Zenyatta v. Rail Trip??

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Under no circumstances would I consider a horse sitting behind an overmatched foe in very slow time then flying home late impressive. This is especially true when said horse has never shown the ability to do this from farther back than second in his entire career.

Again, I'm not knocking the horse, it was a workout, nothing more. I would think he will have trouble being ready for the HGC off this effort alone.

These were essentially the same type of horses RT was running against with the exception of the GC and the Pacific. If the time was 'very slow' then why did Tres Borrachos not hold on better, the way he did in the Gold Cup --- was that pace 'very slow', as well? Or was that pace 'fast'?

Moreover, if the pace was 'very slow', then why did all the horses that were behind RT early ALSO get wiped out in the lane (with the exception of Slew's Tiznow)? Hadn't Dakota Phone shown that he could stay relatively close to RT in a number of their meetings? What was the problem on Saturday? I mean, he was BEHIND RT and backed up in the lane relative to him.

You've obviously developed a good model here and it works for you. But some of the things you write just don't make sense to me. It stems from the assumption that numeric pace is a larger set than setups -- moves with a race and the type of race it is-- and that your figures determine how you 'see' races. The underlying assumption is that such a system will reveal things that are not immediately obvious. While this is a good thing, what's obvious is that the way horses run, more often than not, is a good indication of who exactly the 'pace' favored and who exactly ran well and poorly.

It seems to me that 'slow' and 'fast' paces need to 'result' in the same 'type' of race, a distinct type for fast and a distinct type for slow, on a consistent basis. From the little I've been able to follow, this isn't the case.

[cmorioles]

Well, the horses aren't machines and they aren't always in the same form. Tres B is clearly not the same horse, and the rest stink. There is a reason Rail Trip was 6/5 ML coming off an eight month layoff.

As far as numeric pace, it works pretty well. Setups can work well too. Together they tell the whole story.

[the_fat_man]

All I'm saying is that if we consider what the other horses did in that race, RT ran pretty well. We can argue that the others were off form, or whatever, but in order to be able to do so, we need to be on top of these horses a lot more than you and I are, as we play multiple tracks. It can't be the case that everything else in the race was off form.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

All I'm saying is that if we consider what the other horses did in that race, RT ran pretty well. We can argue that the others were off form, or whatever, but in order to be able to do so, we need to be on top of these horses a lot more than you and I are, as we play multiple tracks. It can't be the case that everything else in the race was off form.

He did run well.....but did you really look at the pps of the others? Save Dakota Phone, who never really was much on dirt, the others were decidedly mediocre at best. Now, considering how poorly Dakota Phone ran, and given his general synth consistently, it is fair to say he is, in fact off form.

That's not to say it wasn't a decent race by the winner, and certainly it was a great start off an eight plus month layoff, but his competition was non-existent.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cardus

This post is missing a few "I's".

It's time to heed the advice of others....and where better to start than SCUDS.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It's time to heed the advice of others....and where better to start than SCUDS.

This is a subtle use of a defense mechanism that reduces cognitive dissonance.
By diminishing the stature of the messenger – the narcissist minimises the impact of the disagreement or criticism on himself. He did it more strongly last night with Fat Man:

""Yes, I was wrong about Rail Trip. Happy? I doubt it....as you are as miserable as they come."

Now, after he did that, he quickly changes the subject:

"Now, that we have gotten past that, try to actually make one post that is related to the actual discussion. Surely you can do this once."

This is a double shift. When forced to admit something he doesn't like, he makes a definite effort to shift attention away from himself.

[Antitrust32]

SCUDS are u a shrink or something? cause THAT would be scary!!

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

This is a subtle use of a defense mechanism known as cognitive dissonance.
By diminishing the stature of the messenger – the narcissist minimises the impact of the disagreement or criticism on himself. He did it more strongly last night with Fat Man:

""Yes, I was wrong about Rail Trip. Happy? I doubt it....as you are as miserable as they come."

Now, after he did that, he quickly changes the subject:

"Now, that we have gotten past that, try to actually make one post that is related to the actual discussion. Surely you can do this once."

This is a double shift. When forced to admit something he doesn't like, he makes a definite effort to shift attention away from himself.

Bump necessary to re-focus attention that the enablers strongly tried to displace.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

This is a subtle use of a defense mechanism that reduces cognitive dissonance.
By diminishing the stature of the messenger – the narcissist minimises the impact of the disagreement or criticism on himself. He did it more strongly last night with Fat Man:

""Yes, I was wrong about Rail Trip. Happy? I doubt it....as you are as miserable as they come."

Now, after he did that, he quickly changes the subject:

"Now, that we have gotten past that, try to actually make one post that is related to the actual discussion. Surely you can do this once."

This is a double shift. When forced to admit something he doesn't like, he makes a definite effort to shift attention away from himself.

Bump due to specific efforts made to displace attention away from this (by attacking the messenger.) If you'll stop the efforts to distract attention away from the subject, then no bumps.