Holy Bull Gulfstream Park

[Charlie D]

Boys of Tusconova out, but looking forward to watching replay anyway :)

[Charlie D]

Entries

[Robert Fischer]

Major Gain is a very solid horse and should do well regardless. Solid and fully developed, he has shown heart and toughness and should compete in a variety of circumstances. Major Gain is kind of a horse to include in single race exotics in a number of positions. Could win in a weak event.

There are about 3-4 others in here who can do well if the race flow favors them. One of the most circumstance-dependent runners is Mucho Macho Man. "3M" is a sizable morning line underlay and could easily be non-competitive if he doesn't get things his way here. 5-2 on the tote would be surprising and tempt use against. Unfortunately a speed-favoring race isn't out of the question so he could look better than he is once again.

Dialed In is so far above these horses, it's not even close. He should absolutely devastate this field without much effort in any kind of a fair circumstance. In the event that the race is speed favoring and he doesn't settle near the front, he should still be fairly competitive. If an east coast horse wins that silly 5.5mil(holybull,florida,preak) DI is the current fav, but that's neither her nor there

[joanied]

A wide open field, IMO...I have it:
Mucho Macho Man
Sweet Ducky
Dialed In

[Dahoss9698]

Dialed In is so far above these horses, it's not even close. He should absolutely devastate this field without much effort in any kind of a fair circumstance.

Really? His debut was nice, but the race pretty much collapsed into his lap. I won't be shocked if he wins and I think he's one to keep an eye on going forward. But I'll be surprised if he devastates the field.

[Market Mover]

Major Gain is a very solid horse and should do well regardless. Solid and fully developed, he has shown heart and toughness and should compete in a variety of circumstances. Major Gain is kind of a horse to include in single race exotics in a number of positions. Could win in a weak event.

There are about 3-4 others in here who can do well if the race flow favors them. One of the most circumstance-dependent runners is Mucho Macho Man. "3M" is a sizable morning line underlay and could easily be non-competitive if he doesn't get things his way here. 5-2 on the tote would be surprising and tempt use against. Unfortunately a speed-favoring race isn't out of the question so he could look better than he is once again.

Dialed In is so far above these horses, it's not even close. He should absolutely devastate this field without much effort in any kind of a fair circumstance. In the event that the race is speed favoring and he doesn't settle near the front, he should still be fairly competitive. If an east coast horse wins that silly 5.5mil(holybull,florida,preak) DI is the current fav, but that's neither her nor there

I've always believed that More Than Ready youngsters are precocious 2-year-olds and 3-year-olds, for the most part, and they seem to excel in races up to a mile. This Holy Bull distance may fit him just well. More Than Ready was able to throw some pretty solid turfers Down Under, with Phelan Ready and Sebring winning at a young age, and also the brilliant filly More Joyous, who was very fast.

As for More Than Ready offspring in the classics, I feel they have definite distance limitations. Even that Wild Again blood on the bottom side of last week's Lecomte also-ran Action Ready could not get that colt to take to the two-turn distance. Rose rode a good race and kept him as relaxed as possible, after getting shuffled in between horses down the backside, and he angled out and had every chance. But that's when the Mineshafts and the AP Indy genes come out, in that last sixteenth of a mile, when the going gets tough, and it's stamina, NOT brilliant speed, that gets the job done.

I'd rather have a colt by a young sire out of the AP Indy line like Jump Start or Bernardini or Stephen Got Even or Friends Lake or Malibu Moon or Pulpit (heck even High Octane or Weekend Cruise) going a two-turn route of ground rather than a More Than Ready sired offspring. The longer they go, the tougher it is for these More Than Ready's to show their stamina. Yes, even with classic distance-oriented broodmare sires in the pedigree, and yes, I believe that even the 2010 BC Juvenile Turf winner Pluck has distance limitations (GoGo was successful in holding him early, and unleashing a fury late).

[Robert Fischer]

Really? His debut was nice, but the race pretty much collapsed into his lap. I won't be shocked if he wins and I think he's one to keep an eye on going forward. But I'll be surprised if he devastates the field.

I don't think it collapsed as much as you do.

IMO it was a pretty fairly run race that actually slightly favored speed. Ninja Blade is a very solid runner who should he stay healthy will earn some money, and he absolutely had a dream trip in that race. The race unfolded for Ninja Blade, he changed strongly and finished well. Blade "deserved" to win it with that trip and with his solid talent and excellent fundamentals, and DI was green as a bean in the 3rd week of spring and he dwarfed Blade.
Percussion is a lesser quality, who will have to drop and graduate as a claimer and he hardly collapsed finishing a pretty safe 3rd, presenting a suggestion that the race didn't collapse.

[Dahoss9698]

I don't think it collapsed as much as you do.

IMO it was a pretty fairly run race that actually slightly favored speed. Ninja Blade is a very solid runner who should he stay healthy will earn some money, and he absolutely had a dream trip in that race. The race unfolded for Ninja Blade, he changed strongly and finished well. Blade "deserved" to win it with that trip and with his solid talent and excellent fundamentals, and DI was green as a bean in the 3rd week of spring and he dwarfed Blade.
Percussion is a lesser quality, who will have to drop and graduate as a claimer and he hardly collapsed finishing a pretty safe 3rd, presenting a suggestion that the race didn't collapse.

The pace was pretty fast. By no means did the race favor speed at all.

[Robert Fischer]

The pace was pretty fast. By no means did the race favor speed at all.

I'll book your action on Percussion in any future MSW ;)

[Tom]

Dialed In is so far above these horses, it's not even close. He should absolutely devastate this field without much effort in any kind of a fair circumstance.



In terms of pace and speed, he is so far below most here it isn't funny. All he has shown so far is a good rally into a slow final time. His numbers leave a lot of improvment needed to hit the board. He will have to do a lot more tomorrow than he did at CD.

[Chris G]

I've seen the pp's on all of them except Dialed In.


That said, I think the race is between Black N Beauty & Leave of Absence. Both ran solid figs as 2yo's and are ready to run new tops now.

I would not expect either of these to be in the Kentucky Derby since they failed to route as 2yo's.

[cj]

I don't think it collapsed as much as you do.

IMO it was a pretty fairly run race that actually slightly favored speed. Ninja Blade is a very solid runner who should he stay healthy will earn some money, and he absolutely had a dream trip in that race. The race unfolded for Ninja Blade, he changed strongly and finished well. Blade "deserved" to win it with that trip and with his solid talent and excellent fundamentals, and DI was green as a bean in the 3rd week of spring and he dwarfed Blade.
Percussion is a lesser quality, who will have to drop and graduate as a claimer and he hardly collapsed finishing a pretty safe 3rd, presenting a suggestion that the race didn't collapse.

Have you even bothered to look how the front runners have done when they returned from Dialed In's race? How about the other closer that made up some ground that day?

The pace was not only fast, it was extremely fast, and future results of those that have run back seem to back up this opinion.

[Charlie D]

If Dialed In can unleash his big late kick against this company, his name will go on the already formidable list of potential 3-year-old stars.

http://www.drf.com/news/kentucky-derby-talk-high-hopes-or-wishful-thinking

[Tom]

He might be tons better than his last race, as he was a victim of his tardy start and just could not post a good winning number. But he will have to show major improvement top hit the board.

What Beyer did he get in that race? He got a 77 Cramer, which is pretty low compared the multitude of 90's in the other horses' PP lines.

I think his race was more of a "I see the cop sitting there, so I hit my brakes and YOU look like you were speeding by me and I don't get pulled over" move.

But I could be wrong.

[PhantomOnTour]

Zito normally doesn't have them cranked up (his Derby prospects) first off the break in Florida. However, Dialed In is behind schedule with only one start and he needs Graded earnings. The sharp works tell me Zito is trying with him in this race. It's only a one turn mile and the distance isn't out of anyone's range. He's certainly capable but I don't like him here.
My top choice right now is Black N Beauty.

[toussaud]

i don't see anything here worth getting excited about. Mucho macho man just isn't a good horse and he's being talked about like a contender

i agree with hoss. I would not be shocked if Dailed IN wins but come on he won a maiden race with a stupid pace scenrio

[Charlie D]

2nd at 2f, Phillipe fell out of tv, 4th at 2f, Military Jewel fell out of tv, Santo Gato tired, The Freak tired, Percussion tired

Not been helped much by the race dynamics has he Dialed In :)

[cj]

2nd at 2f, Phillipe fell out of tv, 4th at 2f, Military Jewel fell out of tv, Santo Gato tired, The Freak tired, Percussion tired

Not been helped much by the race dynamics has he Dialed In :)

Has anyone bothered to see how those horses have done when returned?

