Early Weekend Beyers

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The reason Pioneer of the Nile is the most absurd possible Derby horse is that he can't run on the dirt. He is a mediocre turf horse, running on a turf course, that his competition can't particularly handle. My God, Bittel Road finished less than two lengths behind him. Take a step back and look at what is going on here.

And don't give me that " how do we know he can't run on the dirt " crap. We know.....because they know.

The bottom line is that this surface has particularly destroyed the TC prep season. One, it has elevated mediocre turf horses and fooled some people into thinking they are talented dirt horses, two, it has hampered dirt horses from actually getting to showcase their true talents, and three it has made the process of analyzing these preps virtually impossible. But, one thing it hasn't done, is made Pioneer of the Nile a true TC contender.

I just used him as a name horse but you finally echoed my point, if its so impossible why do people continue to do it, they certainly are guessing when making the figures?

"it has made the process of analyzing these preps virtually impossible."

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The bottom line is that this surface has particularly destroyed the TC prep season. One, it has elevated mediocre turf horses and fooled some people into thinking they are talented dirt horses, two, it has hampered dirt horses from actually getting to showcase their true talents, and three it has made the process of analyzing these preps virtually impossible.

If you look at last year's Kentucky Derby, there were seven horses who won a race over synthetics and were largely considered synthetic horses. They finished 6th, 9th, 13th, 16th, 17th, 19th and 20th. Fairly interesting.

The lone exception would be Gayego, as he ran well on the dirt in the Arkansas Derby. On the flip side, Recapturetheglory lost his first two career races at Arlington (Polytrack) and then rattled off four good efforts in a row before running extremely well to finish fifth in the Derby itself.

It's a different surface, and should be treated as such.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I think one of the differentiators is when these horses move to dirt and are forced to run more "dirt-like" than the turf style of sit and run. The "How was the figure earned?" approach...

this I agree with, the way the races are run has such a dramatic effect on final time that comparing final times without that element is a complete waste, yet I hear handicapper after handicapper comparing figures without even putting the efforts into context, and worse yet comparing abilities to dirt horses.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

If you look at last year's Kentucky Derby, there were seven horses who won a race over synthetics and were largely considered synthetic horses. They finished 6th, 9th, 13th, 16th, 17th, 19th and 20th. Fairly interesting.

The lone exception would be Gayego, as he ran well on the dirt in the Arkansas Derby. On the flip side, Recapturetheglory lost his first two career races at Arlington (Polytrack) and then rattled off four good efforts in a row before running extremely well to finish fifth in the Derby itself.

It's a different surface, and should be treated as such.

Last year I don't think any of the synthetic horses were very good, to point out one of those horses did win the Travers (and suddenly got faster doing it).

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

this I agree with, the way the races are run has such a dramatic effect on final time that comparing final times without that element is a complete waste, yet I hear handicapper after handicapper comparing figures without even putting the efforts into context, and worse yet comparing abilities to dirt horses.

I guess in this case you are using the word " handicapper " loosely.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I guess in this case you are using the word " handicapper " loosely.

You want popular main stream examples, "loosely" being certain professionals that get paid to analyze the races?

[blackthroatedwind]

I don't need examples.

These races in California are turf races. They have no measurable affect on the TC races. That is not to say a West Coast horse can't do well in later dirt races, but their performances right now are in no way reliable predictors, and without that possibility we learn nothing.

[King Glorious]

I think it's pretty clear that turf horses can perform well on the synthetics. The BC should have ended that debate. But I feel like the mistake some people are making is assuming automatically that horses that perform on sythetics can't or won't be able to continue to do well on dirt. Last year alone, we saw:

-Zenyatta, Indian Blessing, Intangaroo, Cocoa Beach, Midnight Lute, Black Seventeen, Colonel John, Tiago

All of them were horses that showed they could win big races on both surfaces. Albertus Maximus just went to Florida and won the Donn. My point is that to say that you'll keep a reserved opinion on any horse that has yet to perform on dirt is completely logical. To say unequivically (sp) that one can't do it before they've even tried it is not logical.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I don't need examples.

These races in California are turf races. They have no measurable affect on the TC races. That is not to say a West Coast horse can't do well in later dirt races, but their performances right now are in no way reliable predictors, and without that possibility we learn nothing.

we are agreeing, it actually should be a benifet for a player like you who can analyze a horse not only based on a speed figure.

For the record, the most impressive win of the meet was Matto Mondo and that horse got a 102, he can win the Met, ran on dirt in Chile so that should not be an issue.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

The reason Pioneer of the Nile is the most absurd possible Derby horse is that he can't run on the dirt. He is a mediocre turf horse, running on a turf course, that his competition can't particularly handle. My God, Bittel Road finished less than two lengths behind him. Take a step back and look at what is going on here.

And don't give me that " how do we know he can't run on the dirt " crap. We know.....because they know.

