W/E Beyer Review

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by ddthetide

surprised that the 2 colonial races were that high. conditions looked to worsen quickly.

there was no possible way to make the figure for the colonial turf cup. I think the beyer guys did a poor job of guessing at the figure. they obviously just reassigned SC figure from his last race.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by VOL JACK

there was no possible way to make the figure for the colonial turf cup. I think the beyer guys did a poor job of guessing at the figure. they obviously just reassigned SC figure from his last race.

Arguably the best turf performance of the year (other than Pay to Dream's freakish run at PIM) and we can't do better than a 93? The horse basically ran the same it did in its previous races?

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Arguably the best turf performance of the year (other than Pay to Dream's freakish run at PIM) and we can't do better than a 93? The horse basically ran the same it did in its previous races?

I agree, how does that explain Nistles Crunch? Did he run one of his worst races ever while being well clear of the rest of the field in a 600k stake??

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by VOL JACK

I agree, how does that explain Nistles Crunch? Did he run one of his worst races ever while being well clear of the rest of the field in a 600k stake??

Maybe he hated the turf condition a little less than some of the others. Who knows. He certainly didn't run particularly well. I have a much easier time buying that he ran six or seven lengths worse than his prior efforts than I would saying he ran a similar race.

[jcs11204]

Originally Posted by VOL JACK

I agree, how does that explain Nistles Crunch? Did he run one of his worst races ever while being well clear of the rest of the field in a 600k stake??

i totally agree, the figures are a mess.... i think the winner freaked and they are afraid to make the figure to high, like a 105-110, that would put the rest of the field in a better range

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by jcs11204

i totally agree, the figures are a mess.... i think the winner freaked and they are afraid to make the figure to high, like a 105-110, that would put the rest of the field in a better range

[jcs11204]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

if they made it that high, where would he go from there ?>

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by jcs11204

if they made it that high, where would he go from there ?>

I think you need to try to understand how the figs are made. . .

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by jcs11204

i totally agree, the figures are a mess.... i think the winner freaked and they are afraid to make the figure to high, like a 105-110, that would put the rest of the field in a better range

he didn't freak, he handled a very soft course that the others didn't. there's a difference between a horse putting a field away, and a horse winning because he was the only one who was comfortable. he shouldn't get a higher figure just because he was the only one to run well enough to win.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Danzig

he didn't freak, he handled a very soft course that the others didn't. there's a difference between a horse putting a field away, and a horse winning because he was the only one who was comfortable. he shouldn't get a higher figure just because he was the only one to run well enough to win.

I'm not so sure about that. . .

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I'm not so sure about that. . .

i would call freaking something out of the ordinary. i thought everyone recognized that soft turf would help sailors cap immensely? he benefitted from his course. now, if he wins like gangbusters over a course not quite to his liking, that would be freakish. a fish in water is not a freak, a fish out of water but winning is.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I'm not so sure about that. . .

i would call freaking something out of the ordinary. i thought everyone recognized that soft turf would help sailors cap immensely? he benefitted from his course. now, if he wins like gangbusters over a course not quite to his liking, that would be freakish. a fish in water is not a freak, a fish out of water but winning is.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Danzig

he didn't freak, he handled a very soft course that the others didn't. there's a difference between a horse putting a field away, and a horse winning because he was the only one who was comfortable. he shouldn't get a higher figure just because he was the only one to run well enough to win.

What, exactly, was so different about Pays to Dream's run in the Dixie and Sailor's Cap's run on Saturday? Obviously the competition wasn't as good on Saturday, but we're supposed to believe that Pays to Dream freaked, yet Sailor's Cap ran his usual race.. I don't see why that's automatically the conclusion.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Arguably the best turf performance of the year (other than Pay to Dream's freakish run at PIM) and we can't do better than a 93? The horse basically ran the same it did in its previous races?

TFM, if the Colonial race got a big figure I would make the same case as I did with Pays to Dream's big PIM win.

When the conditions are like that - some horses seem to handle the going a lot better than others causing FAR greater margins of victory and defeat than normal.

I tend to dismiss those performances - but it doesn't mean those horses weren't possibly clearly best anyway.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

TFM, if the Colonial race got a big figure I would make the same case as I did with Pays to Dream's big PIM win.

When the conditions are like that - some horses seem to handle the going a lot better than others causing FAR greater margins of victory and defeat than normal.

I tend to dismiss those performances - but it doesn't mean those horses weren't possibly clearly best anyway.

It's impossible not to think of Brilliance in the Kent a couple years ago.

Bottom line....the fig is meaningless. Sailor's Cap is a good horse, probably the leading US 3YO turf horse right now, but quantifying that race considering the conditions is fruitless.

I don't know why this is hard for people to understand.

[jcs11204]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It's impossible not to think of Brilliance in the Kent a couple years ago.

Bottom line....the fig is meaningless. Sailor's Cap is a good horse, probably the leading US 3YO turf horse right now, but quantifying that race considering the conditions is fruitless.

I don't know why this is hard for people to understand.

i am having a hard time understanding it

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Bottom line....the fig is meaningless. Sailor's Cap is a good horse, probably the leading US 3YO turf horse right now, but quantifying that race considering the conditions is fruitless.

I don't know why this is hard for people to understand.

Here's the point; why it's not fruitless. No matter what your method of evaluation, this race needs to come up huge for SC. He ran an incredible race. To not be able to capture it in terms of figures, for whatever reason, is a huge flaw in the system (if the case is such).

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Arguably the best turf performance of the year (other than Pay to Dream's freakish run at PIM) and we can't do better than a 93? The horse basically ran the same it did in its previous races?

Certainly didn't stop them from giving Pays to Dream a gigantic figure, but this time, they refrained. I don't get it.