Rapid Redux

[firstoffclaim]

just won his 13th straight, 11-11 in 2011 all in starter allowances. It looked like he might get a challenge on the turn tonite at Penn, but he would have none of it.

[Stillriledup]

This horse is a freak, he would be competitive in some grade 1 races at this point. I believe he might be the best starter alw horse who ever lived.

[Bruiser1]

And he won his 14th straight at Mountaineer on Friday night.

In a time where Thoroughbred racing is suffering, why is this streak going so unreported?

[cj]

...he would be competitive in some grade 1 races at this point...

Lets not get carried away.

[lamboguy]

he's not that crazy, that horse would beat any of the 3 horses that won the tripple crown races this year by a mile.

[cj]

he's not that crazy, that horse would beat any of the 3 horses that won the tripple crown races this year by a mile.

No, he wouldn't.

[lamboguy]

No, he wouldn't.
why because his number is not as good as the tripple crown horses?

i don't care how good those numbers are, none of those horses can beat RAPID REDUX if they ran the race 100 different times and at any distance that the race come up.

[RXB]

he's not that crazy, that horse would beat any of the 3 horses that won the tripple crown races this year by a mile.

You're kidding, right? Because if you're not... :faint:

[lamboguy]

You're kidding, right? Because if you're not... :faint:of course i am not kidding. i am not talking when those horses turn 4, i am talking right here right now. no way do those 3 year olds come close to this guy no matter what the numbers are.

[cj]

of course i am not kidding. i am not talking when those horses turn 4, i am talking right here right now. no way do those 3 year olds come close to this guy no matter what the numbers are.

So pretty much you think his trainer is an idiot for running him in starter races.

[lamboguy]

So pretty much you think his trainer is an idiot for running him in starter races.he's real smart a matter of face. he is just going real well right now. he probably would have a tough time beating older stake horses right now. as you know that is a far cry from running against 3 year olds this time of the year

[Bruiser1]

of course i am not kidding. i am not talking when those horses turn 4, i am talking right here right now. no way do those 3 year olds come close to this guy no matter what the numbers are.

He's a starter allowance freak. Whether he's anything more isn't the point. For a horse to win 14 straight races, 11 wins in 11 starts in 2011, is something special, regardless of the level. Not only that, but he's been on the lead at the first call in all 11 starts this year, distances from 5 furlongs to 1 1/8 miles.

Why this guy and his streak isn't being promoted is beyond me.

[RXB]

He's a starter allowance freak. Whether he's anything more isn't the point. For a horse to win 14 straight races, 11 wins in 11 starts in 2011, is something special, regardless of the level. Not only that, but he's been on the lead at the first call in all 11 starts this year, distances from 5 furlongs to 1 1/8 miles.


On that point, I totally agree. I love any horse that can hold its form so consistently with such a regular racing schedule, and am only too happy to give him his due plaudits. But for somebody to say that he would easily beat Shackleford or Animal Kingdom-- it's just not reasonable.

[lamboguy]

On that point, I totally agree. I love any horse that can hold its form so consistently with such a regular racing schedule, and am only too happy to give him his due plaudits. But for somebody to say that he would easily beat Shackleford or Animal Kingdom-- it's just not reasonable.how is anyone of those horses going to get by RAPID REDUX? he doesn't let anyone get by him, and he has faced some real good horses with lots of back class in his last 14 races. this crop of 3 year' old horses were no world beaters. there are no seattle slew's or spectacular bids in this crop. maybe they can beat him in october, i say not now.

[RXB]

how is anyone of those horses going to get by RAPID REDUX? he doesn't let anyone get by him, and he has faced some real good horses with lots of back class in his last 14 races. this crop of 3 year' old horses were no world beaters. there are no seattle slew's or spectacular bids in this crop. maybe they can beat him in october, i say not now.

He's faced "real good horses?" Really good horses don't get drubbed in 5k starter allowances at Mnr.

I know that these 3YO's aren't world beaters but are you not even aware of the massive difference between a 5k starter and even a relatively soft Gr 1 race for midseason sophs? We're talking different planets here.

[Bruiser1]

He has excellent human conections and they know what they're doing. I'm sure at some point they will test him for class, just not soon. Why should they? He's eligible at this level for the rest of the year and has a chance at history.

This guy was a $6,250 claim before this streak started. He is not the second coming of Secretariat, but he is special.

[PaceAdvantage]

how is anyone of those horses going to get by RAPID REDUX?The same way that Zenyatta eventually got beat. You travel up the class ladder, and then all of a sudden, it's not so easy anymore.

Handicapping 101.

[lamboguy]

The same way that Zenyatta eventually got beat. You travel up the class ladder, and then all of a sudden, it's not so easy anymore.

Handicapping 101.that is for sure.

[Mineshaft]

He has excellent human conections and they know what they're doing. I'm sure at some point they will test him for class, just not soon. Why should they? He's eligible at this level for the rest of the year and has a chance at history.

This guy was a $6,250 claim before this streak started. He is not the second coming of Secretariat, but he is special.






Agree knock out ur starter races and then when those conditions are gone move up in class. The name of the game is to win money not see if the horse can move up in class especially when hes a money machine in the starter races.

[cj]

Agree knock out ur starter races and then when those conditions are gone move up in class. The name of the game is to win money not see if the horse can move up in class especially when hes a money machine in the starter races.

If the trainer thought he could win so much as a G2, he'd win more in one race than he can in any five of those, at least. The horse is a really cool story doing what he has done, but its more shrewd management than the horse being top class.

[lamboguy]

i think the last starter horse that won a bunch in a row was GOLDEN HAIRE. i am not sure what they did with him after he lost his eligiblilty. if i remember right he was running twice a week sometimes. they never risked him in a stake race, and they made alot of money with him.

[the little guy]

i think the last starter horse that won a bunch in a row was GOLDEN HAIRE. i am not sure what they did with him after he lost his eligiblilty. if i remember right he was running twice a week sometimes. they never risked him in a stake race, and they made alot of money with him.


And how exactly do horses lose their starter conditions while running in Starter Allowances?

[Robert Goren]

And how exactly do horses lose their starter conditions while running in Starter Allowances?As I am sure you they don't run out of conditions, They run out time. Starters are horses who started for Cliaming price of such and such since such and such.

[Mineshaft]

And how exactly do horses lose their starter conditions while running in Starter Allowances?





starter races are for horses who have started for a 5k claiming price in 2010-2011. When 2011 closes out if the horses hasnt started for 5K in the last 2 years hes not eligible for starter races in 2012.


Some tracks go back only a year some tracks go back 2 years for starter eligibility

[onefast99]

i think the last starter horse that won a bunch in a row was GOLDEN HAIRE. i am not sure what they did with him after he lost his eligiblilty. if i remember right he was running twice a week sometimes. they never risked him in a stake race, and they made alot of money with him.
Algeiba has won 4 in a row at Mountaineer there is something about that track that certain horses love. When Breen had Rapd Redux for the Halls he ran ok, he won a few 5k claimers and finally Cole took him after that. Great story on how you can get a good one for a small amount of money!

[lamboguy]

Algeiba has won 4 in a row at Mountaineer there is something about that track that certain horses love. When Breen had Rapd Redux for the Halls he ran ok, he won a few 5k claimers and finally Cole took him after that. Great story on how you can get a good one for a small amount of money!
moeny in horses is all about perception. we beat a field of maiden special weight horses in belmont last week that the total amount paid for the horses was over $2 million. our horse cost $2000 out of a keeneland yearling sale.

[Cardus]

he's not that crazy, that horse would beat any of the 3 horses that won the tripple crown races this year by a mile.

Here is my advertisement: your post is idiotic.

[Relwob Owner]

that is for sure.


I dont know how to say this without sounding like I am personally attacking you Lambo.....you are contending that a horse who has won many Starter Allowance races in a row can beat the Triple Crown winners "by a mile".....hopefully, you will wake up tomorrow, realize how foolish this sounded and come to your senses.

[lamboguy]

I dont know how to say this without sounding like I am personally attacking you Lambo.....you are contending that a horse who has won many Starter Allowance races in a row can beat the Triple Crown winners "by a mile".....hopefully, you will wake up tomorrow, realize how foolish this sounded and come to your senses.
i said this time of year relwob. i am sure you know that the toughest race for a horse to win is the first time he or she faces older in open races. i make Rapid Redux a hard horse to beat right now if he was in high priced claimers. the 3 year olds that were in tripple crown races have yet to face open horses and that is the acid test for all horses. i am not saying that rapid redux can beat these guys at the end of the year. i am saying right this second he would have the edge. i wish i could pull up some history for you to put to rest this theory that a tripple crown horse has to beat a tough hard knocking older horse at 3. i will go to work on this and give you some good examples where it has happened in the past.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Paging DaHoss98675309...

[Relwob Owner]

i said this time of year relwob. i am sure you know that the toughest race for a horse to win is the first time he or she faces older in open races. i make Rapid Redux a hard horse to beat right now if he was in high priced claimers. the 3 year olds that were in tripple crown races have yet to face open horses and that is the acid test for all horses. i am not saying that rapid redux can beat these guys at the end of the year. i am saying right this second he would have the edge.


OK-so, he runs against Shackleford right now, he wins? I would love to see how RR runs the second half of a race after going against Shackleford in the first part of the race.

This horse has an amazing streak going and as someone said, it is unfortunate that he isnt getting a little more attention. However, comparing him with triple Crown winners at any time of the year makes little sense to me.

[Mineshaft]

Paging DaHoss98675309...



oh no leave him out of this

[the little guy]

starter races are for horses who have started for a 5k claiming price in 2010-2011. When 2011 closes out if the horses hasnt started for 5K in the last 2 years hes not eligible for starter races in 2012.


Some tracks go back only a year some tracks go back 2 years for starter eligibility


Unsurprisingly, you are wrong.

[Mineshaft]

Unsurprisingly, you are wrong.




watever dude.


starters are for horses that have started for a particular claiming tag over a period of time. some starters are for 5K or less some are for 10K or less depends on whats in the condition book. some starters are for horse which have started for a particular claiming tag in the last 12 months, some are for the last 2 years.


and im not talking about a starter race which you broke your maiden for a certain claiming tag. RR has run in true starter races.

[lamboguy]

OK-so, he runs against Shackleford right now, he wins? I would love to see how RR runs the second half of a race after going against Shackleford in the first part of the race.

This horse has an amazing streak going and as someone said, it is unfortunate that he isnt getting a little more attention. However, comparing him with triple Crown winners at any time of the year makes little sense to me.i think what you are tying to say here is that there is no difference in a human chilld that is a 5 year old than a kid that is 7. i have to beg to differ with your theory because normal human children not only have major physical development but mental as well. it is the same with horses.

i just compared a starter horse distintfully on a july day vs. a 3 year old horse on a july day. the 3 year old is still in a development stage and has plenty of upside to his abiliity, while the starter has more than likely reached his very full potential.

i am not that stupid to think that a good tripple crown horse will eventually destroy a starter horse at some point of his 3 year old career, but not in the middle of july. you can take and spin whatever you want and it will not change that fact.

[rrpic6]

Any chance Rapid Redux runs in one of the under card Stakes at Mountaineer on West Virginia Derby day? Is Peter Berry on vacation? A different announcer was there last week.

RR

[lamboguy]

Any chance Rapid Redux runs in one of the under card Stakes at Mountaineer on West Virginia Derby day? Is Peter Berry on vacation? A different announcer was there last week.

RRpeter berry announced last night. the big prize for Rapid Redux is the claiming crown tittle in Fair Grounds later this year.

the competion in these straters is not the same league as the older handicap horses that he would have to face in either the sprint or a route race on the undercard i brought up that he could beat good 3 year olds now, that is a far cry from what he would have to face in a stake race at the mountain.

[onefast99]

Any chance Rapid Redux runs in one of the under card Stakes at Mountaineer on West Virginia Derby day? Is Peter Berry on vacation? A different announcer was there last week.

RR
Nope.

