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 03-21-2018, 10:06 PM   #1
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,180
Riddle me this Batmen (and Batwomen):

If you can put your hands on the PPs for today's eighth race at Gulfstream Park, I want someone to put together a cogent argument for how in the world the following happened:
  1. Uncle B won the race
  2. Most shocking, how he went off as the 3-1 second choice

Discuss.
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-21-2018, 10:17 PM   #2
Andy Asaro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,789
Woke up in last with Blinkers Off for new Trainer and Ortiz stuck with him and was also a first time gelding before last.

Don't know what the sheets said about last race but suspect it was higher rated than the comparative beyer for his last race. That's the only way it gets bet down to 3-1 IMO
Attached Files
File Type: pdf GP--03-21-2018 Race 8.pdf (221.1 KB, 51 views)
Andy Asaro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-21-2018, 10:49 PM   #3
Immortal6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,047
While I didn't bet the race due to not having pps... Looking at the above posters link to DRF and seeing that the 7 ran a raw time of 1:28 in his last is impressive enough amongst this group to give him consideration. Irad up gives him another boost. 15-1 ML was way off to begin with, but I'm inclined to agree with you that 3-1 and second choice was a bit rich, but hey, a lot of folks must have figured it out to get him down to his post time odds.
Immortal6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-21-2018, 10:49 PM   #4
JustRalph
Just another Facist
 
JustRalph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Now in Houston
Posts: 52,615
They knew..........
__________________
WE ARE THE DUMBEST COUNTRY ON THE PLANET!
JustRalph is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-21-2018, 11:02 PM   #5
Spalding No!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,046
This race on paper seemed light on early speed. The 3 horses that looked to have decent early speed ran 1-2-3 in the race.

But only Uncle B ran in a recent race with a really strong pace. He stalked and pounced into the teeth of a 3/4 split of 1:10+, something none of his pace rivals had seen in recent starts. Global Entry and Chief Exchanger both walked on the lead in their previous race.

The pace was slow again today, but Global Entry was held of the early lead and Chief Exchanger as expected had something left but not surprisingly Uncle B had more to offer through the stretch.

The closers were at a disadvantage to begin with, but the main hope from the back, Royal Blessing, missed the break.

The only other horse with any historical speed was Cut To Order, who ran well after setting a strong pace back in June at GP, but upon reappearance last month had absolutely no speed, but finished with interest. Today it seems as though he was held off the pace deliberately while being keen early and finished evenly. Next time will be 3rd off the layoff and I would expect him to be sent next and should be tough at this condition.

The rest of the field were a bunch of 8-10 year olds.

Another note, Uncle B had never been further than 7.5f to this point, but from a pedigree standpoint he is a 1/2 to Room For Me who made her mark sprinting but owned 3 or 4 two turn wins in cheap races and further down the female family there are long winded sorts like champion Sachuista, Derby prospect Dalhart, Paulsen runners Geri and AP Arrow, and Belmont Stakes runner-up John's Treasure.
Spalding No! is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-21-2018, 11:39 PM   #6
PaceAdvantage
PA Steward
 
PaceAdvantage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,180
I just don't get how this horse went off at 3-1.

His last race speed figure was a real cut or two below practically the rest of the field. This was one of the toughest fields he had ever faced on the turf and he was stretching out to boot.

This isn't the kind of horse that takes a ton of action, although all things considered, I've seen a bunch of horses lately that have taken a shocking amount of money that I wouldn't have bet at 100-1, this being one of them.

I guess that's why I'm ice cold lately...
PaceAdvantage is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 12:06 AM   #7
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
The 7 was unproven at the distance, was being raised substantially in class off of a restricted $16,000 claimer...and figured to have considerable pressure on the front end from the 1, the 3 and the 9, whose last race was obviously uncharacteristic of what the horse was capable of, pace-wise. In spite of these "disadvantages", the 7 went off at odds of 3-1...while the more accomplished 8 went off at 9-2 odds, and finished off the board.

