Weekend Beyers: Blind Luck 104; Sidney's 100; AmLion 98

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Getting back to the thread, I agree the 109 is too high and that AL 98 is too low.

Why? Just guessing? Any insight?

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Why? Just guessing? Any insight?

I posted in the other thread on this and parisix sums up pretty much how I feel. AQ was not slow on Sat and that time for the Wood was avg, I think sometimes draw off performances simply get overrated....The HAW fig is tougher. That track was pretty slow so the raw final doesn't bother me.

Figs aren't always perfect. Remember that Arnold(I think) maiden a few years ago getting 20 subtracted from it? It does happen.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

I posted in the other thread on this and parisix sums up pretty much how I feel. AQ was not slow on Sat and that time for the Wood was avg, I think sometimes draw off performances simply get overrated....The HAW fig is tougher.

Figs aren't always perfect. Remember that Arnold(I think) maiden a few years ago getting 20 subtracted from it? It does happen.

You think that Eskendereya got a 109 because he drew off late?

He ran a very strong final time based on the pace of the race. Was it aided by the pace of the race? More than likely but when you take his time at face value stacked up against the Excelsior it was a strong effort.

If there was one horse in any of the stakes portion whose figure can be taken with a grain of salt (and not because it's wrong, I think it's right on) its Warrior's Reward who ran a fifth of a second faster for the 7/8ths in the Carter than Eightyfiveinafifty did in the Bay Shore despite the pace of the Carter being nearly a second slower. I think Warrior's Reward's effort was outstanding.

NT

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

You think that Eskendereya got a 109 because he drew off late?

He ran a very strong final time based on the pace of the race. Was it aided by the pace of the race? More than likely but when you take his time at face value stacked up against the Excelsior it was a strong effort.

If there was one horse in any of the stakes portion whose figure can be taken with a grain of salt (and not because it's wrong, I think it's right on) its Warrior's Reward who ran a fifth of a second faster for the 7/8ths in the Carter than Eightyfiveinafifty did in the Bay Shore despite the pace of the Carter being nearly a second slower. I think Warrior's Reward's effort was outstanding.

NT

Humans make these. They are not infallable. And yes I think there are times that fig makers fall in love with certain performances....and also downgrade horses based on previous races.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

He ran a very strong final time based on the pace of the race. Was it aided by the pace of the race? More than likely but when you take his time at face value stacked up against the Excelsior it was a strong effort.

If there was one horse in any of the stakes portion whose figure can be taken with a grain of salt (and not because it's wrong, I think it's right on) its Warrior's Reward who ran a fifth of a second faster for the 7/8ths in the Carter than Eightyfiveinafifty did in the Bay Shore despite the pace of the Carter being nearly a second slower. I think Warrior's Reward's effort was outstanding.

I agree completely about Warrior's Reward's performance.

I think it is dangerous to legitimize Eskendereya's performance off the Excelsior. I thought that was an ugly race where the winner gutted a win out at a distance that is probably farther than his best (nor was it the best distance for More Than a Reason or Nite Light for that matter). I don't think any of those horses produced their "A" effort, so to say that Goldsville's figure is legit because he ran a comparable figure in his prior race is a mistake, in my opinion.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I agree completely about Warrior's Reward's performance.

I think it is dangerous to legitimize Eskendereya's performance off the Excelsior. I thought that was an ugly race where the winner gutted a win out at a distance that is probably farther than his best (nor was it the best distance for More Than a Reason or Nite Light for that matter). I don't think any of those horses produced their "A" effort, so to say that Goldsville's figure is legit because he ran a comparable figure in his prior race is a mistake, in my opinion.

The funny thing is that the Excelsior provided an absolutely perfect backdrop to make the Wood figure. It couldn't have made the number easier to make, accept, and understand.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The funny thing is that the Excelsior provided an absolutely perfect backdrop to make the Wood figure. It couldn't have made the number easier to make, accept, and understand.

I thought Eskenderya's Wood was slow early, fast late; the Excelsior was just plain slow. I agree that the Excelsior provides a perfect backdrop for a figure maker to say that Eskenderaya ran "x" points faster than Goldsville. It does not answer whether the figure for both races is too high (to the extent that final times were influenced by the pace in the respective races).

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I thought Eskenderya's Wood was slow early, fast late; the Excelsior was just plain slow. I agree that the Excelsior provides a perfect backdrop for a figure maker to say that Eskenderaya ran "x" points faster than Goldsville. It does not answer whether the figure for both races is too high (to the extent that final times were influenced by the pace in the respective races).

" You thought ".....while a highly respected figuremaker, CMOrioles, says differently.

I apologize if this seems nasty, but sorry if I don't respect his thoughts more than yours. Appearances can be very deceiving in this game.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

I thought Eskenderya's Wood was slow early, fast late.

The slower you think the pace was - the more impressive you have to think Eskenderya's race was. You don't win like that over halfway respectable opposition when the pace is a true crawl.

The slower you think the pace was - the more you can entertain the idea that a likely much faster pace in the Derby will have a likely negative impact on the horse because he will have to work a lot harder early or get his face real dirty for a change in mid-pack under a wide-trip loving jockey.

They wash each other out for me.

Eskenderya is obviously the most likely winner - but I'm not a big fan. I think both Quality Road and I Want Revenge were probably better horses at this time. Esk is also from the barn of a trainer who's suspiciously on fire and not very easy to root for.

I'm a much bigger fan of Eightyfiveinafifty and Sidney's Candy as horses because they are much cooler.

If nothing changes with the way they're made - I think 15 years from now Sidney's Candy will still probably have the fastest Beyer of any 2-year-old in the history of Del Mar synthetic. It such a mind-bogglingly wide margin lead he has now.

And when you think 2yo's running huge going 5.5f .. you normally think of a speed and precious pedigree and a 2yo sprint trainer. Sidney's Candy is the total polar opposite of all that. Sire who ran a 123 Beyer going 10fs. Late developing 2nd dam who was a Graded Stakes winner at 12 furlongs and was nothing if not tough and loaded with stamina. A trainer who's numbers are mind-bogglingly better with route horses than sprinters year after year on all 3 different surfaces. That's a real unique horse to me.

It's pretty obvious that Eightyfiveinafifty is the coolest horse in this crop though. As a fan ... I will be pretty happy if Eskenderya gets beat.