Preakness Beyer

[philcski]

I'm convinced the Preakness Beyer came back too low. Using the "projection method", looking only at the route races for the day, normalized to 9F using the formula of 110%*the final 1/2 furlong for the 8.5F races and subtracting 1/3 of the final 1.5F in the Preakness (a CONSERVATIVE approach):

R1) ALW 8.5F Bond Fire 1:43.91 -> 1:51.07
R3) AOC 8.5F Smart Pace 1:43.55 -> 1:50.94
R9) the Barbaro 8.5F Chelokee 1:43.44 -> 1:50.70
R11) the Schaefer 9F Flashy Bull/Hesanoldsalt 1:47.86 -> 1:47.86
R12) the Preakness 9.5F Curlin/Street Sense 1:53.46 -> 1:47.2
R13) 16K Starter Hcp 8.5F Fire Hero 1:45.43 -> 1:52.70

Using Fire Hero as the key, a very consistent older type who clearly ran his race on Saturday, assigning him a 75 yields:

An 88 for Bond Fire (reasonable on the stretchout)
An 89 for Smart Pace (no opinion)
A 91 for Chelokee (which indicates he regressed off the Florida Derby by 4 points, which I can accept as he could have regressed 5 lengths and still won)
A 113 for Flashy Bull/Hesanoldsalt (a significant improvement over their previous 105 and 107's, but not totally crazy as these clearly are two colts on the upswing)
A 118.6 for Curlin/Street Sense

I don't know for sure if the 75 is the right number for Fire Hero, even though that's what I felt most comfortable with. Even if you say he ran a 71 it's still a 115 for the Preakness, and an 87 for Chelokee and 109 for the Schaefer.

[cmorioles]

Many years ago I began downgrading 1 3/16 races at Pimlico 5 or 6 points. It has served me well. For whatever reason, the races just come back too fast. This includes many Preaknesses and Pimlico Specials, as well as ordinary races.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Many years ago I began downgrading 1 3/16 races at Pimlico 5 or 6 points. It has served me well. For whatever reason, the races just come back too fast. This includes many Preaknesses and Pimlico Specials, as well as ordinary races.

Do you think this was built in to the figure assigned, accounting for the difference between my calculation and the "official" number?

[cmorioles]

Beyer did some odd things with the day. He split out the Diabolical race. I chose to split the day there. I can see why he did it, though I don't agree.

Splitting the variant there gives Chelokee around an 89 figure, which does seem low. The pace was pretty quick in that race though, so I tend to think the 89 is a good figure. Beyer instead gives Chelokee his 95, while downgrading the Diabolical race by itself.

He does then split the variant for the 11th and 12th, while reverting back to the old variant, or splitting again, for the last race.

[blackthroatedwind]

He most likely split the last two races because of the weather. It rained before the Preakness and then some more prior to the 13th.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Beyer did some odd things with the day. He split out the Diabolical race. I chose to split the day there. I can see why he did it, though I don't agree.

Splitting the variant there gives Chelokee around an 89 figure, which does seem low. The pace was pretty quick in that race though, so I tend to think the 89 is a good figure. Beyer instead gives Chelokee his 95, while downgrading the Diabolical race by itself.

He does then split the variant for the 11th and 12th, while reverting back to the old variant, or splitting again, for the last race.

I don't agree with splitting out the Diabolical race either. That was a tremendous performance by both him and Talent Search, whom I hold both in high regard.

Looking at the 6F races, I assigned Suave Jazz a 96 and worked off of there (I didn't buy the 108 at Del at ALL, and using his previous numbers this was the best fit) which gets a 96 for Street Magician (par for the level and himself), a 94 for the Kingpin (Munson Roy E., fair for an improving colt, maybe a touch higher than I expected- the race to watch in future performances), and a 115 for Diabolical.

Here's the thing I have a problem with. It seems like the Beyer associates are hesitant to release a big number these days, even if it's warranted. "It rained a little" isn't a reasonable argument as to splitting the variant for two specific races, then reverting back to the original variant for the finale.

Basically all I'm saying is there were some outstanding performances on Saturday that may or may not be duplicated in future starts, but that's not the objective of a speed figure. It's to assign a numerical value to that specific performance, it should be up to the handicapper to determine the legitimacy of the number.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by philcski

I'm convinced the Preakness Beyer came back too low. Using the "projection method", looking only at the route races for the day, normalized to 9F using the formula of 110%*the final 1/2 furlong for the 8.5F races and subtracting 1/3 of the final 1.5F in the Preakness (a CONSERVATIVE approach):

R1) ALW 8.5F Bond Fire 1:43.91 -> 1:51.07
R3) AOC 8.5F Smart Pace 1:43.55 -> 1:50.94
R9) the Barbaro 8.5F Chelokee 1:43.44 -> 1:50.70
R11) the Schaefer 9F Flashy Bull/Hesanoldsalt 1:47.86 -> 1:47.86
R12) the Preakness 9.5F Curlin/Street Sense 1:53.46 -> 1:47.2
R13) 16K Starter Hcp 8.5F Fire Hero 1:45.43 -> 1:52.70

Using Fire Hero as the key, a very consistent older type who clearly ran his race on Saturday, assigning him a 75 yields:

An 88 for Bond Fire (reasonable on the stretchout)
An 89 for Smart Pace (no opinion)
A 91 for Chelokee (which indicates he regressed off the Florida Derby by 4 points, which I can accept as he could have regressed 5 lengths and still won)
A 113 for Flashy Bull/Hesanoldsalt (a significant improvement over their previous 105 and 107's, but not totally crazy as these clearly are two colts on the upswing)
A 118.6 for Curlin/Street Sense

I don't know for sure if the 75 is the right number for Fire Hero, even though that's what I felt most comfortable with. Even if you say he ran a 71 it's still a 115 for the Preakness, and an 87 for Chelokee and 109 for the Schaefer.