[lamboguy]

from what i understand, Parx has 3 different starting gates in the place. 2 of them are caput right now. i was trying to break a horse out of the gate this morning out of the remaining gate and i was told that there is an electrical problem with the gate. unless they get it fixed this morning, there will be no racing today.

[the little guy]

watever dude.


starters are for horses that have started for a particular claiming tag over a period of time. some starters are for 5K or less some are for 10K or less depends on whats in the condition book. some starters are for horse which have started for a particular claiming tag in the last 12 months, some are for the last 2 years.


and im not talking about a starter race which you broke your maiden for a certain claiming tag. RR has run in true starter races.


You don't really understand the question. You also don't fully understand eligibility for Starter races. At least Lamboguy has skirted answering the question. It's OK not to know.

[Mineshaft]

You don't really understand the question. You also don't fully understand eligibility for Starter races. At least Lamboguy has skirted answering the question. It's OK not to know.



i just laid it out as far as eligibility goes for starter races go. Learn the game laddie.

[lamboguy]

You don't really understand the question. You also don't fully understand eligibility for Starter races. At least Lamboguy has skirted answering the question. It's OK not to know.i didn't skirt any question, i just didn't answer you

[onefast99]

from what i understand, Parx has 3 different starting gates in the place. 2 of them are caput right now. i was trying to break a horse out of the gate this morning out of the remaining gate and i was told that there is an electrical problem with the gate. unless they get it fixed this morning, there will be no racing today.
There are 2 at ACRC I am sure if one is needed they will bring it up by post time.

[the little guy]

i didn't skirt any question, i just didn't answer you

Right, because like Mineshaft, you don't fully understand Starter Allowance eligibility. But, I'll give you some credit for realizing it...unlike the other poster.

[lamboguy]

Right, because like Mineshaft, you don't fully understand Starter Allowance eligibility. But, I'll give you some credit for realizing it...unlike the other poster.
ok of course i know what it is. it is a race where the horse are weighted through alowance, and i suspect i knew that long before you ever did

[Saratoga_Mike]

Right, because like Mineshaft, you don't fully understand Starter Allowance eligibility. But, I'll give you some credit for realizing it...unlike the other poster.

While it pains me to agree with MS, what he describes is how it works in MD and WV. Do the rules work differently in NY?

[the little guy]

While it pains me to agree with MS, what he describes is how it works in MD and WV. Do the rules work differently in NY?

It's not a State thing as much as how a Secretary writes the conditions I believe. In our case, horses keep the condition by running in a Starter handicap or allowance for whatever claiming condition. In other words, if it's a Starter $20K, the horse continues its eligibility for as low as that number, even though it actually didn't run for that price. Which books are specifically written that way I'm not sure....though its a fair guess the previous poster doesn't know for sure either. It's easy enough to find out, though probably not written specifically in the race conditions.

[lamboguy]

i think the question was about starter allowance, not starter handicap. the weights on a starter handicap are all assigned by the racing secretary and horses are assigned the weight before they take entries for the race. the race gets drawn by the highest weights down, and not by date or any star system unless there are more horses eligible by the same weight.

[lamboguy]

i forgot, you must nominate your horse for a starter handicap before they assign the weight. also if you are in a starter handicap series the weights can change after each race. even though you might be nominated and you can nominate after the first races has been run of the starter handicap if your horse was not nominated in certain jurisdictions.

it usually cost nothing at all to nominate too.

[Saratoga_Mike]

It's not a State thing as much as how a Secretary writes the conditions I believe. In our case, horses keep the condition by running in a Starter handicap or allowance for whatever claiming condition. In other words, if it's a Starter $20K, the horse continues its eligibility for as low as that number, even though it actually didn't run for that price. Which books are specifically written that way I'm not sure....though its a fair guess the previous poster doesn't know for sure either. It's easy enough to find out, though probably not written specifically in the race conditions.

There was an article about this very issue somewhere in the past couple of yrs. I looked at drf.com, but I couldn't find anything. Personally, I prefer the more narrow definition, but it isn't a big deal at all.

[RXB]

"For Three Year Olds And Upward Which Have Started For A Claiming Price Of $5,000 Or Less In 2010-2011."

Very straightforward. Yes, Rapid Redux will eventually lose his eligibility for these races unless he's re-entered for the listed claiming price.

[the little guy]

"For Three Year Olds And Upward Which Have Started For A Claiming Price Of $5,000 Or Less In 2010-2011."

Very straightforward. Yes, Rapid Redux will eventually lose his eligibility for these races unless he's re-entered for the listed claiming price.


As I said, it isn't necessarily written in the race conditions, but often elsewhere in the condition book.

[Dexter M]

i think what you are tying to say here is that there is no difference in a human chilld that is a 5 year old than a kid that is 7. i have to beg to differ with your theory because normal human children not only have major physical development but mental as well. it is the same with horses.

i just compared a starter horse distintfully on a july day vs. a 3 year old horse on a july day. the 3 year old is still in a development stage and has plenty of upside to his abiliity, while the starter has more than likely reached his very full potential.

i am not that stupid to think that a good tripple crown horse will eventually destroy a starter horse at some point of his 3 year old career, but not in the middle of july. you can take and spin whatever you want and it will not change that fact.

what about all of the 3 year olds that have beaten older horses by this point already. many allowance races are for 3 year olds and up at this point in the year and 3 year olds are winning them. that isnt just a coincidence.

hell, 3 year olds have won grade 1 stakes for older horses earlier than this in the year.

no amount of maturation or physical conditioning would enable rapid redux to beat the better 3 year olds right now, at any distance.

[lamboguy]

what about all of the 3 year olds that have beaten older horses by this point already. many allowance races are for 3 year olds and up at this point in the year and 3 year olds are winning them. that isnt just a coincidence.

hell, 3 year olds have won grade 1 stakes for older horses earlier than this in the year.

no amount of maturation or physical conditioning would enable rapid redux to beat the better 3 year olds right now, at any distance.
those are all condition races where the 3 year old would have the edge.


and this time of year there aren't to many 3 year olds entered against older horses in stakes races, i would think for very good reasons too. but later on in the year you will see some.

[lamboguy]

what about all of the 3 year olds that have beaten older horses by this point already. many allowance races are for 3 year olds and up at this point in the year and 3 year olds are winning them. that isnt just a coincidence.

hell, 3 year olds have won grade 1 stakes for older horses earlier than this in the year.

no amount of maturation or physical conditioning would enable rapid redux to beat the better 3 year olds right now, at any distance.but that was an excellent point that you made about the alowance condition horses which i agree with whole heartedly

[Dexter M]

those are all condition races where the 3 year old would have the edge.


and this time of year there aren't to many 3 year olds entered against older horses in stakes races, i would think for very good reasons too. but later on in the year you will see some.

have the edge how? you already said the older horse has the edge physically and mentally.

sure there arent many 3 year olds entered against elders in stakes, but it happens, and they win on occasion. 3 year olds have won the met mile in may of their 3 year old year.

seems dumb to argue about something that will never happen, but acting like a starter horse beating up on horses at mountaineer could compete with the best 3 year olds around seems pretty far fetched.

[lamboguy]

have the edge how? you already said the older horse has the edge physically and mentally.

sure there arent many 3 year olds entered against elders in stakes, but it happens, and they win on occasion. 3 year olds have won the met mile in may of their 3 year old year.

seems dumb to argue about something that will never happen, but acting like a starter horse beating up on horses at mountaineer could compete with the best 3 year olds around seems pretty far fetched.as i am sure you know, when an older condition horse faces younger it usually means that that horse has either had many tries before or the horse has some type of physical problems. the same thing would be in maiden special weights. when you look at entry level allowance races in new york racing i am sure you will find a very low percentage of 4 year olds that win those races against younger. and if you go one step further and go to the maiden special weight races the chances of older horses are even less than they are in the entry level alowance races.

also lets not mix up condion races with wide open ones. the difference is like night and day

[Dexter M]

as i am sure you know, when an older condition horse faces younger it usually means that that horse has either had many tries before or the horse has some type of physical problems. the same thing would be in maiden special weights. when you look at entry level allowance races in new york racing i am sure you will find a very low percentage of 4 year olds that win those races against younger. and if you go one step further and go to the maiden special weight races the chances of older horses are even less than they are in the entry level alowance races.

also lets not mix up condion races with wide open ones. the difference is like night and day

im totally lost with what point you are trying to make.

first you said older horses have an advantage this time of the year. now you are saying the 3 year olds that beat older this time of the year are doing it because the older horses have physical problems. dont all horses have issues of some sort?

rapid redux is a nice story. he would get lapped by the better 3 year olds.

[lamboguy]

im totally lost with what point you are trying to make.

first you said older horses have an advantage this time of the year. now you are saying the 3 year olds that beat older this time of the year are doing it because the older horses have physical problems. dont all horses have issues of some sort?

rapid redux is a nice story. he would get lapped by the better 3 year olds.
let me straighten you out. there is a GIANT difference between horses that are maiden, non winners of 2 races, non winners of 3 races--------compared to horses that have already won all those races and might have 7 or 8 wins underneath their belt.

this time of year most 3 year olds have not won 5 races yet, therefore the older horses that have won 7 have a big edge.

as far as condition races it is a completely different story. an older horse with only 1 win running agaist 3 year olds with 1 win usually don't beat the 3 year old.

i hope this helps you with your future endevors at the mutual windows at your favorite race track. i don't know how to explain this you any better than i have already. if someone else has a better way of doing it, please help out

[Dexter M]

let me straighten you out. there is a GIANT difference between horses that are maiden, non winners of 2 races, non winners of 3 races--------compared to horses that have already won all those races and might have 7 or 8 wins underneath their belt.

this time of year most 3 year olds have not won 5 races yet, therefore the older horses that have won 7 have a big edge.

as far as condition races it is a completely different story. an older horse with only 1 win running agaist 3 year olds with 1 win usually don't beat the 3 year old.

i hope this helps you with your future endevors at the mutual windows at your favorite race track. i don't know how to explain this you any better than i have already. if someone else has a better way of doing it, please help out

thanks for straightening me out. all you did was state the obvious while completely ignoring things like class. seems like a good way to go broke at the windows to me.

a 5k claimer at mountaineer could have 20 lifetime wins. he or she isnt going to be able to defeat a 3 year old that just won a msw race at belmont 99.9999% of the time. thats called class.

ive only been here a few weeks but i find it hard to believe many take you seriously. especially after reading some of your takes on things and your insistence on never admitting when you are very obviously wrong.

[lamboguy]

thanks for straightening me out. all you did was state the obvious while completely ignoring things like class. seems like a good way to go broke at the windows to me.

a 5k claimer at mountaineer could have 20 lifetime wins. he or she isnt going to be able to defeat a 3 year old that just won a msw race at belmont 99.9999% of the time. thats called class.

ive only been here a few weeks but i find it hard to believe many take you seriously. especially after reading some of your takes on things and your insistence on never admitting when you are very obviously wrong.my good man, this is horseracing, we all have our opinions. the only voice that really matters in this game is at the windows. if you don't believe or like my opinions that is your perogative. some day i will grow up and be as smart as you. for the time being though, i would rather be dumb like i am and have a good time being stupid.

as you can tell i posted a horse that ran second today in the second race race at parx racing, i voiced my opinon on it at the windows and i am still hurting from it now 2 hours later.

i really do appreciate you input though. i hope you are a better more knowledgeable horse player than i am and seriously hope that all your wagers are winning ones. good luck

[JeremyJet]

of course i am not kidding. i am not talking when those horses turn 4, i am talking right here right now. no way do those 3 year olds come close to this guy no matter what the numbers are.

I would like to know what kind of Beyers RAPID REDUX is running. Anybody?

[RXB]

During the winning streak, 79 - 94.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I would like to know what kind of Beyers RAPID REDUX is running. Anybody?

90 (most recent), 88, 79

[JeremyJet]

and this time of year there aren't to many 3 year olds entered against older horses in stakes races, i would think for very good reasons too.

The main reason is because there are many 3yo stakes to choose from. There is no reason to go against older when you don't have to.

