Final Verdict ... Fog Is A Fraud

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 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.

I never said that LITF was an all-time great. What he did last year was pretty amazing but I'm still not going to say that he's an all-time great. I am saying that I think he was the best sprinter in the country last year and he definitely deserved the Eclipse Award. Who else was there? Who do you think the best sprinter was last year? I don't know how could say Silver Train. Silver Train repeatedly lost to worse 3 year olds than the ones that LITF consistently beat. Do you think that Taste of Paradise was the best sprinter? He only won one race all year.
By the way, when LITF went :43 1/5 and ran in 6 furlongs in 1:07 1/5, I know it was at Golden Gate. But still, who could have beaten him that day? If Taste of Paradise went up there for that race, do you think he would have run 1:07 and won the race. I don't think so.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I am saying that I think he was the best sprinter in the country last year and he definitely deserved the Eclipse Award. Who else was there?

I do believe that he was deserving of the Eclipse Award as he absolutely accomplished more in that category than any other horse. He was NOT, however, the best sprinter in the country.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I do believe that he was deserving of the Eclipse Award as he absolutely accomplished more in that category than any other horse. He was NOT, however, the best sprinter in the country.

If LITF was not the best sprinter last year, then who was?
I don't know how you can say that your friends' assessment of LITF was better than yours. Why would you think that? The fact that he lost one race at the end of a hard campaign doesn't prove anything. I'll bet that these same friends were constantly betting against him and were constantly wrong. Then when he finally lost, they probably said I told you so.
And this year, the horse has had excuses. I don't think you can hold it against him too much that he lost his first race off the layoff. His race in Kentucky was huge. That was an awesome race. I'm not that big on figures but I'll bet that all the figures confirm that he ran a huge race that day. I know he ran a 111 Beyer. I don't know what his sheet number was but I bet it is was a huge number. Kelly's Landing is a very good sprinter when he fires. On his best day, he can compete with anyone. He ran huge that day and LITF still beat him.

[blackthroatedwind]

I completely disagree.

First of all, my friends who properly evaluated him were NOT betting against him in the weak fields he faced, as it's all about relative ability.

Secondly, he didn't just fail the ONLY time he met even a reasonably tough field, he was drowned.

As for this year, he lost in essentially a match race in his return this year, as the third and fourth finishers in that four horse field are not even competitive in 25 claimers. Hardly an excusable loss for the supposed best sprinter in the country.

As for his Churchill race, it was a decent performance at best, as all he did was stalk a very slow pace set by an overmatched horse and hold off an established mediocrity ( one who failed after having the race wrapped up in his previous start to the aforementioned overmatched mediocrity ). He did what he had to do, which is his greatest quality, but it was simply nothing close to a " huge " effort.

And, let me go back to your opening paragraph and your comments about the people I know. These people are some of the most recognized names in handicapping in the game and, believe me, I have talked racing with them for years and respect their opinions greatly. I am not somebody who is even close to assuming someone is sharp because they write for a paper....I know these individuals are sharp because I have seen their results over many years. They are hardly the " I told you so " kind of people.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by 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.

I have a question for you. You say your friends were correct that LITF would not win the BC Sprint. It sounds like one of the things they thought was that LITF was not that good of a horse. He only looked good because he was facing 3 year olds and the 3 year olds were not nearly as good as the older sprinters. Even though LITF was the top 3 year old spriner going into the BC sprint, he would have no chance because the 3 year olds were not as good as the older horses. If this was their assessment, then they were totally wrong becasue two 3 year olds ran 1st and 4th in the Sprint. Did your friends think Silver Train or Attila's Storm had good chances? If not, then you can't say that they called the race so well.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I have a question for you. You say your friends were correct that LITF would not win the BC Sprint. It sounds like one of the things they thought was that LITF was not that good of a horse. He only looked good because he was facing 3 year olds and the 3 year olds were not nearly as good as the older sprinters. Even though LITF was the top 3 year old spriner going into the BC sprint, he would have no chance because the 3 year olds were not as good as the older horses. If this was their assessment, then they were totally wrong becasue two 3 year olds ran 1st and 4th in the Sprint. Did your friends think Silver Train or Attila's Storm had good chances? If not, then you can't say that they called the race so well.

You are arguing points that aren't relevent.

A horseplayer's job is to make money. In order to do that they make judgements about races being run on a given day. I have often bet, and sometimes won money on, horses that I didn't even think were best going into a race. There are many odds-on horses that I bet against knowing full well they are the likeliest winners of the race ( they VERY rarely aren't ). The bottom line is cashing...ie. making money. Being right is for losers. Knowing how to make money by making correct relative choices, and betting them properly, is ALL that matters.

