Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-11-2010, 12:41 PM
hockey2315 hockey2315 is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,403
Default

I really hope Steve or somebody can get to the bottom of this.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-11-2010, 12:59 PM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315 View Post
I really hope Steve or somebody can get to the bottom of this.
You honestly don't get it?
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:04 PM
hockey2315 hockey2315 is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,403
Default

I know why they did it, but strongly disagree.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:09 PM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315 View Post
I'm pretty sure I know why they did it, but I don't think they should have done it.

So, Pickapocket and Trickmeister should have gotten 75s....or Blind Luck and Havre de Grace should have gotten 115s.

OK, feel free to expound on either scenerio....because clearly you believe in one of them.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:26 PM
hockey2315 hockey2315 is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,403
Default

I'm fine with them playing with the figures to a certain extent. It was obviously a tricky day with the track condition, DEL's a quirky track for making figures in general, and the paces of the two races for males were very different from Blind Luck's race.

None of the figures even seem off to me from what I would expect any of those horses to run.

However, last I checked, Beyers aren't supposed to incorporate pace like that. There's no way that you can give a horse who ran two seconds faster a lower fig without splitting the variant or something (which they didn't do). It's just too big of a gap to justify what they did.

I expected BL's fig to be a little higher, and the other two's to be a little lower. I don't even think much of BL talent-wise, although I respect the fact that they haven't kept her in the barn.

The spirit of Beyers--what set them apart from the more "sophisticated" figures--was their objectiveness and room for interpretation by handicappers. That has been completely lost. Maybe they can come with Joe Cardello's personal trip notes from now on.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:31 PM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315 View Post
I'm fine with them playing with the figures to a certain extent. It was obviously a tricky day with the track condition, DEL's a quirky track for making figures in general, and the paces of the two races for males were very different from Blind Luck's race.

None of the figures even seem off to me from what I would expect any of those horses to run.

However, last I checked, Beyers aren't supposed to incorporate pace like that. There's no way that you can give a horse who ran two seconds faster a lower fig without splitting the variant or something (which they didn't do). It's just too big of a gap to justify what they did.

I expected BL's fig to be a little higher, and the other two's to be a little lower. I don't even think much of BL talent-wise, although I respect the fact that they haven't kept her in the barn.

The spirit of Beyers--what set them apart from the more "sophisticated" figures--was their objectiveness and room for interpretation by handicappers. That has been completely lost. Maybe they can come with Joe Cardello's personal trip notes from now on.

So they can fudge them a little....but not a lot?

You do realize this is more inaccurate and/or more disingenuous?

Maybe you should discuss projection with Jerry Brown some time ( to take Beyer out of the equation ). Honestly, I think you would find it very enlightening.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:34 PM
hockey2315 hockey2315 is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,403
Default

If I see a time that seems "off", my first inclincation is not to go directly to the opposite end of the spectrum. Unless it points to a timing malfunction.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:32 PM
cmorioles's Avatar
cmorioles cmorioles is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 3,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315 View Post
I'm fine with them playing with the figures to a certain extent. It was obviously a tricky day with the track condition, DEL's a quirky track for making figures in general, and the paces of the two races for males were very different from Blind Luck's race.

None of the figures even seem off to me from what I would expect any of those horses to run.

However, last I checked, Beyers aren't supposed to incorporate pace like that. There's no way that you can give a horse who ran two seconds faster a lower fig without splitting the variant or something (which they didn't do). It's just too big of a gap to justify what they did.

I expected BL's fig to be a little higher, and the other two's to be a little lower. I don't even think much of BL talent-wise, although I respect the fact that they haven't kept her in the barn.

The spirit of Beyers--what set them apart from the more "sophisticated" figures--was their objectiveness and room for interpretation by handicappers. That has been completely lost. Maybe they can come with Joe Cardello's personal trip notes from now on.
Wow, that is as clueless a post on making Beyers as I have seen. Where has pace been mentioned? You are saying the figures were a little high for two races and a little low for one, but that is doing exactly what Beyer did. "A little" is certainly not 21 points.

I think the problem is with the clock in this case. It is doubtful track maintenance sped the track up and then it immediately reverted back to its previous speed for the next race.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:36 PM
hockey2315 hockey2315 is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,403
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles View Post
Wow, that is as clueless a post on making Beyers as I have seen. Where has pace been mentioned? You are saying the figures were a little high for two races and a little low for one, but that is doing exactly what Beyer did. "A little" is certainly not 21 points.

I think the problem is with the clock in this case. It is doubtful track maintenance sped the track up and then it immediately reverted back to its previous speed for the next race.
So you don't think the stark difference in paces came into play in their calculations?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-11-2010, 02:01 PM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
You went 0 for 3.....but you knew that.
Dude, I don't know what's gotten into you, but this is way too typical these days. I get that you're an opinionated person. But YOUR opinion isn't necessarily the beliefs of everyone else. Enlighten me on why or what I'm "wrong" on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles View Post
Wow, that is as clueless a post on making Beyers as I have seen. Where has pace been mentioned? You are saying the figures were a little high for two races and a little low for one, but that is doing exactly what Beyer did. "A little" is certainly not 21 points.

I think the problem is with the clock in this case. It is doubtful track maintenance sped the track up and then it immediately reverted back to its previous speed for the next race.
Did you go back and hand time the races?
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:16 PM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
You honestly don't get it?
Want to elaborate on why you think they are good numbers?