If we had handicapped this race ahead of time on this board...my guess is that not a single person here would have predicted that the 7 would go off at a shorter price than the 8.
__________________
Live to play another day.

Last edited by thaskalos; 03-22-2018 at 12:12 AM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 12:42 AM   #8
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spalding No! View Post
But only Uncle B ran in a recent race with a really strong pace.
Was the pace of Uncle B's last race faster than the pace of Royal Blessing's last race? Because my pace ratings have the latter's 6F rating as the faster one.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 12:45 AM   #9
Spalding No!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
The 7...and figured to have considerable pressure on the front end from the 1, the 3 and the 9, whose last race was obviously uncharacteristic of what the horse was capable of, pace-wise.
I don't agree here. The 1-horse was not a frontrunner historically save for its last start when it set very slow fractions at a longer distance than today's race.

The 3-horse was a confirmed frontrunner at the distance--something Uncle B was not--, but was also coming off a wire job with tepid fractions. At any rate, he did in fact set the pace again.

The 9-horse, like the 1-horse, had shown front-running speed only once in its career, and that race was several months ago. He appears to be a horse racing into shape and not a certainty to contest the pace in today's race.

All that aside, Uncle B wasn't even a dedicated frontrunner to begin with. But, ignoring his start on a non-firm turf course (in which he had a troubled start), he was clearly coming out of the two fastest races based on raw times. I'm not sure how much stock should be given to turf BSFs, they seem to be a distraction.

The 8-horse was not the most accomplished horse from a class standpoint. At the advanced age of 9, he had done nothing but run in $16K starters for the past 2 racing seasons and had little success early in his career in stakes. While he was in solid form, note that the only two times he failed to hit the board on firm turf were in races with very slow paces.

Meanwhile, Uncle B has won or placed in 5 stakes races (in fact he debuted in a stakes) during his career. While he may have been moving up in class--condition-wise at least--he also had previously made the biggest nosedive of the group when he hit the $16K conditioned race. I'm not a fan of the huge drop for a "confidence boost", but on the surface, the move seemed to work as he won and just missed in his two tries at the level on firm ground.

The only other horse of note that was a contender off the morning line was the 2-horse. Like the 8-horse, he was an ex-Ken Ramsey octogenarian, and note that despite fitting the condition as a horse who started for $16K, the connections--who just claimed him for $25K--opted for the $30K tag. Showed up in front wraps and drifted out in the stretch. Not promising for future starts.
Spalding No! is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 12:46 AM   #10
Spalding No!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
Was the pace of Uncle B's last race faster than the pace of Royal Blessing's last race? Because my pace ratings have the latter's 6F rating as the faster one.
Royal Blessing was well off that pace and note he was a no-show in two starts that featured tepid paces.
Spalding No! is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 12:56 AM   #11
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spalding No! View Post
I don't agree here. The 1-horse was not a frontrunner historically save for its last start when it set very slow fractions at a longer distance than today's race.

The 3-horse was a confirmed frontrunner at the distance--something Uncle B was not--, but was also coming off a wire job with tepid fractions. At any rate, he did in fact set the pace again.

The 9-horse, like the 1-horse, had shown front-running speed only once in its career, and that race was several months ago. He appears to be a horse racing into shape and not a certainty to contest the pace in today's race.

All that aside, Uncle B wasn't even a dedicated frontrunner to begin with. But, ignoring his start on a non-firm turf course (in which he had a troubled start), he was clearly coming out of the two fastest races based on raw times. I'm not sure how much stock should be given to turf BSFs, they seem to be a distraction.

The 8-horse was not the most accomplished horse from a class standpoint. At the advanced age of 9, he had done nothing but run in $16K starters for the past 2 racing seasons and had little success early in his career in stakes. While he was in solid form, note that the only two times he failed to hit the board on firm turf were in races with very slow paces.

Meanwhile, Uncle B has won or placed in 5 stakes races (in fact he debuted in a stakes) during his career. While he may have been moving up in class--condition-wise at least--he also had previously made the biggest nosedive of the group when he hit the $16K conditioned race. I'm not a fan of the huge drop for a "confidence boost", but on the surface, the move seemed to work as he won and just missed in his two tries at the level on firm ground.

