Week/Weekend Stakes Beyers: Art Collector/Medina Spirit ~ !07

[southerndutch]

Thanks, Steve. I was interested because I thought Jack Christopher’s Beyer came back a little high, since it was the slowest Champagne(when run at a mile) since 1989. The mile time for the fifth on Saturday was virtually the same as JC’s final time 3 races later, so the number makes sense.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by southerndutch

Thanks, Steve. I was interested because I thought Jack Christopher’s Beyer came back a little high, since it was the slowest Champagne(when run at a mile) since 1989. The mile time for the fifth on Saturday was virtually the same as JC’s final time 3 races later, so the number makes sense.

HUH?

[southerndutch]

I thought Jack Christopher’s Beyer of 93 was a little high for a race that was the slowest Champagne since 1989. So I wanted to compare it to the dirt routes that were run earlier on the card. The 4th race a 40 n2l claimer was not comparable, so I went to the 5th race, an 80 optional claimer @ 8 1/2 furlongs that the mile split was 1:37:2, one tick slower than JC’s mile. When that race came back with a 91 Beyer, I could see how JC was awarded a 93. However, I still feel the time of the Champagne was very mediocre, particularly the final 1/4 in 26:1. We shall see.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by southerndutch

I thought Jack Christopher’s Beyer of 93 was a little high for a race that was the slowest Champagne since 1989. So I wanted to compare it to the dirt routes that were run earlier on the card. The 4th race a 40 n2l claimer was not comparable, so I went to the 5th race, an 80 optional claimer @ 8 1/2 furlongs that the mile split was 1:37:2, one tick slower than JC’s mile. When that race came back with a 91 Beyer, I could see how JC was awarded a 93. However, I still feel the time of the Champagne was very mediocre, particularly the final 1/4 in 26:1. We shall see.

You understand final fractions, especially in dirt races, are related to how quickly the early fractions were run....right?

[southerndutch]

Yes, I am aware of that, but I don’t think an opening 1/4 of 23:4 should impact the final quarter that negatively. Like I said, we shall see.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by southerndutch

Yes, I am aware of that, but I don’t think an opening 1/4 of 23:4 should impact the final quarter that negatively. Like I said, we shall see.

It's good not to tailor the truth to fit our personal agendas. Try comparing the first two fractions to those of the Woodward, as an aside a figure that for some reason you are not questioning despite it relying on the Champagne number being correct, before determining whether or not they were fast or slow.

[southerndutch]

I’m not attempting “ to tailor the truth.” I did not use theWoodward because it was 14 points higher and thus not comparable. I used the 5th race because it was comparable and it pointed out that the number was valid, which is all I was attempting to do, as I originally thought the number was too high but was proven wrong. P.S. I still don’t think that was a strong finish. We’ll find out down the road.