Friday, September 28, 2012

Yankee Fourtune, presumably on the down side

Yankee Fourtune, a 5-year-old who has now won over $300,000 and who bagged a couple of grade IIIs a couple of years ago, inhabited a $16,000 claimer at Belmont Thursday. He registered a romp by the standards of turf races, coming home 4 3/4 lengths clear.

He is a horse who you can present as even better than his record. Not that he is, but there are some neat facts about him around company lines. When he won the Commonwealth Turf, the horses he beat included Guys Reward (finished 2nd and has earned $553,000), Turallure (3rd, $1,341,000), Mister Mardi Gras (5th, $729,000), and Stormy Lord (6th, $1,153,000). Then you can look at a more recent race, a December allowance where Little Mike bested him for the win by only a nose, and we all know what Little Mike has accomplished this year.

It took time for the strength of the Commonwealth Turf to play out, and the subsequent success of those horses does not necessarily mean that they ran as well that day as they would go on to run later, and does not necessarily mean that Yankee Fourtune achieved a major feat in beating them. Even setting aside somewhat nondescript Beyers, I don't think many regarded Yankee Fourtune as a likely future grade I winner when he was winning the Commonwealth Turf and running his other best races.

But he was a horse who stood out for winning as much as for anything else, taking his second career start, and winning four more in a row before suffering his first loss on the turf. How ironic, then, that running 2nd to him on Thursday was Gamblin Fever, who not only had run off the board in 13 straight races before Thursday, but stood a woeful 2 for 59 lifetime in the win department. The first of those wins came in 2009 with our W. C. Jones a neck behind him in 3rd, so I'll always feel some sort of a connection to the horse.

Yankee Fourtune's steep drop (he had been favored in his last two starts when exposed for $35,000 and $50,000) is not dissimilar to what we saw with a couple of Baffert trainees this year. Stirred Up, 3rd in the Sunland Derby and Jerome this year, started for $16,000 a couple of months ago, checking in 4th. Baffert also at least toyed with running 4-year-old Da Ruler, a 5 3/4-length winner of a nw1x at the Spring/Summer Hollywood meet, for $10,000 three weeks ago, but Da Ruler was scratched. Like with Da Ruler, Yankee Fourtune's preparation for his big-drop claiming race did not omit workouts; last competing on August 31, he had worked on September 14 and September 22.

The sobering reality is probably that many racers have essentially negligible value, even if they are just a bit on the downside and nothing is terribly wrong with them. Since this is true, the aggressive trainer has an opportunity to win races with horses like Yankee Fourtune who lay over a field.



Monday, September 24, 2012

Males invariably faster than females in state-bred stakes

One pattern I notice, which is purely an observation, and of a type that could well be dead wrong, is that males really outperform females when two divisions of "little" stakes," or state-bred stakes are run. I'm talking time-wise; for instance, it's not the best example because Palmy Bay won by 12 1/4, but he won the Louisiana Stallion on Saturday in 1:23.94, while I Dare U Em required 1:25.25 in the fillies' division. I generally see large differences between males and females in these lower-division races, while the sexes seem more closely matched at the graded stakes level.

If anything, I would have guessed the trend would be opposite -- that when you're talking about a Louisiana Stallion race, the quality of the winner from year to year is likely to vary greatly, and the same would apply with the quality from one division to the next. So times for the sexes would cross quite a bit. When you're looking at the past performances for state-bred stakes, particularly in states that don't produce many serious race horses, there's a decided lack of depth. If that lack of depth permeates the top, which it sometimes does, then you can get some really dreadful races. Quality would seem to matter more than sex. But this doesn't seem to play out; I think males or well ahead of females in small-time racing.

Trying to figure out why is completely perplexing. Is the style of training less fancy horses, maybe of working them somewhat hard, more effective with males? This is about the best I can come up with.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

The case for Radiant Cut

She was 8th by 7 1/2 at Saratoga without an excuse in a maiden special weight, but my heart ached when I saw this filly was in for 50k at Belmont yesterday and won. It seems too easy to tab horses who projected out to very good showings with a normal break in one of their races -- too easy, and as if it doesn't work as often as logic says it should.

Radiant Cut fit the bill in her 6/29 Belmont debut; my notes have her start as "super slow." She finished 6th by 6 1/4 in a field of 9, and I remember her start as hypothetically accounting for the entire deficit. (I like to give context, so the winner was Almost an Angel, who either planted the seed or directly inspired the "Wesley Ward with raced 2 yos" post).

That race was 6f on the turf. Then came the 1 1/16 race at Saratoga, where I didn't see any of the promise I'd seen in the debut. She continued to work afterwards, so soundness was not obvously lacking.

