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
  #81  
Old 11-22-2006, 12:39 AM
brianwspencer's Avatar
brianwspencer brianwspencer is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER
Notice how you didn't start this thread innocently.You started it to fight about the track that day. The reason nobody complained to the track super was because they didn't want to be accused by this guy of blaming the track for losing a race.That is what he accused people of doing in the article,and why you think people want to face a load of that crap from him is beyond me.What are they gunna do? Go to his office and tell him that horses on the outside are struggling on that track? He would laugh at them ,and do what you folks have done all day,and month on here(anybody who speaks of the track condition is a sore loser etc.,etc..) As far as QLM goes, your not familiar with this filly.If you were,you would know that she got very little pace to close on in the Oak Leaf(yet made a nice move on a heavily speed favoring Anita track to get 3rd.)They went a 47 or something,and then simply sprinted for home.She closed anyways.If Churchill was in any shape at all for the outside horses,she would have come in a good 2nd-3rd-4th.Your probably right that Anna wasn't gunna be run down from behind after those splits,but I know QLM was better than shown on that piece of crap track,and she returned to win the Moccasin on just 2 weeks rest.
you are without a doubt, and everyone here will see it, infusing your own beliefs into my intentions. You're saying that I didn't start this thread innocently. I absolutely did. I've had enough of the bias controversy. You and others believe it exists, myself and others believe if didn't. There is no right answer, and i'm okay with that resolution (if you're not, that's your problem, not mine). I presented this thread (please reread the original post) as an interesting point of view that many on this board may not have otherwise come across. Again, you're infusing an agenda on my posts that simply isn't there. It was so that posters on this board could see what Lehr had to say for himself which I thought was interesting (and which in the original post I said was "interesting" -- notice how "interesting" here and "interesting" there are the same word PLEASE!" I am a strict believer in the fact that words speak for themselves....)

So basically I haven't said that those who thought a rail bias exists are dumb -- I've just said that I don't believe it. I can't imagine a more fair way to look at it. I'm being diplomatic, and YOU are making it confrontational. That's your issue and not mine. You love QLM. Fine, I don't. But don't pretend that with easy splits, that QLM somehow deserved to run well enough for a check. If she ran well enough for a check, she would have....(SHOCKER) gotten a check!
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 11-22-2006, 12:46 AM
SCUDSBROTHER's Avatar
SCUDSBROTHER SCUDSBROTHER is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 11,326
Default

Spencer, I am not wasting anymore time on you.I have given you a list of people that can see what you can't.More important than the inside bias,was the struggle many consistent horses had on the middle,and outside of that track.Most never had a chance,and you will start to get that(maybe,but I doubt it) when most of them run just fine when they run their next race.

Last edited by SCUDSBROTHER : 11-22-2006 at 12:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 11-22-2006, 12:50 AM
brianwspencer's Avatar
brianwspencer brianwspencer is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER
Spencer, I am not wasting anymore time on you.I have given you a list of people that can see what you can't.More important that the inside bias,was the struggle many consistent horses had on the middle,and outside of that track.Most never had a chance,and you will start to get that(maybe,but I doubt it) when most of them run just fine when they run their next race.
that's cool. that's an agreement if i ever heard one. you've given me people, and zero examples.

I''ve given you examples, and a couple people who agree with me -- and yet you have still not answered ANY question I've posed. I can deal with that. We'll call it even out of the goodness of my heart.

that's a deal. 10-4. You love QLM and will make an excuse for her no matter what. That's cool. I respect loving a horse unconditionally, even if irrationally.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 11-22-2006, 01:12 AM
SCUDSBROTHER's Avatar
SCUDSBROTHER SCUDSBROTHER is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 11,326
Default

Oh, each and everyone of us is simply stunned that Lehr's point of view is that the track was just fine.That was incredibly surprising(I am sure.)His point is that nobody complained.If they would have complained,he would have called them poor losers.We are simply stunned by the cards he is playing. Do you really expect anybody to believe your load about starting this thread?No,you don't have an agenda, but you just happened to start a thread about a guy that does.You just thought it would be interesting huh? Yep.Sure.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 11-22-2006, 07:50 AM
Dunbar's Avatar
Dunbar Dunbar is offline
The Curragh
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,962
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oracle80
I can't wait for all those good races this weekend that can help end the breeders cup hangover.
I know its slow now, we are in between Tri Crown season and BC season, but it will be nice to put this one to bed.

How about that Discreet Cat and Nobiz Like Showbiz huh?
And the Clark on Friday. It will be amusing if Super Frolic takes it, after the connections made that idiotic choice of running in the BC Mile!

