12/12: AQU - $206,0000 Carryover

[blackthroatedwind]

But he's barely a winning trainer. He wins at 14%. However, there are times when his horses just run out of their skulls, and these performances are neither repeated or exhibited elsewhere in their pps.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

But he's barely a winning trainer. He wins at 14%. However, there are times when his horses just run out of their skulls, and these performances are neither repeated or exhibited elsewhere in their pps.

It's the dichotomy between the Aqueduct meets and the rest of the year that really gets my goat. It isn't just 14%, it's like 32% on the inner and 8% at Saratoga/Belmont, which is kind of ridiculous. Granted, he's one of the few that keeps his better stock around in the winter, but still.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by philcski

It's the dichotomy between the Aqueduct meets and the rest of the year that really gets my goat. It isn't just 14%, it's like 32% on the inner and 8% at Saratoga/Belmont, which is kind of ridiculous. Granted, he's one of the few that keeps his better stock around in the winter, but still.

Better stock of what?

[miraja2]

Isn't there also a possible good aspect of something like this in terms of betting?
Don't Wishful Tomcat (and his other one-hit wonders) become solid bet-againsts in their next starts?

[blackthroatedwind]

To be honest, if this horse doesn't win it's next start it's even more disgraceful.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

To be honest, if this horse doesn't win it's next start it's even more disgraceful.

The horse is 5-2-1-1 over an off surface...I wouldn't jump to this conclusion unless the track conditions are similar.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

The horse is 5-2-1-1 over an off surface...I wouldn't jump to this conclusion unless the track conditions are similar.

We were referring to today's wunderkind.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

The horse is 5-2-1-1 over an off surface...I wouldn't jump to this conclusion unless the track conditions are similar.

Here are the career Beyer figures for the mighty Missile Motor, starting with his debut, and I have highlighted each wet track number....

67, 83, 73, 88, 93, 87, 75, 71 ( turf ), 90, 89, 91, 90, 89......and then the Big Daddy 111.

Based on this there is absolutely no evidence that he improves on a wet track.....in fact two of his three worst dirt numbers were earned on wet tracks.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Better stock of what?

his 10k claimers that run like 50k'ers, not just his 10k claimers that run like 10k claimers. Not to mention his ridiculous Winning Move purchases, which seem to have a runner in EVERY race these days.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

So let me get this straight, because David Jacobson also has suspicion improvements then it is OK, or reasonable, that Gary Contessa does? Nobody here suggested Contessa was the only trainer in America that has these unreasonable performances, I wish it was true, but since he was the magician du jour we were focusing on him.

Not at all. In fact I believe I made it a point to not suggest this...What I am suggesting is that in my opinion this was more of an 11-14 point move up, and considering this horses affinity for an off surface, and the visually impressive win over a field that didn't particularly care for it - the figure seemed ridiculously high.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You say Missile Motor got an inflated figure. Based on what? Did you analyze the other horses' performances in the race or were you just trying to suggest that the improvement by Mr. Contessa couldn't possibly have been as outrageous as it was? A 104 would have seemed reasonable for this horse?

I don't have anything more to base my opinion on other than the replay and tomorrow's form. And the fact is that IANS was awarded a bsf 9 points lower going a 1/5 of a second faster at the same distance. I would love to find out what sort of bsf's MM was awarded in his previous 3 board hits over an off track. And furthermore my post was simply to point out an ironic observation that in the same race your point would have been more clearly served by a more flagrant example. Unless the point was to throw axes at Contessa, then it was spot on.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

I don't have anything more to base my opinion on other than the replay and tomorrow's form. And the fact is that IANS was awarded a bsf 9 points lower going a 1/5 of a second faster at the same distance. I would love to find out what sort of bsf's MM was awarded in his previous 3 board hits over an off track. And furthermore my post was simply to point out an ironic observation that in the same race your point would have been more clearly served by a more flagrant example. Unless the point was to throw axes at Contessa, then it was spot on.