The bottom line is that this surface has particularly destroyed the TC prep season. One, it has elevated mediocre turf horses and fooled some people into thinking they are talented dirt horses, two, it has hampered dirt horses from actually getting to showcase their true talents, and three it has made the process of analyzing these preps virtually impossible. But, one thing it hasn't done, is made Pioneer of the Nile a true TC contender.

very true!
if anything, california has removed themselves from triple crown contention. if you have a legit contender, you have no alternative except to ship, as a dirt horse can't get graded earnings on a surface he doesn't like.

the people making mistakes with beyers are those thinking a horse getting a 94 on awt is going to produce a 94 on dirt.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

I just used him as a name horse but you finally echoed my point, if its so impossible why do people continue to do it, they certainly are guessing when making the figures?

"it has made the process of analyzing these preps virtually impossible."

it doesn't make it impossible. it is impossible to project a dirt beyer based on an awt beyer, but it doesn't make it impossible when POTN runs only on AWT.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

But I feel like the mistake some people are making is assuming automatically that horses that perform on sythetics can't or won't be able to continue to do well on dirt. Last year alone, we saw:

-Zenyatta, Indian Blessing, Intangaroo, Cocoa Beach, Midnight Lute, Black Seventeen, Colonel John, Tiago

The only assumption is that those horses went synth-to-dirt. The problem is Indian Blessing, Cocoa Beach, Midnight Lute, Black Seventeen and Tiago all started their careers on dirt.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the people making mistakes with beyers are those thinking a horse getting a 94 on awt is going to produce a 94 on dirt.

There is no real correlation. If it's a dirt horse that happens to handle the synthetic surface, the figure will be higher on the dirt, and if it's a turf horse that won't handle dirt, then the figure has no predictive power for future dirt races. The horses that won on synthetics that later won dirt races were hampered by the synthetics, in all likelihood, whether they won on them or not. As an extreme, look at Zenyatta. Her dirt race last year was far and away her most impressive win. It's a shame we can't see her really strut her stuff on the dirt. It might be extremely exciting....as she may well be being muted running only on synthetics.

[Danzig]

i don't think tho, that just by saying some horses can run on multiple surfaces means that all of them can. just like all turf horses don't like poly-wait a while for instance.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The only assumption is that those horses went synth-to-dirt. The problem is Indian Blessing, Cocoa Beach, Midnight Lute, Black Seventeen and Tiago all started their careers on dirt.

All of those horses, save Cocoa Beach, are good dirt horses that were ( are ) hampered by running on synthetic surfaces. Cocoa Beach was singularly unimpressive in winning the Beldame, and flourished on synthetics and turf in California, and don't even get me started on how crazy it is that Tiago continues to race out there. He won the Santa Anita Derby and Oaklawn Handicaps on dirt....yet flounders race after race on synthetics...and they keep running him out there. Mind boggling.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

There is no real correlation. If it's a dirt horse that happens to handle the synthetic surface, the figure will be higher on the dirt, and if it's a turf horse that won't handle dirt, then the figure has no predictive power for future dirt races. The horses that won on synthetics that later won dirt races were hampered by the synthetics, in all likelihood, whether they won on them or not. As an extreme, look at Zenyatta. Her dirt race last year was far and away her most impressive win. It's a shame we can't see her really strut her stuff on the dirt. It might be extremely exciting....as she may well be being muted running only on synthetics.

exactly. it's my contention that those saying beyers are misleading on awt is incorrect. the only time it's misleading would be when trying to take an awt # and figure whether a horse will run back to that # on dirt. but i think many are just saying no awt beyer is useful-i just think it depends on where and when you're using it. obviously potn likes awt-so why anyone would toss his beyer # on that surface is beyond me.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

All of those horses, save Cocoa Beach, are good dirt horses that were ( are ) hampered by running on synthetic surfaces. Cocoa Beach was singularly unimpressive in winning the Beldame, and flourished on synthetics and turf in California, and don't even get me started on how crazy it is that Tiago continues to race out there. He won the Santa Anita Derby and Oaklawn Handicaps on dirt....yet flounders race after race on synthetics...and they keep running him out there. Mind boggling.

makes you wonder how much more often tiago could/would win if he wasn't hampered by being owned by californians..

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The only assumption is that those horses went synth-to-dirt. The problem is Indian Blessing, Cocoa Beach, Midnight Lute, Black Seventeen and Tiago all started their careers on dirt.

They still performed on both surfaces. That they started on dirt and still were able to perform on a surface that favors grass horses only reinforces my belief that good horses can make the transition. Not all of them, of course, but it can be done and I think it's silly to automatically write off a horse as a grass runner when they haven't even been given a chance on dirt. Again, that's not the same as being wary of their chances or saying that you want them to prove it to you before you are a believer or not wanting to take them at short odds on dirt.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

...and don't even get me started on how crazy it is that Tiago continues to race out there. He won the Santa Anita Derby and Oaklawn Handicaps on dirt....yet flounders race after race on synthetics...and they keep running him out there. Mind boggling.

ntamm1215 and I have been saying this for a while. Who would he have to beat to win the Stephen Foster, Suburban, Whitney etc? It's not a big list. This is the year to bring him East!