--Dunbar
__________________
Curlin and Hard Spun finish 1,2 in the 2007 BC Classic, demonstrating how competing in all three Triple Crown races ruins a horse for the rest of the year...see avatar
photo from REUTERS/Lucas Jackson
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 11-22-2006, 08:22 AM
philcski's Avatar
philcski philcski is offline
Goodwood
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER
Henny never ran worse than 2nd (until he met that piece of crap track.)TM Bling never ran out of the money in a sprint(until he met that piece of crap track.)Race is gunna stick out like a sore thumb on the past performances of so many horses that are gunna roar back to show that track was simply crap.
You fail to mention that TMB had (a) never run against older horses, and (b) was off a layoff since forever (not the way to win the Sprint.)

You fail to mention that Henny had only run once against older horses, broke poorly, shuffled back, was never perservered. He looked like LITF-lite to me (an overbet 3YO who had never faced a brutal field like this) coming in and proved that.

I rewatched the race several times, and Thor's was much the best on that day. I lost a ****load of money on the race because i didn't think anything of Thor's but I'm not searching for excuses. My horse clipped heels and almost went down costing him ANY remote chance, that's bum luck, that's all. My longshot ran 2nd at 58-1. I got nuttin' and that's my fault, not the track "condition."
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 11-22-2006, 08:27 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think that Thors benefited greatly by your horse clipping heals. That really allowed him to shoot up and totally take control of the race from the 3 path. But Thor was the best horse in that race on that day. I had him in the pick three only because I went 8 deep. The Sprint is always the hardest race--I always go back to Housebuster losing at like 3/5 when he stumbled at the start.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 11-22-2006, 10:03 AM
brianwspencer's Avatar
brianwspencer brianwspencer is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER
Do you really expect anybody to believe your load about starting this thread?
Yes, because the reason I started it is exactly what I told you -- because nobody has heard from him, and now we have. It's like if I had posted a link to election results a few weeks ago. It doesn't mean I want to debate it again, it means: here is information you may want to see.

Interesting information. I've said it once, I'm saying it again. If you don't believe me, that's your issue. There was no confrontation in this thread on my part until you brought it into the thread, my friend. I think that everyone (capable of reading) can see that, so there is not really even a question of whether they believe me or not...they can read it for themselves and see that you turned it into this.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 11-22-2006, 12:22 PM
Pointg5 Pointg5 is offline
Sheepshead Bay
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperSB23
Especially since it was the second race off a layoff which often leads to a big race. It is called bounce THEORY for a reason. In reality what is perceived as a bounce is really just regression to the mean after a big race.

I took a look last night and Thor's Echo was coming off of a 6 point top, his mean is about a 2 and he ran a negative 4 in his last race, it's not like he's a developing 2yo or 3yo, it was a 6 point top coming 3/4 of the way through his 4yo year. Not every horse bounces, but that had some sort of regression written all over it or even back to his mean which would have made him a non factor in the Sprint. He ran a negative 5 in the Sprint and from the comments looks like he rode the rail and then swung out 3 wide and won, so I believe his number was aided by an golden rail. For those that believe there was no rail bias, I don't know what to say to you and I am not going to argues with you, because it looks like a hopeless cause. I guess we'll see what happens in the next couple of races....
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 11-22-2006, 12:34 PM
SniperSB23 SniperSB23 is offline
Hialeah Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 6,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointg5
I took a look last night and Thor's Echo was coming off of a 6 point top, his mean is about a 2 and he ran a negative 4 in his last race, it's not like he's a developing 2yo or 3yo, it was a 6 point top coming 3/4 of the way through his 4yo year. Not every horse bounces, but that had some sort of regression written all over it or even back to his mean which would have made him a non factor in the Sprint. He ran a negative 5 in the Sprint and from the comments looks like he rode the rail and then swung out 3 wide and won, so I believe his number was aided by an golden rail. For those that believe there was no rail bias, I don't know what to say to you and I am not going to argues with you, because it looks like a hopeless cause. I guess we'll see what happens in the next couple of races....
As I said before he was running those figures early in the year in what was essentially the end of a long 3yo campaign. He obviously needed the time to rest and develop and has apparently done just that. Why did other horses that rode the rail run poorly but he was aided by it? Is Brother Derek that atrociously bad that he couldn't crack the top four with the magical rail trip? What about the horse that was in front of Thor's Echo that they had to swing wide to pass because Nakatani had so much horse under him? Why wasn't that horse benefiting from the same golden rail? Just doesn't make much sense to me. When Thor's Echo wins the De Francis on Saturday will that quiet people?
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 11-22-2006, 01:01 PM
Pointg5 Pointg5 is offline
Sheepshead Bay
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 1,096
Default

That's a ton of development and with no signs of doing that before, it sets up for a bounce. I believe he bounced and still won, so he has every right to win the Defrancis, wouldn't surprise me, he's obviously a talented animal. I think it might prove my point even more.

