A question on Easy Goer...

[Bravado2112]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Sounds like I might be able to convince Beyer to do an article about the kind of numbers good horses used to run and compare them to these recent flashes in the pan in order to provide some perspective. If nothing else I will find out some numbers from him.

If you know him personally, I think some kind of publication listing the figs of some of the best pre-1992 horses would be wonderful (especially 70s and 80s when the info was far less available). I was always surprised he never did that before b/c he seems like the type who's into that type of stuff too. That'd be great if you could find out some additional figs to add to what I posted.

[ArlJim78]

Bravado this has been fascinating, reviewing the data you have brought forward. But at the same time sorta depressing when you stop and realize that we don't have these types of horses/performances anymore.

[Hickory Hill Hoff]

Here's two more - AP Indy and Xtra Heat

[blackthroatedwind]

For the most part Xtra Heat was slow.

[Bravado2112]

AP INDY
BC Classic - 114
JC Gold Cup - 107
Molson - 93
Belmont - 111
Peter Pan - 108
SA Derby 95
San Rafael - 100

Hol Futurity (not published but seem to recall it being in the 95-98 range)

XTRA HEAT
Fritchie - 99
What a Summer - 105
Garland - 102

BC Sprint - 101
Phoenix - 107
Endine - 99
Str8 Deal - 100
Princess Rooney - 111
Vagrancy - 106
Genuine Risk - 108
Fritchie - 101

Interb - 102
DeFrancis - 106
BC Sprint - 118
SweetnSassy - 120
Endine - 117
Str8 Deal - 113
Test - 100
Prioress - 113
Arctic Cloud - 87
Nassau - 95
Beaumont - 89
Cicada - 90
nothing else above 89

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Bravado2112

Long-time lurker. Figured I'd sign up since I actually have this information saved and it's pretty cool to look at for historical perspective. Beyer Figs were available via Bloodstock Research in those days. I always wished they would make some of the older figures available in some kind of publication - I think a lot of racing fans would love to see this stuff.

EASY GOER (check out his #'s at 2)
Suburban - 119
Met Mile - 114
Gold Stage - 111

BC Classic - 124
JC Gold Cup - 120
Woodward - 115
Travers - 121
Whitney - 119
Belmont - 122
Preakness - 113
Derby - 97
Wood - 110 (This figure was very controversial - the raw # was much higher)
Gotham - 118
Swale - 110

BC Juv - 100
Champagne - 116
Cowdin - 110
Allowance - 113
MSW - 102
MSW - 86

While u are checking out his numbers as a 2yo, go pull up King Glorious' numbers. He was the fastest 2yo of 1988 and should have been the Eclipse winner, not Easy Goer. I don't have the Beyer's but I believe his final race times were:

4.5f-51 1/5
5.5f-1:01 and change
6f-1:08 4/5
7f-1:21 1/5
8f-1:35 3/5 sloppy track

[Slewbopper]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Bravado this has been fascinating, reviewing the data you have brought forward. But at the same time sorta depressing when you stop and realize that we don't have these types of horses/performances anymore.

I don't have Bernie's BSFs in front of me, but he ran 5 straight races between 113 and 117. With slight improvement from 3 to 4, it could be expected that he would run 116 to 120 consistently, but we will never know.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

how about risen star/pine bluff./ caveat/creme fresch

[philcski]

If you read Beyer's books, he hand wrote a lot of figures in the PP's he includes for study- for example i know General Assembly was a 134 in the Travers.

I have a sense that some of the figures are MUCH higher than what he would award now- which means he either (a) revised down his formula somewhat or ( b ) interjects more human decisionmaking into the final variant selections than before.

For example, Rockhill Native earned a 119 for his Young America win at 2. No 2YO has come even close to that in the last 15 years. My first love as a fan of the game, Devil's Bag, had several in this range as well.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

For the most part Xtra Heat was slow.

I respectfully disagree, from a filly perspective she was one of the fastest I've ever seen, especially in her late 3YO year. Granted it wasn't a classic revival but her (first) BC Sprint was pretty heady.

Originally Posted by philcski

If you read Beyer's books, he hand wrote a lot of figures in the PP's he includes for study- for example i know General Assembly was a 134 in the Travers.

I have a sense that some of the figures are MUCH higher than what he would award now- which means he either (a) revised down his formula somewhat or ( b ) interjects more human decisionmaking into the final variant selections than before.

For example, Rockhill Native earned a 119 for his Young America win at 2. No 2YO has come even close to that in the last 15 years. My first love as a fan of the game, Devil's Bag, had several in this range as well.

