Crist Blog | May 27, 2008
Moral Victory
They don't pay off on moral victories, but Commentator could not have been more gallant in defeat than he was while finishing second to Divine Park in the Met Mile Monday.
After being pushed by First Defence to run very strong fractions (22.48, 44.52) on a tiring track, Commentator appeared cooked in upper stretch when First Defence ranged up on his outside and began to go past him. The old boy rose to the challenge, however, digging back in and regaining the lead, refusing to let First Defence go by him and crushing his bid. He reopened some daylight and looked like he might gut it out, but then along came a fresh Divine Park to go past him.
The extremely strong pace and dull surface led to a slow final time of 1:36.91 and very slow final quarter of 27.30 off a pace of 1:09.61. There were only four dirt races at Belmont Monday, three of them at a mile, but it was nearly four hours between the Met and the previous one-mile races. The final times of the three mile races are very hard to fit together because the first two were slow-paced events, but they make a little more sense if you look at both the six-furlong splits and the final times:
Race 2 (maiden claimers): 1:12.84/1:40.19
Race 3 (statebred Alw N1x): 1:11.77/1:37.43
Race 10 (Metropolitan H.): 1:09.61/1:36.91
Think of it this way: While the final time of the statebred N1x was only three lengths (5-6 Beyer points at a mile) slower than the Met, it was 13 lengths slower (33-34 Beyer points at six furlongs) slower to the six-furlong call.
Commentator now will be pointed for the Whitney and a possible date with Curlin while Divine Park -- who has now won the Withers, Westchester and Met, all one-turn miles -- looks like a strong Breeders' Cup Dirt Mile candidate.
I had singled Commentator on a small pick-six play that died one leg earlier Monday. The $238k double-carry drew a hearty $1,028,157 in new money, producing a $45,376 6-of-6 payoff that feels a little high for a $12.40/$12.20/$8.60/$10.60/$6.40/$12.40 sequence. On the other hand, the parlay works out to a suprisingly high $34,201, and all six favorites lost.
Posted by Steven Crist May 27, 2008 2:54:04 PM | Permalink
Keywords:
Comments
mike says:
C:
What was harsh about your posting? I just think you're misguided, and I want you to apply some of that advanced math to racing, not just your vocation.
How did I calculate the pace figure? First, I paid $4 to pull down the Beyer from DRF.com. Once I had the Beyer, I opened up my well worn copy of "Beyer on Speed" and turned to the one-turn speed ratings (raw Beyers) table. From that table, I calculated the variant for the race. At that point, I turned back to the chapter on the "Mathematics of Pace," which contains a handy table listing raw Beyers for half times. I found DP's half time and applied the variant.
Steve and others might object to this calcualtion on a number of grounds: (1) pace figures are more useful in shorter races, (2) my method applied the final Beyer variant and not a specific pace figure variant (meaning a head-on wind down the back stretch could totally compromise this approach), (3) I used pars for a generic racetrack, not pars specific to Belmont (but I was comparing his pace fig in the Met to his pace fig in the Weschester, so this point is moot).
Why calculate the pace fig? Because pace makes the race. A horse that typically runs 90 Beyers accompanied by 50 pace figs will usually lose to a horse that runs 85 Beyers and 70 pace figs. In 7 furlong races or less, I would go so far as to suggest that the two figs (final Beyer and pace) be added together (comparing the sum for each horse; but use Moss pace figs if the horses have come in from various tracks, not my approach).
In any case, I claim horses and I've haven't claimed one in five yrs without first adding his/her pace fig to final Beyer (I only claim sprinters that possess speed). And it's worked out well over time.
Posted by Mike May 29, 2008 9:35:34 PM
angus_buck says:
Sorry folks, Big Brown could run on three legs backwards and still beat the crew he is expected to face in the Bel. Just try to find some value on Belmont day in your pic3's(now doubles),pic4's (now pic3's) and the one day only pick5.
Posted by Angus Buck May 29, 2008 7:18:05 PM
yuwipi says:
Flipper_Dawson: Your superfecta numerology reminds me of a guy who used to tell me to forget the Form and play my DD based on the number of buttons on the pajamas of the guy running the Chinese laundry in a NY Daily News comic strip. He was serious.
I'm thinking your half kidding, no?
