California Chrome

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by greengorilla

I guess you don't comprehend that the track was lightning fast. In regard to the times you posted. Race 2 was won gate to wire by Storm Fighter, in a State bred nw1x 20000 optional and they went in 22.67 45.77 1.09.67 1.22.42 1.35.67. Thats smoking for that state bred condition. If that doesn't tell you the track was like concrete, and hence increased the speed number falsley, not to mention make it nearly impossible to close on the track.

Before i hold a 'bias' against anyone, the question i ask myself is this. What horse on the card would have won and what horse would have lost if the track was "Fair' and not biased towards speed.

If Cal Chrome was a speed horse with no real quality, he wouldnt have won, he would have gotten run off his feet....horses don't win that easily and by that large of a margin just on a bias, you have to be pretty good to pull that off. And this bias wasnt as strong as the bias we saw on BC Friday last year.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by greengorilla

I guess you don't comprehend that the track was lightning fast. In regard to the times you posted. Race 2 was won gate to wire by Storm Fighter, in a State bred nw1x 20000 optional and they went in 22.67 45.77 1.09.67 1.22.42 1.35.67. Thats smoking for that state bred condition. If that doesn't tell you the track was like concrete, and hence increased the speed number falsley, not to mention make it nearly impossible to close on the track.

A "concrete" racetrack will be reflected in any and all properly constructed speed figs.

[comet52]

Originally Posted by greengorilla

Couldn't win a state bred stakes back in november, and ran against no real proven runners in his last 4 starts. All horses in both open stakes san felipe and santa anita derby were in house horses. There in house 3 yrolds are rats there. If he beat a real racehorse I could see him being a contender. and as someone eluded to in and other post, Santa anita had the track fast as lighting through the meet holding front speed bias. Which definitely contributed to his recent success. The party will soon be over when he faces the real monsters back east.

alluded

[clocker7]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

A "concrete" racetrack will be reflected in any and all properly constructed speed figs.

I respectfully dispute that. It has long been a contention of mine that superfast tracks distort things too much when constructing figs and applying them to longer distances.

Now, as long as their usage are restricted to the very shortest races, then the impact is not as noticeable, and not a problem. But they tend to exaggerate the abilities of horses facing longer tests and mask the weakness of those who tend to fade more by essentially "clipping off" the most challenging portion of a race when energy reserve is a premium.

It's much, much easier to toss and move on than to finagle an untrustworthy number for. Who needs to rely upon a controversial fig, anyway? There's always another race to bet right around the corner.

[cj]

Originally Posted by clocker7

I respectfully dispute that. It has long been a contention of mine that superfast tracks distort things too much when constructing figs and applying them to longer distances.

Now, as long as their usage are restricted to the very shortest races, then the impact is not as noticeable, and not a problem. But they tend to exaggerate the abilities of horses facing longer tests and mask the weakness of those who tend to fade more by essentially "clipping off" the most challenging portion of a race when energy reserve is a premium.

It's much, much easier to toss and move on than to finagle an untrustworthy number for. Who needs to rely upon a controversial fig, anyway? There's always another race to bet right around the corner.

I don't think it can be argued much that super fast race tracks distort things a little. If it takes less time to run a race, less stamina is required. However, this amount of distortion is very small in my opinion, even at longer distances. Not only that, it can be incorporated into figures pretty easily.

[mountainman]

I've seen lots of super-fast surfaces that weren't speed-biased. It depends on the track in question. And while I would assume there's a general correlation between running times and speed-proficiency, I'd love to see statistical proof. Even then, a distinction would be needed between intrinsically quick surfaces and those playing faster than par.

[clocker7]

Originally Posted by cj

I don't think it can be argued much that super fast race tracks distort things a little. If it takes less time to run a race, less stamina is required. However, this amount of distortion is very small in my opinion, even at longer distances. Not only that, it can be incorporated into figures pretty easily.

I'm not sure how you have been able to calculate such a compensation factor for a variant (generally based upon a sample of sprint races, and extrapolated for longer distances), but I'd like to read how. Imo, when it comes to those circumstances, art takes over from science when it comes to fig providers struggling with a difficult race. I've never had much confidence in those results.

In races of 10f or longer, I think that a super fast track changes the nature of the running so much that variants become buggy; and that any claim of accuracy is suspect; and that it almost becomes a significant-figure situation.

[cj]

Originally Posted by clocker7

I'm not sure how you have been able to calculate such a compensation factor for a variant (generally based upon a sample of sprint races, and extrapolated for longer distances), but I'd like to read how. Imo, when it comes to those circumstances, art takes over from science when it comes to fig providers struggling with a difficult race. I've never had much confidence in those results.

In races of 10f or longer, I think that a super fast track changes the nature of the running so much that variants become buggy; and that any claim of accuracy is suspect; and that it almost becomes a significant-figure situation.

I'm not going to get into too deep here, but with the use of computers, it isn't that hard. This wouldn't have been practical 20 years ago. Instead of using speed charts for each distance, how about a new one for each final time? If a 10f race takes 2 minutes to complete, it isn't too hard to program it to use different values than a race that takes 2:06 to complete. Getting beat 10 lengths in the first race is more significant than getting beat 10 lengths in the second race.

Comparing races at different distances this way gets a little trickier, but it is possible. If a group of horses sprints a race in 1:10, and a similar group ability wise runs 10 furlongs in 2:00 later in the day, is it possible to project what the latter group would run 10f in if the first group sprinted in 1:12 next time?

