Silverbulletday VS Rachel Alexandra through Aug of 3yo season

[postpicker]

With Beyer figs being a so called measurement, does this mean Rock and Roll's 121 makes him one of then greatest horses of all time?

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by postpicker

With Beyer figs being a so called measurement, does this mean Rock and Roll's 121 makes him one of then greatest horses of all time?

Only to a complete and utter moron.

Rock and Roll's 121 came with an uncontested early lead - over a sloppy speed favoring Belmont Park race track. He won by 14 lengths under just 112lbs in track record time. Getting 8.5 furlongs in 1:39 2/5ths.

Simply, that number only means that when Rock and Roll is allowed to loaf on an uncontested early lead under 112lbs over a sloppy speed favoring track - he's capable of beating a lot of outstanding horses. Assuming those outstanding horses don't have the speed to press him - or have jockeys who give R&R a free pass on the lead.

The horse who ran 2nd to him beaten 14 that day was 2nd by 5 to the very good Coronado's Quest less than a month later.

It really would take monumental stupidity to suggest that final time speed figures are not the best overall measurement when comparing horses from different time periods throughout the last 15 years or so.

To suggest that they aren't even a measurement at all is something you'd expect to hear from Sumitas when he's on PCP.

[postpicker]

Which is why I bring it up. Anyone that uses Beyer figs to compare who is the better horse is a moron. Each race is unique, no two races are run the same. To use Beyer figs as any type of comparision between horses, especially great horses, is a disservice to the horse. While Easy Goer had the consistently higher Beyer figs, Sunday Silence had the 3 - 1 record over him in 1989. You want to compare Rachel and SBD, don't use the Beyer figs, just look at their record and accomplishments on track.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by postpicker

Which is why I bring it up. Anyone that uses Beyer figs to compare who is the better horse is a moron. Each race is unique, no two races are run the same.

Final time figures - like Beyer figures - simply tell you how fast the race was run.

To suggest being able to run fast isn't important is laughable. And if someone can't analytically factor the circumstances of a race with how fast a horse ran ... they're simply not a very good handicapper.

Originally Posted by postpicker

To use Beyer figs as any type of comparision between horses, especially great horses, is a disservice to the horse.

Disservice to a horse? Just use their record and accomplishment on track?

That is the kind of stupidity that gets Favorite Trick voted horse of the year over Skip Away.

It's the same kind of stupidity that made people insist Stardom Bound was way better than Rachel Alexandra.

It's the same kind of stupidity that made bettors bet Justwhistledixie to favortisim over Rachel Alexandra in the Kentucky Oaks future pool in late March.

Here I am saying Rachel Alexandra is the best 3yo in the country - male or female - back in Mid Feb. after she won the ungraded Martha Washington Stakes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P007YXgCvE


You have a filly who was 3-for-6 as a 2yo, with just one stakes win - and just won a 50K stake against bums in her 3yo debut...

Are you supposed to pretend that she's somehow not as good as Stardom Bound .. because Stardom Bound is a champion who won 5 straight Grade 1 stake races? Like that means anything at all.

Rachel Alexandra's Golden Rod was unarguably the best two turn route race by a 2yo last year - male or female.

In the Martha Washington, she ran 3.5 lengths faster than Eight Belles did when EB won that race by a pole the prior year. AND .. unlike Eight Belles, Rachel Alexandra came into that race off of a layoff for a trainer who's not a very good layoff trainer.

But yeah, it's a disservice to Stardom Bound and her amusing 5 straight Grade 1 wins and championship .. to say that she's inferior to a horse (RA) who is unquestionably open lengths better than Eight Belles.

Think this one through a little bit. By your half baked theory .. Stardom Bound and her 5 straight Grade 1's and championship in 7 lifetime races drowned Rachel Alexandra's much more modest resume through her first 7 races.

[postpicker]

In my half baked theory I would never have said Stardom Bound is "superior" to RA because with my own eyes I can see how Starbom Bound was regressing and RA was moving forward. As we all know, 2 year old form doesn't always translate to 3 year old form. We can argue for or against who deserves awards, HOY, who is better etc. and we all have some validity. I'm just saying, Beyer figs or any type of figs in general shouldn't be used as a major source of comparision between horses. BTW, I wouldn't have made Justwhistledixie the favorite in Oaks future wagering either, that was probablty made by the West Point owners.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by postpicker

I'm just saying, Beyer figs or any type of figs in general shouldn't be used as a major source of comparision between horses.

So we are supposed to ignore how fast horses run when comparing horses?

Heck - if race record and accomplishment is all that matters ... we're even supposed to ignore a hell of a lot of other handicapping factors that are far more important than race record and accomplishment.

I don't blame people who bash final time figures from a betting standpoint - because they're priced into the odds .. and sometimes figuremakers get them wrong. However, when comparing horses from the last two decades ... there is without question no better starting point than asking 'how fast is the horse .. and how were his figures earned.'

[Thunder Gulch]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

So we are supposed to ignore how fast horses run when comparing horses?

Heck - if race record and accomplishment is all that matters ... we're even supposed to ignore a hell of a lot of other handicapping factors that are far more important than race record and accomplishment.

I don't blame people who bash final time figures from a betting standpoint - because they're priced into the odds .. and sometimes figuremakers get them wrong. However, when comparing horses from the last two decades ... there is without question no better starting point than asking 'how fast is the horse .. and how were his figures earned.'

Agree. What's foolish is to completely disregard how fast a horse ran and to only measure it by the competition faced. Both are important, but does anyone want to tell me (again) how Spectacular Bid never beat much and how his seven track records (seven different tracks and multiple distances) and world record 10f don't speak to his greatness? I've heard it before. When you can't control the quality of the competition faced beyond entering the best races, so the only measure becomes the clock or figure.