First of all, you really don't understand speed figures, and to be surprised that similar times earned on different racing days received different figures only magnifies this. Your baseless claims about the 111 have been thoroughly debunked.

However, the latter part of your post is really outlandish. Once again, we were talking about Gary Contessa because of what took place in today's 9th race. " Throw axes at Contessa?????" You have to be kidding! I stated facts about his horses. If you don't like that these facts make him look bad then that's not my problem and I suggest you ask yourself why you feel a need to defend him if you don't think the situation is at all curious.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

First of all, you really don't understand speed figures, and to be surprised that similar times earned on different racing days received different figures only magnifies this. Your baseless claims about the 111 have been thoroughly debunked.

Finally, common ground

I understand what they purport to represent, based on some subjective formula. I understand that a number of factors go into the formula each day based of various conditions and that a because 1:09.2 earned a 102 on one day may not necessarily mean that it's impossible for a 1:09.3 to earn a 111 the next. No surprise here. Got it.
I use them loosely as a minor confirmation of an opinion and perhaps a plausable snapshot of current form. Nothing more. I certainly would put no more credence in them than any other form of technical analysis available, and don't ever base my wagering dollar solely on them.

So as far as my "claim" being baseless and thoroughly debunked - Once again I never "claimed" anything, only offered an opinion - an opinion, as far as I'm concerned, that is as subjective as the science they are based on.

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

However, the latter part of your post is really outlandish. Once again, we were talking about Gary Contessa because of what took place in today's 9th race. " Throw axes at Contessa?????" You have to be kidding! I stated facts about his horses. If you don't like that these facts make him look bad then that's not my problem and I suggest you ask yourself why you feel a need to defend him if you don't think the situation is at all curious.

I'm not defending Gary Contessa, have no need to defend him, and honestly couldn't care less. What I'm getting from you is that you don't care for him as a trainer because you feel his inconsistancies, particularly first off the claim, makes your life more difficult as a player - thus suggesting improprities...I just won't jump off that cliff with you, Andy..Lastly, I didn't see the last race today and only responed to your allegations about Missile Motor tomorrow. I think the number is high, you don't. C'est la vie.

[pmacdaddy]

Nice work Titan!

[Rudeboyelvis]

I hardly believe MM's effort last out was worthy of anything remotely close to a 111 especially considering were talking about, at the end of the day, the horse getting 1:09.3 over a sealed surface. Granted many other factors go in, yada yada, but you have to assume this number is hugely inflated based on how he embarassed a field that obviously wanted nothing to do with the off going. I don't posess the resourses for such data, but would love to see how others fared in similar conditions...I'm guessing closer to 101-104.

Funny that in this exact same race, Mr. Jacobson's Lazarus style reinvigoration of the 3 I Ain't No Saint, taken off Linda Rice's goes completely unmentioned.

If one were interested in raising an objective "hairy eyeball" to anything in this race, my god man, it would have to be this. I however am more than willing to give Mr. Jacobson the benefit of the doubt here.

Since were talking BSF's here, I Ain't No Saint 3 starts prior to being claimed at Saratoga were 66/83/64. He ran a soundly beaten 3rd and turned in a 76 for the effort the day he was claimed.

Jacobsen claims the horse, gives it 7 weeks off and brings him back to record a 98 bsf 22 points better than the claim effort and miles better than anything in his then recent form. Cut to the next start in the Maria's Mon when he lost by a nostril in a blanket finish at the wire where he puts up a 102 bsf 26 points better than the claim effort. For what it's worth,
and again, many factors including the stake, the surface, etc. but the race was run over the same 6f track where MM was graced with a 111, the winning time of The Maria's Mon was 1:09:2 a fifth faster than MM.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Jacobson

I have no idea how this guy stays in business. Everything he claims ends up dropping in class, he has Samyn as his go-to rider, and wins at like 8%.....I wish I could get paid to have production like that.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

I hardly believe MM's effort last out was worthy of anything remotely close to a 111 especially considering were talking about, at the end of the day, the horse getting 1:09.3 over a sealed surface. Granted many other factors go in, yada yada, but you have to assume this number is hugely inflated based on how he embarassed a field that obviously wanted nothing to do with the off going. I don't posess the resourses for such data, but would love to see how others fared in similar conditions...I'm guessing closer to 101-104.

