Thorograph Belmont Numbers

[cmorioles]

The more times a horse runs, the more likely it is that a new "top" will be followed by a regression. This doesn't mean the horse bounced. It usually has a lot more to do with the circumstances of the races in question.

Curlin had raced five times. His last was his top, meaning four out of five races he had run below his top. That means there was probably an 80% chance he would again last Saturday. That is simplified of course, but this bounce thing is so overused it is ridiculous.

[KY_Sasquash]

the bounce has been debated plenty of times here and there are many different opinions on it. when i refer to a bounce i mean in terms of regression, which is what curlin did especially coming off 2 hard races in the derby and preakness and his 4th race in 8 weeks. i do think it's overused by trainers for an excuse when their horses run poorly.

[cmorioles]

In this particular race, the pace obviously influenced the final time. Of course with TG, the time is a secondary factor in assigning figures, behind the history of the horses.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

In this particular race, the pace obviously influenced the final time. Of course with TG, the time is a secondary factor in assigning figures, behind the history of the horses.

He really regressed off that number, he runs that number again he should have won by 5 lengths. I am sure TG put a S_pace next to the number. Fact is that you can use numbers to predict what they would run. I didn't have Rags improving the way she did, but I did have Curlin coming back to his previous top so I was pretty close.

[golfer]

Originally Posted by Scav

He really regressed off that number, he runs that number again he should have won by 5 lengths. I am sure TG put a S_pace next to the number. Fact is that you can use numbers to predict what they would run. I didn't have Rags improving the way she did, but I did have Curlin coming back to his previous top so I was pretty close.

Scav, no Slow pace designation, Jerry Brown explains why on his message board.
As far as the term "bounce" is concerned, it simply signifies a regression, for whatever reason (ie pace, poor start, wide trip, etc...). So in that sense, it is not over used. When a horse doesn't run as well as he did in his previous race, he bounced. Determining why is the way money is made the next time out.

[cmorioles]

Some of his arguments seem a little out there. Noone could ever make any figure for this race with the kind of certainty he is trying to convey.

The figure doesn't matter in the end. They will never run that far again, which is sad.

[Bobby Fischer]

i never know for sure when we talk about regression or progression, if we mean from the figure earned, or if we are talking about the form and ability of the horse. Then the term "bounce" is bounced in there as well which adds more confusion (purposeful?).

My opinion is that I really couldn't tell if Curlin regressed or if Rags to Riches progressed at all as far as actual ability and performance. If i was going to make some kind of speed rating figure for the race my rough estimate is that Curlin's speed rating regressed, and that Rags to Rich's speed rating was roughly the same as the oaks maybe a slight regression. I wouldn't make any adjustments for those two horses based on ground-loss. I would note the weight, but not use the weight to adjust my official speed rating. I would view both as being in sharp form for the next race.