12/12: AQU - $206,0000 Carryover

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by philcski

It's the dichotomy between the Aqueduct meets and the rest of the year that really gets my goat. It isn't just 14%, it's like 32% on the inner and 8% at Saratoga/Belmont, which is kind of ridiculous. Granted, he's one of the few that keeps his better stock around in the winter, but still.

Better stock of what?

[miraja2]

Isn't there also a possible good aspect of something like this in terms of betting?
Don't Wishful Tomcat (and his other one-hit wonders) become solid bet-againsts in their next starts?

[blackthroatedwind]

To be honest, if this horse doesn't win it's next start it's even more disgraceful.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

To be honest, if this horse doesn't win it's next start it's even more disgraceful.

The horse is 5-2-1-1 over an off surface...I wouldn't jump to this conclusion unless the track conditions are similar.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

The horse is 5-2-1-1 over an off surface...I wouldn't jump to this conclusion unless the track conditions are similar.

We were referring to today's wunderkind.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

The horse is 5-2-1-1 over an off surface...I wouldn't jump to this conclusion unless the track conditions are similar.

Here are the career Beyer figures for the mighty Missile Motor, starting with his debut, and I have highlighted each wet track number....

67, 83, 73, 88, 93, 87, 75, 71 ( turf ), 90, 89, 91, 90, 89......and then the Big Daddy 111.

Based on this there is absolutely no evidence that he improves on a wet track.....in fact two of his three worst dirt numbers were earned on wet tracks.

[dylbert]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Here are the career Beyer figures for the mighty Missile Motor, starting with his debut, and I have highlighted each wet track number....

67, 83, 73, 88, 93, 87, 75, 71 ( turf ), 90, 89, 91, 90, 89......and then the Big Daddy 111.

Based on this there is absolutely no evidence that he improves on a wet track.....in fact two of his three worst dirt numbers were earned on wet tracks.

You say toe-may-toe and I say toe-mah-toe. Two of Missile Motor's fastest BSFs came on WET surface. I am using Olympic scoring here -- toss 67 debut and 111 inexplicable fig. History would suggest that 89-90 is tomorrow's number.

Overbet is probably real headline here. Finding "live" overlay is challenge for all.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by dylbert

You say toe-may-toe and I say toe-mah-toe. Two of Missile Motor's fastest BSFs came on WET surface. I am using Olympic scoring here -- toss 67 debut and 111 inexplicable fig. History would suggest that 89-90 is tomorrow's number.

Overbet is probably real headline here. Finding "live" overlay is challenge for all.

And hopefully you don't use this kind of logic when you bet your money. The simple fact is that prior to Contessa having this horse the best he ever performed on a wet track was consistent with his current form.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Better stock of what?

his 10k claimers that run like 50k'ers, not just his 10k claimers that run like 10k claimers. Not to mention his ridiculous Winning Move purchases, which seem to have a runner in EVERY race these days.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

So let me get this straight, because David Jacobson also has suspicion improvements then it is OK, or reasonable, that Gary Contessa does? Nobody here suggested Contessa was the only trainer in America that has these unreasonable performances, I wish it was true, but since he was the magician du jour we were focusing on him.

Not at all. In fact I believe I made it a point to not suggest this...What I am suggesting is that in my opinion this was more of an 11-14 point move up, and considering this horses affinity for an off surface, and the visually impressive win over a field that didn't particularly care for it - the figure seemed ridiculously high.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You say Missile Motor got an inflated figure. Based on what? Did you analyze the other horses' performances in the race or were you just trying to suggest that the improvement by Mr. Contessa couldn't possibly have been as outrageous as it was? A 104 would have seemed reasonable for this horse?