Funny that in this exact same race, Mr. Jacobson's Lazzrus style reinvigoration of the 3 I Ain't No Saint, taken off Linda Rice's goes completely unmentioned.

If one were interested in raising an objective "hairy eyeball" to anything in this race, my god man, it would have to be this. I however am more than willing to give Mr. Jacobson the benefit of the doubt here.

Since were talking BSF's here, I Ain't No Saint 3 starts prior to being claimed at Saratoga were 66/83/64. He ran a soundly beaten 3rd and turned in a 76 for the effort the day he was claimed.

Jacobsen claims the horse, gives it 7 weeks off and brings him back to record a 98 bsf 22 points better than the claim effort and miles better than anything in his then recent form. Cut to the next start in the Maria's Mon when he lost by a nostril in a blanket finish at the wire where he puts up a 102 bsf 26 points better than the claim effort. For what it's worth,
and again, many factors including the stake, the surface, etc. but the race was run over the same 6f track where MM was graced with a 111, the winning time of The Maria's Mon was 1:09:2 a fifth faster than MM.

So let me get this straight, because David Jacobson also has suspicion improvements then it is OK, or reasonable, that Gary Contessa does? Nobody here suggested Contessa was the only trainer in America that has these unreasonable performances, I wish it was true, but since he was the magician du jour we were focusing on him.

You say Missile Motor got an inflated figure. Based on what? Did you analyze the other horses' performances in the race or were you just trying to suggest that the improvement by Mr. Contessa couldn't possibly have been as outrageous as it was? A 104 would have seemed reasonable for this horse?

But, to be fair, let's take a look at the other participants in Missile Motor's Grade 1 type performance.....Fleet Valid finished second and earned an 88. His previous six figures were 81, 101, 75, 102, 80 and 108. Introspect, who finished third, got an 87. His previous figs were 75 ( off a layoff ), 84, 88, 83, 92, 88 and 87. He's a Pioneer ( 4th ) got an 81. His prior efforts earned 85, 93, 91, 68, 101 and 93. That Magic Moment was 5th and earned an 80. His prior numbers were 71, 85, 70, 67 and 81. Daddy Joe got a 66 for his 6th place finish. His prior numbers were 98, 78, 82 and 79. The Student, who was 7th, got a 64. His prior efforts earned 86, 90, 91, 87 and 93. And Sinkwich finished 8th and last and earned a 61. His prior numbers were 53, 88, 67, 83, 90, 88 and 88.

It appears that only That Magic Moment's number was even possibly out of line....but then again he too was running first time for the great Gary Contessa. Like it or not, the 111 stands up extraordinarily well under scrutiny.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

But, to be fair, let's take a look at the other participants in Missile Motor's Grade 1 type performance.....Fleet Valid finished second and earned an 88. His previous six figures were 81, 101, 75, 102, 80 and 108. Introspect, who finished third, got an 87. His previous figs were 75 ( off a layoff ), 84, 88, 83, 92, 88 and 87. He's a Pioneer ( 4th ) got an 81. His prior efforts earned 85, 93, 91, 68, 101 and 93. That Magic Moment was 5th and earned an 80. His prior numbers were 71, 85, 70, 67 and 81. Daddy Joe got a 66 for his 6th place finish. His prior numbers were 98, 78, 82 and 79. The Student, who was 7th, got a 64. His prior efforts earned 86, 90, 91, 87 and 93. And Sinkwich finished 8th and last and earned a 61. His prior numbers were 53, 88, 67, 83, 90, 88 and 88.