[JeremyJet]

The top 3yo's in the country are running something in the low-to-mid 100's on the Beyer scale. What more needs to be said?

Btw, thanks for posting the Beyer numbers.

[lamboguy]

The main reason is because there are many 3yo stakes to choose from. There is no reason to go against older when you don't have to.
i couldn't agree more, these days there are restricted 3 year old stakes right up until the end of the year. i know that holliwood park has a straight 3 year old stake race around thanksgiving on the turf.

[tbwinner]

It's not a State thing as much as how a Secretary writes the conditions I believe. In our case, horses keep the condition by running in a Starter handicap or allowance for whatever claiming condition. In other words, if it's a Starter $20K, the horse continues its eligibility for as low as that number, even though it actually didn't run for that price. Which books are specifically written that way I'm not sure....though its a fair guess the previous poster doesn't know for sure either. It's easy enough to find out, though probably not written specifically in the race conditions.

I don't think this is the case. In fact I don't think I've ever seen a starter written like this. In the coming Saratoga book, there are two starter races in the book for July 24th. One is for horses that have run for a claiming tag of $25k or less in 2009-2011. If a horse ran in a $15k claimer in 2008 and starter allowances since it would NOT be eligible for this race. There is another starter in the book that same day for NY breds only - eligible for any NY-bred that has started for a tag lifetime. That's NY-breds though and I don't think I've ever seen an open starter allowance which had a horse in there that kept eligibility by running in Starters and not claimers. Show me a race if I'm wrong.

[onefast99]

The top 3yo's in the country are running something in the low-to-mid 100's on the Beyer scale. What more needs to be said?

Btw, thanks for posting the Beyer numbers.\
Rattlesnake Bridge won with a 91 in the Long Branch. I haven't seen too many low to mid 100's for 3yo's thus far.

[Mineshaft]

While it pains me to agree with MS, what he describes is how it works in MD and WV. Do the rules work differently in NY?





Come on Mike be nice to me on this one.. Hes talking about Starter Handicaps and im talking about true Starter races. Starter races are the same for every track. Handicaps are a different ballgame.





Little Guy needs to 'Learn the game laddie"

[Saratoga_Mike]

\
Rattlesnake Bridge won with a 91 in the Long Branch. I haven't seen too many low to mid 100's for 3yo's thus far.

As of May 14, 2011 (old DRF I had in front of me), there were 14 beyers (12 horses) at 100 or above acheived by 3-yr-olds. Surely the number of Beyers above 100 is greater than 14 now.

Not to take anything away from RR, but he'd get destroyed by most of today's top 3-yr-olds, even though this yr's crop is very ordinary.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Come on Mike be nice to me on this one.. Hes talking about Starter Handicaps and im talking about true Starter races. Starter races are the same for every track. Handicaps are a different ballgame.





Little Guy needs to 'Learn the game laddie"

No, I don't think he is. I believe Campo has the rules written differently for NYRA tracks. I believe it was a Crist blog that discussed this matter, but his blog can't be searched. For WV and MD (and presumably Louisiana), you are correct.

[JeremyJet]

\
Rattlesnake Bridge won with a 91 in the Long Branch. I haven't seen too many low to mid 100's for 3yo's thus far.

I believe I made reference to the top 3yo's in the country. RATTLESNAKE BRIDGE, whoever that is, would not be in that class.

[Mineshaft]

As of May 14, 2011 (old DRF I had in front of me), there were 14 beyers (12 horses) at 100 or above acheived by 3-yr-olds. Surely the number of Beyers above 100 is greater than 14 now.

Not to take anything away from RR, but he'd get destroyed by most of today's top 3-yr-olds, even though this yr's crop is very ordinary.





Agree RR would get eaten up against this 3 yr old crop.

[onefast99]

As of May 14, 2011 (old DRF I had in front of me), there were 14 beyers (12 horses) at 100 or above acheived by 3-yr-olds. Surely the number of Beyers above 100 is greater than 14 now.

Not to take anything away from RR, but he'd get destroyed by most of today's top 3-yr-olds, even though this yr's crop is very ordinary.
Lambos arguement is that this time of year, July, the 3yo's aren't running the 106 beyer numbers they may have run from February thru June. I looked at a few races and the Long Branch stood out as RB won it with a 91 beyer.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Lambos arguement is that this time of year, July, the 3yo's aren't running the 106 beyer numbers they may have run from February thru June. I looked at a few races and the Long Branch stood out as RB won it with a 91 beyer.

got it.

[RXB]

No, I don't think he is. I believe Campo has the rules written differently for NYRA tracks. I believe it was a Crist blog that discussed this matter, but his blog can't be searched. For WV and MD (and presumably Louisiana), you are correct.

It's sort of like the NoCal N1X condition, where Cal-breds can win it twice even though that's not expressed explicitly each time in the specific race conditions. It's written as a rule somewhere in the CHRB rules and regulations.

Those are relatively isolated situations. In most cases in most jurisdictions, the eligibility requirements are fully laid out in the specific race conditions.

[lamboguy]

the high numbers that 3 year olds put up in stake races so far this year are against straight 3 year olds, if they ran against older the numbers would not be as high. 3 year old stake races are RESTRICTED. 3 year old and up are NON RESTRICTED.

[Saratoga_Mike]

the high numbers that 3 year olds put up in stake races so far this year are against straight 3 year olds, if they ran against older the numbers would not be as high. 3 year old stake races are RESTRICTED. 3 year old and up are NON RESTRICTED.

Presumably you say this b/c the pace figs would be higher in 3 & up. That's probably true, but they'd still destroy RR.

[JeremyJet]

the high numbers that 3 year olds put up in stake races so far this year are against straight 3 year olds, if they ran against older the numbers would not be as high. 3 year old stake races are RESTRICTED. 3 year old and up are NON RESTRICTED.

Hogwash.

[onefast99]

I believe I made reference to the top 3yo's in the country. RATTLESNAKE BRIDGE, whoever that is, would not be in that class.
Here are some of those high beyers:
Flashpoint 104
Air support 99
Pender harbour 93
Inglorious 90
Pants on Fire 94
Ruler on ice 100

[Dexter M]

in the recently run dwyer, assuming they made a concession and let rapid redux run, where would he have finished?

in the upcoming haskell, if they let rapid redux run where would he finish, assuming the horses that are pointing there run?

what a silly arguement.

[Saratoga_Mike]

in the recently run dwyer, assuming they made a concession and let rapid redux run, where would he have finished?

in the upcoming haskell, if they let rapid redux run where would he finish, assuming the horses that are pointing there run?

what a silly arguement.

Last and last.

[Mineshaft]

It's sort of like the NoCal N1X condition, where Cal-breds can win it twice even though that's not expressed explicitly each time in the specific race conditions. It's written as a rule somewhere in the CHRB rules and regulations.

Those are relatively isolated situations. In most cases in most jurisdictions, the eligibility requirements are fully laid out in the specific race conditions.




I would go farther than that and say every track and jurisdiction will have the eligibility requirement laid out in the race conditions. But Little Guy says otherwise.

[lamboguy]

thank you, thank you and thank you. i give up, you guys are all to sharp for me. congradulations for those of you that listened to onefast and got a $25 winnier in the last race at parx today. i hope you guys were not to busy making a fool out of me today and played that horse.

[PaceAdvantage]

Why can't people disagree with you without you thinking it's a personal attack?

I too think the notion that Rapid Redux could beat Animal Kingdom or Shackleford TODAY (assuming they were healthy, and one is not) is a preposterous one.

It's nothing personal. Please don't take it that way.

[Saratoga_Mike]

thank you, thank you and thank you. i give up, you guys are all to sharp for me. congradulations for those of you that listened to onefast and got a $25 winnier in the last race at parx today. i hope you guys were not to busy making a fool out of me today and played that horse.

I wasn't trying to make a fool out of you. I just disagreed with you, rather strongly. And I'm glad you had a nice winner in the last at PRX.

[JeremyJet]

thank you, thank you and thank you. i give up, you guys are all to sharp for me. congradulations for those of you that listened to onefast and got a $25 winnier in the last race at parx today. i hope you guys were not to busy making a fool out of me today and played that horse.

All the guy posted on the winner you had was "perfect spot." Perfect spot based on what? Race conditions? Speed figures? What?

It would really be cool if people would "handicap" a race instead of just posting the name of the horse they like. But that's just me.

[Dexter M]

All the guy posted on the winner you had was "perfect spot." Perfect spot based on what? Race conditions? Speed figures? What?

It would really be cool if people would "handicap" a race instead of just posting the name of the horse they like. But that's just me.

do you want him to bet it for you too?

[JeremyJet]

do you want him to bet it for you too?

Dude, you obviously don't get it.

[duncan04]

Dude, you obviously don't get it.


What doesn't he get? You want someone to do the work for you? Or am i "not getting" it either??

[Dexter M]

Dude, you obviously don't get it.

the guy posted a horse and it won. not much else to get. say congrats or dont, but your response comes off petty.

[JeremyJet]

:bang:

Yeah, when I play a horse I would like to understand why. The guy posted "perfect spot." In what way is it a "perfect spot?" Is that too much to ask?

Do you mean to tell me you get more out of a post like that, than a post where the person gives a detailed analysis? Which one will you learn more from?

I'm not posting/reading the selection board to find bets. I'm looking at how other people handicap. Maybe I find one that I find interesting and look into it further to help my game. That's my point. Is that so hard to understand?

[lamboguy]

Why can't people disagree with you without you thinking it's a personal attack?

I too think the notion that Rapid Redux could beat Animal Kingdom or Shackleford TODAY (assuming they were healthy, and one is not) is a preposterous one.

It's nothing personal. Please don't take it that way.no problem, i can take anything, and i do understand why you and everyone else here disagree's with me on what i have posted about this starter alowance horse. i can never prove or be proven wrong because there will never be a race ever with a tripple crown winner against a starter alowance horse such as rapid redux.

what i do find interesting is that no living human on this board including yourself can even fathom the possibility that a horse that ran for a $5000 claiming tag within the last 2 years could possibly ever beat a bunch of very weak 3 year old horses that have been lucky to win a tripple crown race. from what i have seen none of these tripple crown winners have run 2 good races in a row in this tripple crown series. yet rapid redux has run lights out for the past 14 races, and has beaten plenty of horses that have more wins than any of the horses in the tripple crown series. i can almost predict that rapid redux will have his running shoes on every single race he steps on a race track. for these tripple crown horses i would have no clue what shows up. i am not going to argue any longer on this one. i gave my reasons why i think this horse would win and no one here gave me a plausible reason why i could be wrong.

[Dexter M]

:bang:

Yeah, when I play a horse I would like to understand why. The guy posted "perfect spot." In what way is it a "perfect spot?" Is that too much to ask?

Do you mean to tell me you get more out of a post like that, than a post where the person gives a detailed analysis? Which one will you learn more from?

I'm not posting/reading the selection board to find bets. I'm looking at how other people handicap. Maybe I find one that I find interesting and look into it further to help my game. That's my point. Is that so hard to understand?

no, its not hard to understand. if you were interested in seeing why he liked the horse, wouldnt you have better served asking nicely instead of what you did?

instead of being a jerk about, ask and im sure he would have answered. but to act like you are owed some sort of explanation seems odd to me.

[JeremyJet]

You want someone to do the work for you?

I'm actually the one doing the work. I handicapped a few races on the selection board recently and I got nothing but crickets. With so many negative opinions out there in regards to speed figures, I thought some of you might chime in with what I may be doing wrong. Or maybe someone can chime in with better speed figures that what I'm useing. Nothing but crickets. Why?

[Dexter M]

i gave my reasons why i think this horse would win and no one here gave me a plausible reason why i could be wrong.

people have given you reasons. your response to that was "i hope someday to be as smart as you" or something like that or you ignore the reasons.

your reasoning is faulty. whether you use speed figures, sheets, trips, whatever, the horses he is facing now are just not as good as what he would face in the triple crown races.

if rapid redux ran in the haskell, do you think he would win?

