Music School was another who was hyped because he was a 1/2 to some GSW.

Here's a shortcut to finding out the most overrated, overhyped 3YOs for '07:

Find out who's out of Grade 1 winners or is a half or full to a Gr. 1 winner.

Simple but reliable.

I just consult Abe's lists.

There were much more overrated horses than this one. Fleet Indian, Lava Man, Brother Derek, Giacomo, Henny Hughes come immediately to mind. You can then add Lawyer Ron, Jazil, and my personal selection, Sweetnorthernsaint, who actually went off favored in the Derby somehow.

Naw, I talked to Bobby. Suggested he mix things up with the colt. Oh well.

I agree with all except Jazil. He was the what, 5th choice in the Belmont and 12th-ish choice in the Derby? Both were pretty reasonable estimations by the public.

I retract my earlier statement for Strong Contender as Overall Overrated Horse of the Year. FLEET INDIAN is the Champion F&M Overrated Horse of the Year and Overall Overrated Horse of the Year. Give her my phantom Eclipse vote.

How about Lady of Venice? Yes, she was impressive beating 3YO fillies at Churchill, but she was then being touted as the second coming. She was bet down to even money in the Diana (against solid older fillies), and then was blown away by Wait a While in the Lake Placid.

In terms of Lemons Forever I would correct you in the Fact that the Alabama is histrocally the most important Grade I for 3 yr oldFilly's. It's the olderst Richest, non BC race and ran at 1 1/4.
The Oaks gets most of it's attention due to the fact they placed it a day before the Derby to give it a more grander exposure. I would say it is numer two though.

I wouldn't call Heny Huges, Lava Man or Fleet Indian overratted. That is the problem with The Breeders Cup. Too much emphasis is put on one race on one day. I would look at these horse who have been above and beyond competitive through the year. I will give you Brother Derek and Giacomo though.

And how about adding Quite a Bride, then, too?

I never had Quite a Bride being more than a Grade III-type, nor was she ever really touted as more than that. To hear people talking about Lady of Venice at Saratoga, you'd think she was the second coming of Gorella.

Seemed to me she was getting some pretty hefty hype too, more than G3 rumblings, but I do agree with you on Lady of Venice.

I would hardly call Lava Man overrated. AND furthermore, how can you call SNS overrated? HORRIBLE trip in the derby and finished 2nd in the Preakness even though he was staggering down the lane and exhausted. Sorry, but I don't agree on those two at all.

No need to apologize, it is just opinion.

How many horses could win everything Lava Man did and still have no chance in the BC? He beat absolutely nothing all year long. I was a fan of what he did, but he took advantage of circumstances while showing he was nothing special figure wise.

SNS? Look at the Preakness chart:

http://msn.foxsports.com/horseracing/story/5625510

Other than one broken down horse and BroDerek, also on my list, there is absolutely nothing there.

Well, of course there was nothing there in the Preakness. Do you think that Bernardini was overrated as well? He didn't beat much all season either. As for Lava Man, he doesn't ship well... some horses just don't. I was still impressed with all of his wins this year.

With Lava Man, its all about Bute. If he can't run on race day Bute, he's a toss out.

If the BC was run at Hollywood or Santa Anita, I still would have given Lava Man no chance.

Bernardini was obviously somewhat overrated, but he isn't anymore.

i agree with this, I think Lava Mans problem was more to do with the distance and quality of the competition than running outside of Ca.

fleet indian and lava man? both found the winners circle every day this year but bc day. so did henny hughes. giacomo wasn't overrated, everyone knew that horse was what he was. lawyer ron was one of the $ winningest 3 yo's this year, and jazil won the belmont, so he's a classic winner. i'd take any of those over strong contender, any day!

this bit of logic ranks up there with barbaros gate-break conspiracy. how many times does 'race day bute' have to be refuted on this board?!

Since when did Ky make it non race day bute. Heck i left there in 2003 and we could hit them with bute and ketofen on the am of the race. Cannon Shell would know the regulations now/

exactly! i couldn't believe i read through 3 full pages of posts before somebody made this point. the words "overrated" and "bernardini" are basically synonymous!
however, even a confirmed bernardini-hater like me would probably rank lava man's dirt wins this year as just as overrated as bern's based on LM's post time odds in the bcc. everybody that knows anything about horse racing knew that horse should have been around 25/1 based on his lifetime of performances outside of California. based on the fact that he was most certainly NOT 25/1....i'd say his performances were severely overrated by the betting public.

Tops on my list would also have Circular Quay's Hopeful & Scat Daddy's Champagne.

1) Wonder Lady Anne- Coaching Club (JJ Castellano with an absolute moronic ride on the late great Pine Island)

2) Brother Derek- San Rafael (Speed bias, 4 hamsters)

3) Lemons Forever- Oaks (Race fell apart and was filled with mediocrity to begin with)

4) Jazil- Belmont (Although not his fault he beat a bunch of gerbils)

5) Scat Daddy- Champagne (Rat Daddy is a better name)

6) Bernardini- Jim Dandy (Most overrated race call by Tom Durkin. It wasnt really as hot as he made it out to be, way exaggerated)

7) Seek Gold- Foster (Perfect Drift is a high priced hanger, I could have gotten by him with a broken leg)

Hey, don't be picking on my girl Lemons -- she's a good horse. And that field was damn good. Wait a While. Bushfire. One of the fastest Oaks in history. Lemons ran a monster race that day and she'll do it again. Circled the field from last to get that final time.