[Charlie D]

Not me cj, but i'll take a guess at not won much

[Charlie D]

here is rating for winner

Dialied In 72

2nd was close up and ran same, now if horse that is on Pace can only post that, it indicates the rest were, well, like second, rubbish and that being so, they would not win much unless they improved significantly on this performance.

So, you could say, i'm making an imformed guess in last post

[cj]

here is rating for winner

Dialied In 72

2nd was close up and ran same, now if horse that is on Pace can only post that, it indicates the rest were, well, like second, rubbish and that being so, they would not win much unless they improved significantly on this performance.

So, you could say, i'm making an imformed guess in last post

Actually, all of the horses that were near the pace have come back to run better races, both positionally and speed figure wise. One paid over $80.

The only other horse to make up ground, the 4th finisher I believe, ran poorly next out as the fave at Tampa. This shows me the pace was indeed very fast.

[AgainstAllOdds]

I, on the other hand, like Dialed In in this spot. I really like Boys Of Toscanova, but considering he isn't running I guess that rules that one out now doesn't it? :ThmbUp:

[Charlie D]

Actually, all of the horses that were near the pace have come back to run better races, both positionally and speed figure wise. One paid over $80.

The only other horse to make up ground, the 4th finisher I believe, ran poorly next out as the fave at Tampa. This shows me the pace was indeed very fast.



Better speedfigures does not suprise tbh, particulary as they'll have run under different race dynamics to this race. Same could happen in Dailed Up's case too, but we'll have to wait for the race result for confirmation.

He's an interesting contender in here, but i think i'd let him beat me.

[cj]

Better speedfigures does not suprise tbh, particulary as they'll have run under different race dynamics to this race. Same could happen in Dailed Up's case too, but we'll have to wait for the race result for confirmation.

He's an interesting contender in here, but i think i'd let him beat me.

That is my whole point, the race dynamics were extreme and not likely to be seen very often. They helped Dialed In, hurt the others. Of course he can win today, but I'll be betting against him.

[Charlie D]

Yeah!! Think we are on same page CJ

Gourmet Dinner for me i think.

[redshift1]

Yeah!! Think we are on same page CJ

Gourmet Dinner for me i think.


Maybe It was the track or pace but he flattened out in the stretch. IMO not a good sign going forward.

MMM
Black & Beauty
Dialed In

In any order.

[redshift1]

Dialed In getting bet early I like his chances but not less than 6-1.

[JBmadera]

Dialed In getting bet early I like his chances but not less than 6-1.


yeah, my pick too, but not at 2-1 will go with the :6: at 7-1+

[Tom]

:7::6::1:

[Charlie D]

Maybe It was the track or pace but he flattened out in the stretch. IMO not a good sign going forward.

MMM
Black & Beauty
Dialed In

In any order.


Fair comment redshift, however today is Dirt and different competition. B&B the one to overcome i think.

[Tom]

OK, this one just got interesting.
If they put Calvin on him and he draws the rail in the Derby.....:cool:

[redshift1]

wow

[Dahoss9698]

He ran very well again and was again helped out by a fast pace. He might be very good, but I want to see how he reacts to a pace that isn't so fast.

[JBmadera]

damn, and exactly what's wrong with $7.40...DOH!

[tribecaagent]

I just got in to catch this race; was the track playing to off-the-pace types?
I'm looking at the charts and it doesn't exactly seem that way.

[redshift1]

Couple of thoughts:

What about To Honor and Serve, MMM's performance takes some of the luster off his wins.

Gourmet Dinner ran well with maybe not the best of rides.

Dialed In has enough earnings for the Derby unless something strange happens.

[Charlie D]

Significant improvement :D

[PhantomOnTour]

Wow, nice run. Full of himself in the lane and looked like lots was left in the tank.
Ofcourse, we numbers guys will form a more firm opinion after doin the figs.

Would someone please tell Nick Zito to shave the black hairs growing out of his ears!? The are becoming like his eyebrows, for Chrissakes....yuck. I watched the pre-race interview and was distracted by the ear hair. Never heard a word Nick said.

[Charlie D]

A wide open field, IMO...I have it:
Mucho Macho Man
Sweet Ducky
Dialed In


:cool: joanied

[AgainstAllOdds]

I hope you boxed them, Joanied :) I just bet the win, but it was a fairly nice profit for me. Hope you cashed in too. :jump:

[keithw84]

Anyone heard yet what figure Dialed In earned?

[sammy the sage]

Major PROPS/kudos to Robert Fischer HERE...posted like he saw it...many here bashed him FOR that...yet HAD NO PICK of their own....one player is actaully HELD IN HIGH regard...but after today..am wondering WHY...all he did was PUT down..(even AFTER the race)...and post NO opinion PRIOR too... :lol: :rolleyes:

again...Robert Fischer....very NICE call :cool:

[Charlie D]

difference of opinions on a performance sammy the sage thats all and the posting of selections is optional.

and well done Robert too and everyone else who bet Dailed In . Maybe even Mr Beyer.

[PaceAdvantage]

Major PROPS/kudos to Robert Fischer HERE...posted like he saw it...many here bashed him FOR that...yet HAD NO PICK of their own....one player is actaully HELD IN HIGH regard...but after today..am wondering WHY...all he did was PUT down..(even AFTER the race)...and post NO opinion PRIOR too... :lol: :rolleyes:

again...Robert Fischer....very NICE call :cool:BASHED? Where the hell was he BASHED?!?!?!

NEWS FLASH: A difference of opinion is NOT A BASH or a PUT DOWN.

So please, point me to the posts where you think he was BASHED and/or PUT DOWN.

This is so tiresome.

[Dahoss9698]

BASHED? Where the hell was he BASHED?!?!?!

NEWS FLASH: A difference of opinion is NOT A BASH or a PUT DOWN.

So please, point me to the posts where you think he was BASHED and/or PUT DOWN.

This is so tiresome.

If I had to take a guess this was the bash/put down.

Really? His debut was nice, but the race pretty much collapsed into his lap. I won't be shocked if he wins and I think he's one to keep an eye on going forward. But I'll be surprised if he devastates the field.

And this was the put down after the race.

He ran very well again and was again helped out by a fast pace. He might be very good, but I want to see how he reacts to a pace that isn't so fast.

Apparently saying I wouldn't be surprised if he wins and then saying he ran very well after it is just awful. And yeah, I'm so stingy with my opinions. Why even bother anymore in this bizarro world?

[cj]

Major PROPS/kudos to Robert Fischer HERE...posted like he saw it...many here bashed him FOR that...yet HAD NO PICK of their own....one player is actaully HELD IN HIGH regard...but after today..am wondering WHY...all he did was PUT down..(even AFTER the race)...and post NO opinion PRIOR too... :lol: :rolleyes:

again...Robert Fischer....very NICE call :cool:

I will say that just because the horse won does not mean Fischer's post about the pace of the prior race is correct...it is woefully wrong.

Personally, I'd play against a similar horse at 5 to 2 in that spot every time. It has served me well over the years. It doesn't mean I cash every ticket.

[PhantomOnTour]

Quirin style I have the final fig at 108, which is right about par.
The track was pretty fast today.

[Charlie D]

My rating for Dialed In 118


Although race dynamics have been to his advantage i think it's safe to say we saw a decent 3yo winner of Holy Bull and i personally look forward to seeing him next time.

Maybe Uncle Mo needs to get some wing mirrors fitted so he can see this guy coming :)

[classhandicapper]

I had no view on this race beforehand, but I think the result speaks volumes about the limitations of figures.

If Robert Fischer, the public, other members of this forum, and even Andy Beyer (who is a notoriously numbers oriented handicapper but lacking in other ways) could recognize that this horse was a major contender or even the deserving favorite despite the very inferior numbers, that's telling you that the numbers are missing something very important at least some of the time.

Most horses with PPs and numbers like this would have been 10-1 or 20-1.

IMHO, part of it is an accuracy issue (though I don't think that was the case here).