I just took a look at the race and have a few comments/questions for you.

I see where Fleet Valid's number ranges from 75 to 108. And he's run over 100 in half of his previous six figures. Is this type of range typical? (Doesn't appear so, given the ranges of the other horses in the race.) If I were doing numbers, I would probably think that looking at this horse's performance would be the best way to approach the winner's number, as FV is the only one that's run close to the winner's number in the past. But, I don't do numbers and I believe that the winner had an advantage that probably goes a long way towards explaining his number.

I didn't take a look at the running style of the other horses in the race but it appears as if Fleet Valid likes the front. He got slammed coming out of the gate in this race, however, and, then, clearly didn't like the dirt being kicked in his face on the backstretch. So much so, that the jock had to swing him outside horses. Then, he was in tight early stretch, and had to wait a bit for room.

Now, the interesting question is not whether FV is able to run with the winner in the lane (his previous peak was 108, after all --for what it's worth) but, rather, how differently the race is run because FV does not get a good start. Assuming there's a speed duel between the two, the winner probably doesn't run 111.

[blackthroatedwind]

I understand the discussion, and am too tired to have it now, but all I was doing in this situation ( and I know you know this and are saying something totally different...and certainly worthy of discussion ) was explaining why the 111 given the winner ( however " earned " ) was a viable and easily defendable final number in this particular case.

It's also worth adding that Missile Motor was loose on the lead in his prior start, on a track kind to speed, and earned an 89.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I just took a look at the race and have a few comments/questions for you.

I see where Fleet Valid's number ranges from 75 to 108. And he's run over 100 in half of his previous six figures. Is this type of range typical? (Doesn't appear so, given the ranges of the other horses in the race.) If I were doing numbers, I would probably think that looking at this horse's performance would be the best way to approach the winner's number, as FV is the only one that's run close to the winner's number in the past. But, I don't do numbers and I believe that the winner had an advantage that probably goes a long way towards explaining his number.

I didn't take a look at the running style of the other horses in the race but it appears as if Fleet Valid likes the front. He got slammed coming out of the gate in this race, however, and, then, clearly didn't like the dirt being kicked in his face on the backstretch. So much so, that the jock had to swing him outside horses. Then, he was in tight early stretch, and had to wait a bit for room.

Now, the interesting question is not whether FV is able to run with the winner in the lane (his previous peak was 108, after all --for what it's worth) but, rather, how differently the race is run because FV does not get a good start. Assuming there's a speed duel between the two, the winner probably doesn't run 111.

To get back to this, I had the exact same thoughts after the race, right after I threw my TV out the window when Introspect couldn't hold second due to the obvious stress of his dream suckup trip.

While its hard to imagine Missile Motor wouldn't have won, the race would have to have been run differently, and had the two hooked up in a duel the results could well have been different. However, Missile Motor has rated effectively in the past, and considering his effort it's hard to believe he wouldn't have won simply stalking Fleet Valid. But, considering most outlying wet track efforts are earned loose on the lead, I can't argue that at least the final figure might well have been different.

Taken as an isolated incident, Missile Motor's outlandish effort probably would fall into the outlyer ( on a wet track ) category. However, considering the number of similar performances from this barn, that never seem to be repeated, I have trouble viewing it as such. Take second time starter Lovely Isle's effort last week ( by the way, contrary to reports, Frankel does not have her ). Sure, a second time starter could improve dramatically, and in isolation I suppose this 101 Beyer figure might be another outlyer as well, but how many outlyers can one barn have before it becomes an inexplicable phenomenon?

[Riot]

Taken as an isolated incident, Missile Motor's outlandish effort probably would fall into the outlyer ( on a wet track ) category. However, considering the number of similar performances from this barn, that never seem to be repeated, I have trouble viewing it as such.

Let us know what the positive comes back for http://rulings.racing.state.ny.us/frm_Rulings.aspx