Final Verdict ... Fog Is A Fraud

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

I don't know if I would call Lawyer Ron slow, he did run a 0 on Thorograph and ran a Beyer at 106 or 107, that's not exactly slow and those numbers were comparable with the other Top 3yo's before the Triple Crown races. I really liked this horse and still do, the thing I didn't want to admit before the Kentucky Derby was that he was over the top with all of that racing, he had to go backwards at some point without taking a break, that was my error in judgement. I think the jury is still very much out on him, he may never be able to improve after his injury, but I certainly would not say he is slow, and if he comes back, he could improve. With that said, I do not think he's as talented as Bernardini or Jazil, but he could certainly hold his own against a Blue Grass Cat or Sunriver....

His Beyer's were consistently in the mid 90s.....hardly special. The one figure he got over 100, a 106, was at Louisianna Downs, where if you followed racing closely you may have noticed many horses shipping there and improving dramatically and then not being able to reproduce those numbers out of town. The 106 Lawyer Ron makes no sense both in relation to his consistent performances elsewhere but also for the other competitors in that race.

Lawyer Ron is not " slow " in relation to the majority of the members of his, or really any, generation. But, he is slow in relation to the majority of horses considered genuine TC contendors.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

His Beyer's were consistently in the mid 90s.....hardly special. The one figure he got over 100, a 106, was at Louisianna Downs, where if you followed racing closely you may have noticed many horses shipping there and improving dramatically and then not being able to reproduce those numbers out of town. The 106 Lawyer Ron makes no sense both in relation to his consistent performances elsewhere but also for the other competitors in that race.

Lawyer Ron is not " slow " in relation to the majority of the members of his, or really any, generation. But, he is slow in relation to the majority of horses considered genuine TC contendors.

He still ran a 0 on Thorograph, more than once and at Oaklawn, going into the Derby, his Thoro's were as good or better than many...

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

He still ran a 0 on Thorograph, more than once and at Oaklawn, going into the Derby, his Thoro's were as good or better than many...

Just further confirming the lack of value of the Thorographs.

[JJP]

Lawyer Ron was overrated by some, but not by many who never considered him a viable Triple Crown horse. He could be a very good sprinter, however, and I don't think its a lock that LITF would drill him at 6f. Actually I'd like to see them both in a 6f race and I think LR would be better value than LITF.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by JJP

Lawyer Ron was overrated by some, but not by many who never considered him a viable Triple Crown horse. He could be a very good sprinter, however, and I don't think its a lock that LITF would drill him at 6f. Actually I'd like to see them both in a 6f race and I think LR would be better value than LITF.

Well, that's not what just about everyone on this message board said. Just about everyone said that LR was overrated/overhyped. I'll pull the thread back up this evening so you can read it.

[ArlJim78]

This is an update on a post I made last night. I had stated that using the Bris pace and speed analysis it is easy to see the actual facts about LITF’s performances. I contacted the people at Bris and they were kind enough to give me the numbers for LITF in the Smile, so it helps to complete the picture.

The line consists of four numbers defined below:
E1-pace figure to the quarter
E2-pace figure to the half
LP-pace figure from the half to the end
SPD-final speed figure

This is a composite or average of all of LITF’s races. It shows his typical pace distribution early and late and total.
E1 E2 LP SPD
95 107 92 102

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

Notice that when he runs an E2 pace figure that is higher than his average, his late pace and final time suffer. Not coincidentally these all occurred in big G1 events or when there is a horse that is faster to the half than he is which is the case in the Golden Gate sprint (Carthage).

In the other races notice that his E1 and E2 pace were well within his target range and he was therefore able to come home strong and win. It is a textbook case of a horse being overmatched. His numbers in the Smile are remarkably similar to the BC sprint. If anything they were just slightly worse.

So Rupert this is why I claim that he IS consistent because when he has things his way you can pretty much predict the outcome and also when he is facing faster horses you can also predict the outcome because his three loses have remarkably similar late pace numbers. They weren't horrible but you can definetely see where he has maxed out.

For the record I’m not a shill for Bris but it is something that I use and find invaluable in deciphering the actual shape of the race.

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

This is an update on a post I made last night. I had stated that using the Bris pace and speed analysis it is easy to see the actual facts about LITF’s performances. I contacted the people at Bris and they were kind enough to give me the numbers for LITF in the Smile, so it helps to complete the picture.