Posted by yuwipi May 29, 2008 6:00:50 PM
bpm says:
Is Rick Dutrow threatening the jockey colony:
"Dutrow was also asked if he was concerned that other riders in the Belmont would “gang up” on Big Brown. He was reminded that some people accused riders of doing that to Smarty Jones when he was defeated by Birdstone in the 2004 Belmont Stakes.
“I don’t believe anyone would do something like that,” he said. “If they did, they might get assassinated after the race. I can’t imagine they would do that.""
Posted by BPM May 29, 2008 4:59:07 PM
tim says:
Its too bad we cant be rooting for a bunch of guys like Sackatoga Stable, a la Funny Cide in 2003. Instead we get to watch a bunch of sharks in suits get out of a 100 yard Hummer Limo. How exciting.
Yawn, wake me up when its over.
Posted by Tim May 29, 2008 4:31:04 PM
stewart says:
I agree that the upcoming Breeder's Cup on the Santa Anita synthetic track has all the makings of a potential public relations disaster for horse racing.
Putting aside the obvious track problem if it rains, how will it look for American racing if an undefeated in 2008 Curlin skips the Classic to run in the Japan Cup dirt and then another Dubai World Cup because of the synthetic track at SA.
Not to mention that its practically guaranteed that the trainers of one or more of the top NY and KY based 2yos will skip this year's Breeder's Cup Juvenile to run instead in the KY Jockey Club and Remsen because of uncertainies regarding the synthetic track, especially given how poorly the California based 2 yos did at Mth last year and how poorly the California 3 yos did this year in the Triple Crown after prepping on the surface. Remember, Baffert and Zayat intentionally shipped Indian Blessing and several other promising 2yos out of California to run at Saratoga and Belmont because of the synthetic surface at Del Mar.
Posted by Stewart May 29, 2008 3:57:49 PM
dick_w says:
I know most of the discussion has been about Commentator and the Met Mile, but there were at least 3 other noteworthy efforts over the weekend that I was able to watch - Daytona winning the Grade 1 Shoemaker, Precious Kitten winning the Grade 1 Gamely (both on the Hollywood turf) and Storm Mesa winning the $100,000 Cinemine at Lone Star on the dirt. Both Daytona and Precious Kitten stalked their main rivals and finished strongly to win fairly easily (I was expecting both to go for the lead). And Storm Mesa was dominating in her first stakes attempt winning by 13 1/2 lengths following an 8 length allowance win in her previous race. She may be one to reckon with in the 3 year old filly division (or maybe she just likes Lone Star ?). All three of these winners recieved a BSF of 108 which is nothing to sneeze at.
Posted by Dick W May 29, 2008 3:29:24 PM
ryan says:
Anyone see Johnny V's ride in the 2nd today (baby race) at Belmont? 6 length lead at 1/16 pole. Never used the whip. Eased horse under wire. And LOST. Don't think he ever saw Prado's horse. If the guy from Prairie Meadows got 2 weeks (http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080528/SPORTS14/80527058/-1/sports09) for doing similar (and his horse was spooked), JV oughta get days as well.
Posted by Ryan May 29, 2008 1:39:09 PM
andyscoggin says:
It still amazes me that people feel Big Brown is a sure thing.
You better really think about whether he will even run in the race!!! If he does run, he has to go a mile and a half with a quarter crack!
Posted by AndyScoggin May 29, 2008 12:11:04 PM
bpm says:
Re Big Brown, IEAH, etc...have there ever been connections as distasteful as IEAH and Dutrow? To say they have a shady past doesn't even tell half the story. Plus, I am not yet convinced that the public knows all there is to know about Iavarone and IEAH, particularly concerning their role, if any, in the A One Rocket milkshaking. While I bet against both Funny Cide and Smarty Jones, I was rooting for the horses as a racing fan and because their connections were good people. Unfortunately, when the time has now come to actually believe that there is a triple crown winner in the offing, some of the most distasteful people are involved. Oh well.
Posted by BPM May 29, 2008 12:10:22 PM
chicago_steve says:
Hi Steve. What adjustment,if any, do you make when the takeout is hiked one percent? Are there any stats that can prove to the "pols" that the reduced takeout increased revenue? Thanks.
Posted by Chicago Steve May 29, 2008 10:07:11 AM
tim says:
Hey jeff:
Thanks for sharing the link.
