Weekend Beyers: Blind Luck 104; Sidney's 100; AmLion 98

[Kasept]

AQU-Wood Memorial S (G1): Eskendereya 109 (T. Pletcher/J. Velazquez)
AQU-Carter H (G1): Warrior's Reward 103 (I. Wilkes/J. Leparoux)
AQU-Bay Shore S (G3): Eightyfiveinafifty 100 (G. Contessa/R. Dominguez)
AQU-Excelsior S (G3): Goldsville 96 (M. Hushion/R. Dominguez)

SA-Santa Anita Derby (G1): Sidney's Candy 100 (J. Sadler/J. Talamo)
SA-Potrero Grande H (G2): Ventana 92 (B. Baffert/G. Gomez)
SA-Arcadia H (G2): Compari 95 (M. Jones/G. Gomez)
SA-Providencia S (G2): City to City 86 (J. Hollendorfer/J. Rosario)
SA-Las Flores H (G3): Mona de Momma (J. Sadler/J. Rosario)

HAW-Illinois Derby (G3): American Lion 98 (E. Harty/D. Flores)
HAW-Cryptoclearance: Shadowbdancing 92 (T. Gore/E. Razo)

OP-Oaklawn H (G2): Duke of Mischief 107 (D. Fawkes/E. Coa)
OP-Fantasy S (G2): Blind Luck 104 (J. Hollendorfer/R. Bejarano)

KEE-Central Bank Ashland S (G1): Evening Jewel 88 (J. Cassidy/K. Desormeaux)
KEE-Transylvania S (G3): Nordic Truce 90 (C. Clement/J. Leparoux)

GP-Skip Away S (G3): Arson Squad 101 (R. Dutrow/P. Lopez)
GP-Harmony Lodge H: Cassidys Pride 96 (M. Estevez/J. Lezcano)

WO-Debut S: Grazettes Landing 92 (M. Casse/P. Husbands)

TAM-OBS Sophomore S: Thank U Philippe 90 (M. Wolfson/E. Trujillo)
TAM-L and D Farm Turf Distaff S: Closeout 91 (T. Proctor/J. Castanon)
TAM-Hilton Garden Inn Sprint S: Tommy's Memory 90 (A. Ryan/D. Amiss)
TAM Stonehedge Farm S. Soph Fillies S: Dances With Ashley 81 (M. Wolfson/E. Trujillo)
TAM-Kinsman Turf Classic S: Picou 98 (C. Brown/E. Trujillo)
TAM-Sophomore Turf S: Thunder Brew 86 (A. Pecoraro/V. Lebron)

LRL-Primonetta S: All Giving 87 (F. Stites/H. Karamanos)

[tector]

So the Ashland graded out as horrible as it looked visually.

Blind Luck might be able to pull a Rachael on April 30.

[the_fat_man]

I'm as big a fan of Blink Luck as there is. And there's no denying that she's better than Evening Jewel (even though she was all out to beat that one last they met). But 16 Beyer points better? Now, there's a system that makes sense.

Question: what did these two run in terms of Beyer # last time they met?

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I'm as big a fan of Blink Luck as there is. And there's no denying that she's better than Evening Jewel (even though she was all out to beat that one last they met). But 16 Beyer points better? Now, there's a system that makes sense.

Question: what did these two run in terms of Beyer # last time they met?

88's.

The Fantasy number appears to have been very easy to make.

Using Tidal Pool's 101 last out as the stick, Blind Luck's 2.5+ advantage is +4 points so a 104-105 makes perfect sense.

6.5 lengths from Tidal Pool back to No Such Word (92 in the Honeybee last) = 11 points, so the margins back up the last race and the current.

Is the difference in Blind Luck Friday at OP versus Blind Luck at DMR, SA and HOL all that tough to figure? There was a slight surface switch involved..

[the_fat_man]

So, she got that ridiculous setup last out and comes back to run what I'm assuming to be a significant new top, running the same type of race?

[tector]

Umm...Oaklawn has dirt. IWR, etc.

[the_fat_man]

Oh. I get it. Horses are FASTER on dirt.

[tector]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Oh. I get it. Horses are FASTER on dirt.

Every time I think you can't possibly be as stupid as you seem, you prove me wrong.

I'll never doubt you again.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by tector

Every time I think you can't possibly be as stupid as you seem, you prove me wrong.

I'll never doubt you again.

What are you RETARDED?

Or have you simply accepted the BEYER BS as gospel? In your case, the former would be the better option.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Oh. I get it. Horses are FASTER on dirt.

Certain individual horses are faster on dirt.. yes. Just as certain individual horses are faster on turf... or even possibly on the third surface. Their individual physical properties can and will make them 'faster' on different surfaces.