On the point of LITF, if you choose to suggest that his ability is close to the reputation he gained prior to last year's BC be my guest, but it is a stubborn and difficult to logically defend position. I would guess you know that in this game it is very important to learn from your mistakes. There is nothing wrong with making incorrect judgements in individual cases, we all do it more often than not, but there is something very wrong ( and expensive ) about making the same mistakes over and over again. Luckily, one of the many great things about this game, is there are always future opportunities to correct mistakes of the past. How one deals with this ultimately seperates the winners and losers or the successful and unsuccessful.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You are arguing points that aren't relevent.

A horseplayer's job is to make money. In order to do that they make judgements about races being run on a given day. I have often bet, and sometimes won money on, horses that I didn't even think were best going into a race. There are many odds-on horses that I bet against knowing full well they are the likeliest winners of the race ( they VERY rarely aren't ). The bottom line is cashing...ie. making money. Being right is for losers. Knowing how to make money by making correct relative choices, and betting them properly, is ALL that matters.

On the point of LITF, if you choose to suggest that his ability is close to the reputation he gained prior to last year's BC be my guest, but it is a stubborn and difficult to logically defend position. I would guess you know that in this game it is very important to learn from your mistakes. There is nothing wrong with making incorrect judgements in individual cases, we all do it more often than not, but there is something very wrong ( and expensive ) about making the same mistakes over and over again. Luckily, one of the many great things about this game, is there are always future opportunities to correct mistakes of the past. How one deals with this ultimately seperates the winners and losers or the successful and unsuccessful.

I agree that we need to learn from our mistakes. Some of my best winners have been horses who I changed my mind about. I was dead-wrong about Your Tent or Mine at the Fasig-Tipton Calder Sale. I didn't like him at all. He was tall and gangly and I just didn't like his work. When he madehis first start at Del Mar, I obviously did not like him at all. I had seen him work at the sale and didn't like him. Needless to say, he won that day. Not only did he win, but I thought he won very impressively. I completely changed my mind about him after his maiden race. I couldn't believe how wrong I was about him. He looked like a totally different horse from the horse I saw work in Florida. He had really grown into himself nicely. Here was a horse who I didn't like at all just 6 1/2 months earlier and now I thought he was a stakes horse. Anyway, I made a big bet on him in his next race which was the Hollywood Prevue. I bet $900 ($450 to win and place) on him that day. He won the race and went off at 6-1. I made a nice score on him.
With regard to LITF, I didn't particularly like him in the BC Sprint. I thought he was definitely one of the main contenders, but I was going to try to beat him. The horse I really liked was Atilla's Storm. He was 45-1. I bet on him to win and place. I also played some small exactas and trifectas using him along with Taste of Paradise, Imperialism, and LITF. I didn't use Silver Train. It wasn't that I didn't think he was good enough. I thought he was good enough. I had always liked him a lot. I liked him so much that he was actually on my watch list. The reason I didn't like him any more was because I thought there was something wrong with him. If my memory is right, I think he had been scratched at the gate by the vet a short time before the BC. I think it was in July or August.
If LITF would have run his best in the BC Sprint, he probably would not have won. But I do think he would have finished very close. I think he would have definitely hit the board.

[SentToStud]

When was the last time a sprinter gave at least 8 lbs to every other starter in a Grade 1 or Grade 2 race?

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Ok, I'll offer my analysis on why LITF didn't win those three races. I have very good explanations on what happened to him.

BC SPRINT-No other horse in the BC sprint had traveled around the country and had a grueling campaign like LITF did last year. Just like LR did in the Derby, LITF was too weary and tired. That is why he gave around the final turn. I believe that the horse's physical problems are a direct result from this race because while the connection's intentions have always been noble, they went a step too far and pushed LITF over the edge.

CARTHAGE-LITF was coming off of a huge layoff and was not fit. He ran into a monster in Carthage in which the trainer of Carthage specifically announced that this would be the only time he could beat LITF. LITF ran a good second to a horse that was 100% fit and ready for this race.

SMILE SPRINT-LITF was never into the race. I don't know how this race can even be debatable. The horse was clearly not himself. You have to watch the races. I think the horse is having some serious physical problems combined with the fact that he didn't take to the track. Something was wrong with him. That is why he may be retired. I mean LITF was seventh at the quarter pole. In what other race in his career has he been seventh at the quarter pole and sixth at the half? NONE. This race can hardly be used to debate that the horse is not good against older quality sprinters. This particular race was clearly indicative of physical problems/not taking to the track. Not that he isn't good enough.

The proof lies within the Aristrides. If LITF was not that good of a horse, the nice Kelly's Landing would have easily beat him. I am very confident in that althought like Rupert, I could be wrong. It definitely wouldn't be the first time.

Also, LITF will never live up to the reputation that has been set for him. He was supposed to be an undefeated horse according to most. He is never supposed to get beaten. Hardly any horses throughout the history of the sport could have lived up the the expectations that have been set for LITF. I really like the horse and I hope they can find out what is wrong with him and fix it. He isn't one of the greatest ever, but he is definitely not as bad or a fraud like some of the posters are making him out to be.