Pedigree was another strong angle with Radiant Cut. Her dam, Ruff, won the Miss Grillo in 2000, and her half brother, Mr. Gruff is/was a very, very talented horse. He's sort of the poor man's Shakespeare: 7 for 13 lifetime, but not breaking his maiden until age 5, and needing five years to compile those 13 starts. Except for a race in Dubai, the horse always runs well. I'd say he's just a hell of a turf sprinter, but running 3rd in the 2010 Shoemaker at a mile, he might just be a hell of a horse, or a hell of a turf horse, anyway.

Then you have Radiant Cut's sire. Sharp Humor isn't just a sneaky good sire; he's good.

Crunching final-time numbers and watching her victory on Friday, I hate to admit that I saw a filly who was probably pegged accurately for $50,000. She showed a legitimate turn of foot to thrust herself into contention down the backstretch, but was workmanlike in the stretch, although on the way to a 2 3/4 length win. Even on a course probably  playing slower than on Wednesday and Thursday, the 1:10.85 time doesn't give the impression that this is a filly ready to battle New York maiden special weight winners in ensuing starts.

There were positives here to an unusual degree for a lightly raced 2-year-old in for a tag. But owner Robert Spiegal bred Ruff, Mr, Gruff, and Radiant Cut, so he knows of the positives more thoroughly than I. It's hard for me to believe he didn't appreciate them, given owners' abilities to appreciate their horses. So either a) Radiant Cut has red flags, maybe of the soundness variety, that I can't know about and appreciate or b) Siegal and David Donk thought they could get away with the $50,000 maneuver, (maybe because the bad start in the debut was somewhat obscured by a 6th-place finish and an understated DRF trouble line.) She wasn't claimed, so they did get away with it.)

I feel somewhat vindicated by the win, in any event. Vindication feels hollow next to missed opportunity, however.

Friday, September 14, 2012

Haldane

Haldane, who won a 7f New York-bred nw1x for fillies and mares by 5 lengths in excellent time at Belmont yesterday, was a glaring overlay at 20-1. She was making just her 3rd start, having captured her last in maiden special weight company at Saratoga by 3 1/4 lengths. She's a full sister to two Empire Classic winners (that's typically a 250k race): Organizer, and Dr. V's Magic. One of the siblings of her dam is Acceptable, who came very close to winning the 1996 Breeders' Cup Juvenile, and siblings to her 2nd dam include Will's Way, Willa On the Move, and Citidancer. You might find New York-breds with stronger pedigrees, but not many. And because of a 62 Beyer in the last, you handicappers are going to allow 20-1? The favorite was the overwhelming Read the Research, fresh off a 76 Beyer she got in a $20,000 claiming win, that race coming two starts after she broke her maiden for the same $20,000. Haldane sure looks like a multiple stakes winner to me.

The Enron of nw1xs (won by Next Question)

A New York-bred named Next Question was a 5-length winner of an open nw1x at Belmont Wednesday. The distance and surface were 7f on the turf. He was the clear favorite, despite having finished 5th and 4th in his last two in New York-bred nw1xs. Looking at that, you'd think Next Question was a "wise guy" horse. To an extent he may have been; the Form past performances indicate a tough trip for him last time, and he went off at 2-1 that day. But when I look deeper, this race was just astonishingly absent of qualified horses.

Fresh maiden winners are appealing prospects in nw1xs, at least in terms of their long-term potential, if not their bettability. There weren't any of those in the race.

Four horses had run in the condition last out, by which I mean in an open nw1x. None had hit the board; Ivanho, 4th by 5 1/4, had been the most competitive.

Wishful Tomcat had run in open nw2xs on the dirt, finishing way back.

The rest of the field came from claimers and starters.

If you read this blog with some regularity, you know that the high volume of turf racing in New York drives me crazy. It would be easier to accept if the big fields the races drew really indicated they were filling a need of the New York-horse population. But in this case, there appears to have been absolutely no need for this race, and maybe only three horses really well qualified for the condition (this counts a horse like second-choice Becky's Kitten, who was in for the 25k optional, and did have decent tries in the condition two and three back). What you had here was really very interesting; even with horses who didn't belong, there were mass entries, with the trainers seemingly knowing that none of the others would qualified, either. The race was basically a faux nw1x; it could have just as easily been the non-winners-from-the-last-six-months $20,000 claimer of race 9.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Sis City and Wonder Lady Anne L continue their common path

Both Sis City and Wonder Lady Anne L had their 3-year-old geldings by Distorted Humor win in the last several days. I connect the two mares strongly. At first I wasn't quite sure why. I knew both were Rick Dutrow fillies, and both I thought unlikely wonders, although on review, I see that Wonder Lady Anne L was always quite nice and never ran for a tag. I thought maybe both were in the same crop, and Sis City was 'A string' and Wonder Lady Anne L. 'B string,' but they were actually a crop apart. Both won the Demoiselle; I think that's the magnetic force pushing them together in my mind -- what pushes the parallels over the edge for me into eeriness.