[lamboguy]

i know i said i would stop this, but what i did was call the trainer of RAPID REDUX, DAVID WELLS and asked him how he thought his horse would do against these horses. he told me that his horse doesn't like to get headed, but once he does he would stop against 3 year olds or anything else that could stick their head infront of him.

[onefast99]

I'm actually the one doing the work. I handicapped a few races on the selection board recently and I got nothing but crickets. With so many negative opinions out there in regards to speed figures, I thought some of you might chime in with what I may be doing wrong. Or maybe someone can chime in with better speed figures that what I'm useing. Nothing but crickets. Why?
I liked the spot the horse was put in today, I didn't like anyone else until 3 minutes to post when lambo told me to play the 10 with the six. This race was a low level maiden claimer, there isn't much data to look at. I liked Felix ortiz because he is a good gate rider he goes to the front and doesn't look back if he has the horse he wins, unfortunately he doesn't get many decent horses to ride. I hope you had him today and if you saw my follow up post I like my horse tomorrow in the third race at Parx because he can get to the front. Enjoy.

[the little guy]

I don't think this is the case. In fact I don't think I've ever seen a starter written like this. In the coming Saratoga book, there are two starter races in the book for July 24th. One is for horses that have run for a claiming tag of $25k or less in 2009-2011. If a horse ran in a $15k claimer in 2008 and starter allowances since it would NOT be eligible for this race. There is another starter in the book that same day for NY breds only - eligible for any NY-bred that has started for a tag lifetime. That's NY-breds though and I don't think I've ever seen an open starter allowance which had a horse in there that kept eligibility by running in Starters and not claimers. Show me a race if I'm wrong.


I really don't mean this to be rude, but you are wrong.

[Dexter M]

i know i said i would stop this, but what i did was call the trainer of RAPID REDUX, DAVID WELLS and asked him how he thought his horse would do against these horses. he told me that his horse doesn't like to get headed, but once he does he would stop against 3 year olds or anything else that could stick their head infront of him.

i bet wells wishes he had caller id

[lamboguy]

I'm actually the one doing the work. I handicapped a few races on the selection board recently and I got nothing but crickets. With so many negative opinions out there in regards to speed figures, I thought some of you might chime in with what I may be doing wrong. Or maybe someone can chime in with better speed figures that what I'm useing. Nothing but crickets. Why?
i am not a great handicapper either. i think that what good numbers can do for a handicapper is give you an idea where the horses in the races are going to be positioned. it is probably a good tool to have, but not the only tool. knowing how the horses train and what type of competion was in the race that horse came out of should help. not very $10k non winners of 2 claiming races are the same. tehn if you can conquer that you have to now figure out how the track is going to play for your horse. there are times when the horse you like is on a dead rail and you can lose 5 lengths or more in the race and you could have the best horse. also it would be good to know how the race track played the last race your horse ran. there are plenty more difficult items to conquer, like horse that go from dry tracks to wet tracks, or from dirt to turf and vice versa and today from regular surface over to synthetic surface. when you get all those parts figured out, you now have to figure the risk reward senario and know if your bet has value behind it.

[Mineshaft]

stop posting everyone little guy is right and everyone else is wrong.

[casterlink]

[QUOTE=Stillriledup]This horse is a freak, he would be competitive in some grade 1 races at this point. I believe he might be the best starter alw horse who ever lived.


Back in 01 or 02 there was a horse called Talknow claimed off Holendorfer for 5K. Went on to win a bunch of starters in a row and then one of the claiming crown races.

[Mineshaft]

Golden Hare was a nice starter horse a couple of years ago.

[the little guy]

stop posting everyone little guy is right and everyone else is wrong.

To suggest that I am making a statement about the conditions of Starter races at NYRA that is wrong is even amazing for you. If someone was to make a betting line on whether or not I discussed this with the Racing Secretary before posting the odds for would be a steal at 1:9, and only someone like you would be jumping on the other side.

[cj]

Damn, and this was such fun.

Didn't Poor But Honest run in some starter races? I know he won a G3 and ran 2nd in some G1s later on, including once to Cigar after running for 5k at the Big M, or something close. I'm pretty sure he hit the starter trail on the way up the ladder, but I could be wrong.

[lamboguy]

i know i didn't win my argument here on the rapid redux beating a tripple crown winner, even the trainer of the horse has some type of doubt of winning, but what i did prove is that there is some pretty decent interest in cheap older horses that can run. if the game was being played on more of a level playing field some of these guys would go out and try to find a horse of their own with a few friends to try to get a starter horse.

[Relwob Owner]

i know i didn't win my argument here on the rapid redux beating a tripple crown winner, even the trainer of the horse has some type of doubt of winning, but what i did prove is that there is some pretty decent interest in cheap older horses that can run. if the game was being played on more of a level playing field some of these guys would go out and try to find a horse of their own with a few friends to try to get a starter horse.


Actually, one of the things that came out of the thread is that it is surprising there isnt more interest in a "cheap older horse"-your words-like Rapid Redux. He has won a ton of races in a row and very few even know about him.

The thhead was more about debating your contention he could beat good 3YO's and about starter conditions, rather than the horse itself, so your contention that the thread showed "decent interest in cheap older horses" is off in my opinion.

[Mineshaft]

:eek: To suggest that I am making a statement about the conditions of Starter races at NYRA that is wrong is even amazing for you. If someone was to make a betting line on whether or not I discussed this with the Racing Secretary before posting the odds for would be a steal at 1:9, and only someone like you would be jumping on the other side.






I really dont mean to be rude but you are wrong.....

[lamboguy]

Actually, one of the things that came out of the thread is that it is surprising there isnt more interest in a "cheap older horse"-your words-like Rapid Redux. He has won a ton of races in a row and very few even know about him.

The thhead was more about debating your contention he could beat good 3YO's and about starter conditions, rather than the horse itself, so your contention that the thread showed "decent interest in cheap older horses" is off in my opinion.
whatever

[Saratoga_Mike]

:eek:






I really dont mean to be rude but you are wrong.....

He's only making the assertion about NYRA. He's essentially told you he asked the NYRA racing secretary. Did Campo lie to him? Why would Campo lie to him? Did he say Campo's rules apply everywhere in the country? I don't get you.

[Relwob Owner]

1-Racing secretaries lie

2-he should of made it known that he was talking about NYRA rules

3-And i was right about starter races.


Seems like TLG came into it asking.....

And how exactly do horses lose their starter conditions while running in Starter Allowances?


I think it was reasonable to infer that the discussion was revolving around the types of Starters that Rapid Redux is running in. So, I think Mineshaft was correct in the sense that a race like RR ran in on Friday does have a time restriction and that you lose the condition when time runs out.

Now, maybe it is different in NYRA but as a pure answer to that question in the context of the horse being discussed, lambo and Mineshaft were correct IMO(assuming there is nothing deeper in the book at MNR that provides a caveat like the one TLG referred to existing in NY)

[onefast99]

Seems like TLG came into it asking.....




I think it was reasonable to infer that the discussion was revolving around the types of Starters that Rapid Redux is running in. So, I think Mineshaft was correct in the sense that a race like RR ran in on Friday does have a time restriction and that you lose the condition when time runs out.

Now, maybe it is different in NYRA but as a pure answer to that question in the context of the horse being discussed, lambo and Mineshaft were correct IMO(assuming there is nothing deeper in the book at MNR that provides a caveat like the one TLG referred to existing in NY)
Save a few bucks we race again in 2 weeks at Mountaineer :cool:

[PaceAdvantage]

I had to delete the last reply because this isn't going to turn into some song and dance between some guy who has a beef...

[Mineshaft]

I had to delete the last reply because this isn't going to turn into some song and dance between some guy who has a beef...



no beef Pace he called me out saying i was wrong. I proved that he was wrong. Even Saratoga Mike agreed with me.

[Mineshaft]

Seems like TLG came into it asking.....




I think it was reasonable to infer that the discussion was revolving around the types of Starters that Rapid Redux is running in. So, I think Mineshaft was correct in the sense that a race like RR ran in on Friday does have a time restriction and that you lose the condition when time runs out.

Now, maybe it is different in NYRA but as a pure answer to that question in the context of the horse being discussed, lambo and Mineshaft were correct IMO(assuming there is nothing deeper in the book at MNR that provides a caveat like the one TLG referred to existing in NY)


no doubt he was asking for it. yet i get called out by the moderator

[Relwob Owner]

no doubt he was asking for it. yet i get called out by the moderator


MS.



I wouldnt say that he was asking for it. I was just pointing out that in the context of the thread at that point in time, I agreed with you and Lambo.

[PaceAdvantage]

no doubt he was asking for it. yet i get called out by the moderatorHe didn't call you name. You called him a name. That's why you were called out.

Get the story straight...I know that's hard sometimes...

Quite frankly, that entire exchange was off topic of the main point of this thread.

[Cardus]

He didn't call you name. You called him a name. That's why you were called out.

Get the story straight...I know that's hard sometimes...

Quite frankly, that entire exchange was off topic of the main point of this thread.

I agree.

I would have locked this thread pages ago.

[maddog42]

Damn, and this was such fun.

Didn't Poor But Honest run in some starter races? I know he won a G3 and ran 2nd in some G1s later on, including once to Cigar after running for 5k at the Big M, or something close. I'm pretty sure he hit the starter trail on the way up the ladder, but I could be wrong.

According to equibase, he ran in one starter allowance, at Garden State in 95.

[maddog42]

Why can't people disagree with you without you thinking it's a personal attack?

I too think the notion that Rapid Redux could beat Animal Kingdom or Shackleford TODAY (assuming they were healthy, and one is not) is a preposterous one.

It's nothing personal. Please don't take it that way.

According to my pace figures, Redux would lose to Ak or shackelford. I don't think it would be by more than 4 or 5 lengths. Distance would factor in. At 1 mile it would be much closer. At 10f it would be much more. Of course this is purely hypothetical. Distance would be critical. When Redux races at 9f he does not project well to go 10f.

[the little guy]

no beef Pace he called me out saying i was wrong. I proved that he was wrong. Even Saratoga Mike agreed with me.


You proved something, that's for sure.

[the little guy]

I had to delete the last reply because this isn't going to turn into some song and dance between some guy who has a beef...


Wait, now I get it....he inferred that i was lied to?

Wow, he's actually dumber than I thought. That's remarkable.

[PaceAdvantage]

Wait, now I get it....he inferred that i was lied to?

Wow, he's actually dumber than I thought. That's remarkable.I had to scold him for calling you dumb...now I have to scold you for calling him dumb. There, now that that's out of the way...

It's incredible, isn't it? People who can't accept facts will resort to any type of distortion to avoid admitting they were wrong.

So now, according to him, the NYRA racing secretary lied to you. Amazing, isn't it?

But like you say, the silliness never ends....

[Tom]

I'm sure they told Andy that so he would go one TV and say something stupid and all the NYRA brass would get a chuckle.

Yeah, that's it. Setting him up for the old Toga Tickle.

:D

[Mineshaft]

You proved something, that's for sure.





you are wrong again.........

[FenceBored]

I'm sure they told Andy that so he would go one TV and say something stupid and all the NYRA brass would get a chuckle.

Yeah, that's it. Setting him up for the old Toga Tickle.

:D

Works for the brass at TVG.

[mountainman]

Starter conditions can vary and be somewhat creative. Headings could be crafted to write R R out, just as penalty clauses could be applied as an equalizer. We considered packing wgt on him at mountain, but decided to not discourage Wells from running the horse here. Who wouldn't want to be part of history?

I loved hearing that Wells is aware of the animal's limitations. That's one sign of a truly professional trainer. Exploiting those limitations is quite another matter. Defeating R R might SOUND as easy as entering some 5-furlong rabbit to exhaust him early. Keep in mind, however, that R R has short-sprint speed in his own right, plus the specialized knack of hitting the first turn quickly and maintaining that stiff cruising speed so unique to good front-running route horses. I'm often amazed at how easily practiced route speeds top seemingly faster sprinters when they match up at two-turns.