Lemons needs a new jockey with better timing. She also needs to go turf. She would be a monster on the turf with that pedigree. Dallas Stewart was bent to hell trying to win a race in New York when she obviously wasn't even training well. And Guidry kept messing with her running style. Tracking closer to the pace in some races and then going back to a closing kick in other races but missing the timing.

Lemons needs things to break perfectly for her and there to be traffic trouble like there was in the Oaks. The race completely fell apart. How could it be one of the fastest Oaks in history when her beyer didnt exceed 100?

I had very little money invested in this as I liked Balance but didnt trust her all that much. Wait a While did run very well.

First off, the unadjusted time for the Oaks means nothing. The figure came back weak. As for the rider, Guidry is one of the best finishers in the country. A different rider up and LF maybe moves too soon in the Oaks. Unlike the 3YO colts who were very strong this year, the filly group was very subpar.

Guidry was seen lighting up a cigarette before he even got back to the midget room. LOL!

All of the Bernardini races were grossly overrated. And even Beyer is somewhat apologetic about Bernardini when he recently stated that, "Bernardini is no super horse". Somebody should ask Beyer how he popped those excessive speed figures for a horse that never broke 1:35 in a mile race or 1:50 in a 9 furlong race. Suddenly the horse is cranking 116s and such? And then Beyer comes up with the split variant on Breeders Cup day -- just some "cover your ass" to justify the earlier bloated hype figures for Bernardini. The track suddenly slowed on BC day? No -- the later races were just won by slow horses.

If Beyer and the other press that touted Bernardini worked in the financial services industry they would be on trial or perhaps be in jail for fraud.

Some other hyped performances this year were definitely Lava Man's races out west. Whether it was the proverbial "juice" in CA or beating up on weak fields in CA Lava Man didn't run on BC Classic Day. His connections shipped early, prepped at KEE, and the horse didn't offer much on the big day.

Another dog was Bob and John. How anybody -- be it Hank Goldberg -- or whoever could pick this dog to win the Derby or the Belmont is beyond me.

Some of the underrated performances of the year:

Jazil. This is a race horse. Solid fractions in the Belmont and solid final time. Would have beaten all of the previous Belmont winners in this decade including Afleet Alex. Look at the charts if you don't believe me. Would have beaten any other class of '06 3 year old at 12f with the exception of Barbaro. This horse can be 30 lengths back and charges unfazed through traffic. Dirt in his face, traffic, slop, you name it -- this horse is a charger. You might have missed the call in the Belmont. That's no reason to deny this horse the the accolades that are due. He's a credit to the class of '06 and a credit to horse racing. The only horse that hung with Barbaro's final fractions in the Derby was Jazil (2nd fastest final fractions -- only Secretariat closed better in Derby history).

Lost in the Fog. Foggy -- cancered up -- blistered Churchill Downs. A Soldier for sure.

From a kid who watched Secretariat to an adult who had a great time this year. 2006 -- despite the difficult times -- was definitely one of the greatest years I've ever seen in horse racing. This year was stunning.

Stunning? This year? Are you kidding? For me it was a year to forget. Worst year I have seen in some time. The big days like Travers Day and Jockey Club Gold Cup were all horrible betting cards. Belmont Stakes Day was a huge disappointment as well. So far the Aqu Inner has been a huge bore. People getting caught cheating all over the place.

Give me the Skip Away and Cigar days back! That was a glorious time.

Arromanches and Shoop on the Inner.

Beyer figures are truly worthless. If you bet the Beyer figures you will lose money. Beyer figures are only slightly better than selecting at random.

CD was not running that fast that day -- and check Lemons time historically.

There are people on this board who are seriously duped by Beyer figures.

Speed figures are a fallacy. Any time you have a dependent variable (speed figure) based on an iffy independent variable (track variant) you have a formula riddled with error.

Beyer figures are truly worthless

I dont totally disagree with this but at the same time, I find it odd that Ole Beyer wouldnt give Lemon a bigger beyer if the race was one of the fatsest runnings of all time. Hes often off the mark but this off?

New York graded stakes are the pits. But because the "old boy network" Graded Stakes Committee favors New York (and CA) you will always have 2nd or 3rd rate races listed as GI or GII.

Any GI race should have a purse of $1,000,000 and it should also have at least a field of 8 horses. Bring on the purse money and you'll get the field sizes. And some of those horses that win big against short fields of nobodys won't look so good.

It's the Graded Stakes Committee that has ruined the breed just as much as perhaps Lasix and other drugs. Mediocre horses win graded stakes in New York and California against allowance competition and short fields -- then those same horses go to the breeding shed and produce inferior offspring.