The line consists of four numbers defined below:
E1-pace figure to the quarter
E2-pace figure to the half
LP-pace figure from the half to the end
SPD-final speed figure

This is a composite or average of all of LITF’s races. It shows his typical pace distribution early and late and total.
E1 E2 LP SPD
95 107 92 102

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

Notice that when he runs an E2 pace figure that is higher than his average, his late pace and final time suffer. Not coincidentally these all occurred in big G1 events or when there is a horse that is faster to the half than he is which is the case in the Golden Gate sprint (Carthage).

In the other races notice that his E1 and E2 pace were well within his target range and he was therefore able to come home strong and win. It is a textbook case of a horse being overmatched. His numbers in the Smile are remarkably similar to the BC sprint. If anything they were just slightly worse.

So Rupert this is why I claim that he IS consistent because when he has things his way you can pretty much predict the outcome and also when he is facing faster horses you can also predict the outcome because his three loses have remarkably similar late pace numbers. They weren't horrible but you can definetely see where he has maxed out.

For the record I’m not a shill for Bris but it is something that I use and find invaluable in deciphering the actual shape of the race.

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

This is excellent work and it goes along with everything we have been saying. Why are people so desperate for this horse to be anything but what he is?

I, too, want a solid concrete argument from someone that claims this horse wasnt vastly overrated.

Okay, for the final time, Name one grade 1 or 2 stake sprint that you are confident that LITF could win. Just one. And if you cant name one- he is overrated in regards to the hype and billing that he receives. It really is that simple.

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

Very pertinent and revealing information ... thanks, Jim.

As I have said .. it isn't the horse who is a fraud ... it's the wild overrating on the part of those who were unduly impressed by a winning streak achieved over less-than-mediocre rivals.

Lost In The Fog is to be applauded for his ability to ship well and to hold his form well over a long stretch of time and many different racing surfaces.

But he simply isn't fast enough or strong enough to win against good G1/G2 sprinters ... much less really good ones. He'd better not be around this Fall ... when Too Much Bling, Songster, Henny Hughes, Keyed Entry and the rest of this year's bumper 3YO crop ... mature into first-rate all-age sprinters.

Retirement is best course for Foggy

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Very pertinent and revealing information ... thanks, Jim.

As I have said .. it isn't the horse who is a fraud ... it's the wild overrating on the part of those who were unduly impressed by a winning streak achieved over less-than-mediocre rivals.

Lost In The Fog is to be applauded for his ability to ship well and to hold his form well over a long stretch of time and many different racing surfaces.

But he simply isn't fast enough or strong enough to win against good G1/G2 sprinters ... much less really good ones. He'd better not be around this Fall ... when Too Much Bling, Songster, Henny Hughes, Keyed Entry and the rest of this year's bumper 3YO crop ... mature into first-rate all-age sprinters.

Retirement is best course for Foggy

I'm surprised you are so high on Henny Hughes. According to the logic that you guys use, I would have thought that you would think his last race was not that impressive because he didn't beat anyone. I think HH's last race was awesome.

[blackthroatedwind]

As far as your question about whether or not someone has made money using BRIS figures ( personally I do NOT advocate computer generated numbers but to each his own ), I understand your point, but I will say that I don't know one successful horseplayer ( and I know many ) who believed the hype last year about Lost in the Fog. In fact, of the successful players I know, I actually ( mistakenly ) liked him more than any of them. I am also a successful horseplayer. I have made money in 14 of the previous 16 years and am well on my way to another successful year. So, if you want to equate successful horseplaying to validity on opinions about LITF, I would say the recent post by Bold Brooklynite pretty much hits the nail on the head. He is a very talented horse but neither as good as his popular reputation nor as good as the top sprinters annually.

Did he run his best race this past weekend? Probably not. But, I would say it is a fairer estimation of his true relative ability, as was his BC performance, than the estimation he seemed to earn while valiantly beating up on vastly inferior competition. Nobody seems to be saying he's a bum. He's hardly that. But, without a very favorable pace scenerio, he is unlikely to be able to handle the top ten sprinters in the country.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

This is an update on a post I made last night. I had stated that using the Bris pace and speed analysis it is easy to see the actual facts about LITF’s performances. I contacted the people at Bris and they were kind enough to give me the numbers for LITF in the Smile, so it helps to complete the picture.