The only other horse of note that was a contender off the morning line was the 2-horse. Like the 8-horse, he was an ex-Ken Ramsey octogenarian, and note that despite fitting the condition as a horse who started for $16K, the connections--who just claimed him for $25K--opted for the $30K tag. Showed up in front wraps and drifted out in the stretch. Not promising for future starts.
I'm not a believer in using "raw times" when pace-handicapping. I also refuse to accept the pace ratings of "lesser" races...when the horse in question is raised substantially in class for a subsequent start, especially in a route. Also...Royal Blessing showed the ability to string good races together...while Uncle B had disappointed at short odds the last two times that he raced off of a "sharp" race.

IMO...the race that Royal Blessing last raced in was noticeably faster pace-wise than that of Uncle B.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 01:03 AM   #12
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spalding No! View Post
Royal Blessing was well off that pace and note he was a no-show in two starts that featured tepid paces.
Even though Royal Blessing was a length and a half behind Uncle B at the 6F of their respective races, he had run faster than his seemingly faster counterpart...because the pace of the former race was faster than that of the latter. It is also folly to compare the inner splits of 7.5F races and 1 1/16M races. IMO, of course.
__________________
Live to play another day.

Last edited by thaskalos; 03-22-2018 at 01:05 AM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 01:11 AM   #13
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,110
On Feb 24th there were two 7.5f, 16,000 claiming races on the turf. One was run in 1:29.9, This horse won in 1:28 and got a 78 Beyer. The 2 mile races on that day were run in 1:36.1 and 136.8. The 3 in this race won the faster of the two and got a 87 Beyer. If I figure this correctly the 7 should have earned a Beyer in the range of 88 to 92 and not a 78.

I'm with you on this horse, looking at the figures, up in class and distance, he is a stretch. But but being bet to 7/5 in the last dump? That is something else.
jay68802 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 01:11 AM   #14
Spalding No!
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
I'm not a believer in using "raw times" when pace-handicapping. I also refuse to accept the pace ratings of "lesser" races...when the horse in question is raised substantially in class for a subsequent start, especially in a route.
Yes, the raw times are not ideal in general, but in this case, we are talking about 3 second or more differences between the 3/4 fractions. Uncle B had been tasting fractions in the range of 1:10+ while the other horses were wading through pedestrian 1:13+ fractions. I doubt any pace adjustments could erase that deficit.

Quote:
Also...Royal Blessing showed the ability to string good races together...
He had also shown he was ineffective when racing behind a slow pace. Royal Blessing, a 9 year old, was also making his 3rd start in 30 days after a 2017 campaign of 12 races. I wouldn't argue with someone who might thing he's coming to the end of the line or at the very least being overraced in the near term.

Quote:
while Uncle B had disappointed at short odds the last two times that he raced off of a "sharp" race.
Uncle B also "checked in tight quarters on the turn" and "bumped between horses at the start" in those races. The latter was on good--not firm--turf which some might choose to draw a line through.

Quote:
IMO...the race that Royal Blessing last raced in was noticeably faster pace-wise than that of Uncle B.
That might have been the case, but the point of that was to establish Uncle B as the superior pace horse in the race. Royal Blessing is a confirmed closer who needs help up front. Maybe if Uncle B's rider chose to engage the 3-horse he would have benefited, but Uncle B is not a one-dimensional frontrunner.
Spalding No! is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 03-22-2018, 01:16 AM   #15
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spalding No! View Post

The 8-horse was not the most accomplished horse from a class standpoint. At the advanced age of 9, he had done nothing but run in $16K starters for the past 2 racing seasons and had little success early in his career in stakes.
We obviously have different definitions for the words "most accomplished", and "class". To me...it matters not what the horse has done in races that no longer appear on the PP chart. I am biased towards the more recent accomplishments, of beast AND man.

As I said previously...I'd like to see which handicapper here would have predicted ahead of time that the would go off at shorter odds than the in that race.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos 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 09:17 PM.


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.