The real money is in the breeding shed and the Graded Stakes committee perpetuates the corruption by allowing New York and California races GI and GII status. Look at the GI winners in California who can't win outside the state. What does that tell you? They race the same old horses in short fields over and over again and yet they are graded stakes winners. Ship 'em and they lose by lengths. Face 2nd rate Euros on turf and our horses flounder (on turf -- most of "our" best horses are really Euros to begin with).

He is often very far off the mark. Invasor's BC Classic. Prime example. No way that mediocre time on a fast track deserves that speed figure. He swags the figures by using "split variants" and such. He can give any figure he wants -- he just has to taint the variant.

Split variants are a fraud. Churchill had rain leading into the BC. The track on BC day got faster as it dried. Yet Beyer said it got slower. Total fraud.

" Split variants are a fraud ".

Thus, you believe 100% that all racetracks maintain the same variant throughout every racing day.

Good to know.

Noone really believes this to be true all the time.
Obviously the amount of water it takes, wind or sun drying out a track, the way its graded, etc etc all can make figure making and splitting variants just about the hardest thing for any figure maker to do. Doesn't matter whether its Beyer, Rag, or Brown this is VERY tricky.
I just think that ever since the Valid Video/Shake YOU Down incident that people have really questioned variant splits, especially when they happen with two races run about an hour apart on the same track, with no weaher changes. That incident may have been the worst blown split variant I ever saw. Which of course is going to happen to anyone who makes figures long enough and often enough, but the high profile nature of those two horses and their subsequent starts really made that one ugly. Had it occurred with two allowance horses, noone would have really noticed much.
Anyone who doesn't realize that we are talking about a very inexact science when we speak of speed figures really doesn't get how hard they are to accurately make, or how much time and effort goes into making them by any of the top guys.

I think it's nearly impossible to make or use speed figures from a Breeders Cup day.

There's absoulutely no inter-race commonality (age/sex/dist/surf/class) so how can anyone come up with a worthwhile number? For example, how many 10F Grade 1 races does Churchill run in a year much less in a day?

I firmly believe the same logic holds for higher class races at all tracks. There are just not enough Graded Stakes races run to generate enough of a basis from which to develop meaningful final figures, much less pace figures.

I think if you look at a single track, it's FAR more likely that anybody's figs for that track are much more accurate for a $25k claiming class where there may be dozens of races in a sample size than for any Graded Stake where the class/age/etc... components of a race are very rare.

I believe in speed and pace figures. I do my own and it's a lot of work. But I play only one track so that helps. I have far greater faith in pace/final pars at the $16k N2L level than I do in those for the Graded or non-Graded stakes races at my track.

Just one Stooge's thoughts.

I should have re-stated and said "all track variants are a fraud"

It is iffy enough to judge a variant in the early races of a card by assessing times versus pars for that class. To conclude that "the track is slow" because 10k claimers ran +.5 at 6f in the first two races on the card is a huge mistake. Maybe the first two races just had weak fields or even full fields. Later a horse goes -.5 in a race with a short field (no traffic) and the horse gets a stunning speed fig.

It is even more iffy to split the track variant. The first 4 races get a certain variant and then the last 4 get a different variant? The track changes drastically between races 4 and 5 but not between races 1 and 2 or races 8 and 9? Gimme a break.

Dirt changes. Nobody is arguing that. It changes every time the water trucks run on it. And not only because of the water -- also because the weight of the trucks compress the track and produce fast lanes. How much do you think a full water truck weighs?

Throw in rain, wind, different field sizes, time spent stalled in the gate while horses refuse to load . . . you name it.

Like I said, any time an independent variable (track variant) is indeterminate then the dependent variable (speed figure) is also indeterminate.

I've often went up against speed figure handicappers at the local tracks. I worked off raw running times, trips, pedigrees . . . the speed figures were taped over so I couldn't see them. I always won. Try it. It will improve your handicapping. Put a piece of tape over the speed figure column on your pps. You'll find yourself taking a lot closer look -- at the fractions, trip, class, pedigree, and chart caller's comments than you will if you remain corrupted by the Beyer speed figs.

Don't get caught up in the hype. Don't be a Bernardinian.

Stud . . . well said. You can't judge a variant for a track that normally runs dime claimers to 54k allowance classes for a day of GI races. It doesn't work. The GI races are so totally different from a normal race day. And so are the early races that lead up to the part of the GI card.

Look at BC day. The card started with a few allowance races which might have been slow because trainers felt they couldn't win due to increased competition, or vice versa, might have been fast because trainers wanted to run their best allowance horses on a big race day. To assess a track variant on those races is foolhardy.

It's a tough call and a huge leap to calculate a track variant based on raw times vs. par for certain classes.

I don't make my own speed figs anymore. Hat's off to people like you who continue the endeavor. It's a huge amount of work -- take it from one who has been there.

You definitely have the right idea. If someone has absolutely no idea how to make variants and speed figures, they shouldn't use them. Heady move on your part as you definitely fit into this category.