W/E BSF's: Blue Grass 92; Arky 103 (!?)

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Just because the track was glib means the Wood wasn't slow? I understand that you have to hack a few seconds off of the day's times, but even on a "normal" track, I don't think they would've gone faster than 1:50 and change..

Pace, Joe.. The pace. Just because the two top horses that were tons better than the rest came home 'slow', doesn't mean the race was slow...

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Pace, Joe.. The pace. Just because the two top horses that were tons better than the rest came home 'slow', doesn't mean the race was slow...

Do you really think that the pace on Derby Day will be any better?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Do you really think that the pace on Derby Day will be any better?

I actually think it will be more reasonable.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I actually think it will be more reasonable.

^^^ Ditto..

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I actually think it will be more reasonable.

Is ET Baird still riding that Illinois horse and is Bob Black Jack still wearing blinkers? Either of those are going to be bad news for the pace horses, both will be disaster.

[rgustafson]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I actually think it will be more reasonable.

Craig, I know you are busy with a lot of other stuff going on, but wondering about the conjecture about the pace of the Derby. If it is not too much trouble, I would be interested in seeing your pace figures for the last few
(10) Derbies to see how they compare with this years prep races and whether they support or refute Steve and your thoughts about the Wood.

Bob

[cmorioles]

I don't have time to look them up right now, but if you go to my site and check the Breeder's Cup Archives, I imagine at least one Derby runner is in there most years.

[cmorioles]

OK, I looked. Note for the pace call at 10f, I use 6f, not the mile most people use.

2007-127, 106
2006-125, 111
2005-128, 100
2004-114, 105
2003-121, 107
2002-112, 113

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

OK, I looked. Note for the pace call at 10f, I use 6f, not the mile most people use.

2007-127, 106
2006-125, 111
2005-128, 100
2004-114, 105
2003-121, 107
2002-112, 113

I have a question for you and any other pace/final figure makers out there.

Do you have a lower confidence level when making figures for Derby preps due to there being a limited sample of age/sex/distance races against which to compare the preps' fractions and final times?

I've made and used my own pace/final figures and have found it far more difficult to have great confidence in figures I've made for infrequently run classifications (like a Derby prep) vs, say, a 6F or 8F race for older.

When figure professionals say that the "track changed" for races like the Florida Derby and Arkansas Derby, is it mostly a case of the surface actually changing or more a reflection of the difficulty of assigning figures for these races?

I guess that's two questions. Thanks.

[rgustafson]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

OK, I looked. Note for the pace call at 10f, I use 6f, not the mile most people use.

2007-127, 106
2006-125, 111
2005-128, 100
2004-114, 105
2003-121, 107
2002-112, 113

Thanks Craig. It looks like 4 out of 6 similar to what War Pass set in the Wood. I guess that final starting field and post position draw wold have some effect on how fast it will be this year.