What's interesting and maybe surprising about their qualified broodmare success so far, of course, is that they were Dutrow horses. Because of all of his charges' positive tests, not even the naive will argue it is far-fetched to argue that they were "on something." Sis City typified patterns many, including myself, believe go along with drug use: she ran some monster races, winning the Gulfstream Davona Dale by 16 and the Ashland by 10 1/2, but she wasn't generally near that caliber. She had the infamous maiden claiming start, giving the Dutrow barn the oppotunity to pick her up.

Sis City's 3-year-old, Second City, appears to feature quite an interesting story. He won the grade III British Columbia Derby on Sunday, running his record to 4 for 4. Those wins have come at Penn National, Charles Town (twice), and Hastings. He's done all of the racing and winning since July 12. And yes, like his dam, his first win came for maiden claiming, maiden claiming 25k. He wasn't even favored, won by 8, and Jamie Ness took the wrong first-timer starter, the Tale of the Cat firster Dubonnet Red (although he was a 5-length winner in his next start, which came last Thursday). Second City went back to his original barn, Stephanie Beattie's. The ceiling might not go any higher; I mean, when the race is just the fourth fastest mile-and-an-eighth race at Hastings on the day, the odds still seem stacked against you. But he's a great story.

There wasn't much attention paid to the Wonder Lady Anne L, Distorted Dream, in his first couple of races, where he ran respectably but didn't do better than 5th. But in his return from a 2+-month layoff Wednesday, people seemed to know he was a different horse, as he just ceded favoritism to Pletcher's Slash Five, who had gotten an 83 Beyer in his last. (To back up what I'm saying, Distorted Dream was 8-1 on the morning line, Slash Five 2-1; odds at post time were 9/5 for Distorted Dream, and 3/2 for Slash Five). Distorted Dream emerged with sharp works at Belmont in August, and he added blinkers Wednesday. I don't want to suggest he's a potential star, because I'm not convinced he is, but he beat Slash Five by 3 1/2 lengths, probably never being completely set down and certainly never being whipped. I got an 87.9 figure for him.

Outside of the fact that both were stars and Distorted Humor is a hot shot in the breeding shed, it appears a coincidence that both mares went to Distorted Humor in 2008. Or at least it was a coincidence from the standpoint of ownership; Wonder Lady Anne L was going to go to Distorted Humor, being partially owned by WinStarm, but Sis City was owned by Stonerside when Distorted Humor was chosen for her, When Darley subsumed Stonerside later in 2008, they became official breeders of Distorted Dream.

The point of this post is not to say that Dutrow didn't abuse the administration of medication, nor that the medications he administered didn't make much difference in the mares' performance, only to sat that there is a lot we don't understand. I will say that I think discounting or endorsing horses based on whether you believe they were clean or not clean does not bring you any closer to making good decisions. I just don't see a correlation with the believed status of individual horses and what they go on to do as producers.

Let's take the stallion side: Saint Liam, a Dutrow horse, was going to be really good. One who is impressive now with his first crop is Frost Giant. A Dutrow horse, and really not even that good of a one; he might be a much better sire.

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

How a healthy sample of races enable variant splits, multiple variants

In the Archwarrior post (to date the only one, and if this blog continues its spotlight on side topics, maybe always the only one), I wrote about my discomfiture making speed figures from just three races, while analysis tells me three races do not make for a much less accurate basis than a full card's worth.

One aspect in which this might not be true is probably for cases where the speed of the track changes during the card. By definition, then we no longer have the requisite three races to use. Patterns cannot be divined. Times do not support one another.

With a couple of races moved to the main track, Belmont had an uncharacteristic seven dirt races Sunday. And the times made it clear that one variant for all of them was untenable. The first four dirt races, all at a mile and including Dreaming of Julia's 1:36.46 clocking, suggested a track playing slightly on the slow side. The last three races were all of very cheap class, but went in 1:10.08, 1:10.88, and 1:23.61 (7f). That's a lightning-fast track, certainly for Belmont. The full-card variant says that Dreaming of Julia didn't run much faster than she did in her maiden win. The other three early mile races say she's about as solid a Breeders' Cup Juvenile Filly candidate as there is out there (which was certainly also the reflective reaction to her win).

Monday, September 10, 2012

Travis Stone

Louisiana Downs' announcer -- he sounds an awful lot like Dave Johnson, doesn't he? He has a nice voice and is easy on the ears.

Sunday, September 9, 2012

Jealous husbands

I got a kick out of "Jealous" being ridden by "Husbands" (the Simon variety) at Belmont on Saturday. Blinkers got her to the front early, but she finished last. Hard to know where the horse's name ended and the jockey's began with that one.

