Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 02-05-2009, 04:08 PM   #16
Indulto
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
One other thing...of these horses:

... Not one of them had the big jump without improvements in between:

... To try to convince people This One's for Phil was normal improvement seen many times every day is simply ludicrous.
I think you ae misinterpreting Kling's point which I understand to be that while this is not NORMAL improvement, it doesn't prove it was accomplished through CHEATING. Even if you believe that both the UNUSUALLY high Beyer number and the preceding low one were both accurate (and there are reasons to suspect they may not be due to the the vagaries of figure-making as opposed to the competence of the Beyer team), there are rational, legitimate reasons for the horse's improvement including the possibility the animal may have real ability that only maturation brings about.

DO I believe there is a drug problem? Yes. Do I believe Dutrow has used medication illegally in the past? Yes. Do I believe Dutrow is an UNUSUALLY competent horseman? Yes. Do I believe Wolfson uses medication illegally? No. Do I believe that both Byk and Kling going out of their way to support Wolfson is significant? Yes. Do I think Beyer's article would have been less controversial and more effective had he not speculated about any trainer's reputation other than "Phil's?" Absolutely!
Indulto is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 04:25 PM   #17
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indulto
I think you ae misinterpreting Kling's point which I understand to be that while this is not NORMAL improvement, it doesn't prove it was accomplished through CHEATING. Even if you believe that both the UNUSUALLY high Beyer number and the preceding low one were both accurate (and there are reasons to suspect they may not be due to the the vagaries of figure-making as opposed to the competence of the Beyer team), there are rational, legitimate reasons for the horse's improvement including the possibility the animal may have real ability that only maturation brings about.

DO I believe there is a drug problem? Yes. Do I believe Dutrow has used medication illegally in the past? Yes. Do I believe Dutrow is an UNUSUALLY competent horseman? Yes. Do I believe Wolfson uses medication illegally? No. Do I believe that both Byk and Kling going out of their way to support Wolfson is significant? Yes. Do I think Beyer's article would have been less controversial and more effective had he not speculated about any trainer's reputation other than "Phil's?" Absolutely!
Let me get this straight...you think all of his first eight races were inaccurate? He was a pretty darn consistent horse. Now, as to the high one, let us assume it was 15 points too high. The horse still improved more than practically any horse I could ever find with similar development. More, that is, unless I start searching Wolfson horses.

Steve Byk is a good guy, and I like him a lot. Since Wolfson is a regular guest on the show, would you expect anything less from him than total support? Kling, I have no idea what his motive is. Maybe it is just poor research. The truth is, very few people in the horse racing "media" are really bettors. They look at the game differently, and probably know a lot less about it.

Do you think either one of these writers could have told you about this horse?


Don't you think maybe Steve should have asked about him? How about B R's Girl who raced on January 30th at GP? She was another rescued from that incompetent horseman Todd Pletcher. She came in 1 for 13, but managed to move from a career high Beyer of 84 to a 98 while drawing away for an easy victory. Of course, she was only 2 to 1, because the people who bet have learned the game is about people more than horses when you have a trainer change these days.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 04:42 PM   #18
ralph_the_cat
The people's choice
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: at my house
Posts: 405
Why would we compare This Ones For Phil to champions?... Phils not a champion... hes a stakes winning 2yo with one 3yo-restricted stakes win...
ralph_the_cat is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 04:50 PM   #19
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,523
This is the way I see it.

This One's for Phil ran an 81 on July 27th 2008.

6 months worth of average natural development equals about 7 Beyer points. That takes him to an 88. That leaves 29 Beyer points unaccounted for.

1. The horse may have developed more than average (0-10 points?)

2. A superior horseman may have corrected some problems that were holding the horse back previously via legal means (0-15 points?)

3. The figure could be too fast for difficult to identify reasons (0-15 points?).

4. The horse could have been illegally drugged etc.. (0-15 points?)
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"

Last edited by classhandicapper; 02-05-2009 at 04:51 PM.
classhandicapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 04:55 PM   #20
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
This is the way I see it.

This One's for Phil ran an 81 on July 27th 2008.

6 months worth of average natural development equals about 7 Beyer points. That takes him to an 88. That leaves 29 Beyer points unaccounted for.

1. The horse may have developed more than average (0-10 points?)

2. A superior horseman may have corrected some problems that were holding the horse back previously via legal means (0-15 points?)

3. The figure could be too fast for difficult to identify reasons (0-15 points?).

4. The horse could have been illegally drugged etc.. (0-15 points?)
So, what do you think it was. Was this the "Perfect Storm" of elements 1 through 3 aligning perfectly, never done in the last 15 years?

1. I don't think it is very likely at all a horse with that many starts is suddenly going to develop more than average. This is especially true since the horse had won long and short easily, one a stakes race.

2. Sure, but probably not to that extent. Very few horses have problems while winning quality races and racing as often as this one did.