One thing I read on here multiple times and whoever writes this nonsense is a complete moron in my opinion. There seems to be a group on here that says if you are questioning the track, you are just making excuses for being wrong. That's the stupidest line of bullcrap I have ever read anywhere. If you are interested in this sport and like to predict winners, you have to be able to look at things and question them and make your own assertions. I didn't think Thor's Echo would win on a fair track, because of his bounce, but he was definetely talented enough on a gold rail to win, that was my mistake for not recognizing that fact. If you are not learning from your mistakes you are going backwards and if you chalk it up to the fact that people are looking for something to blame their losses on, you have a losers mentality...
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 11-22-2006, 01:26 PM
SniperSB23 SniperSB23 is offline
Hialeah Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 6,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointg5
That's a ton of development and with no signs of doing that before, it sets up for a bounce. I believe he bounced and still won, so he has every right to win the Defrancis, wouldn't surprise me, he's obviously a talented animal. I think it might prove my point even more.

One thing I read on here multiple times and whoever writes this nonsense is a complete moron in my opinion. There seems to be a group on here that says if you are questioning the track, you are just making excuses for being wrong. That's the stupidest line of bullcrap I have ever read anywhere. If you are interested in this sport and like to predict winners, you have to be able to look at things and question them and make your own assertions. I didn't think Thor's Echo would win on a fair track, because of his bounce, but he was definetely talented enough on a gold rail to win, that was my mistake for not recognizing that fact. If you are not learning from your mistakes you are going backwards and if you chalk it up to the fact that people are looking for something to blame their losses on, you have a losers mentality...
Questioning a track is one thing. Saying there was without a doubt a track bias when there are plenty of people that disagree is just sour grapes. It is one thing if all the races were wire jobs but that wasn't the case at all, every race was won differently. The post position coincidence was just that, none of the winners were really that unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 11-22-2006, 08:02 PM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointg5
That's a ton of development and with no signs of doing that before, it sets up for a bounce. I believe he bounced and still won, so he has every right to win the Defrancis, wouldn't surprise me, he's obviously a talented animal. I think it might prove my point even more.

One thing I read on here multiple times and whoever writes this nonsense is a complete moron in my opinion. There seems to be a group on here that says if you are questioning the track, you are just making excuses for being wrong. That's the stupidest line of bullcrap I have ever read anywhere. If you are interested in this sport and like to predict winners, you have to be able to look at things and question them and make your own assertions. I didn't think Thor's Echo would win on a fair track, because of his bounce, but he was definetely talented enough on a gold rail to win, that was my mistake for not recognizing that fact. If you are not learning from your mistakes you are going backwards and if you chalk it up to the fact that people are looking for something to blame their losses on, you have a losers mentality...
Seriously, do you not understand the fact that Thor's Echo DID NOT WIN ON THE RAIL. The horse was anywhere from 3-5 wide almost the entire trip. I dont understand how you say he got a "golden rail" when he wasnt on the rail.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 11-22-2006, 08:51 PM
blackthroatedwind blackthroatedwind is offline
Jerome Park
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,931
Default

It seems to me it is the usual misunderstanding/overreaction when it comes to track biases. I think we can all agree the rail was a very good place to be, probably the best part of the track, but enough horses that got decent trips were able to run at least OK, and not significantly worse than prior efforts, while not being on the best part of the track, that the track wasn't one of those super inside tracks.

Take a look at Aqueduct last weekend over the inner, or the main track at Aqueduct on November 11th, and I think one will get a much clearer picture of a super inside track where wide moves were virtually impossible. I just don't think we had one of those on BC Day and perhaps it would be wise to just downgrade some of the performances of horses who spent at least some of their race on the inside. Let's not pretend it was impossible to close outside, as that is simply not true, but certainly some were aided by inside trips.

