Saffie Joseph - How Good Is He

[Valuist]

The public has caught on to him and everything he sends out gets hammered. Not that they shouldn't but there's no secrets anymore with him.

[Niko]

Originally Posted by cj

I think there is a place for long term trends and short term trends. But for the most part, catching on to the short term ones before the public does is the best way to make it profitable. By the time sample size is big enough, profits shrink or disappear.

As an example, there was a time when Jorge Navarro had similar stats as Joseph does currently. But now, past year first after he claims...

17 for 83, 20%, $1.11 ROI per $2. People overdid it, he doesn't win as much, but he is still bet like he does.

I'm still trying to figure out why he went from a 27-30% trainer to an average 15% trainer. It's not simply regression to the mean and it's not because he's forgotten how to place his horses. New vet, someone gives a warning and not tell anyone, personal problems? Tough game to begin with, tougher trying to figure out the behind the scenes action.... although it can show up midway through a race

[AltonKelsey]

Originally Posted by aaron

This post reminds me of a Harvey Pack quote from years ago. When at the Paddock Club,Harvey was asked what are you going to do about Oscar Barrera ? He responded,I don’t know what you are going to do,but I am going to bet him.
This was when Oscar was at his peak. Things are no different today. You have to bet these trainers when they are hot and in most cases throw out their horses when they change barns.

That's why Harvey was the best , there is no match today.

[paulbenny]

If you had field size for all races for a particular trainer, and knew his win rate, then you over a large sample, would have an average win rate. For example, 10 horse average size, 10 percent average rate.



We are not able or are not generating this in the analysis. However, common sense is that average field size is not less than four in Florida as an example and he even beats that figure.


If he continues to win at 2-3 times the average trainer, again not having the numbers, then presumably the best investors in horses, with big dollars, would give him horses. It again seems to me that either these trainers I mentioned originally do not want the big dollar farms and horses, or behind the scenes people know they really are not that good. When a P&L is done for Klaravich maybe they lose but have prestige and their P&L is worse than small claiming trainers, but the point is are they really true horsemen?. I leave that to the gut instincts of people, but my gut says no.


They are business guys, who are doing well, in their field of expertise, independent of betting or returns to us. It is more of a judgement on how you view trainers. I know in my heart of heart Graham Motion is a true horseman, and I love the game because of people like him, much more than McKnight, but I wager almost daily and have to consider McKnight, Joseph etc. with jaded optimism.

[ubercapper]

Originally Posted by Niko

I'm still trying to figure out why he went from a 27-30% trainer to an average 15% trainer. It's not simply regression to the mean and it's not because he's forgotten how to place his horses. New vet, someone gives a warning and not tell anyone, personal problems? Tough game to begin with, tougher trying to figure out the behind the scenes action.... although it can show up midway through a race

Did he really go from 27-30% to average (15-20%) or was the 27-30% win rate explainable by chance given the small numbers?

I understand statistics but don't come close to understanding when a sample size has statistical significance and leave it to experts to determine when that level is reached. From my reading of the work of Dr. Parkin and the Equine Injury Database, it takes some pretty big numbers to have confidence and when it comes to trainers we rarely get those sample sizes.

If that's the case, much of these discussions are speculation, or worse, spurious correlations, for example if trainer A is winning at 40% he must be cheating.

[cj]

Surprised we haven't seen his name pop up today to be honest. Probably not over yet though. Time will tell.

[gabe]

Originally Posted by aaron

This post reminds me of a Harvey Pack quote from years ago. When at the Paddock Club,Harvey was asked what are you going to do about Oscar Barrera ? He responded,I don’t know what you are going to do,but I am going to bet him.
This was when Oscar was at his peak. Things are no different today. You have to bet these trainers when they are hot and in most cases throw out their horses when they change barns.

So it's safe to say you'll be fading these horses that will be changing barns?

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by gabe

So it's safe to say you'll be fading these horses that will be changing barns?