3. Sure, it happens...15 is a bit much though.

4. Of course.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:04 PM   #21
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,523
I think the Wolfson horse is a much more blatant example of probable cheating.

1. The horse moved from a top notch barn to Wolfson. It didn't come from a relatively unknown trainer or one without an outstanding record.

2. Wolfson had the horse for less time and it was not laid off. So he had less time and opportunity to correct any problems or improve the horse via legal means.

3. The horse won by 15 lengths. So there's almost no chance the figure is off by much given that everyone else in the race ran figures more or less in line with the PAR of the class. That's not the case with TOFP. In the latter case, a 117 assumes the 2nd horse is also a budding champion sprinter and the well beaten 3rd and 4th horses are both above average for the class.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
classhandicapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:10 PM   #22
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
I think the Wolfson horse is a much more blatant example of probable cheating.
No doubt about it. I think it is a lot tougher to get away with this stuff in New York, which is why Dutrow has slowed down on the mega move up front there.

Look at what Wolfson did with Miesque's Approval. He took the horse from Mott, who did have some pretty good success with him, and he is suddenly running lifetime tops at 7 years of age and winning a Breeder's Cup race.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:19 PM   #23
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
So, what do you think it was. Was this the "Perfect Storm" of elements 1 through 3 aligning perfectly, never done in the last 15 years?

1. I don't think it is very likely at all a horse with that many starts is suddenly going to develop more than average. This is especially true since the horse had won long and short easily, one a stakes race.

2. Sure, but probably not to that extent. Very few horses have problems while winning quality races and racing as often as this one did.

3. Sure, it happens...15 is a bit much though.

4. Of course.

CJ,

I see examples of horses improving sharply later in their career than that. 2YOs and 3YOs are notorious for sudden sharp improvement. It's true that many are routers that finally got a chance to stretch out, but it's not impossible for a sprinter to get good all of sudden.

I think it's close to 100% certain that part of the improvement was related to Dutrow taking his time with the horse, using superior training, a better vet, and correcting some problems legitimately. How much that is worth I don't know.

I see examples of Beyer figures that IMO are off by 10 points almost every single day I handicap. Some I can account for (extreme pace isues etc..), but many are flukes that I can't explain with certainty. The latest high profile example was the Interborough. It was the 8th race on January 1st. IMO, that figure is too slow by around 10 points.

You are right. I would require a perfect storm of events to explain this race away without it being cheating, but I think at least some of those events are fairly likely in this specific case. I am reserving judgement until after I see how some of these horses come out of the race because even though I am the only one that thinks so, I believe that figure "could be" off by 10 or more points. I readily admit I could be wrong though. If I am, then cheating moves way up on the probability chart.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"

Last edited by classhandicapper; 02-05-2009 at 05:22 PM.
classhandicapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:26 PM   #24
Bubba X
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
This is the way I see it.

This One's for Phil ran an 81 on July 27th 2008.

6 months worth of average natural development equals about 7 Beyer points. That takes him to an 88. That leaves 29 Beyer points unaccounted for.

1. The horse may have developed more than average (0-10 points?)

2. A superior horseman may have corrected some problems that were holding the horse back previously via legal means (0-15 points?)

3. The figure could be too fast for difficult to identify reasons (0-15 points?).

4. The horse could have been illegally drugged etc.. (0-15 points?)
5. The 81 from July could be off.
Bubba X is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:37 PM   #25
the little guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
No doubt about it. I think it is a lot tougher to get away with this stuff in New York, which is why Dutrow has slowed down on the mega move up front there.

Look at what Wolfson did with Miesque's Approval. He took the horse from Mott, who did have some pretty good success with him, and he is suddenly running lifetime tops at 7 years of age and winning a Breeder's Cup race.
Worth noting then, I guess, that Wolfson never ran Miesque's Approval in NY.
the little guy is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:38 PM   #26
the little guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph_the_cat
Why would we compare This Ones For Phil to champions?... Phils not a champion... hes a stakes winning 2yo with one 3yo-restricted stakes win...

Good point. That makes his improvement even more incredible.
the little guy is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:57 PM   #27
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba X
5. The 81 from July could be off.
The horse had 8 races. The last 6 were 76, 75, 66, 79, 71, 81.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 05:58 PM   #28
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
CJ,
...but it's not impossible for a sprinter to get good all of sudden.
I'm certainly willing to listen. Can you name a few?
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 06:04 PM   #29
ralph_the_cat
The people's choice
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: at my house
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by the little guy
Good point. That makes his improvement even more incredible.
Bad point. Your saying that no other horse has improved that much... Only because Champion horses haven't... as if they represent Phil...
ralph_the_cat is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 02-05-2009, 06:12 PM   #30
the little guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph_the_cat
Bad point. Your saying that no other horse has improved that much... Only because Champion horses haven't... as if they represent Phil...

Dutrow and Wolfson have probably come close with some other non-champions ( at least before they got them.....and wormed them and cleaned their teeth ).
the little guy is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.