[tbwinner]

I really don't mean this to be rude, but you are wrong.

Can you please explain then? Really, and I followed NY racing a bit, I've never seen an open starter allowance or starter handicap that runs from a condition book (an overnight race, not a stake) that allows you to keep the "tag" condition by running in the starter condition for that tag. That's what you said so I'm trying to keep you straight...show me an example of a horse where this has done so and I'll believe you. Or maybe you're wrong and don't want to say it.

Aside from NY-bred or other state-restricted races, every starter race I've seen has had something like "run for the claiming price of $X or less from 2009-2011" or another timeframe like that.

[the little guy]

Can you please explain then? Really, and I followed NY racing a bit, I've never seen an open starter allowance or starter handicap that runs from a condition book (an overnight race, not a stake) that allows you to keep the "tag" condition by running in the starter condition for that tag. That's what you said so I'm trying to keep you straight...show me an example of a horse where this has done so and I'll believe you. Or maybe you're wrong and don't want to say it.

Aside from NY-bred or other state-restricted races, every starter race I've seen has had something like "run for the claiming price of $X or less from 2009-2011" or another timeframe like that.


Poovey ( I think that's the spelling ), a Repole horse trained by Bruce Levine, when she finished second in the 1st or 2nd race last summer ( to another Bruce Levine runner ).

However, even if there are ZERO examples, it doesn't change how the rules are written. Why would people think I am making this up? I'm pretty accountable for what I say and write.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Poovey ( I think that's the spelling ), a Repole horse trained by Bruce Levine, when she finished second in the 1st or 2nd race last summer ( to another Bruce Levine runner ).

However, even if there are ZERO examples, it doesn't change how the rules are written. Why would people think I am making this up? I'm pretty accountable for what I say and write.

I don't think you're making it up, but I'd like to make a suggestion. Perhaps you could suggest the eligibility language for starters provided to equibase/DRF be a little clearer (for your tracks of course)? I think NYRA is somewhat unique in this starter eligibility aspect.

[Relwob Owner]

Poovey ( I think that's the spelling ), a Repole horse trained by Bruce Levine, when she finished second in the 1st or 2nd race last summer ( to another Bruce Levine runner ).

However, even if there are ZERO examples, it doesn't change how the rules are written. Why would people think I am making this up? I'm pretty accountable for what I say and write.


I dont think anyone with any amount of common sense thinks that you are making it up. I think that since it appears most tracks have a specific time limit on Starters that horses can run out of eligibility on(unless there is a caveat deeper in the book), people are looking to you to explain and give examples of how NYRA races are different since you are the expert there.

[the little guy]

I dont think anyone with any amount of common sense thinks that you are making it up. I think that since it appears most tracks have a specific time limit on Starters that horses can run out of eligibility on(unless there is a caveat deeper in the book), people are looking to you to explain and give examples of how NYRA races are different since you are the expert there.


So he needs an example in order to believe me, his words, but you made these conclusions.

I'll beg to differ.

[Relwob Owner]

So he needs an example in order to believe me, his words, but you made these conclusions.

I'll beg to differ.


Beg to differ with what? My contention that people with common sense wont think you are making it up? With the idea that people look to you for specifics on how NYRA races are written? Both those things seem to make a fair amount of sense, dont they?

You say "he" in your post and if you are referring to a poster who thinks you made anything up, they dont apply to any of my conclusions and are why I put in the "common sense" part.

[the little guy]

Beg to differ with what? My contention that people with common sense wont think you are making it up? With the idea that people look to you for specifics on how NYRA races are written? Both those things seem to make a fair amount of sense, dont they?

You say "he" in your post and if you are referring to a poster who thinks you made anything up, they dont apply to any of my conclusions and are why I put in the "common sense" part.


I know you need to get involved, but now it's a semantics discussion? Come on. Surely you have better things to do. It's fairly obvious that my use of the word " people " was not referencing the entire population. But, sorry for the confusion.

[Relwob Owner]

I know you need to get involved, but now it's a semantics discussion? Come on. Surely you have better things to do. It's fairly obvious that my use of the word " people " was not referencing the entire population. But, sorry for the confusion.

I will ignore your "I know you need to get involved" and "surely you have better things to do" because there is really no point to either statement and nothing positive would be achieved by me responding in a similar manner.

If you were referring to one particular poster with "people", then yes, I missed it and apologize for the confusion on my end and didnt mean to make it into a semantics discussion. My post was meant to be a positive one in the sense that I was trying to say that people with common sense would never think you were lying and that people on here look to you for NYRA facts because noone on here knows them better. If that got lost from my end, I apologize.

[Mineshaft]

now we having fun...................

[rrpic6]

Are there any links to condition books? Maybe each track that has their own website will have condition books listed? I like to use www.equidaily.com (http://www.equidaily.com) to look at different tracks' web pages. Maybe we can get to the bottom of this mystery. It seems many are running out of patience...or just getting crazy from the heat.

RR

[Relwob Owner]

now we having fun...................


I think TLG and I just miscommunicated, thats all. No biggie and no need for anything else.

[Mineshaft]

Are there any links to condition books? Maybe each track that has their own website will have condition books listed? I like to use www.equidaily.com (http://www.equidaily.com) to look at different tracks' web pages. Maybe we can get to the bottom of this mystery. It seems many are running out of patience...or just getting crazy from the heat.

RR





equibase.com but they dont have every tracks cond book

[Relwob Owner]

Are there any links to condition books? Maybe each track that has their own website will have condition books listed? I like to use www.equidaily.com (http://www.equidaily.com) to look at different tracks' web pages. Maybe we can get to the bottom of this mystery. It seems many are running out of patience...or just getting crazy from the heat.

RR


Go to the website for a track, click on "horsemen" or something of the like and it should take you to the condition book.

[rrpic6]

Go to the website for a track, click on "horsemen" or something of the like and it should take you to the condition book.

Hopefully someone who has a lot of time on their hands.....I sure don't, can do that and report back here. I'd like to know who is telling the truth on this subject.

RR

[Relwob Owner]

Starter conditions can vary and be somewhat creative. Headings could be crafted to write R R out, just as penalty clauses could be applied as an equalizer. We considered packing wgt on him at mountain, but decided to not discourage Wells from running the horse here. Who wouldn't want to be part of history?

I loved hearing that Wells is aware of the animal's limitations. That's one sign of a truly professional trainer. Exploiting those limitations is quite another matter. Defeating R R might SOUND as easy as entering some 5-furlong rabbit to exhaust him early. Keep in mind, however, that R R has short-sprint speed in his own right, plus the specialized knack of hitting the first turn quickly and maintaining that stiff cruising speed so unique to good front-running route horses. I'm often amazed at how easily practiced route speeds top seemingly faster sprinters when they match up at two-turns.



MM,


Question for ya with regards to the race that RR won up there Friday. I believe it was for horses that had started for 5K or lower in 2010 or 2011. Will RR be eligible for that type of race at Mountaineer starting January 1, 2012? It would appear that he wont unless there is some sort of caveat that isnt listed in the description.

[cj's dad]

Just kind of reading this thread in the last few hours. Aren't SA races written typically with certain conditions which allow trainer/owner connections to get involved at a certain level as [payback (in some cases) for helping to fill a race.

Just askin'.

[Relwob Owner]

Starter conditions can vary and be somewhat creative. Headings could be crafted to write R R out, just as penalty clauses could be applied as an equalizer. We considered packing wgt on him at mountain, but decided to not discourage Wells from running the horse here. Who wouldn't want to be part of history?

I loved hearing that Wells is aware of the animal's limitations. That's one sign of a truly professional trainer. Exploiting those limitations is quite another matter. Defeating R R might SOUND as easy as entering some 5-furlong rabbit to exhaust him early. Keep in mind, however, that R R has short-sprint speed in his own right, plus the specialized knack of hitting the first turn quickly and maintaining that stiff cruising speed so unique to good front-running route horses. I'm often amazed at how easily practiced route speeds top seemingly faster sprinters when they match up at two-turns.


MM,

I dont think I phrased that correctly. I guess I am asking you if a horse can lose his or her Starter condition up there when the timeframe expires on that type of race being written.....sorry if my question isnt clear but it is basically asking you to clear up some of the q's(with regards to how they are written at MNR) about Starters.

[Tom]

The condition book for last Friday is gone already, but I found this same type of race coming up.....

[Relwob Owner]

The condition book for last Friday is gone already, but I found this same type of race coming up.....



Thanks Tom. I think that is almost the exact same as the one RR was in except for the obvious filly designation and the distance....with how this reads and how RR's read, it seems like a horse can lose their condition as the time elapses and the races are subsequently written to change the timeframe for the start at the specified level.

[tbwinner]

Poovey ( I think that's the spelling ), a Repole horse trained by Bruce Levine, when she finished second in the 1st or 2nd race last summer ( to another Bruce Levine runner ).

However, even if there are ZERO examples, it doesn't change how the rules are written. Why would people think I am making this up? I'm pretty accountable for what I say and write.

I never said you were making it up. If the rules are written like that, specifically allowing a horse to keep starter eligibility by running in starter races, and not for claiming tags, please show me. I am interested in finding this out as it is not very often, if ever, you see a horse like this in a race.

For example if I have a horse break its maiden for $16k in NY, I can keep starter eligibility for $16,000 if I just run in a 16k starter race (NOT for a tag) every year for years on? And there's no "expiration" in NY you're saying? That seems unrealistic but if there are stated rules written then I'll believe it.

[Relwob Owner]

I never said you were making it up. If the rules are written like that, specifically allowing a horse to keep starter eligibility by running in starter races, and not for claiming tags, please show me. I am interested in finding this out as it is not very often, if ever, you see a horse like this in a race.
For example if I have a horse break its maiden for $16k in NY, I can keep starter eligibility for $16,000 if I just run in a 16k starter race (NOT for a tag) every year for years on? And there's no "expiration" in NY you're saying? That seems unrealistic but if there are stated rules written then I'll believe it.

I think the third race at Saratoga on Friday may shed some light on things. The Starter condition is for horses that have started for 50k or less(with another condition attached)with no timeframe specified. In that situation, the
horse can't lose their Starter eligibility at any point. I am assuming these are
the races TLG was referring to?

However, in the case of the Rapid Redux and the race he ran in, a horse can essentially run out of the starter condition in the sense that there are
timeframes written in. Eventually, he will not qualify, assuming that the condition is kept in a timeframe of running in a 5k race in the last 2 years.
If I am not mistaken, many starters at Mid Atlantic tracks are written like this.

[the little guy]

I never said you were making it up. If the rules are written like that, specifically allowing a horse to keep starter eligibility by running in starter races, and not for claiming tags, please show me. I am interested in finding this out as it is not very often, if ever, you see a horse like this in a race.

For example if I have a horse break its maiden for $16k in NY, I can keep starter eligibility for $16,000 if I just run in a 16k starter race (NOT for a tag) every year for years on? And there's no "expiration" in NY you're saying? That seems unrealistic but if there are stated rules written then I'll believe it.

I gave you the example you asked for....but now that's not enough for you??? Too funny.

Have a good one.

[tbwinner]

I gave you the example you asked for....but now that's not enough for you??? Too funny.

Have a good one.

Poovey ran for $12,500 in December 2007.
She hasn't ran that low since, the lowest claiming tag was $20k since.
She ran in a $16k starter last year. The chart of that race made no mention to the timeframe of the starter condition.
This doesn't show me that a horse keeps a starter condition by running for that condition.

It's not that I don't believe you may be right; why would I keep asking for the actual NYRA or NY state rule that allows for this? I would just let it go...but no I am interested in the actual. And you're skirting by not actually answering my question. If you don't want to answer, just say so. I will email NYRA asking for clarification of their starter races.

For the race at SAR, that is for horses running for $X amount or lower in 2009-2011, you're saying that a horse that ran for $X claiming tag in 2007 would be eligible as long as they ran in the STARTER race for $X condition in 2009-2011?

