i love Justify, but he is a big time bet against on Belmont day

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

I have made my feelings about the Beyer figures in recent years, especially at the top end of races, I think they are often too low for the Graded horses.

I trust the figures CJ has made for well over a decade.

To each their own. But the blanket finish also doesn't seem to back up the number.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

And totally out of line with Beyer. We'll see what TG and Ragozin do, but I'll bet they back up Beyer.

If my figures were always in line with Beyer I would have never bothered to make my own. Why would I?

I think the biggest difference I've seen between us is that I'm more likely to trust that young, lightly raced horses can improve a lot from race to race where Beyer is more conservative in that regard.

I can think of four really high profile horses where I had the horses faster than Beyer, i.e. out of line as you say. American Pharoah was one, Gun Runner another, California Chrome, and now Justify. The first three worked out really well for me. I guess Bolt d'Oro was another. That one, while Bolt d'Oro has been a bit of a disappointment I guess, has held up very well from a figure perspective.

I also have an advantage of using pace to explain the difference between finishers in races. I'm not locked in by margin at the finish. It is set and doesn't require judgement where sometimes I break races out and other times I don't.

Here is an example:

I project Horse A to run 100 and Horse B to run 90 and they finish a length apart. On final time alone, Horse A is going to get somewhere between 100 and 92 and Horse B between 98 and 90. But the gap will always be one length.

By using pace, I might know Horse A run a final time of 92 but gets extra credit for pace, so upgraded to a 100, while Horse B ran his usual 90 and had a great pace set up. So I have a variant that lines up perfectly for both horses while final time only numbers have to find a way to split the difference. This kind of thing happens literally many times every single day.

[cj]

I also want to add that the last race on Preakness day had a timer malfunction and no times were given. When I originally looked at the card, I thought it was possible the track sped up for the Preakness by about four points from previous races. With nothing else to go on I probably would have went with that but it was an iffy decision at best.

So, I downloaded the 14th race and timed it from video. It was tough to see but since I have a lot of experience with this stuff and I know exactly where Pimlico race timing starts it wasn't too hard. The time of the 14th told me the race track hadn't really sped up at all. I guess it is possible the track sped up then slowed down again, but that isn't really the kind of hair you want to be splitting when making speed figures. If you do that too often you aren't making speed figures at all, you're making a type of class rating.

How many other figure makers do you think bothered to time the last race and use it as part of the decision process? And personally, I think it was vital information to have in light of all the other data.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Blenheim

There are no legitimate 12 fl horses nor legit 10 fl horses; one of the reasons why he wasn't passed in the Kentucky and the Preakness - none of the horses are bred to go that long.

If he gets out front in the Belmont w/a moderate pace, he has a shot at it.

That may be the case, but there will be horses that are better than Bravazo and Tenfold coming at him Belmont day. They will be fresh and ready while he'll be coming off two tough races in a row and will be going into his 6th race of the year without a freshening.

I guess Justify has never looked like a 12F horse to me. In 3 of his 5 races he got drawn into fast paces. In another he set solid fractions on a slow track while loose. In only one start did he actually relax off the fast pace. To me, that's not the profile of a 12 furlong horse. I'd prefer a more even paced speed or near the front type that has shown me he won't get drawn into fast paces and slow down late. Some of it may have been related to track conditions, but we don't know that.

Maybe the field will have no speed at all and Smith will have no trouble backing him down to 48 113. We'll see.

However

If the Preakness is an indication he's tailing off even slightly he's in trouble.

If he's pressured (we'll see who else is entered) imo he's in trouble.

That's not what I want from a horse that's going to be 2/5.

[Parkview_Pirate]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

The bonus isn't the reason people run injured horses for the TC. Majestic Prince ran injured with no bonus.

I hardly stated the bonus was the ONLY reason potentially injured horses run for the TC. I simply stated that now that it no longer exists, that's one less reason for connections to get greedy.

And greed is a factor. Refer to Spend A Buck or Gato Del Sol who "cheapened the image" of the TC, and skipped out of the pursuit for greener pastures. Perhaps their connections thought the dough was in the purses, and less so in the breeding shed (which was true for Gato Del Sol, but not so much for Spend a Buck).