Limited purse incentives for overnight stakes runners

It was certainly odd to see the overnight Affiliate Stakes at Belmont on Saturday run for the same purse ($80,000) that sprint maiden special weights were just days before at Saratoga. And, indicating the limited options horse people have, the Affiliate drew a fine field, if a very small one of four horses. 2011 Vanderbilt winner Sean Avery made a successful return; Royal Currier and his seven 2011-12 stakes wins came up from Monmoth. I do think it could be said that, in the interests of fairness, more separation is needed in the money offered between overnght stakes and money allowances on the one hand, and maiden special weights and first allowances on the other.

A 2 1/8th mile race, but you wouldn't have guessed it from the pedigrees

Presque Isle ran a 2 1/8th mile starter as their final race of the night Saturday, and the sires of the horses were not exactly renowned for stamina. The eight-horse field included a Gilded Time (ran 4th), an Indian Charlie (ran 8th), a Smoke Glacken (ran 7th), and a Mr. Greeley (ran 2nd). Two of those sires placed in Breeders' Cup Sprints as race horses, and another was Sprint Champion. Despite frequent noise to the contrary, if you note the sires in a Kentucky Derby and especially in a Belmont Stakes, they were typically much better stayers as race horses, and better producers of stayers, than the sires in this field. A part of me thinks that horse people get intimidated by sprint and middle-distance pedigrees and don't stretch out good horses who could handle a distance of ground. And then part of me thinks that the guidelines about stamina in pedigrees apply much better in high-quality racing than in "cheap" racing. Still, you would think that the horses in a starter race are not only blessed with less stamina than Triple Crown kinds of horses, but also slower, and that with the additional strike of limited stamina against them, they could not hope to win these kinds of races, if they were truly limited in stamina.

PID Masters bettors seemed to be betting synthetic record, not graded-stakes record

For the second straight year, the betting on the Presque Isle Downs Masters was curious. By extension, and with a big field for the second straight year, it's a race that can be counted on to be a good betting race. Indeed, even with a 7-10 winner, the $2 trifecta paid $892.80.

Last year, the fans blew it letting winner and eventual Eclipse champion Musical Romance go off at almost 9-1after she was 7/2 on the morning line. This year, Salty Strike was dismissed at 21-1 after being listed at 5-1 on the morning line, but Salty Strike did not enjoy the success of Musical Romance, running 9th. While winner and betting favorite Groupie Doll took much more money than was predicted on the morning line, the horses with odds around Salty Strike's on the morning line were not dismissed the way she was. ML price is given first, followed by actual price.

Groupie Doll 2-1, 0.70-1
It's Me Mom 4-1, 4.80-1
Salty Strike 5-1, 21.40-1
Atlantic Hurricane 6-1, 7.90-1
Holiday for Kitten 8-1, 9.60-1
Kitty in a Tizzy 8-1, 18.80-1

Four-year-old Salty Strike was a grade III winner in 2011, had taken the GIII Gardenia last out, and taken three in a row overall. What stands out about her is an 0 for 1 record on synthetic before the Masters. I wouldn't have thought the fans would have emphasized that so much, but Salty Strike was unproven on the surface.

Atlantic Hurricane's recent form was equally strong, but she was a proven commodity on synthetic, winning three times in six starts on it with in-the-money finishes on the other occasions.

Holiday for Kitten is best described as a 5f and 5 1/2-furlong turf filly and has a career-best Beyer of just 89. However, her last two races on synthetic resulted in wins in the grade II Thoroughbred Club of America, and in the Giant's Causeway, a race where she beat older horses despite being a spring 3-year-old.

Kitty in a Tizzy's price is harder to figure, since she had won the grade III Chicago on synthetic in her last, and raced on the surface in all eight of her starts previous to that. Most likely, she just got lost in the cracks in the betting, and did not possess the intriguing early speed of It's Me Mom and Holiday for Kitten. With no wins in the 24 months prior to the Chicago, she also wasn't going to excite as a synthetic specialist, even if she was proven on it.

The weighting system for the PID Masters probably leaves something to be desired, with an undue focus on 2012 record, and whether the horse was a 2012 graded stakes winner. This system left Groupie Doll, Salty Strike, and Kitty in a Tizzy giving all of the rest at least 5 pounds. It's interesting to note that Salty Strike and Kitty in a Tizzy were the two horses the oddsmaker really misread.

Perhaps he or she was looking through the framework of graded stakes success jsut the way the weighting system did, and the fans did not care about graded stakes success. It would seem to be giving the fans a lot of credit to say that they weighed the weights heavily in their bets, while the oddsmaker did not, although I suppose that is possible.

Thursday, September 6, 2012

The turbo finish of Goldencents

It's funny that I mentioned Into Mischief yesterday, because he's a first-crop sire, and on Sunday at Del Mar his 2-year-old Goldencents rang up some of the most impressive finishing fractions I can ever recall, at least by a 2-year-old winning wire-to-wire. In the 5 1/2-furlong race, he went the 1/8th from 4f to 5f in 10.95. Sounds like a work at a 2-year-old sale, doesn't it? Then he finished with a cool 5.69 for the final 1/16th.

