Quote:
Originally Posted by Indian Charlie
That's part of my problem. To me, it seems like he is lacking objectivity, which is a must when working with numbers, like he does. He's run several very fast races, but because he THINKS AP hasn't, he adjusts his numbers downwards.
Again, maybe I'm missing something, but using the Brooklyn to downgrade the Belmont seems pretty far fetched in this instance.
|
Why do you think it's far fetched? It's the way speed figures are calculated. Or do you mean that the Brooklyn figs should have been higher? That's a reasonable proposition, IMO.
If AP had gotten a 110 BSF for the Belmont, that pretty much forces a 106 for the top two finishers in the Brooklyn. (a half-sec = about 3 lengths; 3 lengths = about 3.5 BSF's at 1.5 miles). Coach Inge ran a 104 last time out. His next best in 9 starts was a 93 BSF. But giving a 106 for the Brooklyn wouldn't have seemed unreasonable to me.
Likewise, a 106 for V. E. Day doesn't seem in left field. V.E.Day earned a 102 winning the Travers last year. He earned BSF's of 93 and 95 in his remaining 2014 starts, but encountered enough trip trouble to push those figs well past 100, IMO. His only start in 2015 earned a 96 on grass. To me it's completely believable that he could run a 106 as a 4-yr-old.
So, just using the top 2 horses in the Brooklyn, it looks like the figs could have been higher. Beyer's team uses all the horses in the races, so maybe they thought there were compelling reasons for the lower figs. cmorioles apparently didn't feel that way? At any rate, I can understand how AP's low fig would be annoying to some.