I don't have anything more to base my opinion on other than the replay and tomorrow's form. And the fact is that IANS was awarded a bsf 9 points lower going a 1/5 of a second faster at the same distance. I would love to find out what sort of bsf's MM was awarded in his previous 3 board hits over an off track. And furthermore my post was simply to point out an ironic observation that in the same race your point would have been more clearly served by a more flagrant example. Unless the point was to throw axes at Contessa, then it was spot on.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

I don't have anything more to base my opinion on other than the replay and tomorrow's form. And the fact is that IANS was awarded a bsf 9 points lower going a 1/5 of a second faster at the same distance. I would love to find out what sort of bsf's MM was awarded in his previous 3 board hits over an off track. And furthermore my post was simply to point out an ironic observation that in the same race your point would have been more clearly served by a more flagrant example. Unless the point was to throw axes at Contessa, then it was spot on.

First of all, you really don't understand speed figures, and to be surprised that similar times earned on different racing days received different figures only magnifies this. Your baseless claims about the 111 have been thoroughly debunked.

However, the latter part of your post is really outlandish. Once again, we were talking about Gary Contessa because of what took place in today's 9th race. " Throw axes at Contessa?????" You have to be kidding! I stated facts about his horses. If you don't like that these facts make him look bad then that's not my problem and I suggest you ask yourself why you feel a need to defend him if you don't think the situation is at all curious.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

First of all, you really don't understand speed figures, and to be surprised that similar times earned on different racing days received different figures only magnifies this. Your baseless claims about the 111 have been thoroughly debunked.

Finally, common ground

I understand what they purport to represent, based on some subjective formula. I understand that a number of factors go into the formula each day based of various conditions and that a because 1:09.2 earned a 102 on one day may not necessarily mean that it's impossible for a 1:09.3 to earn a 111 the next. No surprise here. Got it.
I use them loosely as a minor confirmation of an opinion and perhaps a plausable snapshot of current form. Nothing more. I certainly would put no more credence in them than any other form of technical analysis available, and don't ever base my wagering dollar solely on them.

So as far as my "claim" being baseless and thoroughly debunked - Once again I never "claimed" anything, only offered an opinion - an opinion, as far as I'm concerned, that is as subjective as the science they are based on.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

However, the latter part of your post is really outlandish. Once again, we were talking about Gary Contessa because of what took place in today's 9th race. " Throw axes at Contessa?????" You have to be kidding! I stated facts about his horses. If you don't like that these facts make him look bad then that's not my problem and I suggest you ask yourself why you feel a need to defend him if you don't think the situation is at all curious.

I'm not defending Gary Contessa, have no need to defend him, and honestly couldn't care less. What I'm getting from you is that you don't care for him as a trainer because you feel his inconsistancies, particularly first off the claim, makes your life more difficult as a player - thus suggesting improprities...I just won't jump off that cliff with you, Andy..Lastly, I didn't see the last race today and only responed to your allegations about Missile Motor tomorrow. I think the number is high, you don't. C'est la vie.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

So as far as my "claim" being baseless and thoroughly debunked - Once again I never "claimed" anything, only offered an opinion - an opinion, as far as I'm concerned, that is as subjective as the science they are based on.




I'm not defending Gary Contessa, have no need to defend him, and honestly couldn't care less. What I'm getting from you is that you don't care for him as a trainer because you feel his inconsistancies, particularly first off the claim, makes your life more difficult as a player - thus suggesting improprities...I just won't jump off that cliff with you, Andy..Lastly, I didn't see the last race today and only responed to your allegations about Missile Motor tomorrow. I think the number is high, you don't. C'est la vie.

I debunked your baseless claim that the number was high by going horse by horse through the field and showing that each and every one of them ran a number consistent with their history of numbers. It is absolutely impossible for those seven horses to have run consistent numbers ( the only ones, in fact, seemingly out of line were actually lower than could have been expected ) and the winner to have run too high. His figure holds up....period. Your assertion was based on nothing other than you saying it. And, you said it from weakness.

I never said " I didn't care for him as a trainer " nor did I say the performances of his horses, whether off the claim or not, make things difficult for me as a bettor. I never said any of this. What I did was point out that his horses run inexplicably and outrageously well from time to time and seemingly at random. How this affects me, whether good or bad, is entirely besides the point. You are, and I don't know why, somehow trying to deflect the discussion towards me. I have nothing to do with it.

[pmacdaddy]

Nice work Titan!