In Figures We Trust

the_fat_man · #1 08-31-2010, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

ing claimed FROM Dub and Chip Dutrow.

Nothing the Cactus did is worth anything considering his behavior throughout the race, but the big fig he earned doesn't seem that out of whack considering the surface and distance changes - especially since he showed an inability to rate on the turf.

I don't have the Beyer numbers for these horses (or the others in their races) so, I'm just going with what's posted here. But some of your reasoning doesn't make sense to me: a horse that's unable to rate routing on turf is able to run big numbers of dirt? What was FC's Beyer number for that race? It wasn't as high as the BRIS # was it?

ateamstupid · #2 08-31-2010, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I don't have the Beyer numbers for these horses (or the others in their races) so, I'm just going with what's posted here. But some of your reasoning doesn't make sense to me: a horse that's unable to rate routing on turf is able to run big numbers of dirt? What was FC's Beyer number for that race? It wasn't as high as the BRIS # was it?

101.

hockey2315 · #3 08-31-2010, 01:55 PM

His turf performances gave the impression of a horse better suited to dirt sprinting, so for him to move up when turned back isn't really much of a surprise is it?

the_fat_man · #4 08-31-2010, 02:02 PM

With the exception of his 3 turf routes, he's always been a sprinter. He has one other dirt race, the GP sprint. Per BRIS, he improved that effort by 27 points in the race in question. I realize, Canani didn't have him then and Dutrow got him after that. That's why, I wondered whether this was a JUICE or distance thing.

hockey2315 · #5 08-31-2010, 02:09 PM

Can't really go off one figure, but it being a juice thing isn't out of the realm of possibility.

And I know figs aren't your thing, but it's pointless to ever quote a Bris fig. They're not real figures.

the_fat_man · #6 08-31-2010, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Can't really go off one figure, but it being a juice thing isn't out of the realm of possibility.

And I know figs aren't your thing, but it's pointless to ever quote a Bris fig. They're not real figures.

I'm only using the BRIS #'s as a point of comparison between prior figures and those for the races in question. Obviously, I have no idea what the Beyers were for these horses. Which puts me at a bit of a disadvantage here.
Of course, Serling spoke about these figures in some detail yesterday. He certainly didn't trust them, as he didn't pick either horse in his top 4. I'm assuming he knows more about this than I do, and it got me to wondering WHY these figures were as high as they were. And, whether they were justified.

One the one hand, BRIS, which are automated, are not real figures for you; on the other, you're outspoken about the ad hoc tweaking of numbers by the Beyer crew. Which one is it?

hockey2315 · #7 08-31-2010, 02:19 PM

I'm for tweakings that are logical and justified. It's an application issue for me, not philosophical. The way they tweaked the Blind Luck fig originally just seemed off to me.

blackthroatedwind · #8 08-31-2010, 02:50 PM

I NEVER said I didn't trust the speed figures and in fact pointed out that I knew the raw number for the Fastus Cactus race was even higher than the 101. What I said was they were unlikely to be predictive....especially for yesterday's 7F race. It's handicapping not a problem with the figs.