Speaking of bonuses, another one is now in the works:

https://www.app.com/story/sports/hor...bet/614970002/

Though Monmouth Park's $5 million bonus program hasn't been formalized, Justify would also need to win the Haskell Invitational on July 29, the Travers Stakes at Saratoga on Aug. 25, and the Breeders Cup Classic on Nov. 3 at Churchill Downs. The horse's owners would also need to place a winning 2019 Super Bowl bet at Monmouth the day of the Haskell.

Having this type of arrangement seems to be pure lunacy, where the connections are tempted to overreach with a three-year old, and also apply their (completely unrelated) NFL handicapping skills.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

I also want to add that the last race on Preakness day had a timer malfunction and no times were given. When I originally looked at the card, I thought it was possible the track sped up for the Preakness by about four points from previous races. With nothing else to go on I probably would have went with that but it was an iffy decision at best.

So, I downloaded the 14th race and timed it from video. It was tough to see but since I have a lot of experience with this stuff and I know exactly where Pimlico race timing starts it wasn't too hard. The time of the 14th told me the race track hadn't really sped up at all. I guess it is possible the track sped up then slowed down again, but that isn't really the kind of hair you want to be splitting when making speed figures. If you do that too often you aren't making speed figures at all, you're making a type of class rating.

How many other figure makers do you think bothered to time the last race and use it as part of the decision process? And personally, I think it was vital information to have in light of all the other data.

Timer malfunction on Preakness day? I am shocked.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

That's not true. Horses have a harder time staying together now.

The evidence of this comes almost exclusively from horsemen, who lie a lot.

[Fightingirish51195]

Belmont’s the type of track that even if justify doesn’t get pressure, the track size, and whether the superintendents have it deep that day, could be enough to beat the horse. Gotta see how the track is playing

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Timer malfunction on Preakness day? I am shocked.

Well, since you mentioned it, there were at least three. The Mitole 21.67 opening 1/4 was a joke. That simply isn't possible at Pimlico at 6f. I knew that instantly. They kept talking about it on NBC like it was real. Anyone that follows Pimlico at all knew it wasn't.

I also think the first race opening quarter was way too slow. And then there was the 14th. That one I think the timer person just couldn't see the gate and didn't turn the system on in time.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Fightingirish51195

Belmont’s the type of track that even if justify doesn’t get pressure, the track size, and whether the superintendents have it deep that day, could be enough to beat the horse. Gotta see how the track is playing

Belmont won't be near as deep as Santa Anita was, that is a virtual lock.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

Here is an example:

I project Horse A to run 100 and Horse B to run 90 and they finish a length apart. On final time alone, Horse A is going to get somewhere between 100 and 92 and Horse B between 98 and 90. But the gap will always be one length.

By using pace, I might know Horse A run a final time of 92 but gets extra credit for pace, so upgraded to a 100, while Horse B ran his usual 90 and had a great pace set up. So I have a variant that lines up perfectly for both horses while final time only numbers have to find a way to split the difference. This kind of thing happens literally many times every single day.

I've always found this kind of thing valuable.

A big part of figure making is interpreting the results accurately. If pace isn't part of the analysis, it's going to leave you more open to interpretation errors.

Not that fractions are the only way to analyze these things, but most people do rely heavily on fractions when they analyze the race flow. It's kind of shocking to me how often very smart people are mistaken about the pace because they looked at the raw fractions and don't have a grasp of what's fast/slow relative to each final time at a specific distance and track. You need good pace figures or you need a different approach.

[Grits]

Speaking of what was able to be seen or not seen yesterday.


I don't ever want to read another complaint about Larry Colmus and his race calls!! EVER!!


If either of you think you can do a better job?


Have at it and good luck. Personally, I don't think either of you could have pulled it off.

[Pensacola Pete]

The winner of the Belmont probably hasn't even been announced as a starter yet.

[Fightingirish51195]

Originally Posted by cj

Belmont won't be near as deep as Santa Anita was, that is a virtual lock.

Mile and a half

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Grits

Speaking of what was able to be seen or not seen yesterday.


I don't ever want to read another complaint about Larry Colmus and his race calls!! EVER!!


If either of you think you can do a better job?


Have at it and good luck. Personally, I don't think either of you could have pulled it off.

He was great yesterday. If I were to nitpick, he missed the drama of the Preakness finish to crown Justify. But he was great.