![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Am I the only one that would find a mythical Oklahoma Millions as interesting as the Sunshine Millions?
__________________
The world's foremost expert on virtually everything on the Redskins 2010 season: "Im going to go out on a limb here. I say they make the playoffs." |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() The 108 for This One's for Phil was boosted about 5 by the Beyer boys for some reason.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() So making a fig 25 instead of 20 is the same as 110 to 115? I guess it seems a more dramtic inflation from 20 to 25?
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() It is pretty much the same. It might be a tiny bit different, but nowhere what you were suggesting. The difference at 6f between a 20 and a 100 Beyer is 5 to 6 seconds. The race takes high 60s, low 70s seconds to complete. Wrap your head around that for awhile before asking more questions. You'll get it.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Interesting..
Horse A was given a 25 should have been a 20 and his next race is one were the winning par in 30 Horse B was given 95 but it should have been a 90 and his next race is one were the winning par is 100 Both theorically need to improve 10pts to win but the jump from 20-30 is equal to 90 -100.. I would have thought the 20 to 30 horses had more to improve then the 90 to 100 horse.. I guess I was very wrong again |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Obviously because of the quick pace ... they've done it many times before in big races. Remember the '01 Amsterdam when City Zip and Speightstown hooked up in an early war through insane fractions - and both lasted despite totally staggering home to a 1-2 finish. They inflated City Zip's fig all the way to a 100 and Speightstown's to a 97 - a MUCH slower paced NY Bred maiden race at the same distance 30 minutes later went faster. I think you would agree with me that they shouldn't do this ... because it unjustly rewards the suck-up closers. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Of course that is why they did it, and it does make horses that didn't run well look better. They do it in big races and small races alike ALL THE TIME.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]() They did it for some reason because they do it ALL THE TIME...
But actually, they don't do it all the time, just some of the time. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Do you like when they lower figs for reasons that they just believe the horses couldnt have improved as such? |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]() GGG got a 95
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]() I think they do it out of ignorance, not arrogance. They don't look at pace so they don't know why the horse ran slower (or faster) than expected. Since it isn't understood, it is just assumed the track changed. That is my opinion only.
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|