The track was fast; that mile record I spoke of last week finally fell, to the powers of Potesta, and my varant was 1:08.35 for 6f = 100. But the track was hardly the speed of a typical firm turf course.

The two final fractions combined for a 16.64 final 3/16ths. That comes out to a 22.19-quarter pace. Goldencents ran his first two quarters in 22.83 and 23.32.

The early fractions were perhaps too slow to grant him a maximum-ability figure, and that's extremely unusual in a 5.5-furlong race (I got the Beyer-style number at 90.6, but I haven't been using the higher points-per-second-deviation on synthetic that Beyere recommends, which would lead to a better number).

Running as fast as he did late, it's sort of surprising that Goldencents lead "only" stretched from 1 1 1/2 lengths after 3/8ths, to 7 1/4 lengths at the wire. But evidently, others were also able to finish well, as they pivoted as well from the slow early fractions.

As quick as Into Mischief's dam was, I wonder what kind of distances his progeny will prefer, even though he won the Cashcall Futurity. With a dam by Banker's Gold, and a 2nd dam by Bold Ruckus, at first blush one would not think Goldencents would be the Into Mischief to break through as a router.

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Shakespeare's Achilles Heel becoming clear?

Comparing my assessment of Shakespeare 12 months ago to what has transpired with his runners since, I feel psychological bruising on a par with having spent $1,000,000 on a yearling who couldn't run. Shakespeare seemed like my secret discovery everyone else would soon get wind off. At Saratoga and Woodbin in 2011, a succession of them won in fine style. The ones who didn't win gave good accounts of themselves, and seemed to win next time. But this year....there's been nothing. As infallibly talented as the Shakespeares seemed, they've been that unsound. As Shakespeare retired at the end of his 6-year-old year with just eight career starts on his ledger, perhaps I shouldn't be so surprised. But I just don't see how they can all be this unsound. Live and learn, I guess.

I did some work once that established that runners/starters was a very consistent, very reliable, very real stat. The problem was that it didn't have much to do with anything else important. Getting horses who make it to the races doesn't mean that a sire sired good horses. At all.

The Shakespeare cautionary tale again brings this into question. With enough stallions like him, the relationship between soundness and stakes performance should emerge, just because unsound horses eliminate themselves from stakes contention. The rest of the thoroughbred population inevitably benefits. Eighty percent of being a stakes winner certainly isn't about showing up, to take the Woody Allen percentage, but it sure seems like it must be 15%.

Tune Me In and the non-believers

Having now won the Cliff Hanger on the heels of having won the Oceanport, Tune Me In seems on the verge of sweeping some sort of unofficial series of Monmouth middle-distance turf races. Yet in what must qualify as a freak occurrence, he was the longest shot on the board in both races! Digest that: here is a horse which had just won a race of the same grade at the same track, on the same surface and almost at the same distance, and he went off the longest shot on the board.

And I can't say I blame the Cliff Hanger bettors. Tune Me In "stole" the Oceanport; he was the rank outsider that day at 25-1; and the Cliff Hanger was just a five-horse field. Somebody had to be the longest shot on the board. Still, I wonder when the last time the equivalent happened? I bet it was a long time ago.

Tune Me In certainly looked unimpressive in the DRF PPs before the Oceanport. He had run 19 times before, placing in one stake, and earning just shy of $200,000. If you wanted to say something laudatory about him, though, the horse was in the money in 13 of his first 14 career races. That certainly suggests some class. It is notable that when he left New Jersey for New York and Florida, he stopped running in the money. But I don't mean to suggest that the Cliff Hanger and Oceanport are easier than nw3x allowances at Gulfstream and Belmont (although I suppose that is a reasonable contention).

Leslie's Lady, dam of Beholder and Into Mischief

Doing an initial and superficial analysis of her race record, I'm finding it interesting. First of all, so that everyone knows what kind of a runner this filly was, her career record was 28-5-3-2 for earnings of $187,014. She won the Hoosier Debutante, which was an open race, and ran 2nd in the Martha Washington when it was just 6f, beaten just 2 lengths by the excellent The Happy Hopper (just over $800,000 in earnings).

Leslie's Lady's in-the-money percentage of 36% was, at best, mediocre. And in none of the three years that she ran did it even hit 50%. This was not because she was usually running over her head and trying stakes; only seven of her starts were in stakes (four came consecutively at the peak of her career, which was the end of her 2-year-old year and the beginning of her 3-year-old year). Going along with a low ITM %, Leslie's Lady's winning percentage of 18% was nothing to write home about. What is interesting is that when she won, she won impressively, by good margins. Her wins came by 3 lengths, 7 lengths, 2 1/2 lengths, 6 lengths, and 6 1/2 lengths. Most horses who win that authoritatively do it more often: winning big and winning often are two characteristics of the brilliant horse. From this standpoint, Leslie's Lady was only half brilliant.

