BSF 'Doldrums': Figure Dives

[Dunbar]

I'd like to hear what Beyer has to say about this. How can they have been wrong by 12 pts, which is something like 7 lengths!? I'm a bigger fan of the BSF's than most people here, but this is ridiculous. Revising a fig AFTER a subsequent race (and perhaps BECAUSE of the poor performance in the subsequent race) reminds me of the way dosage is back-fitted.

Did they actually say that they had re-evaluated the fig because of the Gotham? Either way, it's ludicrous.

--Dunbar

[randallscott35]

Yet another reason why Thoros kick the snot out of BSF. Do thoros get adjusted---very rarely and when they are its a small amount....Someone was asleep at the wheel on this number or the powers that be would like a higher price on SD going forward.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Yet another reason why Thoros kick the snot out of BSF. Do thoros get adjusted---very rarely and when they are its a small amount....Someone was asleep at the wheel on this number or the powers that be would like a higher price on SD going forward.

Thoros get adjusted at least as often, if not more, than Beyers. The adjustments are smaller mostly because the scale is a lot tighter. However, this adjustment is gigantic.

I remember the 2yo filly race that the Beyer was adjusted even more from Belmont this summer, but that one made a lot more sense.

[The Bid]

If you are going to put that much weight into those figures you should learn how to make them yourself.

Its a joke that any trainer would use those numbers to dictate how they train, or where they point a horse. If these guys dont know what they have in the barn without a black and white number they dont need to be training.

[Hickory Hill Hoff]

Originally Posted by The Bid

If you are going to put that much weight into those figures you should learn how to make them yourself.

Its a joke that any trainer would use those numbers to dictate how they train, or where they point a horse. If these guys dont know what they have in the barn without a black and white number they dont need to be training.

Figures mean little...unless your talking about the "opposite" sex
But then again...with true love, looks shouldn't matter
With horses, they still have to run a winning race...no matter what their "figure" was last time.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by The Bid

If you are going to put that much weight into those figures you should learn how to make them yourself.

Its a joke that any trainer would use those numbers to dictate how they train, or where they point a horse. If these guys dont know what they have in the barn without a black and white number they dont need to be training.

wasnt that air lord or something like that, like 90 to 72.

[Linny]

I don't disagree Cannon Shell. As a horseman you know more than most that it's a fine line between undertraining and overtraining. I think that far too many horses are considered Derby material and are ruined trying for an unreachable grail. I agree that the two race method isn't the best but look at how many of the top Derby colts are doing it this year. These are not "off the beaten path" colts and in the case of Ravel, not horses with much 2yo foundation either.
From time to time I see horses in "Derby preps" who really don't look like strong Derby horses. As a handicapper, I assume that a race like the Florida Derby or the Lane's End (or whatever) IS their Derby. It's the big money race they want with this horse. While others are pointing for Churchill, they are pointin got that one race.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Linny

From time to time I see horses in "Derby preps" who really don't look like strong Derby horses. As a handicapper, I assume that a race like the Florida Derby or the Lane's End (or whatever) IS their Derby. It's the big money race they want with this horse. While others are pointing for Churchill, they are pointin got that one race.

Very true

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The problem with the plan is that only one guy is going to win and most of the rest of the horses are going to turn out to be finished by the first Sunday in May. If they worried more about winning the races at hand instead of worrying about "peaking" on Derby day, they would be much better off. It is impossible to keep a horse from peaking unless you undertrain them, which leads to injuries which is why the attrition rate is so high among three year olds after the Derby. The trend toward fewer preps is a bad one.

Good to read that!

Originally Posted by Linny

I don't disagree Cannon Shell. As a horseman you know more than most that it's a fine line between undertraining and overtraining. I think that far too many horses are considered Derby material and are ruined trying for an unreachable grail. I agree that the two race method isn't the best but look at how many of the top Derby colts are doing it this year. These are not "off the beaten path" colts and in the case of Ravel, not horses with much 2yo foundation either.

Just because several top colts are being handled that way this year doesn't mean it's a successful route to the Derby. To some degree, Barbaro legitimized the 2-prep route, even though if I remember correctly, he had a technical "3rd prep" just after the New Year. It's suddenly fashionable to go lightly into the Derby. It remains to be seen whether other horses can duplicate Barbaro's Derby result with that kind of light 3-yr-old racing. IMO, it will take another vastly superior horse to win going that route.

--Dunbar

[Thoroughbred Fan]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Thoros get adjusted at least as often, if not more, than Beyers. The adjustments are smaller mostly because the scale is a lot tighter. However, this adjustment is gigantic.

I remember the 2yo filly race that the Beyer was adjusted even more from Belmont this summer, but that one made a lot more sense.

The adjustment in question was to the Magical Ride race. I think it was originally a 102 and is now int he 80's.