NVM- already answered
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:18 PM
cmorioles's Avatar
cmorioles cmorioles is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 3,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski View Post
Want to elaborate on why you think they are good numbers?

(If the answer is "every horse in the Oaks would end up with a new top", I think that's a cop-out on the part of the figuremaker.)
There is a difference between every horse (but one) getting a new top, and every horse (but one) getting new tops averaging 18 points, or about 11 lengths.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:24 PM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles View Post
There is a difference between every horse (but one) getting a new top, and every horse (but one) getting new tops averaging 18 points, or about 11 lengths.
I know. But it still creates the problem of did the surface change that much in 30 minutes (and 57 minutes from the previous race)? No (or at least, very unlikely). Was the clock wrong? Maybe. Is 94 the right adjusted number? I don't know.

But I'm not allowed to discuss Beyers anymore so I'll shut up now.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:29 PM
cmorioles's Avatar
cmorioles cmorioles is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 3,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski View Post
I know. But it still creates the problem of did the surface change that much in 30 minutes (and 57 minutes from the previous race)? No (or at least, very unlikely). Was the clock wrong? Maybe. Is 94 the right adjusted number? I don't know.

But I'm not allowed to discuss Beyers anymore so I'll shut up now.
I think it is a great time to discuss Beyers. All the bashers hate when he breaks out races, but I'd love to hear the alternatives here from them. What would they do? There is always criticism, but never a better solution given.

The 94 is certainly debatable, but any time a race has to stand on its own that will happen. Does anyone really believe Gio Ponti ran a 100 yesterday? That one is probably off by a lot more than this one.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:29 PM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski View Post

But I'm not allowed to discuss Beyers anymore so I'll shut up now.

Oh you victim you.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:45 PM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
There was ZERO hostility there. It was a question where I pointed out to disagree with the figures you had to believe one of the two scenerios I laid out. You would have understood that if you would stop grinding that f'n axe.
Axe? With what? I have none. I just think, as Hockey laid out extremely eloquently in his post, the spirit and initial purpose of the Beyers has been lost when pace and/or trip gets incorporated into the figure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles View Post
I think it is a great time to discuss Beyers. All the bashers hate when he breaks out races, but I'd love to hear the alternatives here from them. What would they do? There is always criticism, but never a better solution given.

The 94 is certainly debatable, but any time a race has to stand on its own that will happen. Does anyone really believe Gio Ponti ran a 100 yesterday? That one is probably off by a lot more than this one.
The better solution is to just leave it alone. If it came up a 115, and cannot be explained by mechanical failure of the timing device, let the bettors decide whether they are legitimate and/or repeatable. It is extremely hard to fathom that BL and HDG ran that much better than the other two races. But it is certainly possible- she is the best 3YO filly in the country and HDG has unlimited potential, and a 115 from a 3YO filly isn't unheard of. If the rest of the field got "towed along" by the top finishers and get figures that they probably didn't earn, that means one of three things: (1) the beaten lengths adjustments need to be examined (unlikely but possible), or (2) they all actually ran their career bests (even less likely) or (3) the handicappers will make the correct determination on their own.

It isn't just the importance to future races' betting determinations- which like them or not, the Beyers drive millions in handle, but in the breeding industry, and their historical ranks, horses are also referenced and promoted by their Beyer figure accomplishments. They are the industry standard- shouldn't they be the best?

No question the turf Beyers have even more "interpretation"... but also much less importance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
Oh you victim you.
Please. I got banned at PA for a similar argument. Not going to do the same here. For one, I have a LOT more respect for Steve as a person and a friend than the other guy, for two, I actually like the people here.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:18 PM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski View Post
Want to elaborate on why you think they are good numbers?

NVM- already answered
Geez, Phil, I would think as a figure maker you would know the extraordinarily obvious answer.

Then again, perhaps you are testing me. Nah, couldn't be.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:20 PM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
Geez, Phil, I would think as a figure maker you would know the extraordinarily obvious answer.

Then again, perhaps you are testing me. Nah, couldn't be.
I knew the answer. But I think the adjustment was too strong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind View Post
So, Pickapocket and Trickmeister should have gotten 75s....or Blind Luck and Havre de Grace should have gotten 115s.

OK, feel free to expound on either scenerio....because clearly you believe in one of them.
Not sure I follow why there's hostility here. It's a reasonable question. The adjustment, while understandable, is awfully severe.

On the flipside, anybody that thinks Pickapocket ran better than Blind Luck and Havre De Grace is fooling themselves.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-11-2010, 01:28 PM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,938
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski View Post
I knew the answer. But I think the adjustment was too strong.



Not sure I follow why there's hostility here. It's a reasonable question. The adjustment, while understandable, is awfully severe.

On the flipside, anybody that thinks Pickapocket ran better than Blind Luck and Havre De Grace is fooling themselves.

There was ZERO hostility there. It was a question where I pointed out to disagree with the figures you had to believe one of the two scenerios I laid out. You would have understood that if you would stop grinding that f'n axe.
__________________
Just more nebulous nonsense from BBB
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-12-2010, 05:21 PM
The Indomitable DrugS's Avatar
The Indomitable DrugS The Indomitable DrugS is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 11,007
Default

This thread was painful to read.

Phil - tell me you're kidding about being okay with Havre De Grace getting a 115 and Derwin's Star getting a 112 in the same race?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.