You may have guessed that Leslie's Lady was a real speed horse, and that is right. She was on the lead at the first call in four of her five wins, and 2nd by a head at the first call in the other. The distances in her wins ranged from 5f to 6 1/2 furlongs, with the first three coming at under 6f. While she did not excel over her career in either winning percentage or ITM percentage, by itself, the fact that she won four races at age 2 is impressive.

I provide all of these breakdowns because Leslie's Lady has obviously been a hell of a broodmare, and an unexpectedly good broodmare. She's just by Tricky Creek, after all, and her siblings do not get the pulse racing. But despite the negatives, there were real strengths in her race record, and maybe we should be looking for the same strengths in other broodmare prospects. Lelie's Lady probably wasn't particularly brave, but she was at least moderately talented, and talent has ended up being the important component with Into Mischief and Beholder.

I really like Beholder and what she brings to the table. Watching the Debutante again, though, where she got caught by Executiveprivilege in the last couple of jumps, it occurred to me that she just may not want to go very far. She's by Henny Hughes, and he was certainly at his best at under a mile. Now that I know Lesle's Lady's record on the track, this fortifies the reading of Beholder as a sprinter.

 But since Giacomo and Tiago's dam, Set Them Free, was a sprinter, I'm always a but cautious in ascribing too much significance to a dam's distance record. And Into Mischief never ran long, but he took the grade I, 1 1/16 CashCall Futurity in just his 3rd start. It's also not like Into Mischief's sire, Harlan's Holiday, is Dynaformer from a stamina perspective; Harlan's Holiday's Average-Winning-Distance is 7f, even.

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Keen's fortuitous claim

I don't have the exact ranking for you, but Saturday's 5th at Del Mar, won by Pure Indy, was a very fast 2-year-old-filly maiden special weight. It was faster than the first division by exactly two-fifths-of-a-second (both races were 5 1/2 furlongs), and it outdid the males in race 7 easily (although that race was at a mile). The time was nearly as good as the time for the Del Mar Debutante.

Finishing 2nd in the 5th was Controlled Chaos, who had not only ran and lost for $50,000 in her last start, but been beaten handily that day. Her Beyer was only 52.

She was claimed from that race, her career debut. With the sort of improvement she enjoyed Saturday, just over two weeks later, one assumes the new trainer is one of the usual suspects -- very likely PM. But the only Peter involved with Controlled Chaos was original trainer Peter Eurton.

Instead, Controlled Chaos's new trainer is Dallas Keen. I must confess that Dallas Keen has always been branded in my mind as the guy who trained Valhol, the infamous Arkansas Derby winner disqualified when his jockey used a battery. Keen has probably given me reason to know him since, but it seems my mind will just not let in the new information.

Keen has apparently been dogged running horses at Del Mar this year, compiling 29 starts entering Saturday's card. Unfortunately, he hadn't won any of them. Lime Rickey took Saturday's 3rd race for Keen (was the 2-1 favorite), getting him off the schneid, but his meet totals are still not pretty.

So in light of Keen's record, what do we make of Controlled Chaos showing stakes-winning potential Saturday? Did Keen just make an astute claim? Or does he often improve horses, and the ones that he's been running at Del Mar have been so bad this hasn't resulted in wins or even many near wins? If you're not making a lot of acquistions or claims, but just running horses you've had for a while, your positive role in the horses' performances might not be noticeable.

If the secret in the Controlled Chaos case is the horse and not a Peter Miller or Mike Mitchell Midas touch, again this is partially hidden because Controlled Chaos's debut for Eurton was so unremarkable. Then she runs for Keen against tougher and does better. So it looks like the key had to have been the training. But maybe Controlled Chaos just needed her first race, or there was an obvious adjustment to make, and her 2nd start with Eurton would have been equally good.

Friday, August 31, 2012

Closure with Archwarrior not helped by just two other dirt races on card

The debut of the ballyhooed Archwarrior was certainly steeped in suspense, not any less so after he was scratched a couple of times. Figure makers (and actually, the figure-receiving public) received one more trial, since turf-race obsessed NYRA chose to run only two other dirt races yesterday, both maidens, and neither in Archwarrior's division. Running more turf races than dirt races on a card is standard for NYRA but makes me feel nostalgic and protective. I feel like vintage dirt racing is being taken away from us, and no one is talking about it.

Anyway, I don't feel this way emotionally, but my analysis is that you can make fairly accurate figures off of three races. If you're to draw a line between when you can responsibly and can't responsibly figure, three races is really how many you need.