The line consists of four numbers defined below:
E1-pace figure to the quarter
E2-pace figure to the half
LP-pace figure from the half to the end
SPD-final speed figure

This is a composite or average of all of LITF’s races. It shows his typical pace distribution early and late and total.
E1 E2 LP SPD
95 107 92 102

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

Notice that when he runs an E2 pace figure that is higher than his average, his late pace and final time suffer. Not coincidentally these all occurred in big G1 events or when there is a horse that is faster to the half than he is which is the case in the Golden Gate sprint (Carthage).

In the other races notice that his E1 and E2 pace were well within his target range and he was therefore able to come home strong and win. It is a textbook case of a horse being overmatched. His numbers in the Smile are remarkably similar to the BC sprint. If anything they were just slightly worse.

So Rupert this is why I claim that he IS consistent because when he has things his way you can pretty much predict the outcome and also when he is facing faster horses you can also predict the outcome because his three loses have remarkably similar late pace numbers. They weren't horrible but you can definetely see where he has maxed out.

For the record I’m not a shill for Bris but it is something that I use and find invaluable in deciphering the actual shape of the race.

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

I know nothing about Bris pace figures, but are you going to tell me that they are extremely reliable? Do you make money bettting the horses overall by using those figures? Do you usually show a profit at the end of the year by relying on those pace figures? If those figures are so reliable, then how many winning years in a row have you had betting the horses?
Do you understand my point? Here is an anology. Let's say that a guy likes to bet football and he loves the Jets this weekend. The Jets lose. He also loves the Rams this weekend. The Rams lose. The third game he loves is the Eagles. The Eagles win, so he won 1 out of 3 games. He says after the game, "I knew the Eagles would win." In reality he didn't know the Eagles would win. He may have thought they would win but he also thought the Jets and Rams would win. If he's not a winning player overall, then I think it's silly for him to say I knew this team would win for these reasons. He didn't know the team would win. He was just as positive that the Rams would win and he was totally wrong. I think the same could be said about those pace figures. The figures said that LITF would lose those races and he lost. That doesn't prove those figures are reliable any more so than the Eagles winning proves that my football guy is reliable at picking winners.
If you make a profit every year betting the horses by using those Bris figures, then they are probably pretty reliable. If not, then they are like anything else that works once in a while. A guy can say that he knew such and such a horse would win because the horse had the highest Beyer number. What about the other 8 races where the horse with the highest Beyer number lost.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I know nothing about Bris pace figures, but are you going to tell me that they are extremely reliable? Do you make money bettting the horses overall by using those figures? Do you usually show a profit at the end of the year by relying on those pace figures? If those figures are so reliable, then how many winning years in a row have you had betting the horses?
Do you understand my point? Here is an anology. Let's say that a guy likes to bet football and he loves the Jets this weekend. The Jets lose. He also loves the Rams this weekend. The Rams lose. The third game he loves is the Eagles. The Eagles win, so he won 1 out of 3 games. He says after the game, "I knew the Eagles would win." In reality he didn't know the Eagles would win. He may have thought they would win but he also thought the Jets and Rams would win. If he's not a winning player overall, then I think it's silly for him to say I knew this team would win for these reasons. He didn't know the team would win. He was just as positive that the Rams would win and he was totally wrong. I think the same could be said about those pace figures. The figures said that LITF would lose those races and he lost. That doesn't prove those figures are reliable any more so than the Eagles winning proves that my football guy is reliable at picking winners.
If you make a profit every year betting the horses by using those Bris figures, then they are probably pretty reliable. If not, then they are like anything else that works once in a while. A guy can say that he knew such and such a horse would win because the horse had the highest Beyer number. What about the other 8 races where the horse with the highest Beyer number lost.

That’s it? All you have to offer are unrelated questions as to whether I show a yearly profit and analogies about betting football games? I’ve stayed right on topic offering you my take on LITF and backing it up completely with facts. You don’t even mention anything I’ve offered. You merely say that you don’t know anything about Bris numbers. Well you wouldn’t necessarily have had to because I explained everything I posted and it actually is rather hard to deny the patterns. I guess you’re still more comfortable with the vague “he didn’t fire” hypothesis for those races.

Yes the Bris numbers are very reliable. I have improved tremendously using them. Like I said they give you a view of the race that you cannot find elsewhere. I am not touting them as some kind of simple solution to picking winners. Like I said I also relied heavily on replays in order to come to an opinion about LITF’s true class. I use several tools when handicapping. The Bris numbers did not predict that LITF would lose. That was my conclusion after noticing the consistent pattern of his performances. By no means am I implying that these numbers lead me to easy winners and yearly profits, there is much more to it than just looking at numbers. In an earlier post you were trying to back up your assertion that LITF had as much early speed as any horse running by stating that he ran a 43.2 half mile and won by ten lengths at GG. If you want to talk about data that is unreliable, it’s hard to beat looking at raw times.