If you watch these horses, while there will be some exceptions, in general when they show up in another barn with an unknown trainer, the ones that were 2-1 will be 10-1. The people who bet substantial money will be well aware of the situation, so there won't be any money in fading them.

[Fightingirish51195]

Originally Posted by cj

Surprised we haven't seen his name pop up today to be honest. Probably not over yet though. Time will tell.

Agreed

[paulbenny]

I am going to try to summarize statistics, and again, it is important to be unbiased and reasonable. I think I am. I did ace stats in college but am not a statistics man. Substantially higher win rates than average when adjusting for field size for each trainer, a tough number to get at but I am sure it could be had, would be a great baseline.



So gut reaction to the indictment of the people such as Servis and Navarro is that even a tepid discussion on numbers would suggest the 25-30 percent win rate is pretty darn good. So not to be accusatory, but I think that anyone trying anything shifty will go down in performance in the next year, and it will go unexplained. A few will disappear, and I do not know their names. Moreover, if they see substantial criminal situations with the NY Southern District indictments, they might really disappear in mass or revert to the average Joe.


Only time will tell.

[Niko]

Originally Posted by ubercapper

Did he really go from 27-30% to average (15-20%) or was the 27-30% win rate explainable by chance given the small numbers?

I understand statistics but don't come close to understanding when a sample size has statistical significance and leave it to experts to determine when that level is reached. From my reading of the work of Dr. Parkin and the Equine Injury Database, it takes some pretty big numbers to have confidence and when it comes to trainers we rarely get those sample sizes.

If that's the case, much of these discussions are speculation, or worse, spurious correlations, for example if trainer A is winning at 40% he must be cheating.

Wasn't looking at it from a purely statistical viewpoint, rarely are there enough samples for one trainer to make it statistically significant. Was looking at how his horses were performing (speed and pace at class levels) compared to before.

[how cliche]

Originally Posted by cj

Today's 4th at GP was the poster child for a Saffie Joseph horse. They just keep coming even if under a drive for a long time.

The look you're describing is of the doped race horse. Appreciate your politeness. First recollection of that look was Lawyer Ron. The most recent high profile doped horse is Maximum Security and it was there for us to see wo the FBI telling us it was so. Watch the saudi cup replay. Scrubbed on too early and for too long. All in, tiring and behind before the stretch run. He does nothing more than not stop. That's the dope keeping him going.

[AltonKelsey]

Originally Posted by how cliche

..... He does nothing more than not stop. That's the dope keeping him going.

The folks here won't appreciate that , too subtle


I feel sorry for the horse, as a certain amount of grit is required ,even if doped


Wonder what the real story is behind the 16k claiming tag.



Never bought the bullshit



Maybe didnt respond to the stuff early, or they got a diff cocktail that worked better, and moved him up

[gabe]

Originally Posted by AltonKelsey

The folks here won't appreciate that , too subtle


I feel sorry for the horse, as a certain amount of grit is required ,even if doped


Wonder what the real story is behind the 16k claiming tag.



Never bought the bullshit



Maybe didnt respond to the stuff early, or they got a diff cocktail that worked better, and moved him up

Think it shows he was never a real trainer. Thats reckless to have that good of a horse and risk losing him for pennies.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by how cliche

The look you're describing is of the doped race horse. Appreciate your politeness. First recollection of that look was Lawyer Ron. The most recent high profile doped horse is Maximum Security and it was there for us to see wo the FBI telling us it was so. Watch the saudi cup replay. Scrubbed on too early and for too long. All in, tiring and behind before the stretch run. He does nothing more than not stop. That's the dope keeping him going.

Back in the late 1990s, that was the trademark of the Scott Lake off-the-claim horse (before Lake became mortal again)---get the lead and then rebreak at the top of the stretch. Sure, not every one of the horses that do that is juiced, but for 20 years that's always been indicator number 1 to me too.