These Big Brown guys arent exactly a great rooting story, are they? None of whats in the article surprises me.
I want to see a Triple crown winner as bad as anybody but I just wish it would have had a better story behind it. Somebody genuine you could want to root for.
Sorry, I just cant.
Problem is theres not a chance this horse can lose the Belmont unless something goes bad and I dont want to see that.
Crown this horse the king. Its not his fault hes owned by this guy.
Posted by Tim May 29, 2008 9:28:41 AM
floridalarry says:
Michael Iavarone (with newly reported suspicious past), Rick Dutrow (with reported suspicious past in & out of racing),Paul Pompa and Big Brown (a super horse on steroids) make for an interesting convergence. There has to be a 'story' underneath this meld ...
Posted by Florida-Larry May 29, 2008 9:13:27 AM
jeff says:
Want to see what kind of people are behind Big Brown? Click the link:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601170&refer=home&sid=aGle6KcO9IJ0#
Posted by jeff May 29, 2008 12:17:32 AM
joesph_r_monaco says:
steve.....the governor thinks the state got screwed on the nyra deal as reported in todays ny post. getting land worth 1 to 1.5 billion for a loan or if you want a bail out of 150 million to continue racing in ny with out a long interuption, seems like a good deal for all, horsemen, bettors, breeders and all. as i said before i hope saratoga 2008 is a reality and not a dream........joe
Posted by joesph r monaco May 28, 2008 11:40:18 PM
george_quinn says:
As juicy as the wagering is on Breeders cup day, you can keep it on synthetic. I hope Curlin stays home, that would give all the Breeders cup suits just what they deserve. Stiffed by the best. Not to mention a huge week of rain so they can finally run their drainage test that they just canceled. I will pass on the synthetic world champion weekend. IDIOTS.
George in Lexington Ky.
Posted by george quinn May 28, 2008 10:50:21 PM
allen_klayman says:
Have you heard that twinspires.com is now offering conditional wagering where you can set your minimum odds you will accept to wager on a bet. Here is the link to the FAQ.
http://www.twinspires.com/content/conditionalwagering
Posted by Allen Klayman May 28, 2008 10:44:52 PM
unitas says:
I know this is a little bit off the subject matter, but I have a feeling that this years Breeders Cup(and next years as well) to be held @ Santa Anita, has the potential to become racings next public relations disaster. With the synthetic surface @ Santa Anita still incurring drainage problems, if the problem is not rectified in time, and Southern California receives heavy downpours within a few days of the BC, it will be a nightmare for the racing industry(again) if the BC card has to be postponed, or moved to another venue. Another potential problem, if indeed Santa Anita does not opt to change its surface in the meantime to a different synthetic surface or a conventional dirt surface, is that trainers who do no like the surface will not race their equine stars there. Trainers such as Steve Assumussen(trainer of Curlin), who has publicly stated his dislike of the synthetic surfaces, will not ship, let alone race his horses over the surface if he believes it will compromise his horses chances in anyway. What will it say for racing on the day where it crowns its year end divisional champions that some of it's biggest stars stay in the barn that day due to a controversy over a racing surface? Stay tuned...
Posted by Unitas May 28, 2008 10:01:39 PM
w_c says:
Let me set everyone straight about what's going on at NYC OTB...
1. The statewide OTB system is highly inefficient, but it was politicians that structured it that way decades ago. It is only those politicians (not NYC OTB or mayor Bloomberg now) that can fix it.
2. The accounting issues are all nonsense. NYC OTB is mandated to make certain payments to government, the industry etc... It also has costs (many of which are fixed). It doesn't matter whether you classify the various payments NYC OTB makes as profits or not. It doesn't matter if NYC OTB made a few bad deals. What matters is whether or not the corporation has the cash flow to operate after it makes its required payments. Soon it will not. It will soon be broke no matter what the profit statement should really look like.
3. There are only a few ways to cope with the imminent shortfall of cash flow. Either the industry and government payments have to be reduced, NYC OTB's expenses have to be reduced, a little of both, and/or the take has to be raised.
4. NYC OTB already has and continues to make drastic cuts to expenses as this issue is being worked out. Several NYC OTB branches have been closed in the last couple of months. Several more are on a list to be closed as soon as the leases are up for renewal later this year. There have been job cuts, overtime cuts, replacement of betting clerks with SAM machines etc... NYC OTB "IS" streamling and downsizing in an effort to cope with lower demand for it's product given an increase of phone and internet betting.