Archwarrior's Beyer-scale number came out to 85.2 for me. That's a good number, there are no red flags there, and he's within reach of being a top 2-year-old, particularly if he improves with more distance. Basically, 85.2 might not usually enable a horse to factor, but times in the 2-year-old male stakes have been been poor so far this year. My faith in the number is bolstered by the previous day's variant rendering it an 84.4 -- very close to the 85.2 Thursday' s races gave me.

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Double Ante and Bwanadana: sneaky-good pedigrees, and a 58-1 stablemate beating a 7-2 one

I wrote a blog recently about lightly regarded stablemates getting the better of their fellow trainee. I don't know what Mike Mitchell expected, but an extreme example was in evidence from the public's point of view Wednesday when Mitchell's 58-1 Bwanadana came in 3rd, a couple of places better than 7-2 Mitchell firster Point Cadet in the 5th race at Del Mar. The race was for fillies and mares. Point Cadet is half sister to Point Given, by Distorted Humor, and cost $875,000 as a yearling. Bwanadana is by Bwana Charlie, who has hardly attained prominence. But on the female side, she certainly has a license, as half-sister Kilograeme went "maiden win, allowance win" as a 3-year-old at Santa Anita to begin her career before running 4th of 5 in the Santa Anita Oaks and not returning again. Dam K. O. Princess is also half sister to K. O. Punch, an outstanding 2-year-old in 1997 who kept "who's who" company. They don't make 2-year-olds like K. O. Punch any more, or maybe they just don't make D. Wayne Lukas any more.

Interestingly, Point Cadet had been drilled seriously for her debut (in other words, quickly), while Bwanadana had not, despite the common trainer. None of the recent works matched up by day and distance, however. There wasn't evidence that Point Cadet had been directly outworking Bwanadana, in other words.

Longshots defying their odds was the rule of the day, as My Dark Vada won at 40-1 in race 8. In the Bwanadana/Point Cadet race, 47-1 firster Double Ante not only won, but gave a promising performance. She broke slowly and seemingly a bit in the air to be 10th by 11 lengths after a quarter mile. Then, other than cases of bolting on the turn, she ran about as wide as I have seen an eventual winner run. But she was up to the task and full of run, getting up by a length and a quarter. The time wasn't even half bad. Even though Double Ante's dam, Deux Anes (GB), had produced the talented grade III-winning turfer Makeup Artist, at age 21 she wasn't going to be bred to Dynaformer again, but to a son with a much lower stud fee whose race record could be picked apart. So Double Ante is by Purim. Although Double Ante wouldn't have been included in my debut-winner study had I used this year's maidens since the race was for 3-year-olds and up, note that the pattern of a "behinder" winner paying an excitingly-high mutuel was duplicated.

Bouns points if in the title of the post you can figure out the pedigree connection to the thoroughly-discussed race 5 at Del Mar....

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Track's fast, run-up's 200 feet...how is 1:35.28 the record at Del Mar?

I'm really surprised Del Mar hasn't had a mile race on Polytrack faster than 1:35.28 (set by Do It All, who won the Group II Zabeel Mile this year in Dubai). As Sunday's 1:59.54 Pacific Classic indicates, Del Mar can be plenty fast. Even around two two turns, 1:35 1/5 doesn't set the bar particularly high. And unlike for the track's other route distances on Polytrack, the mile distance is run with an extremely long run-up of 200 feet. The first quarter of the mile races is therefore usually very fast, as you would expect it to be. And unlike for Churchill's 6f races, which were listed as having a 100-foot run-up in the years before 2012, and a 180-foot run-up distance this year, that fast first quarter clearly aids the final time. I adjust the final times up on account of the run-up distance. Then after adjusting for the class of the races, they are still appearing in good light versus the mile-and-a-sixteenth races, even with the penalty I include for the long run-up distance. Also making the track record curious is that Del Mar breaks out mile races regularly -- frequently, even.

For there not to have been a mile faster than 1:35 1/5, the types of races being carded at a mile must be of low quality. It's interesting to me that a track can fall into not writing any good races at a certain distance, and probably without giving that a lot of thought. If there are no stakes at the Del Mar mile distance, though, or few, perhaps that is intentional to avoid the situation of the short run-up to the first turn. Come to think of it, maximizing the run to the first turn is probably the thinking behind the 200-foot run-up. But with 1:35.28 the record, I have to wonder how many allowances, and even how many maiden special weights and mid- and high-priced claimers, are even being written for a mile.

Shug McGaughey's grade I record on dirt and turf and with males and females since 2001

When coaches with a history of success experience a reversal of fortune, a common rhetorical defense is, "Did such and such suddenly forget how to coach?" Like most rhetorical devices, this doesn't completely satisfy the other side, however, who may contend the coach wasn't what he was cracked up to be despite his previous winning, or has had the game pass him by.

I don't think anyone can question Shug McGaughey's overall capability as a trainer, but I have been nagged by questions about his record since his great run with the Phipps has slowed. Specifically, it seemed to me that he never gets a big colt and is therefore absent from the Derby picture.