[Relwob Owner]

My apologies-the race I used as an example at Saratoga had a 1OT condition attached to it so that doesnt make it a direct comparison to the RR situation(I thought it said "or" not "and" before the 1OT part-it was late...). I am assuming that in this situation, once a horse wins that type of race, they arent eligible for that type of race again because they wouldnt fit in that second half of the condition.

[lamboguy]

I dont know how to say this without sounding like I am personally attacking you Lambo.....you are contending that a horse who has won many Starter Allowance races in a row can beat the Triple Crown winners "by a mile".....hopefully, you will wake up tomorrow, realize how foolish this sounded and come to your senses.i don't care about personal attacks, i have alot of confidence in what i do or say in life. i waited 2 days to respond to your comment that i will wake up in the morning smarter. i didn't i woke up the very same way.

i am not a follower of anything in life, i am not a black and white person, my mother raised me and taught me to doubt the obvious and don't come to quick conclusions. i went through the reasons why i though rapid redux could beat this weak group of three year old runners. i even went as far as calling the trainer to congradulate him on his good fortunes on his horse and asked him how he felt his chances would be to beat a top 3 year old this year. he didn't say he couldn't, he just told me what the positives and negetives are on this horse. the main thing that dave said is that if the horse gets headed, he will stop. so in order to make my statement i obvously don't think that the horses that ran in these 3 year old races are good enough right after the belmont stakes to head this horse. they have been very inconsistant horses, where as i do believe that talented older handicap horses will demolish rapid redux. i really don't care how many people have come on this board and played follow the leader and jabbed at me with no legitamate reasons why i could be wrong.

as far as the starter alowance question, what is a starter alowance, i answered that question by stating what a starter alowance race is in thread #45. and tom put the very same thing in writing in post#147 from a condition book somewhere. in tom's post it states that in races for $10k claiming races or less not considered in estimating the alowances.

maybe you and other people here should learn some proper message board etiquette

[Relwob Owner]

i don't care about personal attacks, i have alot of confidence in what i do or say in life. i waited 2 days to respond to your comment that i will wake up in the morning smarter. i didn't i woke up the very same way.

i am not a follower of anything in life, i am not a black and white person, my mother raised me and taught me to doubt the obvious and don't come to quick conclusions. i went through the reasons why i though rapid redux could beat this weak group of three year old runners. i even went as far as calling the trainer to congradulate him on his good fortunes on his horse and asked him how he felt his chances would be to beat a top 3 year old this year. he didn't say he couldn't, he just told me what the positives and negetives are on this horse. the main thing that dave said is that if the horse gets headed, he will stop. so in order to make my statement i obvously don't think that the horses that ran in these 3 year old races are good enough right after the belmont stakes to head this horse. they have been very inconsistant horses, where as i do believe that talented older handicap horses will demolish rapid redux. i really don't care how many people have come on this board and played follow the leader and jabbed at me with no legitamate reasons why i could be wrong.

as far as the starter alowance question, what is a starter alowance, i answered that question by stating what a starter alowance race is in thread #45. and tom put the very same thing in writing in post#147 from a condition book somewhere. in tom's post it states that in races for $10k claiming races or less not considered in estimating the alowances.

maybe you and other people here should learn some proper message board etiquette



Lambo,

I said that your post sounded foolish, thats all. Nothing personal and I made my intention clear by stating I didnt know how not to make it personal, clearly showing my intention not to do so. Your conversation with the trainer seems to back up my assertion, as the horse would most certainly get headed facing top 3 year year olds, no? I think it is pretty clear at the very, very least that Shackleford would head him.......maybe I am wrong and the one whose opinion is foolish but the honest truth is, we will never know.

You bring up board etiquette and how I should learn it. Well, since you bring up the topic of it, look at some of your posts, as you have recently made many accusations about other people in the horse racing world centered around your horse getting claimed earlier this year. Is this good etiquette? I think not.

With regards to the starter conditions, you and I are the same page, I believe. We both see that horses can run out of conditions based on time. So, through this all, we agree on something!

PA has made several requests to not have things get personal....so, if my calling your opinion foolish got into that space, I apologize. Have a good one Lambo and pick some more winners like that one at Parx the other day.

[Mineshaft]

I think the Starter Handicaps in NY read like this. "Horses that have started for 20K or less since 2007-2011. They usually have a 2-4 yr window on this race and they still only draw 6 horses.

A starter allowance goes back only 2 yrs at the most at most tracks. Ive never seen one that goes back 3-4 yrs like they do in NY witht he Starter Handicaps.

[Dexter M]

i don't care about personal attacks, i have alot of confidence in what i do or say in life. i waited 2 days to respond to your comment that i will wake up in the morning smarter. i didn't i woke up the very same way.

i am not a follower of anything in life, i am not a black and white person, my mother raised me and taught me to doubt the obvious and don't come to quick conclusions. i went through the reasons why i though rapid redux could beat this weak group of three year old runners. i even went as far as calling the trainer to congradulate him on his good fortunes on his horse and asked him how he felt his chances would be to beat a top 3 year old this year. he didn't say he couldn't, he just told me what the positives and negetives are on this horse. the main thing that dave said is that if the horse gets headed, he will stop. so in order to make my statement i obvously don't think that the horses that ran in these 3 year old races are good enough right after the belmont stakes to head this horse. they have been very inconsistant horses, where as i do believe that talented older handicap horses will demolish rapid redux. i really don't care how many people have come on this board and played follow the leader and jabbed at me with no legitamate reasons why i could be wrong.

as far as the starter alowance question, what is a starter alowance, i answered that question by stating what a starter alowance race is in thread #45. and tom put the very same thing in writing in post#147 from a condition book somewhere. in tom's post it states that in races for $10k claiming races or less not considered in estimating the alowances.

maybe you and other people here should learn some proper message board etiquette

people answered your questions. you avoided the answers and then said you called the trainer trying to impress people.

maybe you should focus more on getting facts straight, then making every thread about you or impressing people being some kind of an insider.

[onefast99]

people answered your questions. you avoided the answers and then said you called the trainer trying to impress people.

maybe you should focus more on getting facts straight, then making every thread about you or impressing people being some kind of an insider.
He is an insider he has been involved with some of the top horses in this game and their connections for quite some-time. He has never tried to impress anyone he is as genuine as they come. You should focus on the topic and not the person who started it.

[Tom]

He is an insider he has been involved with some of the top horses in this game and their connections for quite some-time. He has never tried to impress anyone he is as genuine as they come.

Dittos - heck of a nice guy in the real world.
Look forward to chatting agian at Toga this year.

[the little guy]

I think the Starter Handicaps in NY read like this. "Horses that have started for 20K or less since 2007-2011. They usually have a 2-4 yr window on this race and they still only draw 6 horses.

A starter allowance goes back only 2 yrs at the most at most tracks. Ive never seen one that goes back 3-4 yrs like they do in NY witht he Starter Handicaps.


Here's part of the problem....you " think " the Starters in NY have such and such conditions......I KNOW how the conditions work at NYRA. How do I know? Because the Racing Secretary explained them to me. Being that he writes all these conditions, his word is a little better than what you " think " you know. OK, a lot better. You're an anonymous person on the internet, one who has openly admitted here at times to basically not following the game very closely, that's fine....but also relevant, whereas I am not anonymous and I follow the game a lot more closely.

I have also mentioned, at least twice, that the caveats about Starter participation furthering eligibility are not specifically listed in the race conditions, but are elsewhere in the condition book. You and another choose to continue to ignore this fact. Fine, go ahead, but don't pretend this too hasn't been addressed.

I've tried. Now I have more semi-meaningful work to do. If stubbornly holding onto a misconception is more important to you ( as well as another here ) than learning a minor nugget of truth, be my guest. It's really not that important...if it even matters at all.

[Tom]

Some NYRA guy is holding a Q&A on the internet Thursday night.
I'll ask him about this and get back to everyone.
Maybe everyone will believe HIM!

[Dexter M]

He is an insider he has been involved with some of the top horses in this game and their connections for quite some-time. He has never tried to impress anyone he is as genuine as they come. You should focus on the topic and not the person who started it.

who cares if he is an insider or if hes a nice guy? im sure the board is filled with them. they just dont feel the need to make every thread about themselves like some do. doesnt mean he cant (and is) be wrong in this instance.

not trying to impress people? i called david wells, im going to be with marcus vitali, i paid 2000 for a horse and beat horses worth 600,000. its all about him and who he is. look at the thread on juan carlos guerrero. if some are impressed by that, fine. some of us dont care.

since you decided to defend his honor, help him get his facts straight.

[Tom]

Since many of us here enjoy the guy, and YOU seem to be the minority, maybe YOU should put him on ignore.

[Dexter M]

Since many of us here enjoy the guy, and YOU seem to be the minority, maybe YOU should put him on ignore.

maybe you should put me on ignore.

[Tom]

Not to worry.

[duncan04]

maybe you should put me on ignore.

Classic comeback! lol :bang:

[Relwob Owner]

who cares if he is an insider or if hes a nice guy? im sure the board is filled with them. they just dont feel the need to make every thread about themselves like some do. doesnt mean he cant (and is) be wrong in this instance.

not trying to impress people? i called david wells, im going to be with marcus vitali, i paid 2000 for a horse and beat horses worth 600,000. its all about him and who he is. look at the thread on juan carlos guerrero. if some are impressed by that, fine. some of us dont care.

since you decided to defend his honor, help him get his facts straight.


I have found some of Lambo's post to be in the head scratching category, have seen him be incorrect about some things but I think we are all sometimes guilty of that. I disagree with regarding your assertion that he tries to impress people-I dont get that from him at all, as he comes across as a pretty humble guy who usually mentions knowing people when it applies to the topic,like he did when he mentioned Wells in this thread(since he trains Rapid Redux).

[Mineshaft]

Here's part of the problem....you " think " the Starters in NY have such and such conditions......I KNOW how the conditions work at NYRA. How do I know? Because the Racing Secretary explained them to me. Being that he writes all these conditions, his word is a little better than what you " think " you know. OK, a lot better. You're an anonymous person on the internet, one who has openly admitted here at times to basically not following the game very closely, that's fine....but also relevant, whereas I am not anonymous and I follow the game a lot more closely.

I have also mentioned, at least twice, that the caveats about Starter participation furthering eligibility are not specifically listed in the race conditions, but are elsewhere in the condition book. You and another choose to continue to ignore this fact. Fine, go ahead, but don't pretend this too hasn't been addressed.

I've tried. Now I have more semi-meaningful work to do. If stubbornly holding onto a misconception is more important to you ( as well as another here ) than learning a minor nugget of truth, be my guest. It's really not that important...if it even matters at all.






I dont care if you are 2 doors down from the racing secretary and yall eat out every day. i could care less that you work for NYRA as a tout. Could care freakin less. The starters at NYRA, Belmont-Aqueduct-Toga usually are Starter Handicaps, which means that the race is for horses that have started for 25K or less in 2009-2011 just like the cond book for Toga has on July 24th. A horse loses its eligibility if he never started for a claiming tag 25K or less during that 3 yrs. Whats so hard to understand about that? Therefore if the horse never started for a 25K or less claiming price during that window which is 2009-2011 the horse is INELIGIBLE for that race.



A horse will run out of eligibility in either a starter handicap or starter allowance if the horse hasnt run for a specific claiming price during the window set in the cond book for that race.




Belmont-Aqueduct-Toga dont usually write starter allowance races, they go with the starter handicaps. Handicaps you have to nominate where as starter allowance you dont. Starter allowance are usually run at Fort Erie or Finger Lakes.

[Tom]

I have found some of Lambo's post to be in the head scratching category, have seen him be incorrect about some things but I think we are all sometimes guilty of that. I disagree with regarding your assertion that he tries to impress people-I dont get that from him at all, as he comes across as a pretty humble guy who usually mentions knowing people when it applies to the topic,like he did when he mentioned Wells in this thread(since he trains Rapid Redux).

Compare lambo's post record the newbie - 27 posts and at least 10 of them were whines about established posters here. Bright future from this one!

[Tom]

Whats so hard to understand about that?