Also I’m not implying that having an opinion that a horse will not win has much value. However when the horse routinely goes off at odds between 2:5 and 1:1 there is a great chance to make a nice score if you play the rest of the race or races correctly, but that’s no gimme. You can still screw it up like I did in the big pick five last week. I had 4 of 5, of course not using LITF, but I relied too much on Dubai Escapade so I didn’t have the winning combo.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

That’s it? All you have to offer are unrelated questions as to whether I show a yearly profit and analogies about betting football games? I’ve stayed right on topic offering you my take on LITF and backing it up completely with facts. You don’t even mention anything I’ve offered. You merely say that you don’t know anything about Bris numbers. Well you wouldn’t necessarily have had to because I explained everything I posted and it actually is rather hard to deny the patterns. I guess you’re still more comfortable with the vague “he didn’t fire” hypothesis for those races.

Yes the Bris numbers are very reliable. I have improved tremendously using them. Like I said they give you a view of the race that you cannot find elsewhere. I am not touting them as some kind of simple solution to picking winners. Like I said I also relied heavily on replays in order to come to an opinion about LITF’s true class. I use several tools when handicapping. The Bris numbers did not predict that LITF would lose. That was my conclusion after noticing the consistent pattern of his performances. By no means am I implying that these numbers lead me to easy winners and yearly profits, there is much more to it than just looking at numbers. In an earlier post you were trying to back up your assertion that LITF had as much early speed as any horse running by stating that he ran a 43.2 half mile and won by ten lengths at GG. If you want to talk about data that is unreliable, it’s hard to beat looking at raw times.

Also I’m not implying that having an opinion that a horse will not win has much value. However when the horse routinely goes off at odds between 2:5 and 1:1 there is a great chance to make a nice score if you play the rest of the race or races correctly, but that’s no gimme. You can still screw it up like I did in the big pick five last week. I had 4 of 5, of course not using LITF, but I relied too much on Dubai Escapade so I didn’t have the winning combo.

I heard your explanation loud and clear as to why LITF got beat in those 3 races. If you believe in those Bris figures, then your assessment sounds logical. I don't buy it. I've watched the horse a million times. I know he didn't fire in those races and I don't think it had much to do with who he was facing. If LITF would have run at Golden Gate this past Saturday against a bad field, I don't think he would have run 1:07 1/5. I think he would have run lousy on Saturday no matter where he ran. I would say the same for Dubai Escapade. She didn't have it on Saturday. If I explained to you that I had some figures that showed that Dubai Escapade ran her best this past Saturday and she got beat because she was totally overmatched, I don't think you would buy it.
I never said that LITF's going :43 1/5 at GG proved he was as fast as anyone. I know the track at GG is scorched and it is hard to compare to other tracks. But LITF has only run at GG a few of times. He's run all over the country. In every race he ever ran last year including the BC Sprint, LITF was always within a length of the lead no matter what the fractions were. I think he can pretty much keep up with anyone when he has it. There may be a few horses that have a little more early speed than him, but he has enough speed so that nobody is going to really get away from him.
To me, a horse "not firing" is not a vague hypothesis. To be a successful handicapper, you have to be a good judge of this. We've seen many really good horses lose. When they lose, we always have to ask the question of whether they simply were not good enough or did they lose because they didn't fire. When Saint Liam didn't hit the board at Santa Anita, was it because he wasn't good enough or was it because he didn't fire? It may have been a combination of both. I would say he definitely didn't fire, but I don't know if he would have beaten Rock Hard Ten even if he did fire. You could argue that RHT wasn't that impressive that day. He only beat Congrats by about a length. Congrats is not a good horse at all. I disagree. I think Congrats ran huge that day. He's never been the same since, but that day he ran great.
Anyway, you're not going to change my mind about LITF and I'm not going to change yours. And even though I'm confident that I'm right, it's possible that I have misjudged LITF. I've been wrong before and I could be wrong in this case. I don't think I'm wrong but it is certainly possible.
There is a chance that the truth is somewhere in between. LITF may not have fired in those races but even if he would have fired, maybe he would have still lost. He may have finished much closer but he may have still lost.