5. Now it's up to the other side (those actually receiving all the cash from OTB - namely government and industry) to take a little less of that shrinking pie or for the politicans with the real power to be men (instead of the corrupt little swine they usually are) and reorganize the entire industry in a way that makes some sense.
This really has nothing to do with NYC OTB or the people that work there.
Many people at NYC OTB are worried about their jobs just like anyone else during a downsizing. So the powers inside OTB and at the unions will certainly lobby politicians, but so would anyone else that was about to lose their job. If it's not fixed, don't blame NYC OTB, the union, or the managers for acting in their own self interest etc... That's normal and to be expected. Blame the politicians! They are the only ones that can fix it because they created it.
Posted by W. C. May 28, 2008 9:16:00 PM
c says:
Mike,
I hope I didn't sound too harsh. The last line of my previous post was actually just a joke. When you think about it, we reached a somewhat similar conclusion (I wouldn't say the Met was MUCH better... I just think he had to work harder) with totally different approaches. That being said, when it comes to handicapping, I think almost everything is open to question, particularly figures, because 2+2 doesn't always equal 4 as it does in the sciences.
Posted by C May 28, 2008 7:29:50 PM
flipper_dawson says:
See above re a question I had to all readers---
We have determined from the tote board that the super result was 4-8-13-all. We now go to the entries and see what the Morning Line was for the "all horse."
Let's say it was 30-1.
Then check the Morning Line on the first 3 nags.We'll guess at 12-1, 20-1, and 15-1.
So, the winning ML figures were 12-1, 20-1, 15-1, and 30-1.
Here is the fun part. Play all the ML totals the next day. So, your first horse will be all the 12-1 shots. Your second horse will be all the 20-1 shots, and so on to the last horse.
The reason for this is that nobody had the 4th horse for 4th, hence the "all" amount in the results.You could fine tune this by matching up the original race with today's race. So, if the last "all" race was 7 furlongs, you would only play these combos on a seven furlong race.
Reason? The "all" horse was not selected to start with. So, there is a good chance he will anchor a super 5 months hence.Horse players cannot remember the past odds of a super race. I can and do, by charting them. So far this year at Woodbine, there have been only 3 races with an "all " horse for 4th in the super.
Nobody had all 4 in the right order, so the track was obligated to pay "all" for 4th with any and all numbers bet for 4th.
Posted by Flipper Dawson May 28, 2008 7:19:51 PM
c says:
Mike,
How did you determine the Met Mile variant? How confident are you in that number and why?
The Form provides the following information: the early fractions, the lengths behind/ahead at the pace calls, and the Beyer Speed Figure. It does not provide a Beyer Pace Figure or the Beyer variant. You are suggesting we take pace into account. Fine. The raw fractions were pretty much the same for the 2 races in question, so I assume you go through the other races on each card and calculate your own pace figures and variant. That's the only way you could've determined that Divine Park ran a "bigger" race in the Met. I reached a similar conclusion without a single calculation, nor did I care about the other races on each card. I didn't consider any fifths or hundredths, in fact, I could've been blind to the fractions and it wouldn't have made much of a difference.
You say Beyers reign supreme. Supreme to what? He gave Divine Park a 111 in the Westchester and a 109 in the Met. Again, the Form only publishes the final BSF, the raw times, and the lengths behind. Without going through the additional computations, one would conclude that the Westchester was 2 points better. If you have to perform the additional pace calculations, as you suggest, then what do you even need the final figure for? If you're already considering all the other factors, what are the BSFs providing you at the end of the rainbow? There's no independent information. Why not just watch the race? Do you enjoy tedious numerical exercises?
Posted by C May 28, 2008 4:56:47 PM
richiebee says:
Steve:
Which track is going to show some cojones and run a series of graded high purse dirt races on the weekend of the Breeders Cup?
Posted by richiebee May 28, 2008 12:52:31 PM
blue_horseshoe says:
RE: NYC OTB
Steve,
Did you notice the ads that the city has taken out (today's NY Post) looking for "qualified persons or business entities interested in providing asset liquidation, auctioneering, ...."?? At this point in time, I'm hoping that the state does nothing, calls their bluff, and let's them shut down... I've always found their surcharge to be an abomination and now the way they are playing this leaves me with wanting to see them gone! The players that haven't done so already, need to go ahead and move over to NYRA Rewards anyway...