But another part of it is that races aren't sprints where everyone is giving everything they have all the way and all are equally exhausted at the end.

Horses (especially closers) use the other horses in a race as prompters. They only do their serious running over the last few furlongs or just through the stretch. When they cross the finish line, it's impossible to tell from numbers whether a horse had very deep reserves of stamina left that would have enabled it to run a lot faster if required or whether the horse was full out exhausted at the end. That's even true sometimes in a loss if the jockey badly mistimed a move, someone else just happened to finish really well, there was trouble etc...

Eventually all lightly raced horses get exposed as they move up in class. That's when you find out who has been running fast in cheap races because of the soft competition and easy race dynamics and who has been running slow for those very same reasons but is actually loaded with deep reserves and capable of more.

The ones that are loaded can sometimes be recognized very early by people with keen eyes (like Robert Fischer apparently has) based on trip and how they finished. Still others can be recognized a little later because they seemingly always get the job done (or almost always) no matter what the pace, trip, race development etc... That kind of record screams superior ability than what has been shown to date.

Figures simply cannot measure these things.

IMHO this is a kind of advanced class/trip handicapping that is superior to numbers handicapping even though the numbers will always provide an essential information about ability also.

[PhantomOnTour]

Classhandicapper,

I see your points. Numbers don't measure everything, esp how much gas a horse has in his tank when he crosses the finish line. That was the case with Dialed In...he had much more in him. Leparoux was patting him before they finished. Very nice race.
I am a numbers guy and believe in them. In my opinion they are the best way to gauge a horses ability and assess a performance. You clearly are not a numbers guy, which is cool. More than one way to skin a cat, but I would imagine most pros and those who profit at this game use pace and speed figs.

[Charlie D]

Of course numbers have limitations, of course they don't measure certain things and that's because they are not designed to measure everything, but as you probably know CH they are used by numerous successful bettors.


Dialed in was unproven and if people want to take shot at 5-2 then thats thier choice. At 10-1, 20-1 i would probably have toook at shot.


People should not delude themselves. This is Greatetest guessing Game in world we are playing because no past performance is guaranteed to be repeated.

[cj]

Of course numbers have limitations, but I wouldn't even say that was really the case here. The horse was moving from a sprint to a route and obviously was going to like it.

My point was betting a horse routing first time at 5 to 2, moving from a maiden win to a graded stake no less, is a poor proposition no matter the figure earned. I'm sure classhandicapper knows this as well as anyone.

[Dahoss9698]

I had no view on this race beforehand, but I think the result speaks volumes about the limitations of figures.

The ones that are loaded can sometimes be recognized very early by people with keen eyes (like Robert Fischer apparently has) based on trip and how they finished. Still others can be recognized a little later because they seemingly always get the job done (or almost always) no matter what the pace, trip, race development etc... That kind of record screams superior ability than what has been shown to date.



This is getting old also. It has nothing to do with figures. I personally don't even use them. People are acting like a $70 horse was uncovered. It's embarrassing really.

Dialed In was one of, if not the most hyped maiden winner at Churchill. He was being buzzed all through Gulfstream for WEEKS. He opened up 8/5 and went off at 5/2. Anyone with a set of eyes could see he put in an impressive run in his debut. However, it was worth noting he did it with a face pace. It didn't mean he wasn't still a good horse.

These discussions involve betting, which I know is foreign to many that post here. Dialed In won and congrats to those that cashed. It doesn't change the fact that he was too short oddswise based on his debut for many people that liked him. It also doesn't mean he didn't get another favorable setup.

All of this over a $7 horse. Bizarro world.

[gm10]

I agree with CJ (shock! horror!) if I understand correctly. I think this is a case where numbers were very useful.

His late number on debut was very strong, it was grade 1 territory. A horse that can produce such a late number on debut is always worth following, especially when stretching out in distance. It certainly wasn't a case of the pace collapsing. None of the others had managed anything similar.

[Dahoss9698]

I agree with CJ (shock! horror!) if I understand correctly.

I know I'm shocked, but you don't understand it correctly.

[classhandicapper]

Perhaps you guys should re-read this thread.

Before the race people were talking about the horse being way too slow and benefiting from a fast pace last time out.

The reason he was so hyped elsewhere was because people that pay little or no attention to figures saw his trip and the fact that he won with massive amounts of ability in reserve.

I can tell you how I would have handicapped and played the race after the fact even though I didn't look at it until late last night.

I would have passed.

I would have known he was massively better than his figures, but I would have had no way of telling how much better. So I would have had no way of assessing the fair value of the bet.

There are dozens of other horses with the same exact numbers (pace, final time etc....), running style, stretching out etc... that I would have tossed at 20-1 without hesitation without the same trip/visual clues apparent in this horse.

Figures are an important tool in my own handicapping also. In fact they are indispensable for me in some situations. But the accuracy issues are problematic and the things they cannot measure (like some aspects of the race dynamics, what a horse has left in the tank after the finish, and many other things) will mislead almost as often as they will help.

This was an example of that, but there are many every day (especially among very high level stakes horses and very lightly raced horses that haven't been tested yet).

I think some of you guys are just trying to rationalize away the fact that he won by saying he was underlay or that just because he won doesn't mean that those that liked him were right. I think the better approach is to ask why is that so many people loved this horse and were right and my numbers or method didn't make it so apparent.

[cj]

Perhaps you guys should re-read this thread.

Before the race people were talking about the horse being way too slow and benefiting from a fast pace last time out.

Where? I saw one poster call him slow, but he said the same thing everyone else did...he could improve. He did benefit from a fast early pace. Nobody said it meant he couldn't win yesterday.

The reason he was so hyped elsewhere was because people that pay little or no attention to figures saw his trip and the fact that he won with massive amounts of ability in reserve.

People that use figures saw the same thing.

I can tell you how I would have handicapped and played the race after the fact even though I didn't look at it until late last night.

I would have passed.

I would have known he was massively better than his figures, but I would have had no way of telling how much better. So I would have had no way of assessing the fair value of the bet.

I wound up passing too, but normally I would bet against him if I was interested in another contender. Surely you know these "massive amounts of ability in reserve" types falter much more often than they deliver in future contests.

There are dozens of other horses with the same exact numbers (pace, final time etc....), running style, stretching out etc... that I would have tossed at 20-1 without hesitation without the same trip/visual clues apparent in this horse.

Figures are an important tool in my own handicapping also. In fact they are indispensable for me in some situations. But the accuracy issues are problematic and the things they cannot measure (like some aspects of the race dynamics, what a horse has left in the tank after the finish, and many other things) will mislead almost as often as they will help.

This was an example of that, but there are many every day (especially among very high level stakes horses and very lightly raced horses that haven't been tested yet).

I think some of you guys are just trying to rationalize away the fact that he won by saying he was underlay or that just because he won doesn't mean that those that liked him were right. I think the better approach is to ask why is that so many people loved this horse and were right and my numbers or method didn't make it so apparent.

I think some of you guys are just pretending to be smarter than everyone else after the fact. The horse was 5 to 2, not 52 to 1. This game is about finding overlays, and he was not one. The only thing I debated was the Fischer guy saying the pace in his last race favored early speed. It did not. There is tons of evidence to the contrary. I've bet horses I thought would wire the field and they come from midpack to win. Does it mean I was right, or did I get lucky? If Fischer really believes that last race favored early types, he certainly had at least some luck on his side.

Instead of knocking the figures, tell me of one figure handicapper that would have predicted this horse to run another 75 Beyer yesterday. I can't imagine anybody would.

[classhandicapper]

CJ,

With all due respect, these were some of the comments:

the race collapsed, the pace was not fast it was extremely fast, he earned a 77 and many others earned in the 90s, dynamics helped him and hurt others, i'll be betting against him, i'd bet against horses like him at 5-2 etc...

The entire thread was a series of posts trying to either diminish his performance and call him an underlay.

I don't have a strong opinion on his value even now, but in his first start he was off slowly, lost some ground, and during the last part of the race he outran the other closer like he was a turd without even being all out late.

Even if the pace that day was fast relative to the final time and too fast for some of the other cheaper horses, it didn't help this horse. He was flying late. He may have even been accelerating late which is really rare on dirt.

I'm not trying to prove I'm any smarter than anyone else after the fact. I wouldn't have been able to tell just how good he was. I just would have been able to tell that he was very good.

