exactly. It was a staggerfest at the end...and Drosselmeyer "staggered less..."
correction the drossinator and fly down were the only ones not staggering
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.