Posted by Blue Horseshoe May 28, 2008 11:18:57 AM
wayne80 says:
tm, i singled Grasberg on a small pick six, missing the big payoff when Zip held on.
Cant speak for Steve, but I personally thought Zip would bounce and was a little questionable at 9f., and thought Grasberg, a 3yo, was eligible to move forward big time in his second East Coast start.
Certainly wish I invested the extra money.
Posted by Wayne80 May 28, 2008 10:27:05 AM
mike_c says:
The sometimes ugly projection methodology rears its head again. The 109 in the Met is one thing but I can't wait to see the Beyer fig for the state bred NW1X winner(only 3/5 ths slower).I completely understand that the wicked pace in the MET lead to the slow final quarter and final time(assume the dull track got slower later in the card)
Bottom line is that the statebred NW1X will NOT get a fig of app 103 because of who he is(although thats what he would get if he was a grade 3 open stake winner that same day and not a NYB nw1x)...
Posted by mike c May 28, 2008 9:01:46 AM
stephen_taylor says:
Steve-
Just had an opportunity to read your article on NY Otb's "losing money" (yea right?) and here's a simple suggestion. If Bloomberg wants to close them, then let him close them. With simulcasting, account wagering online, and two tracks in NYC are they really needed? (And when those political appointees realize they're about to lose their cushy jobs, guess what, Bloomberg will back off his demands so fast it will make your head spin!) If a business isn't making money they either change the way they do business (i.e. streamline the way they do business) or they close the doors. If they really want to carry on the sharade, then let them take extra money out of the bets that they accept (not increase the takeout for everyone) But the best idea, to quote Jay and the Americans (I'm old!) is "LET'S LOCK THE DOORS AND THROW AWAY THE KEY NOW!)
Posted by Stephen Taylor May 28, 2008 8:35:22 AM
tk says:
Steve:
I have two Triple Crown trivia questions.
Do you know of a horse who won a Triple Crown race wearing bar shoes?
Has there ever been a jockey to sweep the Triple Crown in one season but not with the same horse?
Both of these scenarios came to mind in light of Big Brown's hoof problems.
Thanks
TK
Posted by TK May 28, 2008 1:26:38 AM
hey_mr_dj says:
Steve. I have to disagree with your comment on Commentator. There are two Commentators. The good Commentator is one who can post some awewome Beyer numbers when he has his own way on the lead or he is facing inferior competition. The other is the Commentator who will stop the moment he faces pressure. I believe the Met Mile was more of the latter. I cannot dismiss Manteca's 1:37.43 mile. Manteca is still a NW2X NY-Bred even though the race was run nearly four hours earlier...
I must finally note that you have given quite a bit of attention to the current state of New York City OTB. I must comment that I could recall an article that you wrote in Playboy Magazine nearly 20 yeays ago that has had a lasting impression on me.
The first comment you made in that article (which I have not seen in nearly 20 years) that I could recall was you stated that waiting on line to place a bet at an OTB office was only slightly less pleasant than waiting on line for an uneployment check.
The second comment I could recall was you stated that if one attended one Jai Lai game you have seen them all. If you went to two, you seen one too many.
The third comment I could recall was that you stated that walking the streets of Atlantic City was dangerous at any hour.
As a result of your article:
I never went to New York City OTB.
I never thought of atending a Jai Lai game.
I went to Atlantic City onyl twice (and never went off the Boardwalk).
Hey, I never went to the beach after I saw the movie "Jaws".
Posted by Hey Mr DJ May 28, 2008 12:39:46 AM
kevin_price says:
Steve,
If OTB officials claim that takeout rates don't matter to their customers its likely because for them (the customers) there is no acceptable substitute to betting on horse racing. As Andy Beyer points out, seemingly insignificant changes in the takeout rate turn winners into losers and such a person may choose to abandon wagering altogether.
Perhaps then a more effective test (the recent test at Laurel notwithstanding)to prove bettor sensitivity to takeout rates would be a prolonged, meaningful reduction in the takeout rate for the purpose of determining the incremental growth that might be realized from rekindling interest in former players who have found acceptable substitutes for wagering on racing.