Lots of people saw the sames things otherwise he would have gone off at 20-1 like the typical slow maiden winner coming into a stakes race. Instead he went off at 5-2 because so many people recognized his quality.

This is same kind stuff that has come up in discussions about other horses.

IMO there isn't a neat formula for converting a performance into a number that works all the time because all horses have a unique combination of speed, stamina, competitiveness, acceleration etc... and the race dynamics are sometimes more complicated than just the fractional calls.

Sometimes you have to just watch a race, look at the quality of the horses in it, look at the chart to see how the horses ran relative to each other, watch how the horse went out after the finish etc.. to see how well a horse ran and whether it had a little or lot left in the tank and whether it won easily because it caught an easy field and perfect race dynamics or the horse is just very good.

Numbers are great, but they have limitations.

[cj]

With all due respect, these were some of the comments:

the race collapsed, the pace was not fast it was extremely fast, he earned a 77 and many others earned in the 90s, dynamics helped him and hurt others, i'll be betting against him, i'd bet against horses like him at 5-2 etc...

And not one person said he couldn't win. Every one of those mentioned he could win. They all just questioned if he was value or not.



The entire thread was a series of posts trying to diminish his performance and call him an underlay.

I don't have a strong opinion on his value, but in his first start he was off slowly, lost some ground, during the last part of the race he outran the other closer like he was a turd and he wasn't even all out late.

A think all anybody here was doing was trying to assess his value. You say you have no opinion on it, yet you chastise those that did, and you do it after the fact. Oh, the the other closer is a turd. Did you check out his last race?

Numbers are great, but they have limitations.

I don't think I've ever heard a serious figure handicapper say they don't. It is others that try to attribute that them. This was definitely not a time to base a horse on his last final time number. It doesn't mean he was the bet of the century either.

[Relwob Owner]

This is getting old also. It has nothing to do with figures. I personally don't even use them. People are acting like a $70 horse was uncovered. It's embarrassing really.

Dialed In was one of, if not the most hyped maiden winner at Churchill. He was being buzzed all through Gulfstream for WEEKS. He opened up 8/5 and went off at 5/2. Anyone with a set of eyes could see he put in an impressive run in his debut. However, it was worth noting he did it with a face pace. It didn't mean he wasn't still a good horse.

These discussions involve betting, which I know is foreign to many that post here. Dialed In won and congrats to those that cashed. It doesn't change the fact that he was too short oddswise based on his debut for many people that liked him. It also doesn't mean he didn't get another favorable setup.

All of this over a $7 horse. Bizarro world.



From someone who has observed this debate, it seems to fit the bizarro world description. You and a few others commented that the horse benefited from a fast pace in his last(which I believe he did) and that you wouldnt bet him, which I wouldnt have either....like you said, it isnt as if the horse went off at 10 to 1.

Looking back, I would say that a bet on a horse like DI was probably not a good move in the sense that in the short run, you cash the ticket but in the long run, if you always bet horses like that at 5 to 2, you will be in trouble.

[cj]

Looking back, I would say that a bet on a horse like DI was probably not a good move in the sense that in the short run, you cash the ticket but in the long run, if you always bet horses like that at 5 to 2, you will be in trouble.

That sums it up nicely.

[Dahoss9698]

Perhaps you guys should re-read this thread.

Before the race people were talking about the horse being way too slow and benefiting from a fast pace last time out.

The reason he was so hyped elsewhere was because people that pay little or no attention to figures saw his trip and the fact that he won with massive amounts of ability in reserve.

I can tell you how I would have handicapped and played the race after the fact even though I didn't look at it until late last night.

I would have passed.

I would have known he was massively better than his figures, but I would have had no way of telling how much better. So I would have had no way of assessing the fair value of the bet.

There are dozens of other horses with the same exact numbers (pace, final time etc....), running style, stretching out etc... that I would have tossed at 20-1 without hesitation without the same trip/visual clues apparent in this horse.

Figures are an important tool in my own handicapping also. In fact they are indispensable for me in some situations. But the accuracy issues are problematic and the things they cannot measure (like some aspects of the race dynamics, what a horse has left in the tank after the finish, and many other things) will mislead almost as often as they will help.

This was an example of that, but there are many every day (especially among very high level stakes horses and very lightly raced horses that haven't been tested yet).

I think some of you guys are just trying to rationalize away the fact that he won by saying he was underlay or that just because he won doesn't mean that those that liked him were right. I think the better approach is to ask why is that so many people loved this horse and were right and my numbers or method didn't make it so apparent.

Seriously....what are you talking about? The horse was an obvious contender on pretty much every method one wants to use. You're acting like he was in fact a hopeless longshot that only a few people noticed.

There is nothing to learn here. He showed talent in his debut. He overcame a rough start and flew home into a sharp pace. Stevie Wonder could see that he had ability with the way he finished. The question was what kind of price were you willing to take on him with the way his debut unfolded.

Before we crown him the Derby winner, let's see him navigate two turns and I'm curious to see how he runs into a moderate pace. I think a better approach might be to not pretend you are above everyone and type less to get your point across. More words doesn't = better post.

[gm10]

I know I'm shocked, but you don't understand it correctly.

How should I interpret this then

'Of course numbers have limitations, but I wouldn't even say that was really the case here.'

[redshift1]

Dialed In's maiden race is on youtube, if anything Its more impressive than the Holy Bull.

[Dahoss9698]

How should I interpret this then

'Of course numbers have limitations, but I wouldn't even say that was really the case here.'

This has to be an act. You said you agree with CJ and then posted pretty much the opposite of what he said.

[gm10]

That sums it up nicely.

Now we are disagreeing
Have a look at the following 'system'.

Limit to horses that

- ran a 90+ late number on debut (90 corresponds to graded stakes level here)
- finished in the top 3 on debut
- are running in their second race lifetime today

Results apply to 2010 season only.

319 horses
78 winners (24.5%)
Profit of 4.4 on flat unit stakes betting (ROI +1.4%)

When I make the 'late number' >= 94 (Dialed In had 94 late on debut):


131 horses
39 winners (29.8%)
Profit of +63.2 on flat unit stakes betting (ROI +48.2%)

Not many bets but great ROI.

[gm10]

This has to be an act. You said you agree with CJ and then posted pretty much the opposite of what he said.

Another question goes unanswered.

[Charlie D]

.




A think all anybody here was doing was trying to assess his value. You say you have no opinion on it, yet you chastise those that did, and you do it after the fact. Oh, the the other closer is a turd. Did you check out his last race?





Indeed.

I'll take Robert, Joanied, Dahoss, redshifts etc comments onboard anyday and put other clowns on ignore.

[cj]

Now we are disagreeing
Have a look at the following 'system'.

Limit to horses that

- ran a 90+ late number on debut (90 corresponds to graded stakes level here)
- finished in the top 3 on debut
- are running in their second race lifetime today

Results apply to 2010 season only.

319 horses
78 winners (24.5%)
Profit of 4.4 on flat unit stakes betting (ROI +1.4%)

When I make the 'late number' >= 94 (Dialed In had 94 late on debut):


131 horses
39 winners (29.8%)
Profit of +63.2 on flat unit stakes betting (ROI +48.2%)

Not many bets but great ROI.

You have many chances to post your figures before the race, but you don't. Once you do, we'll discuss figures.

[classhandicapper]

And not one person said he couldn't win. Every one of those mentioned he could win. They all just questioned if he was value or not.



That's understood. People always say that to hedge their position. I do it too.

But the entire premise of the thread was that one person said the horse looked like a standout and a bunch of others responded by saying his debut race collapsed, the pace was extremely fast, the race was slow, he was a huge underlay etc... In other words, his race was not "that good" and he's a bet against.

To me, it couldn't be more obvious the horse ran a really special race in his debut (as maiden winners go), the fast fractional times/pace had virtually nothing to do with the visual impressiveness of his performance, and the final time was irrelevant. The race did not collapse. He was flying late and probably still accelerating when he left a bunch of other horses that were also off the pace in the dust without even being fully extended. Even the track announcer understood it.

It may be coming after the fact, but everything I am saying above is 100% consistent with everything I've said when it came to other disputed horses that I thought were very underrated by most numbers guys.

I haven't argued the value because I don't think I'm not smart enough to make that kind of fine line decision and it wouldn't be fair after the fact anyway. But I doubt the horse was any more of an underlay than any other horse in the race and it's more likely that the original poster was correct in his assessment of the chances.

