W/E Beyer Review - Page 2

hockey2315 · #21 06-23-2008, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Figures for this kind of race are near impossible to 'make', so in this case, I think he's right in that they were apprehensive about putting the number too high.

They didn't come up with a 110 and say "uh oh! that's too high! let's drop it 17 points. . . "

ateamstupid · #22 06-23-2008, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

They didn't come up with a 110 and say "uh oh! that's too high! let's drop it 17 points. . . "

As if dropping Beyers is unheard of. They do it all the time.. Not 17 points, but Beyers seem to have been getting raised and dropped because they don't 'look right' a lot recently, IMO.

blackthroatedwind · #23 06-23-2008, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

As if dropping Beyers is unheard of. They do it all the time.. Not 17 points, but Beyers seem to have been getting raised and dropped because they don't 'look right' a lot recently, IMO.

Pretty ill-informed post.

ateamstupid · #24 06-23-2008, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Pretty ill-informed post.

I'm just going by what I see, and I've seen a bunch of figures raised and lowered recently. I'm not going to pretend I know their exact reasoning, but with Curlin's figure for example, I can't see any reason to raise it other than that it didn't look right. If you see another reason, I'd seriously like to hear it.

blackthroatedwind · #25 06-23-2008, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

I'm just going by what I see, and I've seen a bunch of figures raised and lowered recently. I'm not going to pretend I know their exact reasoning, but with Curlin's figure for example, I can't see any reason to raise it other than that it didn't look right. If you see another reason, I'd seriously like to hear it.

Let me try to follow your logic....

You don't know why someone does something, and admit to not understanding it, so therefore you feel free to say it is done for no good reason.

Makes sense....if you don't understand something then nobody does.

ateamstupid · #26 06-23-2008, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Let me try to follow your logic....

You don't know why someone does something, and admit to not understanding it, so therefore you feel free to say it is done for no good reason.

Makes sense....if you don't understand something then nobody does.

See that little 'IMO' thing? That signifies that I can't see why the hell some figures have been raised or lowered, other than that they don't feel right, but there may indeed be some solid reasoning. It's a hunch, a feeling, a take, etc.. Not a statement of fact.

blackthroatedwind · #27 06-23-2008, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

See that little 'IMO' thing? That signifies that I can't see why the hell some figures have been raised or lowered, other than that they don't feel right, but there may indeed be some solid reasoning. It's a hunch, a feeling, a take, etc.. Not a statement of fact.

Having a hunch about something and attributing that " hunch " to someone else is patently absurd.

Here's the bottom line....whether you agree with Beyer numbers, or any numbers, saying they make random decisions about numbers because you don't understand the situation is an incorrect assumption. That should be implicit to you.

ateamstupid · #28 06-23-2008, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Having a hunch about something and attributing that " hunch " to someone else is patently absurd.

Here's the bottom line....whether you agree with Beyer numbers, or any numbers, saying they make random decisions about numbers because you don't understand the situation is an incorrect assumption. That should be implicit to you.

OK. The Beyer guys are innocent until proven guilty, I get it. I still feel the same way about some recent figures.

SentToStud · #29 06-23-2008, 05:39 PM

My question is:

Are the stakes BSFs fast tracked to be published in a day or two? Or do they become available just like any other race run the same day? I'm guessing the latter but don't really know.

jcs11204 · #30 06-23-2008, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

They didn't come up with a 110 and say "uh oh! that's too high! let's drop it 17 points. . . "

i did not say that, maybe 110 is to high, but the horse freaked, and 93 is hard to justify

hockey2315 · #31 06-23-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcs11204

i did not say that, maybe 110 is to high, but the horse freaked, and 93 is hard to justify

From an objective numbers stand-point it isn't when you consider the turf conditions, etc. It's not really a big deal - so the horse got a 93 beyer - anyone can see that he ran a very impressive race. Do you need the fig to confirm what you saw?

jcs11204 · #32 06-23-2008, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

From an objective numbers stand-point it isn't when you consider the turf conditions, etc. It's not really a big deal - so the horse got a 93 beyer - anyone can see that he ran a very impressive race. Do you need the fig to confirm what you saw?

i saw a horse who loved the conditions, if it was firm i dont think sailors cap was there at the end

hockey2315 · #33 06-23-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcs11204

i saw a horse who loved the conditions, if it was firm i dont think sailors cap was there at the end

Fair enough - you're probably wrong, but you could probably formulate that same opinion if the beyer was a 110 or if it was an 80.

jcs11204 · #34 06-23-2008, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

Fair enough - you're probably wrong, but you could probably formulate that same opinion if the beyer was a 110 or if it was an 80.

i think he loves the give in the turf, i question that he is the same horse on a firm turf....
maybe they should send him to the arc

the_fat_man · #35 06-23-2008, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Bottom line....the fig is meaningless. Sailor's Cap is a good horse, probably the leading US 3YO turf horse right now, but quantifying that race considering the conditions is fruitless.

I don't know why this is hard for people to understand.

Here's the point; why it's not fruitless. No matter what your method of evaluation, this race needs to come up huge for SC. He ran an incredible race. To not be able to capture it in terms of figures, for whatever reason, is a huge flaw in the system (if the case is such).

the_fat_man · #36 06-23-2008, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

From an objective numbers stand-point it isn't when you consider the turf conditions, etc. It's not really a big deal - so the horse got a 93 beyer - anyone can see that he ran a very impressive race. Do you need the fig to confirm what you saw?

I don't look at figures, so, personally, I don't need it. BUT, given that 99% of this forum does figure driven handicapping, I would think they'd need an accurate/representative figure.

Danzig · #37 06-23-2008, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcs11204

i totally agree, the figures are a mess.... i think the winner freaked and they are afraid to make the figure to high, like a 105-110, that would put the rest of the field in a better range

he didn't freak, he handled a very soft course that the others didn't. there's a difference between a horse putting a field away, and a horse winning because he was the only one who was comfortable. he shouldn't get a higher figure just because he was the only one to run well enough to win.

hockey2315 · #38 06-23-2008, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

he didn't freak, he handled a very soft course that the others didn't. there's a difference between a horse putting a field away, and a horse winning because he was the only one who was comfortable. he shouldn't get a higher figure just because he was the only one to run well enough to win.

I'm not so sure about that. . .

ateamstupid · #39 06-23-2008, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

he didn't freak, he handled a very soft course that the others didn't. there's a difference between a horse putting a field away, and a horse winning because he was the only one who was comfortable. he shouldn't get a higher figure just because he was the only one to run well enough to win.

What, exactly, was so different about Pays to Dream's run in the Dixie and Sailor's Cap's run on Saturday? Obviously the competition wasn't as good on Saturday, but we're supposed to believe that Pays to Dream freaked, yet Sailor's Cap ran his usual race.. I don't see why that's automatically the conclusion.

Danzig · #40 06-23-2008, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I'm not so sure about that. . .

i would call freaking something out of the ordinary. i thought everyone recognized that soft turf would help sailors cap immensely? he benefitted from his course. now, if he wins like gangbusters over a course not quite to his liking, that would be freakish. a fish in water is not a freak, a fish out of water but winning is.