You might want to look at a condition book, say the current one.
The words "you are wrong" come to mind several times.

[Relwob Owner]

I dont care if you are 2 doors down from the racing secretary and yall eat out every day. i could care less that you work for NYRA as a tout. Could care freakin less. The starters at NYRA, Belmont-Aqueduct-Toga usually are Starter Handicaps, which means that the race is for horses that have started for 25K or less in 2009-2011 just like the cond book for Toga has on July 24th. A horse loses its eligibility if he never started for a claiming tag 25K or less during that 3 yrs. Whats so hard to understand about that? Therefore if the horse never started for a 25K or less claiming price during that window which is 2009-2011 the horse is INELIGIBLE for that race.



A horse will run out of eligibility in either a starter handicap or starter allowance if the horse hasnt run for a specific claiming price during the window set in the cond book for that race.




Belmont-Aqueduct-Toga dont usually write starter allowance races, they go with the starter handicaps. Handicaps you have to nominate where as starter allowance you dont. Starter allowance are usually run at Fort Erie or Finger Lakes.



I agreed with you about the general starter conditions at most tracks earlier in the thread. However, I think it is pretty clear that the races written in NY are unique and I think it is safe to assume that TLG does know what he is talking about.

[Dexter M]

Compare lambo's post record the newbie - 27 posts and at least 10 of them were whines about established posters here. Bright future from this one!

thanks for the warm welcome!

[Mineshaft]

I agreed with you about the general starter conditions at most tracks earlier in the thread. However, I think it is pretty clear that the races written in NY are unique and I think it is safe to assume that TLG does know what he is talking about.






i did read the Saratoga book and it reads "Horses that have started for a 25K claiming price in 2009-2011. That can mean either 2 things.

1-if you started for 25K in that time frame then you are eligible if every starter handicap that reads started for 25K or less in 2009-2011. So i guess they can write a starter handicap in 2013 and if it reads "if you started in 2009-2011 for 25K or less then you are eligible." which would mean you never run out of that condition.


2-or your eligibilty runs out in 2011



watever it is im sure Little Guy knows it all. eerrrrr i mean Andy

[Tom]

You didn't read enough in the condition book - you left of some conditions.
And TLG clearly siad that other condtions exist aht are NOT in the racce headers. This is not unique to NY.

Why do you insist you know it all when you have nothing offical to go on while he has the expa,natinof the guy who writes the conditinos?

[Relwob Owner]

i did read the Saratoga book and it reads "Horses that have started for a 25K claiming price in 2009-2011. That can mean either 2 things.

1-if you started for 25K in that time frame then you are eligible if every starter handicap that reads started for 25K or less in 2009-2011. So i guess they can write a starter handicap in 2013 and if it reads "if you started in 2009-2011 for 25K or less then you are eligible." which would mean you never run out of that condition.


2-or your eligibilty runs out in 2011



watever it is im sure Little Guy knows it all. eerrrrr i mean Andy



I am going to put my money on TLG here in terms of knowing what is what in NY. I dont think you taunting him will help get any answers either. I have done it before on here in other threads and it is a losing proposition IMO.

[Mineshaft]

You didn't read enough in the condition book - you left of some conditions.
And TLG clearly siad that other condtions exist aht are NOT in the racce headers. This is not unique to NY.

Why do you insist you know it all when you have nothing offical to go on while he has the expa,natinof the guy who writes the conditinos?





what did i leave off? i took it straight from the cond book online?

what are the other conditions that nobody is saying? please tell me.

[cj]

what did i leave off? i took it straight from the cond book online?

what are the other conditions that nobody is saying? please tell me.

Why would they? The entertainment is priceless. The condition book online doesn't appear to be the complete condition book to me.

[tbwinner]

It isn't the complete condition book online.

I emailed NYRA to ask for clarification on starter allowance/handicap eligibility...hope I get an answer.

[Mineshaft]

Why would they? The entertainment is priceless. The condition book online doesn't appear to be the complete condition book to me.






no shi9t so why doesnt he say what the whole condition is? why is he holding back?

[NTamm1215]

Here's an example, that TLG pointed to earlier in the thread, of a horse who was eligible for a 16k starter allowance on August 15 of last year. Poovey had not run for 16k or less between 2008 and 2010 but was eligible because she ran in a 15k starter handicap.

http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh252/NTamm1215/Poovey.png

[Mineshaft]

so if you run for a starter handicap you are now eligible for the starter allowance condition? am i reading this right? and this is only on the NYRA circuit?

[Stillriledup]

Siyonara Citation! :lol:

[Bruiser1]

This guy is impressive and 17 straight wins at any level is a monumental accomplishment for both the horse and the human connections.

What is the record for consecutive victories during a calendar year?

[horses4courses]

Heck, you could have picked up this horse for $5k not too long ago.
Would have been a sweet purchase, however........

Rapid Redux could win 30 races in a row, and not be considered a champion.

Pepper's Pride?
Nice accomplishment, but who cares?

[Bruiser1]

Heck, you could have picked up this horse for $5k not too long ago.
Would have been a sweet purchase, however........

Rapid Redux could win 30 races in a row, and not be considered a champion.

Pepper's Pride?
Nice accomplishment, but who cares?

If you've ever owned or trained a thoroughbred, you have to realize how improbable a streak like this is.

FYI, I suspect the record for most wins in a calendar year probably belongs to this guy....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camarero

[horses4courses]

If you've ever owned or trained a thoroughbred, you have to realize how improbable a streak like this is.

FYI, I suspect the record for most wins in a calendar year probably belongs to this guy....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camarero

I doubt that, very much.

No, I have never owned, or trained, a horse of any description.

I do, however, know plenty about the mathematical improbability of such a streak, and I will tell you this.......a $100 win parlay on those 17 victories would have you a sizeable amount of the purse money earned during that time.

Granted, it's a fine accomplishment. More power to them.
Will many people be talking about Rapid Redux ten years from now?
(Go back to line 1)

[Mineshaft]

Heck, you could have picked up this horse for $5k not too long ago.
Would have been a sweet purchase, however........

Rapid Redux could win 30 races in a row, and not be considered a champion.

Pepper's Pride?
Nice accomplishment, but who cares?





The owner and trainer care thats who...

[OntheRail]

It funny so many harp at owners for taking horses out of the game to soon... or how bad the 3yr old crop is. And then knock the bread and butter runners. Rapid Redux and Pepper's Pride thrilled each time the gate opened. I get chills watching horse run be it claimers or graded but I'm a fan of the sport not just a gambler. Rapid Redux's consecutive win is something to :jump: about.

So I guess you can count me as one the cares... :ThmbUp:

[Bruiser1]

It funny so many harp at owners for taking horses out of the game to soon... or how bad the 3yr old crop is. And then knock the bread and butter runners. Rapid Redux and Pepper's Pride thrilled each time the gate opened. I get chills watching horse run be it claimers or graded but I'm a fan of the sport not just a gambler. Rapid Redux's consecutive win is something to :jump: about.

So I guess you can count me as one the cares... :ThmbUp:

Well Put!

[cj]

He is in again Friday, starter race at Mountaineer.

[ten2oneormore]

I think Charles Town wrote a race for him so that the record tying run happens there.



Charles Town has scheduled a $25,000 starter allowance race ($5,000 eligibility) at 1 1/8 miles for Oct. 14, eve of the West Virginia Breeders Classics.
Read more: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/65074/rapid-redux-runs-streak-to-17-straight-wins#ixzz1ZGz0eCH4

[classhandicapper]

He is in again Friday, starter race at Mountaineer.

Can Jack O' Latern put enough heat on him to set it up for someone else? :eek:

[Tom]

Granted, it's a fine accomplishment. More power to them.
Will many people be talking about Rapid Redux ten years from now?

Who cares?
Why can't we just have some entertainment today?
Is it against the rules to have fun with racing?

All this talk about champions one would think everyone was here for some grand reason besides betting. Being a champion does't put a nickle more in your pocket.

If you aren't betting the race, just enjoy it. I'll be watching and rooting for him to win again. And not betting the race.

[toussaud]

scratched

[mountainman]

scratched

No way they were risking the streak against the pace scenario presented by Jack O Lantern. Just no way. Feared that scratch the minute overnites came out.

[turninforhome10]

G

Who cares?
Why can't we just have some entertainment today?
Is it against the rules to have fun with racing?

All this talk about champions one would think everyone was here for some grand reason besides betting. Being a champion does't put a nickle more in your pocket.

If you aren't betting the race, just enjoy it. I'll be watching and rooting for him to win again. And not betting the race.


Tom is that you, whoever stole Tom's computer give it back. :lol:

[ten2oneormore]

Rapid Redux goes for 18 in about 40 minutes(race 8 at ct)

Think the 1 might soften him up .Might try Smiling Jordan if he drifts to 7,8 to 1

[ten2oneormore]

Nevermind the 1 scratched.Looks like Rapid Redux wins easy

[toussaud]

BH_MaidenWatch BH_MaidenWatch
Rapid Redux was originally called Storm Leopard, and was Pleasantly Perfect's first runner. #RapidRedux

[toussaud]

well what happened

[appistappis]

rapid redux won by five over smiling jordan at .40 to the dollar.

[Bruiser1]

Impressive effort. Took some pressure through out honest fractions, put away that competitor and immediately repelled the challenge of a closer to pull away.

[Canarsie]

Didn't watch or bet the race but its a nice story about a horse who once ran for a $5,000 tag. Anybody could have taken him I wish nothing but the best for him and his connections.

[Zippy Chippy]

Impressive effort. Took some pressure through out honest fractions, put away that competitor and immediately repelled the challenge of a closer to pull away.

For a second there it looked like smiling jordan was going to run right by him. Game effort by rapid redux

[Valuist]

I don't have his pps handy, but it sounds like the entire streak has been against starter allowance types. Why not move him up in class?

I've owned horses before and always felt that if you look up at the board and see you are over 15-1, you've messed up as an owner by putting the horse in way too tough. OTOH, if you see you are under 4-5, you've messed up by not testing the horse enough. Now obviously there's cases where, condition wise, you aren't going to skip a condition. But you would think after about 3 starter races wins, they would've tried to rise on the class ladder.

[castaway01]

I don't have his pps handy, but it sounds like the entire streak has been against starter allowance types. Why not move him up in class?

I've owned horses before and always felt that if you look up at the board and see you are over 15-1, you've messed up as an owner by putting the horse in way too tough. OTOH, if you see you are under 4-5, you've messed up by not testing the horse enough. Now obviously there's cases where, condition wise, you aren't going to skip a condition. But you would think after about 3 starter races wins, they would've tried to rise on the class ladder.

The connections are enjoying the easy money, and now the notoriety from the streak. Can't say I blame them, but I also don't know how much of an accomplishment it is to beat the same slow horses over and over. You have to give the horse credit for consistency but it's not anything as notable as what Zenyatta or Cigar accomplished.

[takeout]

Why was the entry scratched?

[Bruiser1]

The connections are enjoying the easy money, and now the notoriety from the streak. Can't say I blame them, but I also don't know how much of an accomplishment it is to beat the same slow horses over and over. You have to give the horse credit for consistency but it's not anything as notable as what Zenyatta or Cigar accomplished.

Trust me on this. Anytime a horse can race as often as RR does, let alone to win 18 straight, it's an unbelievable accomplishment for the animal and the human connections.

He's not Zenyatta, but he still is very special and I really appreciate his streak.

[toetoe]

Trust me on this. Anytime a horse can race as often as RR does, let alone to win 18 straight, it's an unbelievable accomplishment for the animal and the human connections.

He's not Zenyatta, but he still is very special and I really appreciate his streak.




Thanks for drawing the distinction. Zenyatta beat a revolving cast of slow horses in 15 or so of her first 18, then finished second to a reasonably real horse in her swan song. Spectacular Bid who ? :D

[cj]

Rapid Redux is in at Laurel tomorrow. He is in another starter race, but this time cuts back to a one turn 7f. Could be interesting...

[onefast99]

I don't have his pps handy, but it sounds like the entire streak has been against starter allowance types. Why not move him up in class?