It's really not so much about whether he identified some really big hidden long shot. Obviously he didn't. It's that if you didn't understand how well the horse ran because of numbers or because you thought the race collapsed etc..., you'd be very tempted to be against him. IMO that would be an incorrect analysis of his debut performance and assessment of his chances.

I really don't want a rehash of the same arguments I've made in the past. At this stage the horse hasn't done enough to merit that kind of debate anyway. He's just an up and coming 3YO that is displaying a LOT of potential. It's enough to say that IMO he ran a huge race in his debut and there's no chance I would have been looking to play against him.

[Dahoss9698]

Another question goes unanswered.

I try and answer most of your questions. But I don't have time for them all. I can't continue to lead you around on a leash. Some of this stuff you need to figure out on your own.

However, it doesn't change that you said you agree with CJ, then you posted the direct opposite of what he said. True to form.

[classhandicapper]

Now we are disagreeing
Have a look at the following 'system'.

Limit to horses that

- ran a 90+ late number on debut (90 corresponds to graded stakes level here)
- finished in the top 3 on debut
- are running in their second race lifetime today

Results apply to 2010 season only.

319 horses
78 winners (24.5%)
Profit of 4.4 on flat unit stakes betting (ROI +1.4%)

When I make the 'late number' >= 94 (Dialed In had 94 late on debut):


131 horses
39 winners (29.8%)
Profit of +63.2 on flat unit stakes betting (ROI +48.2%)

Not many bets but great ROI.

I find a handful of horses every year that don't reveal their potential final time speed until they are placed in a position that allows it. Very good late speed combined with a great relative stretch performance is often an indication of a depressed final time figure. Since so many people are final time oriented and these lightly raced maidens haven't revealed their final time capabilities in back races, there is potential for value. Aside from breaking slowly, losing ground, running greenly, and not being fully extended, Dialed In qualified on those grounds too.

This phenomenon sometimes extends for multiple races in a row on synthetic tracks because of all the slow paces and even occurs among more experienced horses too.

To me, the biggest problem is not being able measure exactly how much upside there is. So it's hard to value the horses. I don't think it's possible to make more than a guess. You would probably have to work the horse in company with another that you have a good line on to get a better clue.

[Dahoss9698]

That's understood. People always say that to hedge their position. I do it too.

But the entire premise of the thread was that one person said the horse looked like a standout and a bunch of others responded by saying his debut race collapsed, the pace was extremely fast, the race was slow, he was a huge underlay etc... In other words, his race was not "that good" and he's a bet against.

To me, it couldn't be more obvious the horse ran a really special race in his debut (as maiden winners go), the fast fractional times/pace had virtually nothing to do with the visual impressiveness of his performance, and the final time was irrelevant. The race did not collapse. He was flying late and probably still accelerating when he left a bunch of other horses that were also off the pace in the dust without even being fully extended. Even the track announcer understood it.

It may be coming after the fact, but everything I am saying above is 100% consistent with everything I've said when it came to other disputed horses that I thought were very underrated by most numbers guys.

I haven't argued the value because I don't think I'm not smart enough to make that kind of fine line decision and it wouldn't be fair after the fact anyway. But I doubt the horse was any more of an underlay than any other horse in the race and it's more likely that the original poster was correct in his assessment of the chances.

It's really not so much about whether he identified some really big hidden long shot. Obviously he didn't. It's that if you didn't understand how well the horse ran because of numbers or because you thought the race collapsed etc..., you'd be very tempted to be against him. IMO that would be an incorrect analysis of his debut performance and assessment of his chances.

I really don't want a rehash of the same arguments I've made in the past. At this stage the horse hasn't done enough to merit that kind of debate anyway. He's just an up and coming 3YO that is displaying a LOT of potential. It's enough to say that IMO he ran a huge race in his debut and there's no chance I would have been looking to play against him.

Me, me, me, me, me. I, I, I, I, I.

You made your point. You love yourself.

[cj]

To me, it couldn't be more obvious the horse ran a really special race in his debut (as maiden winners go), the fast fractional times/pace had virtually nothing to do with the visual impressiveness of his performance, and the final time was irrelevant. The race did not collapse.

This is all I questioned. It did collapse. The numbers don't lie. The pace figure was 100+, the speed figure in the 70s. That is a collapse. All the other speed horses have returned to run better positionally and figure wise. How is that not a collapse?

[gm10]

You have many chances to post your figures before the race, but you don't. Once you do, we'll discuss figures.

That was not the point. I'm disagreeing that this type of 5/2 is bad value. The speed figure based on final time may not have been great but the clue was in another number. Genuine late speed on debut is telling, and a good basis for a future bet.

[Cardus]

Indeed.

I'll take Robert, Joanied, Dahoss, redshifts etc comments onboard anyday and put other clowns on ignore.

A curious, and absurd, linkling of names here.

From a long ago children's show: "One of these things doesn't belong here... can you guess which one?"

[Charlie D]

Dahoss is right, it is a bizaro world and why bother anymore.

[gm10]

This is all I questioned. It did collapse. The numbers don't lie. The pace figure was 100+, the speed figure in the 70s. That is a collapse. All the other speed horses have returned to run better positionally and figure wise. How is that not a collapse?

Early Pos. / Finish

1 / 3
2 / 8
3 / 2
...
10 / 1
11 / 4
12 / 11

Wouldn't a true pace collapse see the early leaders finish up the track?

Also I don't understand what you mean when you that other speed horses have returned to run better positionally. One improved, the other stayed the same, and the third one hasn't run since. Do you have a different position in mind?

[cj]

Early Pos. / Finish

1 / 3
2 / 8
3 / 2
...
10 / 1
11 / 4
12 / 11

Wouldn't a true pace collapse see the early leaders finish up the track?

Also I don't understand what you mean when you that other speed horses have returned to run better positionally. One improved, the other stayed the same, and the third one hasn't run since. Do you have a different position in mind?

Not necessarily in a maiden race. The race fell apart figure wise. I meant to say and/or with respect to the position/speed part.

As for the other speeds, here you go:

Ninja Blade ran 2nd again, improved Beyer by 12.
Phillipe improved by 9 Beyer points and won, 8th in the DI race.
Military Jewel improved 45 points and won, last in the DI race.


Kreigspiel, the other horse that ran late, dropped his Beyer by 10 getting beat as the favorite at Tampa, albeit a 2nd.

[cj]

That was not the point. I'm disagreeing that this type of 5/2 is bad value. The speed figure based on final time may not have been great but the clue was in another number. Genuine late speed on debut is telling, and a good basis for a future bet.

Well, you didn't break it down by odds. What is the ROI at 5 to 2 or lower? Seeing the win percentage is 24%, that tells me the positive ROI comes from longer priced winners, not 5 to 2 shots.

[gm10]

I find a handful of horses every year that don't reveal their potential final time speed until they are placed in a position that allows it. Very good late speed combined with a great relative stretch performance is often an indication of a depressed final time figure. Since so many people are final time oriented and these lightly raced maidens haven't revealed their final time capabilities in back races, there is potential for value.

We completely agree on that. Pace and final times figures have long been understood and their predictive power has been used effectively. Not so for late speed, and also relative stretch performance (I would trust the latter less, though).



To me, the biggest problem is not being able measure exactly how much upside there is. So it's hard to value the horses. I don't think it's possible to make more than a guess. You would probably have to work the horse in company with another that you have a good line on to get a better clue.

True, it's hard to measure the upside. I just accept a superb late kick on debut as a definite sign of class, regardless of pace. A fast pace and genuine late speed aren't mutually exclusive within the context of the same race imo.

[gm10]

Well, you didn't break it down by odds. What is the ROI at 5 to 2 or lower? Seeing the win percentage is 24%, that tells me the positive ROI comes from longer priced winners, not 5 to 2 shots.

The odds category <2/1 to 3/1> returns +3.2 on 28 bets (ROI 11.4%).

[cj]

The odds category <2/1 to 3/1> returns +3.2 on 28 bets (ROI 11.4%).

That is a far cry from 48.2.

[cj]

That is a far cry from 48.2.

Oh, and what about the first stat you quoted?

Also, why not answer the question the way it was asked, 5 to 2 or less? Didn't like the answer?