So to keep it simple, you have to have variable values between distances, and also for beaten lengths based on the speed of the racetrack. In other words, on a "fast" track, maybe the difference in like performances at 6f and 7f is 12 seconds. In an average track it could be 12.5, and on a slow track 13. It does help make better variants. Is it worth it? That is up to the figure maker.

[big frank]

what kind of numbers did saturday's race have Cj ?? thanks

[Exotic1]

Originally Posted by taxicab

I like the way the connections aren't afraid to run their horse.
He's been racing for close to a year now without a break.
He ran his first race in April.
He broke his Maiden in May.
CC won a stake back in July.
In that stakes race he beat a double bias that DMR had for the first 7 weeks of the meet.
Very few horses closed in the middle of DMR main track to win a race for all of July-Aug.
That might of been the tip off that CC was the goods.
He has 5 Stakes wins.
10 races under his belt.
In an era when barns are afraid to run their 3yo's, they race this guy every chance they get.
I think his heavy workload has given CC an edge on most other 3yo's.
When CC won the San Felipe it was the second fastest running in the 77 year history of the race.......and Espinoza wrapped him up after the 1/16th Pole.
And here's one I like:
When Affirmed won the SA Derby by 8 lengths he went 1:48 flat.
When Sunday Silence won the SA Derby by 11 he went 1:47.3.
CC won the SA Derby in 1:47.2(geared down).
Of course this horse can get beat in the Derby.
He can draw the rail.
The track could come up muddy.
He could get wiped out on the first turn.
But to proclaim he has no shot is foolish.

Good presentation of the facts. Also as you finished with, "Prior Results do not guarantee a similar outcome", especially when there are 19 horses coming at you from all sides. It does seem however like we haven't seen too many (any?) horses overcome adversity such as post position, going really wide, pace pressure, maneuver from between horses, get knocked around a bit and still close strongly. It "seems" (no quantification available) that many of the top 3yo races were won with horses getting good trips. No knocks on CC at all, you can't blame him or downgrade him for beating up his competition. Good horses make it appear that everything went their way when they demolish their competition.

Other than a time based metric, did any horse really impress you to say this horse can overcome most of what they throw at him and still run his race? I don' know, maybe I'm looking for a superstar that can do everything.

[cj]

Originally Posted by big frank

what kind of numbers did saturday's race have Cj ?? thanks

113 for the winner, slightly lower than the 117 in the Wood. I've had the NY horses faster all year, and while there is no guarantee one horse can verify anything, Kristo sure didn't hurt that premise.

[Smarty Cide]

There is absolutely nothing more to say about this horse that I haven’t already said over the past two months. He is simply one of the most special young horses I’ve seen in years, and if the Triple Crown drought is ever to end, this is the kind of horse who will end it. Yes, I’m getting way ahead of myself, but I cannot remember the last time I’ve seen a horse as close to perfection as this guy. For a horse to keep piling up these freakish performances for a so long is a rarity in racing today and he actually keeps getting better. My apologies for a little horn tooting, but I have a reason for doing so. Back on Feb. 3 after his Cal Cup Derby victory, I wrote, Cal-bred or no Cal-bred, this was the most impressive 3-year-old in the country, saying, “This horse has such a long fluid stride and levels off so beautifully he’s a joy to watch…you can’t ask a horse to run any straighter down the stretch. He accelerates on his own at the right time, and for a long-striding horse his lead changes are so smooth you can barely see him do it…this horse has absolutely no flaws.” Two months later and nothing has changed. He has run one monster Thoro-Graph number after another without regressing; he has run the best 3-year-olds in California into the ground at the exact same spot each time and with the same push-button burst of speed; he wins under no urging at all; his works are spectacular while under wraps; he’s now won at 4 1/2 furlongs, 5 1/2 furlongs, 7 furlongs, 1 1/16 miles, and 1 1/8 miles and has been racing steadily for an entire year; he’s brilliantly fast, but has a tremendous mind and knows how to harness his speed and when to use it; and his pedigree is inundated with classic winners at 1 1/2 miles from Europe and the U.S. All this adds up to a “freak.” Can a horse possibly keep up this remarkable pace heading into the Derby? In the words of Al Jolson, we ain’t seen nuthin’ yet. Come to think of it, I take back my apology.

Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://cs.bloodhorse.com/blogs/kentu...#ixzz2yFJvXKSN

[horses4courses]

Way too early to pronounce him the "Chosen One".
The test he will get at Churchill will be like nothing he's attempted before.

He sure appears to have greatness.
Appearances have deceived us for many years now, though.

Although I will be rooting for him,
I'm waiting for his next race before I jump on the bandwagon.

Here's hoping he's a true champion - the sport could sure use one.

[Rex Phinney]

Here come the California haters...

I'll just say as someone who has spoken to the owners of this horse ans been live to his last two races, there is nothing in our 50 united states right now that they are afraid of with this horse, and having watched the other preps they have nothing to be afraid of.

Hope the NY runners end up with lots of runners in the Derby, THEY ARE GOING TO NEED ALOT OF BULLETS TO SHOOT HIM DOWN.

[depalma113]

Originally Posted by greengorilla

I guess you don't comprehend that the track was lightning fast. In regard to the times you posted. Race 2 was won gate to wire by Storm Fighter, in a State bred nw1x 20000 optional and they went in 22.67 45.77 1.09.67 1.22.42 1.35.67. Thats smoking for that state bred condition. If that doesn't tell you the track was like concrete, and hence increased the speed number falsley, not to mention make it nearly impossible to close on the track.

When is Churchill Downs NOT lightning fast on Derby Day?