I also think the Thor's Echo race is not a great example, as no matter what the track, Thor's Echo got a perfect trip. He tucked inside behind a speed duel and angled on the turn to cruise by. He was best but his trip made it easier. It's hard to imagine a bias that would have stopped him. Also, remember it was the only one turn BC race of the day. While inside speed was good in the first sprint, with the best horse probably winning, good trip horses did well in the second race ( a one turn mile ) with only the second finisher spending part of the race on the rail.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 11-22-2006, 10:15 PM
SCUDSBROTHER's Avatar
SCUDSBROTHER SCUDSBROTHER is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 11,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eurobounce
Seriously, do you not understand the fact that Thor's Echo DID NOT WIN ON THE RAIL. The horse was anywhere from 3-5 wide almost the entire trip. I dont understand how you say he got a "golden rail" when he wasnt on the rail.
He wasn't 3-5 wide almost the entire trip.For the slow ones,I give you the man's words once again(damn shame it is necessary.)


Nakatani said he wanted to stay on the rail as long as he could but once leaving the backstretch had no choice but to angle out and go after the leaders."On the turn I had so much horse that if I had stayed on the rail much longer................"


I have written this so much,but you are simply not able to comprehend that he rode the rail until he got to the turn.It is a given.O.K.? He was not 3-5 wide almost the entire trip.I have put stuff on here that is obviously not being read.So,f it.

Last edited by SCUDSBROTHER : 11-23-2006 at 04:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 11-23-2006, 04:42 AM
SCUDSBROTHER's Avatar
SCUDSBROTHER SCUDSBROTHER is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 11,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Easily one of the most amusing threads in awhile. Of course the inside was the place to be BC day, as it was for a week before, and a week after. Could you win from outside, yes, as many did. Honestly, Scuds, you seem like a good guy, but you have a knack for making a lot of excuses for things. Bad rides, track biases, etc. Quiet Little Miss is a neat little horse, but she IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH to make a splash at all in the 3 year old filly division. Was the track a little quirky BC day, sure. but your examples are bad. The sprint is always a crapshoot. Was Henny a bad favorite. yes. And if you took him, or the other grade 1 winners, which are pretty laughable, then it is your fault. I know that is hard to take, but it's the truth. Thors Echo was the best horse that day, no doubt. As was Street Sense, see Breeders Futurity, watch the race. And if you believe the problems Round Pond had before the Beladme, she was very playable. At a certain point, you have to look in the mirror, and say, if you say there is a bias, then you're bad for not picking up on it. The whole, "the track was garbage" thing is a giant excuse for not winning BC day. I cannot think of a race BC day where I cannot say the best horse that day, won that day. For those who are determined to deflect handicapping, for reality, what horse that won BC day, wasn't best that day?
Handicapping is done after the race,and before it.I realize many people don't care why horses don't run .Often you will read a professional handicapper's comments about a race,and they will include an idea about a horse's last race.Like it,or not,there are sometimes reasons why a horse's last race can be forgiven.Not always,because many times horses have health problems etc. There are no excuses for anybody gambling on horses(nobody gets a dime back if a horse has an excuse.)There are (sometimes) excuses for horses that perform poorly in a particular race.You act as though it is an act of pedophilia to examine what happened to a horse during a race,and see if the race can be forgiven.I don't feel that way.You feel as though it is whining to look at what happened to horses during their race.I don't.Mel Stute did it:


"Mel Stute thought his filly Quick Little Miss was compromised by a wide post in the Breeders' Cup Juvenile Fillies at Churchill Downs, and believed she would not mind being brought back just 15 days after that race. He was right. Quick Little Miss, last of seven at the top of the stretch, closed furiously to nail odds-on favorite Jump On In and capture the $100,000 Moccasin Stakes for 2-year-old fillies on Sunday at Hollywood Park.....
"I wasted a little money going back East," said Stute, who trains Quick Little Miss for his wife, Annabelle, and the Schiffer family's The Hat Ranch. "I thought she was good enough for that race. I'm hoping the post position and the track beat her."

So,myself and Mel are evidently the antichrist's little helpers,because we think the track hurt the chances of some horses that day.Fine.I love my company in crime.One more for ya:

“She had no shot after breaking out there, the way that track played on Breeders’ Cup Day,” Chapman said. “It’s one of those things where you wish you hadn’t even run. She came out of it fine. There wasn’t much effort to it.”-James Chapman(trainer of Malibu Mint.)

See,be careful because you aren't just making fun of me,you are making fun of the opinions of grade 1 winning trainers in this sport.I know what I am talking about.I know a totally unfair track when I see it,and these trainers are so sure it was messed up that they wish they didn't even run their horses on that track that day.He didn't say maybe it was the track.He said she had "no shot" from where she was on that track.

Last edited by SCUDSBROTHER : 11-23-2006 at 03:04 PM.
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 08:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.