[gm10]

Not necessarily in a maiden race. The race fell apart figure wise. I meant to say and/or with respect to the position/speed part.

As for the other speeds, here you go:

Ninja Blade ran 2nd again, improved Beyer by 12.
Phillipe improved by 9 Beyer points and won, 8th in the DI race.
Military Jewel improved 45 points and won, last in the DI race.


Kreigspiel, the other horse that ran late, dropped his Beyer by 10 getting beat as the favorite at Tampa, albeit a 2nd.

Why are you ignoring the actual early leader Percussion? Finished third and hasn't raced since. Philippe dropped down to a Turfway maiden, not hard to run better there. Ninja Blade showed logical improvement in his second race.

For Kreigspiel I noted an improvement by 1 point in his next start at Tampa. I don't think he closed that fast at CD. He just plugs on, he'll pick up a race sooner or later.

Fast pace, OK, but not fast enough to explain everything.

[gm10]

That is a far cry from 48.2.

It's also a far cry from it being a bad idea to bet such horses at 5/2.

[gm10]

Oh, and what about the first stat you quoted?

Also, why not answer the question the way it was asked, 5 to 2 or less? Didn't like the answer?

Because you didn't say '5/2 or less' when you agreed to it being a bad bet. You just agreed with '5/2' and that's what I looked at. If you want more detailed stats, you are going to have to ask nicer than that.

[cj]

Why are you ignoring the actual early leader Percussion? Finished third and hasn't raced since. Philippe dropped down to a Turfway maiden, not hard to run better there. Ninja Blade showed logical improvement in his second race.

For Kreigspiel I noted an improvement by 1 point in his next start at Tampa. I don't think he closed that fast at CD. He just plugs on, he'll pick up a race sooner or later.

Fast pace, OK, but not fast enough to explain everything.


He hasn't run back yet. What am I supposed to do, invent a running line? Could you post something more idiotic than asking me what about a horse that hasn't run again yet?

Who said a fast pace explains everything? Of course I realize maidens are generally going to improve, but these exceeded the average by quite a bit, several of them. I also happen to think running in fast paced races help horses in other ways too, but that is for another thread.

As for the others, I use Beyers because everyone is familiar with them. I'm not going to debate your numbers because you only throw them out when it suits you. I say Kriegspiel had another very fast pace to close into and ran worse. If he couldn't plug home in that one, he probably won't any time soon without a class drop.

[cj]

Because you didn't say '5/2 or less' when you agreed to it being a bad bet. You just agreed with '5/2' and that's what I looked at. If you want more detailed stats, you are going to have to ask nicer than that.

No, I don't really care. You just spin it anyway. You tried posting that huge ROI thinking people would just accept it at face value but there are many here smarter than that. I am sure if you changed your sample to 5 to 2 shots running an extra 1.5 furlongs and moving from a maiden race to a graded stake as a 3yo, the results would change as well.

[gm10]

He hasn't run back yet. What am I supposed to do, invent a running line? Could you post something more idiotic than asking me what about a horse that hasn't run again yet?

I didn't ask you, you brought it up yourself. Just a suggestion for the future, but you could not write 'All the other speed horses have returned to run better positionally and figure wise'. That's misleading.

As for the others, I use Beyers because everyone is familiar with them. I'm not going to debate your numbers because you only throw them out when it suits you. I say Kriegspiel had another very fast pace to close into and ran worse. If he couldn't plug home in that one, he probably won't any time soon without a class drop.

Alright I was just trying to explain something to you. It doesn't matter if you use my numbers or someone else's. It's so fundamental that any decent late speed numbers will tell you the same thing. There is good late speed, and there is exceptional late speed. When you are able to spot exceptional late speed (especially on debut), you are on to something. Stop arguing and take it in.

[gm10]

No, I don't really care. You just spin it anyway. You tried posting that huge ROI thinking people would just accept it at face value but there are many here smarter than that. I am sure if you changed your sample to 5 to 2 shots running an extra 1.5 furlongs and moving from a maiden race to a graded stake as a 3yo, the results would change as well.

Haha I was actually writing on this exact same topic in my last post before I deleted it. The percentage of graded stakes winners that this angle produces is astonishing. And now I've told you too much already.

[cj]

I didn't ask you, you brought it up yourself. Just a suggestion for the future, but you could not write 'All the other speed horses have returned to run better positionally and figure wise'. That's misleading.



Alright I was just trying to explain something to you. It doesn't matter if you use my numbers or someone else's. It's so fundamental that any decent late speed numbers will tell you the same thing. There is good late speed, and there is exceptional late speed. When you are able to spot exceptional late speed (especially on debut), you are on to something. Stop arguing and take it in.

If you say it is misleading, fine, but that wasn't the intent. I obviously knew the horse hadn't run back yet. Misleading is you ignoring the last place finisher, who was 4th early, returning to win and pay $80.

I'm not arguing about late speed. I make figures just like you, and have a lot of customers, so I think they are at least decent. I had his last fraction as the best one last time in the race, but I won't pretend that alone is enough to take 5-2 stretching out and moving up a few class levels...I know better.

[gm10]

If you say it is misleading, fine, but that wasn't the intent. I obviously knew the horse hadn't run back yet. Misleading is you ignoring the last place finisher, who was 4th early, returning to win and pay $80.

I'm not arguing about late speed. I make figures just like you, and have a lot of customers, so I think they are at least decent. I had his last fraction as the best one last time in the race, but I won't pretend that alone is enough to take 5-2 stretching out and moving up a few class levels...I know better.

But I just showed to you that (in my case) it makes money, REGARDLESS of class/distance changes. Why do you disagree? I mean, can you do a similar query on your DB and report the ROI?

[cj]

But I just showed to you that (in my case) it makes money, REGARDLESS of class/distance changes. Why do you disagree? I mean, can you do a similar query on your DB and report the ROI?

Because it is always possible, and of course you know this, that there is one subset that produces all the profit, especially one as low as 11%. I'm not knocking 11% at all, but I know how this game is played and I know a whole lot about querying databases.

I also know 28 is way, way, way too small of a sample to draw any real conclusions on anything. If the next two lose, your + ROI is gone, and that is certainly a possibility with the win%.

[gm10]

Because it is always possible, and of course you know this, that there is one subset that produces all the profit, especially one as low as 11%. I'm not knocking 11% at all, but I know how this game is played and I know a whole lot about querying databases.

I also know 28 is way, way, way too small of a sample to draw any real conclusions on anything. If the next two lose, your + ROI is gone. I would guess it is more likely than not the next two will lose, though you didn't give a win% so I can't be certain.

Alright I'm hammering the db right now but I'll get back to you tomorrow.

[cj]

Alright I'm hammering the db right now but I'll get back to you tomorrow.

It doesn't really matter, as I've said, 28 horses don't prove much of anything. Surely you can't argue that point? 11% over that small of a sample could be pure, blind luck, right?

[Tom]

It's official.

Zenyatta has been replaced! :D

[woodtoo]

Just watched the replay.WOW this horse is very impressive,if the pace or the actual track were to collapse He would fly over it:jump:

[theguarantee]

There should be a discussion like this after every Derby prep.

Lep's actions at the end of the race were certainly telling, he really seems excited about Dialed In - and it's a great pairing with Lepareaux being one of the most patient riders out.

What I do know, is that I entered Dialed In to my stable as a possible bet against next out. We'll see where he ends up and vs. who..I thought this field, while fairly accomplished on paper, wasn't all that good.

I think it should be said that Fischer made a great call. 10/1 or 5/2, the bottom line is that he picked the winner and while the early part of the race certainly left some concern, the way he was picking off horses turning for home there was little doubt he was going to push on by. Certainly, the pace worked in his favor again - count me in on those looking forward to seeing what he'll do against a moderate pace - but I do think Fischer was probably right that the horse was flat out much the best in this field.

Just wanted to give him some due props as I think that has been unintentionally lost in this larger debate. He was after all touting a 6/1 ML as much the best, not a 5/2 or 8/5...mind you the hype surrounding the horse probably made that line borderline comical, but still..

[JBmadera]

It's official.

Zenyatta has been replaced! :D

thank goodness!!!........ :jump: , just like in real life each day we "turn the page"

[riskman]

It's official.

Zenyatta has been replaced! :D

Actually I was thinking the same thing. Reluctant to mention the "Z" name. Interesting to watch down the road if Dialed In exhibits the same type running style and how the colt will overcome the obstacles associated with this type run.