From a horseplayer's standpoint nothing is more exhilirating than managing to eke out a small profit for a given year in spite of the high takeout. Conversely, nothing is more discouraging than the ineluctable prospect that because of even higher takeout rates the same effort and success rate will likely result in a loss the following year.
Posted by Kevin_Price May 27, 2008 10:48:54 PM
james_mc says:
Ok:
Race 3 (statebred Alw N1x): 45.49/1:11.77/1:37.43
Race 10 (Metropolitan H.): 44.52/1:09.61/1:36.91
To quote Steve:
"Think of it this way: While the final time of the statebred N1x was only three lengths (5-6 Beyer points at a mile) slower than the Met, it was 13 lengths slower (33-34 Beyer points at six furlongs) slower to the six-furlong call."
Sorry, makes no sense at all. Lord Snowden ran the half mile in about 46 3/5 (he was last, twelve lengths off the pace at that point). He wasn't on the pace.
So his half mile time was actually enormously SLOWER than the half mile time of the leader in the 3rd race for NY allowance horses.
Yet, Lord Snowden finished the race in about 1:37.5, no faster than Manteca did the 3rd race,for NY bred allowance horses.
Lord Snowden purports to be a Graded Stakes horse, Manteca is a NY Bred whose previous high Beyer was 75.
So where's the explanation for that?
Posted by James Mc. May 27, 2008 10:26:55 PM
john_o says:
I thought commentator was very good in defeat.Instead of sitting in the pocket( which i thought was going to happen)First defense pressed at the 1/4 pole causing an acceleration to a 22.04 second quarter.
He later tried him again at the top of the stretch causing commentator to use again,and thus tire very late.Lets not forget that DP is very good right now.His sudden rise mirrors that defere horse last fall for Mclaughlin.The Beyer # looks correct to me.
Posted by John O' May 27, 2008 10:10:28 PM
hz_hackenbush says:
Norm Crosby wrote: "Perfect Drift ran a very condescendingly good race . . ." Quite the egotistical horse, eh?
Also, I will, indeed,look for Commentator at a big price going 1 1/8 miles. I will also look for a big price on Big Brown and Zenyatta this summer. Wish me luck!
Posted by hz hackenbush May 27, 2008 10:02:59 PM
flipper_dawson says:
Can't understand all the scoping of all stake races after they are done.
Why worry about them? After all, most of them are faves, anyway.
I would much rather grab the book EXOTIC BETTING by the master, and the 10 cent superfecta book from the west coast.
Add to these two books a dash of longshots, a touch of SECRET PLAY by Albert G. Illich, some 20 cent supers in the last race, and shake well. Garnish with a fast car to get home to bed, along with credit vouchers to keep away from the tellers, and one may be lucky.
On my last foray against the iron men, I played some supers and the results were : my main 4 horses ran 2-3-4-5 in exact order, with a long shot picked nowhere winning the race. My cost? $2.40.
I hit one 2-3 weeks ago for $300.00 and change. This means that the real super price was $1500.00.
The best race for supers is the nightcap, as more money is bet in the last race on the supers than on the other 2 races offering this wager.
What I really like about Woodbine are the high payoffs in all supers.It is nothing to see a payout of over 70 grand, possibly for 20 cents.
----------------------------
Here is a tip--what would a good bettor do when he sees a superfecta paying on the combination--4-8-13-all?
Don't know what to do?? Shame on you!!!
Posted by Flipper Dawson May 27, 2008 9:51:41 PM
nick_briglia says:
Why aren't they just letting Commentator run in six and seven furlong sprints? with his speed they really don't need to tackle the Whitney this year. Focus on sprinting with the horse. That is what he does best.
Posted by Nick Briglia May 27, 2008 9:30:59 PM
mike says:
Divine Park ran a 109 Beyer in the Met Mile, while the gutsy Commentator ran a 105.
DP earned a 111 Beyer in his prior win.