Your obstinacy and myopia on this particular topic is hard to understand.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Kasept

88's.

The Fantasy number appears to have been very easy to make.

Using Tidal Pool's 101 last out as the stick, Blind Luck's 2.5+ advantage is +4 points so a 104-105 makes perfect sense.

6.5 lengths from Tidal Pool back to No Such Word (92 in the Honeybee last) = 11 points, so the margins back up the last race and the current.

Is the difference in Blind Luck Friday at OP versus Blind Luck at DMR, SA and HOL all that tough to figure? There was a slight surface switch involved..

Then, the 'reasonable' conclusion is that Blind Luck is 15 or so points FASTER on dirt than she is on POLY. Even though, once again, she ran the same type of race. Maybe it has something to do with BEYERS on POLY being USELESS. Think that might come into play at all?

[tector]

OK, all horses are equally adept on all surfaces. Whatever you say.

Sorry: "Adept" = "good" (sort of). Didn't mean to use a word obviously beyond your grasp.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Certain individual horses are faster on dirt.. yes. Just as certain individual horses are faster on turf... or even possibly on the third surface. Their individual physical properties can and will make them 'faster' on different surfaces.

Your obstinacy and myopia on this particular topic is hard to understand.

Steve

This horse ALWAYS runs the same type of race. She's just GOOD. And, the more of these SLOW poly horses that run higher figures on the dirt, the harder it will be to HIDE the inadequacy of Beyers on synthetics. I mean, even CJ is on record that the Beyers in CALI absolutely suck.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Certain individual horses are faster on dirt.. yes. Just as certain individual horses are faster on turf... or even possibly on the third surface. Their individual physical properties can and will make them 'faster' on different surfaces.

Your obstinacy and myopia on this particular topic is hard to understand.

At the end of the day, this is an underused and fantastic word.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Steve

This horse ALWAY runs the same type of race. She's just GOOD. And, the more of these SLOW poly horses that run higher figures on the dirt, the harder it will be to HIDE the inadequacy of Beyers on synthetics.

OK... Understand that point. The inadequacies argument is a different discussion. I can guarantee that Andy Beyer, Mark Hopkins and Randy Moss and everyone involved in Beyer Associates is evaluating and re-examining their formulations constantly to try and get the equation as accurate as possible for the non-organic surfaces. As Beyer himself said when he came on ATR to announce and explain the fig adjustment last January, there is nothing more important to him than providing the most valuable and accurate figures they can to us, the wagering public.

In this case with Blind Luck, you just really see the quantum difference in dirt racing and synthetic racing and how the synthetic oval mutes raw speed. Blind Luck has done fine out west because her style particularly suits the surface and how races on synthetic have come to be run.. Zenyatta is another that fits the surface/style scenario. That isn't to say that Blind Luck still couldn't be bested by dawdling pace as she was in the SA Oaks and almost was in the Las Virgenes.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Kasept

In this case with Blind Luck, you just really see the quantum difference in dirt racing and synthetic racing and how the synthetic oval mutes raw speed. Blind Luck has done fine out west because her style particularly suits the surface and how races on synthetic have come to be run.. Zenyatta is another that fits the surface/style scenario. That isn't to say that Blind Luck still couldn't be bested by dawdling pace as she was in the SA Oaks and almost was in the Las Virgenes.

She wins the Oaks if she's not blocked the length of the stretch -- which would've been a ridiculously huge accomplishment. Combined with the Las Virgenes, where Evening Jewel was 'supposed' to win, one gets a sense of how good this filly is. Then, she comes off the surface that supposedly 'favors' her running style and runs what appears to be an identical type of race (haven't done the charts for this yet.).

All I want is some consistency. I want the Beyers to be able to show that this is a good horse, whether on synthetics or dirt --- as she now has proven. Clearly, there are horses that are better on one surface over another but is this really the case here? Did this filly suddenly get good by running a respectable number or was she always good? (note: I don't know what she's run in the past and have made the assumption that her peak was around 90).

[10 pnt move up]

If the numbers are not comparable to each other, something I completely agree with, then why were they being throw around last year in Eclipse discussions? If they are that important then they should be on the same scale.

I highly doubt that Ventana, what looks like the west coasts best sprinter, is 15 points behind the best sprinters out east.

[blackthroatedwind]

Oh yeah, speed figures are often used in Eclipse decisions.

You used to be much smarter. Have you been eating peyote?

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Oh yeah, speed figures are often used in Eclipse decisions.

You used to be much smarter. Have you been eating peyote?

Are you high, even Beyer used it as an argument last year if memory serves.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

Are you high, even Beyer used it as an argument last year if memory serves.

Obviously Beyer looks at them....but what percentage of voters do...and even if they do how much would it possibly affect the outcomes?