I completely agree with what you are saying and have said repeatedly that when they went public and Beyer allowed these guys to change numbers based on "what made sense" to them, that much of their validity went out the window.
Beyer's initial two books are the greatest racing books ever written, PERIOD!!
Everything you need to know about the basics is in those books, everything.
Biases, trips, how to watch races, trainer intent, etc. Its all there. Noone entering this game should read anything but those two books to start out with.
The problem I have is that they should have just kept publishing the raw numbers. Let us decide "what makes sense". The other problem is that if you read the guys who make many of these numbers, they are always talking about a figure "being in line" with what makes sense. Just post the raw number ok? You take away the ability to spot potential bounces when you keep "evening out" the numbers to "make sense".
Too much of the published figs are now a couple of guys opinions. I respect Mark Hopkins and Dick Jerardi both. Jerardi writes a column for the DRF quite often and its one of the best reads in the DRF, always entertaining. But I don't particularly want or care about what their opinions are on how fast a horse ran, just give me the raw number as determined by Beyer's formula. You know, the formula that made him successful and a pioneer in the first place?
I always have said that Summit of Speed Day at Calder in 2003 was the final straw for me, although it worked out great for me!!!!
On that day Valid Video and Shake You Down ran 6f, about one hour apart, on the same track and both ran identical times.
Shockingly, they gave them far different figs. Shake got a much higher fig.
I'm sorry, but that made no sense to me whatsoever.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Slewbopper

I don't have Bernie's BSFs in front of me, but he ran 5 straight races between 113 and 117. With slight improvement from 3 to 4, it could be expected that he would run 116 to 120 consistently, but we will never know.

He could have. Often the numbers take another jump as a four year old.
No one is happy that we will not be able to find out.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by oracle80

I completely agree with what you are saying and have said repeatedly that when they went public and Beyer allowed these guys to change numbers based on "what made sense" to them, that much of their validity went out the window.
Beyer's initial two books are the greatest racing books ever written, PERIOD!!
Everything you need to know about the basics is in those books, everything.
Biases, trips, how to watch races, trainer intent, etc. Its all there. Noone entering this game should read anything but those two books to start out with.
The problem I have is that they should have just kept publishing the raw numbers. Let us decide "what makes sense". The other problem is that if you read the guys who make many of these numbers, they are always talking about a figure "being in line" with what makes sense. Just post the raw number ok? You take away the ability to spot potential bounces when you keep "evening out" the numbers to "make sense".
Too much of the published figs are now a couple of guys opinions. I respect Mark Hopkins and Dick Jerardi both. Jerardi writes a column for the DRF quite often and its one of the best reads in the DRF, always entertaining. But I don't particularly want or care about what their opinions are on how fast a horse ran, just give me the raw number as determined by Beyer's formula. You know, the formula that made him successful and a pioneer in the first place?
I always have said that Summit of Speed Day at Calder in 2003 was the final straw for me, although it worked out great for me!!!!
On that day Valid Video and Shake You Down ran 6f, about one hour apart, on the same track and both ran identical times. Shockingly, they gave them far different figs. Shake got a much higher fig.
I'm sorry, but that made no sense to me whatsoever.

Actually it's interesting you bring up that example, that was the sequence of events that drove me to create my own figures. It was almost like they had to "justify" the figures they have been given to Shake You Down; when in their next race Shake failed as the 1/2 favorite and Valid Video won the Kings Bishop at like 8-1 (who could forget Ghostzapper's incredible rally in that race...) I began to question the validity of the Summit of Speed figures.
Sadly, SYD is a shadow of his once great self- finished last of 7 for a 20K tag last Friday at Laurel.

Beyer and Crist are definitely my two favorite writers as well.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by philcski

Sadly, SYD is a shadow of his once great self- finished last of 7 for a 20K tag last Friday at Laurel.

That's depressing.

--Dunbar

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Sounds like I might be able to convince Beyer to do an article about the kind of numbers good horses used to run and compare them to these recent flashes in the pan in order to provide some perspective. If nothing else I will find out some numbers from him.

That's an excellent idea. I'm sure it would be a popular read.

I'm also interested in whether Beyer thinks the numbers have suffered deflation over the years, or whether today's numbers really can be compared to those of 20-30 years ago.

--Dunbar

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I was on the third floor at Belmont for that Belmont Stakes. Those were very exciting times.

I'm sure every racing fan of our age can say where he/she was on that day. I listened to that Belmont on the radio while driving back from LA to San Diego. I got so excited by the call that I had to pull over to the side of I-5 or risk losing control of my car.

Could not WAIT for the Travers. Watched that one on a TV at Harrah's in Reno. I could have personally maimed Pincay for robbing fans of an honest showdown.

--Dunbar

[Slewbopper]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Could not WAIT for the Travers. Watched that one on a TV at Harrah's in Reno. I could have personally maimed Pincay for robbing fans of an honest showdown.

--Dunbar

That was my first day ever at Saratoga. The infield was open for the record crowd of 50,000. It was prior to the expansion of the grounds behind the main building. They still saddled the horses under trees with no fences where there are now picnic tables and more betting windows. 6 oz burgers were $1.50 and were very good, unlike the garbage they sell now for $6. And Molson drafts were a dollar at the Rafters. Now that was a disco even this old rock and rolling hippie enjoyed

Pincay did nothing wrong on Affirmed. He was set up. Angel, on Shake Shake Shake, was the devil helping out his buddy Georgie V. on Alydar. Very sleazy race.

Trivia question: Who finished third in that four horse race?

[blackthroatedwind]

Nasty and Bold.

[Slewbopper]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Nasty and Bold.

That didn't take long. He was a nice horse.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Slewbopper

Pincay did nothing wrong on Affirmed. He was set up. Angel, on Shake Shake Shake, was the devil helping out his buddy Georgie V. on Alydar. Very sleazy race.

That wasn't the way I saw it. It looked to me simply that Pincay moved over into Alydar's path as Alydar was flying up the inside, and Alydar clipped heels and almost went down.

How did Shake Shake Shake figure into it? (have to laugh at us arguing a race we saw almost 30 years ago!)

--Dunbar