I've owned horses before and always felt that if you look up at the board and see you are over 15-1, you've messed up as an owner by putting the horse in way too tough. OTOH, if you see you are under 4-5, you've messed up by not testing the horse enough. Now obviously there's cases where, condition wise, you aren't going to skip a condition. But you would think after about 3 starter races wins, they would've tried to rise on the class ladder.
The owner and trainer are doing just fine managing this horse. Odds mean nothing to the horse and everything to the bettors. Give the credit to the connections, and good luck tomorrow at LP.

[Wingtips]

I don't have his pps handy, but it sounds like the entire streak has been against starter allowance types. Why not move him up in class?

I've owned horses before and always felt that if you look up at the board and see you are over 15-1, you've messed up as an owner by putting the horse in way too tough. OTOH, if you see you are under 4-5, you've messed up by not testing the horse enough. Now obviously there's cases where, condition wise, you aren't going to skip a condition. But you would think after about 3 starter races wins, they would've tried to rise on the class ladder.

Actual wins, the easier the better, pay the bills. Why ask the horse to do more as long as he's eligible for the condition? Having a horse in at 2/5 every two weeks is a dream.

[onefast99]

Based on the track conditions I don't see RR running.

[Valuist]

Actual wins, the easier the better, pay the bills. Why ask the horse to do more as long as he's eligible for the condition? Having a horse in at 2/5 every two weeks is a dream.

Like I said earlier, I don't have his past perfs handy so I don't know what type of numbers he's been running. But I have to think he's left a lot of money on the table. You'd think he probably would've been capable of winning of classified allowances; maybe even stakes at some of the mid-Atlantic tracks.

What if Paulson didn't get aggressive with Cigar? Imagine if he just ran him against 40 and 50k claimers.

There's too much obsession with win percentages and streaks. The owner and/or trainer has made a mistake here by not testing the horse.

[Valuist]

The owner and trainer are doing just fine managing this horse. Odds mean nothing to the horse and everything to the bettors. Give the credit to the connections, and good luck tomorrow at LP.

The odds should mean something to the connections. If you are continuously 3-5 or 1-2, and you are not running in stakes, you've entered the horse in spots that are just too easy.

The ship has sailed by now. The horse has gotten used to coasting over crappy opposition. If he was tested now, he'd likely fail. The time to move up would've been after the 2nd or 3rd win.

[cj]

All off turf, but RR is still in.

[Bruiser1]

The odds should mean something to the connections. If you are continuously 3-5 or 1-2, and you are not running in stakes, you've entered the horse in spots that are just too easy.

The ship has sailed by now. The horse has gotten used to coasting over crappy opposition. If he was tested now, he'd likely fail. The time to move up would've been after the 2nd or 3rd win.

RR is probably running around his proper level and he has been very profitable for his connections. During the streak he has been tested, including his last at Charles Town and a couple of races back at Thistledown. That Thistledown race, he was pressured the entire way and looked like a beaten horse at the top of the stretch. Tired as he was, he still refused to lose. Point being, he hasn't been "coasting over crappy opposition" in every race.

Winning 18 straight is a great accomplishment at any level especially with the number of starts this guy has had in a short period of time.

Why be critical of success? Enjoy the streak while it lasts. It's good for his connections and good for the game. If he remains healthy and in great form, a class raise would be the next step since his starter eligibility will run out soon.

[cj]

The odds should mean something to the connections. If you are continuously 3-5 or 1-2, and you are not running in stakes, you've entered the horse in spots that are just too easy.

The ship has sailed by now. The horse has gotten used to coasting over crappy opposition. If he was tested now, he'd likely fail. The time to move up would've been after the 2nd or 3rd win.

The horse did win a couple allowance races, so at best he is eligible for a NW3X allowance. When do those ever fill these days? He probably isn't good enough for stakes races, especially as a need the lead type, so I can't blame them for placing him where he can repeatedly win.

[jeebus1083]

It was a gut-wrencher, but he got there: 19 in a row!

[Bruiser1]

It was a gut-wrencher, but he got there: 19 in a row!

That was fun to watch.

[SansuiSC]

That was fun to watch.
That it was. Looked like it might be a race at the top of the stretch but he dug in and got the job done. Good for the game. 85k or so in the show pool in the middle of the week shows whales are watching at least lol.

[Bruiser1]

That it was. Looked like it might be a race at the top of the stretch but he dug in and got the job done. Good for the game. 85k or so in the show pool in the middle of the week shows whales are watching at least lol.

The interviews afterward were great. Acosta, Wells and Cole sounded exhausted, more relieved than happy.

Looking forward to RR finding a spot to attempt to break the record.

[Zippy Chippy]

link to race anywhere? dont see it on youtube yet.

[JeremyJet]

The horse did win a couple allowance races, so at best he is eligible for a NW3X allowance. When do those ever fill these days? He probably isn't good enough for stakes races, especially as a need the lead type, so I can't blame them for placing him where he can repeatedly win.

Isn't RAPID REDUX running mid-to-high 90's on the Beyer scale? You can't tell me that isn't good enough to win stakes at the tracks he's been competing at.

[Bruiser1]

link to race anywhere? dont see it on youtube yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJpB8t2AHMA

[cj]

Isn't RAPID REDUX running mid-to-high 90's on the Beyer scale? You can't tell me that isn't good enough to win stakes at the tracks he's been competing at.



I don't know what his Beyers are to be honest, but on my stuff his last 10 (not including today) look like this:

87 90 83 73 89 86 79 92 94 91

Those aren't really stakes numbers anywhere, even slots tracks where they rarely run stakes races for horses like him.

[OTM Al]

Isn't RAPID REDUX running mid-to-high 90's on the Beyer scale? You can't tell me that isn't good enough to win stakes at the tracks he's been competing at.

In isolation perhaps, but maybe not facing the actual runners. Wish I could remember his name but there was a really good claimer type running high figs against his fellow claiming competition in NY a couple years ago. Popular fellow. Anyway, his numbers on their face were just as high as the numbers coming out of stakes races. So they tried him at it a time or two and he got destroyed. Ran no where near those previous figs. Went back to his claimers and was just fine.

These animals are herd animals and herd dominance comes into play with them. Good stakes runners also need to be dominant animals and he just wasn't on that level for whatever reason, despite his physical ability. Would hazard to say it's very likely if this fellow was moved up to a level where winners were posting his level of figs on average, he would lose badly.

I see no reason they should move him up though. He's a solid earner for his barn. Why mess with it?

[JeremyJet]

I don't know what his Beyers are to be honest, but on my stuff his last 10 (not including today) look like this:

87 90 83 73 89 86 79 92 94 91

Those aren't really stakes numbers anywhere, even slots tracks where they rarely run stakes races for horses like him.

For example, on 08/06/11 at MNR, the winner of the West Virginia Governor's stakes won it with a 82 Beyer. That's a $125k race. RAPID REDUX ran at MNR July 15. They skip the stake and ship to TDN for a starter allowance. I don't know, as an owner I would think you would want to maximize your horses earning potential, instead of keeping a win streak alive.

[cj]

For example, on 08/06/11 at MNR, the winner of the West Virginia Governor's stakes won it with a 82 Beyer. That's a $125k race. RAPID REDUX ran at MNR July 15. They skip the stake and ship to TDN for a starter allowance. I don't know, as an owner I would think you would want to maximize your horses earning potential, instead of keeping a win streak alive.

He would have had absolutely ZERO shot in that race. Ignoring the last place horse who had no business in there, the first three early finished in the last three spots. There was way too much speed in there for Rapid Redux. It doesn't matter what the final time figure was, he would have been engulfed.

[rrpic6]

The interviews afterward were great. Acosta, Wells and Cole sounded exhausted, more relieved than happy.

Looking forward to RR finding a spot to attempt to break the record.

I just read somewhere that the connections are looking to run RR in the Claiming Crown Classic at The Fairgrounds in December.

RR

[OTM Al]

He would have had absolutely ZERO shot in that race. Ignoring the last place horse who had no business in there, the first three early finished in the last three spots. There was way too much speed in there for Rapid Redux. It doesn't matter what the final time figure was, he would have been engulfed.

And it seems to me they are maximizing his earning potential as well.

[murph8]

won his 19th 6 race at laurel :cool:

[depalma113]

And it seems to me they are maximizing his earning potential as well.

Especially considering they will get far more in merchandising than he will earn on the track.

[proximity]

Looking forward to RR finding a spot to attempt to break the record.

mountaineer should invite him out for a match race vs their great champion jack o' lantern!! it would be bigger than pacquiao vs mayweather!! :jump:

[JeremyJet]

He would have had absolutely ZERO shot in that race. Ignoring the last place horse who had no business in there, the first three early finished in the last three spots. There was way too much speed in there for Rapid Redux. It doesn't matter what the final time figure was, he would have been engulfed.


the horse that set the pace in that race was almost 30/1.
The horse sitting right off the pace was beaten 1L at the wire.
early fractions don't look all that fast to me: 24.59, 48.44, 1:13.12.

[cj]

mountaineer should invite him out for a match race vs their great champion jack o' lantern!! it would be bigger than pacquiao vs mayweather!! :jump:

He was scratched to avoid jack once already.

[cj]

the horse that set the pace in that race was almost 30/1.
The horse sitting right off the pace was beaten 1L at the wire.
early fractions don't look all that fast to me: 24.59, 48.44, 1:13.12.



OK.

[OTM Al]

OK.

Don't worry. This is a good thing. Get a few thousand more like this and we're doing good.

[OntheRail]

What's more phenomenal about RAPID REDUX... is that all but 2 of his 19 wins in this steak have come in this calendar year. So they have run him about once every 3 weeks. He is proof that a horse can run more then 3-5 times a year and thrive even excel from that kind of campaign. If he gets 20 or 21 think he should get a Special Eclipse Award?

[Patrick333]

I just watched the replay and I thought for his level he looked pretty good. I hope he gets his 20th.

[FantasticDan]

What's more phenomenal about RAPID REDUX... is that all but 2 of his 19 wins in this steak have come in this calendar year. So they have run him about once every 3 weeks. He is proof that a horse can run more then 3-5 times a year and thrive even excel from that kind of campaign.Not to mention doing it at seven different racetracks and distances ranging from 5F to 1 1/8 miles. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[JeremyJet]

OK.

smug

[Valuist]

And it seems to me they are maximizing his earning potential as well.

Seen he hasn't lost in 19 races, we don't really know how good he could've been in that streak.

[cj]

smug

I'm not sure what else you want me to say. The closers ran down the front runners despite a moderate pace. You think it was going to be more moderate with Rapid Redux in there? I don't. The figure was probably on the low side because of the moderate pace. I don't see any way he was beating those horses. It should also be noted that despite the final Beyer, many of those entered had better figures the Rapid Redux. It would have been silly to run him there.

[cj]

Seen he hasn't lost in 19 races, we don't really know how good he could've been in that streak.

I actually think we have a very good read on him. He was won while slowing down considerably late. There is no way he is winning with that style at higher levels of racing.

[RXB]

What's more phenomenal about RAPID REDUX... is that all but 2 of his 19 wins in this steak have come in this calendar year. So they have run him about once every 3 weeks. He is proof that a horse can run more then 3-5 times a year and thrive even excel from that kind of campaign. If he gets 20 or 21 think he should get a Special Eclipse Award?

It really is quite special in terms of soundness, consistency and versatility. There aren't many horses that start 17 times in a calendar year anymore, never mind winning 17 times. He's no champ, obviously, but in his way he is a truly remarkable animal.

[cj's dad]

CEX8dXQxUb4

and in the winners circle:

D1mHlVkcZOU

[cj]

smug

I will concede he should have been in the race tonight at Mountaineer for 125k after looking at the PPs.

[JeremyJet]

I will concede he should have been in the race tonight at Mountaineer for 125k after looking at the PPs.

You're in a good mood. You must have made some money today. ;)

[Bruiser1]

Mountainman asked a good question the other night .

Any word on when RR will be attempting to break the record?