To C: You said, "On PAPER, these 2 efforts will look very similar in terms of the fractions and early positioning. The final time will be the only thing separating the 2 races in the PPs. I don't care what the fractions say, I think the 2 races were very different and Divine Park worked much harder today, IMO. It'll be interesting to see how he comes out of the race and how much time off McLaughlin gives him. I'm also curious how the number crunchers end up grading the Met Mile. There were only 4 main tracks events today and of the 3 mile races, the quickest "come home" time was about :26, recorded in the NY-bred n1x. Have fun calculating those track variants and pace/speed figures, guys :>"
NO, on paper, the results are very different IF one accounts for pace, as I've suggested is necessary in previous posts. Yes, the final winning Beyers are within two points of each other, but DP's pace figures are radically different. The variant for the Met Mile was +14 (slow by 14 Beyer pts), whereas the variant for the Westch. Handicap was a -28 (fast by 28 Beyer points). In the Westchester and Met Mile, DP hit the half in 45 3/5 or a raw (unadjusted) 89 Beyer pace figure. Adjusting for the variants, DP's pace fig for the Met Mile was 103 vs 61 for the Westchester Handicap. So on PAPER, DP absolutely ran a bigger race in the Met Mile than the Westchester. There is still order and harmony in the world, as Beyers still reign supreme!
Posted by Mike May 27, 2008 8:06:23 PM
tmarin7 says:
Hi Steve,
Any reason why you didn't like Extra Zip in the 9Th. He had taken money the last two races, drew away to win easily two races back,
exploded in the final quarter (28 3/5) in his last race and had a positive jockey switch from Cedeno to Coa. Extra Zip was a single in my Pick 4. Check out the replay of his last race.
Posted by tmarin7 May 27, 2008 6:57:44 PM
sedonia says:
I don't see Divine Park running in the BC Dirt Mile. His race on Cushion/Poly was horrific at Santa Anita. Maybe it was the long layoff, but with the way this guy has run off of all other layoffs, I'm inclined to think it was the surface. Anyways, he will be a strong "Bet Against" in my book if he runs. By the way, totally different subject, Did anyone else think that Perfect Drift ran a very condescendingly good race yesterday in the Shoemaker. I think his ride was a bit suspect, but he showed he still wants to run and still has class. The shape of the race did not setup well for him, nor do I think that is his preferred distance. Look for him at a big price going 1 1/8 mile or so on dirt next out.
Posted by Sedonia May 27, 2008 5:59:40 PM
david says:
steve, i cant agree with you about commentator. yes the pace was fasr, but the third quarter
went in 25. i dont think commentator fought off first defense as that one stopped. no matter, 27 seconds for a final quarter and 52 for a final half are inexcusable in a grade one
Posted by david May 27, 2008 5:55:20 PM
c says:
"DIRT" Mile? Not this year... or next.
Actually, I see no reason Divine Park can't stretch out in distance and be put on the Classic trail. I think this is a long-winded type with plenty of stamina who would still have plenty of punch at 9 and 10 furlongs.
Posted by C May 27, 2008 4:31:08 PM
jrzingg says:
Grade 1 horses don't run 37.30 seconds final quarter in 1 mile races. These were not Grade 1 horses.
Posted by jrzingg May 27, 2008 4:29:11 PM
tim says:
Steve:
I thought for sure you would have put in a bigger ticket yesterday and watching the results, thought you might have hit it.
It wasnt a terribly hard to find bunch of winners for a guy like you to find and after reading how you may have gone 2 deep in the Met using Divine Park and Commentator, I was waiting to read that you hit it for 47K.
Oh well, they'll be other days, but like you, couldnt help but think 47K was a lot for those 6 winners.
What the heck were you doing, eating hot dogs?
I love Commentator as a horse, but lets be real here. First Defence belongs more in high priced allowance races than he does in Grade 1's. Hes just not that good and has not lived up to 10% of the hype. I think First Defence made Commentator look better than he really was yesterday. The Commentator who was able to hold Saint Liam off 3 years ago would have won yesterday's race by 5 lengths.
Posted by Tim May 27, 2008 3:30:48 PM
blue_horseshoe says:
Steve,
A minor correction, the Withers is a one-turn mile race at Aqueduct (I know you know this and suspect an oversight) but it doesn't change the gist of your point...
Posted by Blue Horseshoe May 27, 2008 3:05:21 PM
About
Steven Crist has been the Publisher and a columnist for Daily Racing Form since 1998. Previously, he covered racing for The New York Times from 1981-1990; was founding editor-in-chief of The Racing Times in 1991-92; and a vice-president of the New York Racing Association from 1994-97. He is the
author of several books including "Betting on Myself" and "Exotic Betting."