113 for flashy bull and hesanoldsalt? 119 for Curlin, which gives CP West a 109 or good enough to win most derbys!

I agree with CJ, the preakness always comes back a bigger figure then it seems makes sense, this number if you ask me is pretty good.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He most likely split the last two races because of the weather. It rained before the Preakness and then some more prior to the 13th.

I don't have the number assigned for the 13th, but according to CJ the original variant was used. How did the 11th (Schaefer) fit into the equation? I am in agreement with Beyer that it was 4-5 points slower than the Preakness, just a matter of where the starting point was.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cardus

That would make sense, since I think the amount of rain that fell on us probably tightened the track just enough to help the Preakness winner and runner-up record a sparkling time.

I'm no agronomist or dirt expert, but I was standing at the rail when it started to rain and the track didn't look any different before and after the rain.

[slotdirt]

Originally Posted by philcski

I'm no agronomist or dirt expert, but I was standing at the rail when it started to rain and the track didn't look any different before and after the rain.

Not to mention the fact the track was watered between every race late in the day, for whatever that is worth.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He most likely split the last two races because of the weather. It rained before the Preakness and then some more prior to the 13th.

Thanks, I was wondering about the last race. It was the only one that didn't really make sense.

[cmorioles]

Even light rain can have a big effect on final times. Moisture content is probably the #1 factor in a track's speed.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Thanks, I was wondering about the last race. It was the only one that didn't really make sense.

I'm bitter about the last race. Hated the winner but couldn't figure out why the second finisher was double digit odds....much less 45-1. Take a look at that horse. Pretty frustrating.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Speaking of frustrating, a friend who was with me hit the "ALL" button on the last race in his Pick 3 or Pick 4. Anyone else but the 2-1 horse...

People who hit the all button and get the favorite home deserve what they get.

I liked a 45-1 shot, who dueled with the entire field, and held for second. Slightly more frustrating that someone who only had him because he used every horse.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I'm bitter about the last race. Hated the winner but couldn't figure out why the second finisher was double digit odds....much less 45-1. Take a look at that horse. Pretty frustrating.

Goes back to my theory that the race after the big race always has some bizzare odds. The mother of all for me was back in '02, I was at the Haskell and the following race was like an 8 horse field with TWO coupled entries that were favored at 8/5 & 5/2ish, but the exacta was paying $150 both ways. I did the right thing and bet as much as I could afford.

[SundayStar]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Beyer did some odd things with the day. He split out the Diabolical race. I chose to split the day there. I can see why he did it, though I don't agree.

Splitting the variant there gives Chelokee around an 89 figure, which does seem low. The pace was pretty quick in that race though, so I tend to think the 89 is a good figure. Beyer instead gives Chelokee his 95, while downgrading the Diabolical race by itself.

He does then split the variant for the 11th and 12th, while reverting back to the old variant, or splitting again, for the last race.

chelokee getting a lower than expected makes sense to me. the jockey decided to closely track stonehouse because letting him have a loose lead was the only way chelokee was gonna lose that race. the strategy worked out, giving him the win but i think it cost him(chelokee) some of his late kick. he came home pretty slow.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by SundayStar

chelokee getting a lower than expected makes sense to me. the jockey decided to closely track stonehouse because letting him have a loose lead was the only way chelokee was gonna lose that race. the strategy worked out, giving him the win but i think it cost him(chelokee) some of his late kick. he came home pretty slow.

that tells me he is not very good

[hockey2315]

The Preakness number makes sense to me because it's right around what Street Sense ran in the Derby. . . I can't really see either horse jumping up 7 or so points in 2 weeks. . . I do, however, think the Diabolical/Talent Search numbers were way too low. . . They both ran HUGE and I thought that number would be somewhere in the mid-110s

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I don't trust any number in any race on anyones figures for Saturday's Pimlico card.

The track seemed to be changing speeds every race.

Curlin didn't get his trip---no way he ran a 119....and no way C. P. West ran a 110 for finishing 4th.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I don't trust any number in any race on anyones figures for Saturday's Pimlico card.
The track seemed to be changing speeds every race.

Curlin didn't get his trip---no way he ran a 119....and no way C. P. West ran a 110 for finishing 4th.

Fair point, and if you make your own figures you know that sometimes there's days where the numbers are just no good and must be discounted/discarded.

CP West, without a doubt, ran a career best. Could he jump up 15-20 points? I'm not so sure, which is what makes me doubt the 118 I came up with yesterday. I have no doubt that either of the top two are capable of a huge number, it's the also-rans that throw the fly in the ointment.