[classhandicapper]

Me, me, me, me, me. I, I, I, I, I.

You made your point. You love yourself.


No.

IMO some people mis-analyzed his debut badly. That same analysis error has been made in other controversial situations and the horses keep running better than they think afterward. I thought by explaining why they might not make the same mistake in the future.

If I thought every horse I didn't like that won was simply another underlay even after someone tried to point out something I may have overlooked I'd still be making the mistakes I was making decades ago.

But rather than it becoming a constructive and mutually beneficial discussion it turns into another Zenyatta-like debate where people refuse to say maybe I missed something or maybe you are making a good point.

[Charlie D]

Just like this one, there is a thread here http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=79662 for all to post thier analysis and selections BEFORE race has been run.

There will be a thread for every KD Prep race

[classhandicapper]

This is all I questioned. It did collapse. The numbers don't lie. The pace figure was 100+, the speed figure in the 70s. That is a collapse. All the other speed horses have returned to run better positionally and figure wise. How is that not a collapse?

First, you know I respect your figures and opinion. I have been one of your customers from close to the start and hope to continue.

I just think you have to look at him both in isolation and relative to the other horses because sometimes the numbers don't capture everything perfectly.

As I've said, IMO he wasn't just passing tired horses or benefiting from a race collapse. He was literally flying , probably accelerating late without being asked for his best, and had plenty in reserve after the finish.

Had he been decelerating, but at a slower rate than the others, I might think the idea of benefiting from a collapse would be appropriate. But neither the chart development or his own fractions seem to indicate that. The race didn't totally collapse and the fractions say he was flying.

I have found that when a horse can do that kind of thing they are usually way better than any number or casual look at the PPs will indicate. I admit I can't measure it really well, but I know the numbers can become misleading.

(this is over an above the fact that he was off slowly and lost ground that everyone could see)

[classhandicapper]

It's official.

Zenyatta has been replaced! :D

Actually this is a subset of the Zenyatta debate but I've been trying really hard to avoid that. ;)

[cj]

First, you know I respect your figures and opinion. I have been one of your customers from close to the start and hope to continue.

I just think you have to look at him both in isolation and relative to the other horses because sometimes the numbers don't capture everything perfectly.

As I've said, IMO he wasn't just passing tired horses or benefiting from a race collapse. He was literally flying , probably accelerating late without being asked for his best, and had plenty in reserve after the finish.

Had he been decelerating, but at a slower rate than the others, I might think the idea of benefiting from a collapse would be appropriate. But neither the chart development or his own fractions seem to indicate that. The race didn't totally collapse and the fractions say he was flying.

I have found that when a horse can do that kind of thing they are usually way better than any number or casual look at the PPs will indicate. I admit I can't measure it really well, but I know the numbers can become misleading.

(this is over an above the fact that he was off slowly and lost ground that everyone could see)

I don't disagree with any of that, but again, the other horses were falling apart.

[Dahoss9698]

No.

IMO some people mis-analyzed his debut badly. That same analysis error has been made in other controversial situations and the horses keep running better than they think afterward. I thought by explaining why they might not make the same mistake in the future.

If I thought every horse I didn't like that won was simply another underlay even after someone tried to point out something I may have overlooked I'd still be making the mistakes I was making decades ago.

But rather than it becoming a constructive and mutually beneficial discussion it turns into another Zenyatta-like debate where people refuse to say maybe I missed something or maybe you are making a good point.

No. You are in love with yourself and have a giant need to be heard. It's why you insist on stating the obvious over and over and over again, while setting records for being long winded.

No one mis-analyzed his debut. No one needs you to explain anything to them. No one needs you to teach them anything. It's incredibly arrogant for you to think you can crash a discussion after a race has been run and think you're going to teach us all something.

[joanied]

Indeed.

I'll take Robert, Joanied, Dahoss, redshifts etc comments onboard anyday and put other clowns on ignore.

Thank you, Charlie. I really liked Dialed In for 4 reasons...the way he finished in his maiden, his works, his pedigree and Zito :)
I don't care what numbers he got in the Holy Bull or what the pace was (it was, IMO, pretty much what I expected) or his odds at post time...any horse that can overcome that horrible start, pick himself up and start cruising along and win with, what I beleive was, plenty more in the so called tank, is impressive:ThmbUp:
To me, he has grit... the will to win.

[joanied]

First, you know I respect your figures and opinion. I have been one of your customers from close to the start and hope to continue.

I just think you have to look at him both in isolation and relative to the other horses because sometimes the numbers don't capture everything perfectly.

As I've said, IMO he wasn't just passing tired horses or benefiting from a race collapse. He was literally flying , probably accelerating late without being asked for his best, and had plenty in reserve after the finish.

Had he been decelerating, but at a slower rate than the others, I might think the idea of benefiting from a collapse would be appropriate. But neither the chart development or his own fractions seem to indicate that. The race didn't totally collapse and the fractions say he was flying.

I have found that when a horse can do that kind of thing they are usually way better than any number or casual look at the PPs will indicate. I admit I can't measure it really well, but I know the numbers can become misleading.

(this is over an above the fact that he was off slowly and lost ground that everyone could see)

Class... I think your post is very good and is pretty much what my thoughts are on the colt and the Holy Bull...well said, well said.

[Dahoss9698]

Class... I think your post is very good and is pretty much what my thoughts are on the colt and the Holy Bull...well said, well said.

Blind leading the blind

[Robert Fischer]

thanks Sammy the Sage , and TheGuarantee for the kind comments. :ThmbUp:



6-1 morning line, but in reality I was estimating that all-told he would go off @ 7-2.
I made a wager early in the day and spent the day w/ daughter.
A little disappointed in the final price(of dialed in) but I got the new belt I desperately needed and shoes to match(fittingly for a florida race "gators")

apparently a minority of the players bet (relatively) large enough to depress the odds even further. Wasn't the best kept secret.


Foremost - I don't believe anyone was really bashing so I want to put that to rest.
Its a game about being contrary. And In many ways seemingly challenges are just friendly discussions. A lot of those that seemed to "bash" weren't really so much disagreeing at all when it came down to half of the basics, maybe they just hedged a little. ;)

some basics - I really focused on Ninja Blade for many viewings of the video replay. If the horse stays sound he should earn some money and he really had so much go his way - which is what impressed me about the athletic ability of Dialed In in that maiden. He beat a horse that was decent-good that "should have" won, and he did it with his athletic ability.
Dialed In was pretty green in the maiden.

The mistakes he made - the greeness in the stretch- if you make the analogy to a prizefighter or maybe a talented youth that you are taking under your wing to teach sports to - they looked correctable and looked like you could do certain things in training to get it right.
He took that left hand whip in his maiden from Lep - and I liked the way he responded. He looked pissed! He beared down and ran on!

If you go back and watch some of Fly Down's races last year he didn't like the whip on certain ocasions. It wasn't a real positive response when he felt the whip, looked too sensitive tail flipping around, and he was a athletic talent as well. Certain things...

Lapenta is buying these and Zito is trying to get the cream of his crop to turn out for Lapenta. So you know Zito knows exactly what to tell them in the workouts to shake him up and get him down to business entering the stretch. And he put his best into the cream of his crop for his man Lapenta.

It was a good sign that missing the little "weathered out" 9f race (both the fact that he signed up for 11/8th)+ he knew they were ready for the stakes and you know he wasn't going to ill-treat this one. From all accounts(including some wagering accounts apparently) he was responding well in training.

and the Holybull had nothing in it! The only way that horse loses the holybull was if an extreme speed favoring pace occured where they went 1-2-3 around the track and he had to face some type of extreme unfair advantage. he was a 7-5, 8-5 type of horse to me.


all the other stuff - did i check so and so run back? did i look at the pace? the pace scenario? etc... is very elementary stuff. I did all that stuff. I did EVERYTHING.

and don't get suckered into over-simplifying thinking its an "angle" or that late pace figs off a maiden etc... type of thing....

with me it's a comprehensive thing. Extensity is dangerous and if anything I am too extensive. I will say that the whole massive sphere of influence is made up of countless patterns like there were mentioned above.

It's hard to explain. Each little part is simplified and first you look at important things to see if it's even worth looking further into...
- If so then you keep going deeper. I go obsessively extensive and comprehensive. And I'm a spot-player.

