Weekend Stakes Beyers

Kasept · #1 02-01-2010, 05:43 AM

SA-Santa Monica H (G1): Gabby's Golden Gal 95 (B. Baffert/M. Garcia)
SA-Sunshine Millions Classic: Bold Chieftain 91 (W. Morey/R. Baze)
SA-Sunshine Millions Filly and Mare Turf: Tight Precision 94 (T. Proctor/J. Rosario)
SA-Sunshine Millions Filly and Mare Sprint: Quisisana 89 (M. Puype/R. Bejarano)

GP-Forward Gal S (G2): Bickersons 97 (K. Breen/J. Bravo)
GP-Sunshine Millions Turf: Jet Propulsion 98 (M. Wolfson/J. Leparoux)
GP-Sunshine Millions Distaff: Sweet Repent 104 (J. Braddy/M. Cruz)
GP-Sunshine Millions Sprint: This Ones for Phil 108 (R. Dutrow/J. Velazquez)

HOU-John B. Connally Turf H (G3): Acting Zippy 93 (W. Bennett/R. Albarado)
HOU-Jersey Lilly S: Love to Tell 91 (J. Caldwell/S. Sellers)

AQU-Coyote Lakes S: Tiger's Rock 93 (T. Pletcher/D. Cohen)
AQU-Correction S: Hold That Prospect 92 (G. Gullo/J. Chavez)

TAM-Manatee S: Lady Alexander 91 (B. Alexander/R. Feliciano)

FG-Marie G. Krantz Memorial H: Bubbler 94 (W. Calhoun/E. Martin)

TP-WEBN S: Kera's Kitten 79 (M. Maker/T. Pompell)

cakes44 · #2 02-01-2010, 08:37 AM

That 91 in a $500,000 race for older horses is a real beaut.

The Indomitable DrugS · #3 02-01-2010, 08:46 AM

It could be worse ... the same race was worth $1 million not long ago.

slotdirt · #4 02-01-2010, 09:30 AM

Am I the only one that would find a mythical Oklahoma Millions as interesting as the Sunshine Millions?

cmorioles · #5 02-01-2010, 10:25 AM

The 108 for This One's for Phil was boosted about 5 by the Beyer boys for some reason.

cmorioles · #6 02-01-2010, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Am I the only one that would find a mythical Oklahoma Millions as interesting as the Sunshine Millions?

Hey, watch it!

freddymo · #7 02-01-2010, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles

The 108 for This One's for Phil was boosted about 5 by the Beyer boys for some reason.

Is boasting a fig from 103 to 108 the same as boasting it for 60 to 65.. when you boast from 103 to 108 its about a 5% inflation but 9% in the other example.. Is there significants to this or is that a poor analysis?

cmorioles · #8 02-01-2010, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddymo

Is boasting a fig from 103 to 108 the same as boasting it for 60 to 65.. when you boast from 103 to 108 its about a 5% inflation but 9% in the other example.. Is there significants to this or is that a poor analysis?

It is a poor analysis, because a 65 is not 60% as fast as a 108, it is much faster.

freddymo · #9 02-01-2010, 10:38 AM

So making a fig 25 instead of 20 is the same as 110 to 115? I guess it seems a more dramtic inflation from 20 to 25?

cmorioles · #10 02-01-2010, 10:43 AM

It is pretty much the same. It might be a tiny bit different, but nowhere what you were suggesting. The difference at 6f between a 20 and a 100 Beyer is 5 to 6 seconds. The race takes high 60s, low 70s seconds to complete. Wrap your head around that for awhile before asking more questions. You'll get it.

freddymo · #11 02-01-2010, 10:54 AM

Interesting..

Horse A was given a 25 should have been a 20 and his next race is one were the winning par in 30

Horse B was given 95 but it should have been a 90 and his next race is one were the winning par is 100

Both theorically need to improve 10pts to win but the jump from 20-30 is equal to 90 -100.. I would have thought the 20 to 30 horses had more to improve then the 90 to 100 horse.. I guess I was very wrong again

The Indomitable DrugS · #12 02-01-2010, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles

The 108 for This One's for Phil was boosted about 5 by the Beyer boys for some reason.

Some reason?

Obviously because of the quick pace ... they've done it many times before in big races.

Remember the '01 Amsterdam when City Zip and Speightstown hooked up in an early war through insane fractions - and both lasted despite totally staggering home to a 1-2 finish.

They inflated City Zip's fig all the way to a 100 and Speightstown's to a 97 - a MUCH slower paced NY Bred maiden race at the same distance 30 minutes later went faster.

I think you would agree with me that they shouldn't do this ... because it unjustly rewards the suck-up closers.

cmorioles · #13 02-01-2010, 11:02 AM

Of course that is why they did it, and it does make horses that didn't run well look better. They do it in big races and small races alike ALL THE TIME.

freddymo · #14 02-01-2010, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Some reason?

Obviously because of the quick pace ... they've done it many times before in big races.

Remember the '01 Amsterdam when City Zip and Speightstown hooked up in an early war through insane fractions - and both lasted despite totally staggering home to a 1-2 finish.

They inflated City Zip's fig all the way to a 100 and Speightstown's to a 97 - a MUCH slower paced NY Bred maiden race at the same distance 30 minutes later went faster.

I think you would agree with me that they shouldn't do this ... because it unjustly rewards the suck-up closers.

Do you like when they lower figs for reasons that they just believe the horses couldnt have improved as such?

smuthg · #15 02-01-2010, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Am I the only one that would find a mythical Oklahoma Millions as interesting as the Sunshine Millions?

how about Red River Thousands... a showdown of OK v. TX breds. Too bad Frank had to sell Lone Star and Remington.

freddymo · #16 02-01-2010, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Of course that is why they did it, and it does make horses that didn't run well look better. They do it in big races and small races alike ALL THE TIME.

Is this deemed the non scientific/artist license that Fig makers require?

cmorioles · #17 02-01-2010, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddymo

Interesting..

Horse A was given a 25 should have been a 20 and his next race is one were the winning par in 30

Horse B was given 95 but it should have been a 90 and his next race is one were the winning par is 100

Both theorically need to improve 10pts to win but the jump from 20-30 is equal to 90 -100.. I would have thought the 20 to 30 horses had more to improve then the 90 to 100 horse.. I guess I was very wrong again

You are getting there. Ten points is about 7/10ths of a second on the Beyer scale. Which horses will have an easier time improving that much, those running 1:14 or those running 1:10?

cmorioles · #18 02-01-2010, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddymo

Do you like when they lower figs for reasons that they just believe the horses couldnt have improved as such?

The biggest bet I ever made in my life was on Mossflower when she first ran in a stakes. The Beyer guys had demoted her figure for no apparent reason from a 110 to something in the low 100s if I remember right. I think it was the Hempstead. So yes, I love it, I take advantage of it when possible.

hockey2315 · #19 02-01-2010, 11:09 AM

GGG got a 95

philcski · #20 02-01-2010, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Some reason?

Obviously because of the quick pace ... they've done it many times before in big races.

Remember the '01 Amsterdam when City Zip and Speightstown hooked up in an early war through insane fractions - and both lasted despite totally staggering home to a 1-2 finish.

They inflated City Zip's fig all the way to a 100 and Speightstown's to a 97 - a MUCH slower paced NY Bred maiden race at the same distance 30 minutes later went faster.

I think you would agree with me that they shouldn't do this ... because it unjustly rewards the suck-up closers.

Wow, was that really '01? Speightstown was 6 when he won the BCS in '04 so I guess I'm getting old quick.