I don't know I'd recommend that style or that I probably did a lousy job of explaining it.

the game is ugly at times. I spend a lot of time looking at head ons for infirmities

i don't know i'm getting sidetracked - lets hope the 3yo season averages this much attention per race. :ThmbUp:

[classhandicapper]

No. You are in love with yourself and have a giant need to be heard. It's why you insist on stating the obvious over and over and over again, while setting records for being long winded.

No one mis-analyzed his debut. No one needs you to explain anything to them. No one needs you to teach them anything. It's incredibly arrogant for you to think you can crash a discussion after a race has been run and think you're going to teach us all something.

I am no different than you. I like expressing my opinion on horses and races. I spend less time on these message boards than you do. So maybe you should look in the mirror first.

If no one mis-analyzed his first race then why were some people diminishing his effort as a FTS, suggesting he was a bet against/underlay etc... when the original poster absolutely loved him, the public bet him down from a 6-1 morning line to 5-2, and then we all watched him win for fun?

Someone was wrong about something.

IMO, it was the people that didn't recognize just how excellent his first start was and how likely he was to be able to run a much much much faster race.

Had he run like shit I can assure you I would have given a lot of thought to what I might have missed and would evaluating what the people that didn't like him had to say.

[Dahoss9698]

I am no different than you. I like expressing my opinion on horses and races. I spend less time on these message boards than you do. So maybe you should look in the mirror first.

If no one mis-analyzed his first race then why were some people diminishing his effort as a FTS, suggesting he was a bet against/underlay etc... when the original poster absolutely loved him, the public bet him down from a 6-1 morning line to 5-2, and then we all watched him win for fun?

Someone was wrong about something.

IMO, it was the people that didn't recognize just how excellent his first start was.

You might spend less time on message boards (which is debatable), but no one spends more time writing on the internet in various ways than you do. No one.

The ML was a joke and has been all meet long. I really think you should go back and read the thread again. As usual you came in with a lot of incorrect assumptions and continue to think people need to be taught something. We don't. Especially from someone who has admitted they have a hard time finding bets to make.

[classhandicapper]

You might spend less time on message boards (which is debatable), but no one spends more time writing on the internet in various ways than you do. No one.

The ML was a joke and has been all meet long. I really think you should go back and read the thread again. As usual you came in with a lot of incorrect assumptions and continue to think people need to be taught something. We don't. Especially from someone who has admitted they have a hard time finding bets to make.

Maybe you should re-read the thread.

the race collapsed, the pace was not fast it was extremely fast, he earned a 77 and many others earned in the 90s, dynamics helped him and hurt others, i'll be betting against him, i'd bet against horses like him at 5-2 etc...

The entire early part of thread was a series of posts trying to either diminish his performance or call him an underlay.

Is it so hard to simply say that some people were wrong about his race?

Hell I'm wrong so often if I came here and posted about it every time it happened you would be right about me. I'd be here all day every day. :lol:

[Dahoss9698]

Maybe you should re-read the thread.

the race collapsed, the pace was not fast it was extremely fast, he earned a 77 and many others earned in the 90s, dynamics helped him and hurt others, i'll be betting against him, i'd bet against horses like him at 5-2 etc...

The entire early part of thread was a series of posts trying to either diminish his performance or call him an underlay.

Is it so hard to simply say that some people were wrong?

Hell I'm wrong so often if came here and posted about it every time it happened you would be right about me. I'd be here all day every day. :lol:

What is incorrect about saying the pace was fast, or his race collapsed, or dynamics helped him out or he was an underlay? Just because all of those things happened doesn't make his performance any less impressive. No one diminished his debut by analyzing it.

You seem to want there to only be glowingly positive things said. Not only is that ridiculous, it's not realistic, especially in this sport. We wager on or against horses that we think we better or worse than their races showed. Dialed In's debut was very impressive from a visual standpoint. But he had some things that worked out in his favor and had some things that worked against him. He improved in his 2nd start, but was a price that people weren't willing to bet him.

I still can't believe all of this nonsense over a hyped $7 horse. Amazing.

[classhandicapper]

What is incorrect about saying the pace was fast, or his race collapsed, or dynamics helped him out or he was an underlay? Just because all of those things happened doesn't make his performance any less impressive. No one diminished his debut by analyzing it.

You seem to want there to only be glowingly positive things said. Not only is that ridiculous, it's not realistic, especially in this sport. We wager on or against horses that we think we better or worse than their races showed. Dialed In's debut was very impressive from a visual standpoint. But he had some things that worked out in his favor and had some things that worked against him. He improved in his 2nd start, but was a price that people weren't willing to bet him.

I still can't believe all of this nonsense over a hyped $7 horse. Amazing.

We probably aren't that far apart.

The reason I'm spending more than 5 minutes on this is because this pace issue comes up a lot and I know I used to mis-analyze it badly until relatively recently.

I disagree with the notion that he was helped by the pace of his debut race and am way less sure he was an underlay than you.

Excluding being off slowly and ground loss, IMO he operated independently within a race where the early fractions set by the leaders appear to be fast relative to the final time. However, his own fractions and his performance relative to the other horses that were also off the pace indicate he was FLYING (high quality flying) late despite lugging in and not giving 100%. Then he went out quite well after the finish.

There's a subtle difference there that can lead to different conclusions.

1. The pace was fast, he benefited, so he's not as good as he looks on paper.

2. He's way better than he looks on paper.

Years ago I would have been looking to play against a horse like this at 5-2. Now I pass because I know horses like this are usually a lot better than they look on paper. I'm still not smart enough yet to quantify it so I can value it properly, but perhaps Robert Fischer is.

I'm not a fan of his running style at all. But I think he still didn't show his best on Sunday. His last 6 furlongs in that race were ridiculously fast.

Time for a truce. We are allowed to agree to disagree. ;)

[Dahoss9698]

We probably aren't that far apart.

The reason I'm spending more than 5 minutes on this is because this pace issue comes up a lot and I know I used to mis-analyze it badly until relatively recently.

I disagree with the notion that he was helped by the pace of his debut race and am way less sure he was an underlay than you.

Excluding being off slowly and ground loss, IMO he operated independently within a race where the early fractions set by the leaders appear to be fast relative to the final time. However, his own fractions and his performance relative to the other horses that were also off the pace indicate he was FLYING (high quality flying) late despite lugging in and not giving 100%. Then he went out quite well after the finish.

There's a subtle difference there that can lead to different conclusions.

1. The pace was fast, he benefited, so he's not as good as he looks on paper.

2. He's way better than he looks on paper.

Years ago I would have been looking to play against a horse like this at 5-2. Now I pass because I know horses like this are usually a lot better than they look on paper. I'm still not smart enough yet to quantify it so I can value it properly, but perhaps Robert Fischer is.

I'm not a fan of his running style at all. But I think he still didn't show his best on Sunday. His last 6 furlongs in that race were ridiculously fast.

Time for a truce. We are allowed to agree to disagree. ;)

Here's my issue and I'm tired of repeating it. All of these words, but little was actually said other than posturing and you still fail to, or are too stubborn to actually look at what people have said. You are trying to interpret things that don't need interpreting.

I've said all I can (numerous times) about his debut and his Holy Bull. I'm tired of repeating it and you seem unwilling to actually read it, so yeah we'll agree to disagree.

But it isn't a pace issue at all, regardless of how you are desperately trying to make it one. Pace was a small part of the discussion. There were other factors and even so, most of the same people discussing pace also thought it was very possible Dialed In could and was a big factor to win. However that is where betting comes in. Some weren't willing to bet him at that price and some were. That is what it really boils down to.

So if people want to do backflips over smoking out a $7 horse, more power to them.

[cj]

We probably aren't that far apart.

The reason I'm spending more than 5 minutes on this is because this pace issue comes up a lot and I know I used to mis-analyze it badly until relatively recently.

I disagree with the notion that he was helped by the pace of his debut race and am way less sure he was an underlay than you.


Here is where I disagree. He absolutely was helped by the pace of his debut. If he broke the same way and had the same trip, and the pace was the reverse, slow early and fast late, he would have lost. There is no way he would have made up that kind of ground and still won if the pace had been 70 and the speed 90. If that had happened, he doesn't even run in the Holy Bull and is still a maiden.

How can you say it didn't help?