I decided to look into this. I have Racing Manuals going back to the 2001 season. Since then, Shug McGaughey has had 13 grade I winners. With three males winning grade Is for him for the first time this year, McGaughey is now up to six grade I winning-males in the time period, just trailing his number of grade I-winning females.

But Hymn Book was McGaughey's first male to win a grade I on the dirt since Traditionally. Hymn Book has had a very nice couple of years consecutively now, but Traditionally not only didn't win any grade Is outside of the Oaklawn Handicap, but didn't even hit the board in his seven other stakes attempts. So the impact of these males winning grade Is on the dirt has been pretty light. By contrast, McGaughey has had six females win grade Is on the dirt in the "2001 to present" period: Serra Lake, Storm Flag Flying, Pleasant Home, Smuggler, Pine Island, and Persistently. The biggest deficit, actually, has been with his turf fillies and mares, at least at the grade I level: McGaughey doesn't have any grade I wins there. I don't know how long Hungry Island will race, but I think she still has a reasonable chance to break the streak. McGaughey has had four males win grade Is on turf: Point of Entry and Data Link this year, and Dancing Forever and Good Reward in years gone by.

I think we can agree that dirt horses confer more glory upon a trainer than turf horses, but the difference is more dramatic with males. With dirt males the quality of his dirt females, McGaughey would have been in the national spotlight more. But the grade I-winning dirt females show he can get grade I-winning dirt horses, and the grade I-winning turf males show he can get grade I-winning males (and today -- not just in the days of Easy Goer, Lure, and Dancing Spree). McGaughey just hasn't found males often in recent years who have been able to showcase his ability to train dirt horses and males. This is bad luck.

Two-year-olds (only 2-year-old grade I winner in the group was Storm Flag Flying 10 years ago) and sprinters (no grade I winners under a mile) are possible weak points, but for McGaughey to be more successful in any given division, the bottom line is he needs to develop more grade I winners total. The slowing of his torrid pace of grade I winners from the '90s probably best explains drop-offs in individual categories.





Monday, August 27, 2012

Other examples of Saratoga's being the place to claim

To follow up on the post about Our Entourage -- I think Desert Storm, who was claimed for $50,000 last Wednesday, had some of the same characteristics and could also be classified as a "class" claim. When he was 3rd at Churchill in his debut last November, I remember track announcer Mark Johnson singling him out for looking very good in the final stages as he seemed to be figuring things out. He never quite flashed ability in the same way again, but could still be said to be a tease, and until trying turf in his 7th start, never was out of the money. After that July 29 allowance, his first against winners, Mott worked him twice, suggesting he came out of the race o.k.

 I think Mott and WinStar just gave up on him. I they just concluded he was never going to get much better. And I can't blame them for such a cold-eyed reading of the facts. But I still think he was a live horse running for $50,000, and presented some rare traits for a horse in a claimer. By Tiznow, he cost $440,000 as a weanling. He was 3rd by 3 3/4 in the race on Wednesday, likely coming out in the end with nearly exactly the same effort he normally does.

From Friday's card at Saratoga, Catinatree could not be described as possessing class incongruous of a claiming entrant, but she still struck me as out of place being up for a tag. She went off at 10-1 and was a badly beaten 6th in the alternate non-winners-of-two-other-than allowance, but Gary Contessa reached the same conclusion I did, rescuing her from the ignomy. Other than a victory, the only development that can soothe the sting of being in a claiming race is for someone to claim the horse. (Wait, I don't think horses know they are in claiming races.)

The interesting potential with Catinatree is that she has Beyers of 92 and 94 this year. Both were blowout wins, at Hawthorne and Parx, respectively. The first time she got a 90+ Beyer, it was another nw2x optional claimer, this time for only $35,000, and she went off at 28-1. So that race was really a bolt from the blue. The second 90+ Beyer (following Beyers of 59 and 82), had her only 5-1 in the July 1 Bed o'Roses, where she led for a half but did not run well.

There are horses for all tastes at Saratoga.

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Heart of 3+up MSW at Saratoga presents easy throw-outs

It might be interesting to devise criteria for "a prospect." I would guess a prospect is a horse who has a chance of being a stakes winner, or maybe a graded stakes winner. One approach could be to list black marks that automatically mean the horse is not a prospect. One could be a certain number of starts without getting the first win.

Evem in races for 3-year-olds and up, Saratoga maiden special weights are places where you expect to find prospects. Yet in Monday's 1st, you had 0 for 10 Suns Out Guns Out beating 0 for 9 Tiz Yankee, with 0 for 13 Flashy Sunrise 3rd. When fans dream of a sturdier animal, this isn't the mold they have in mind.

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Most classy 3-year-old claimer in a while -- Our Entourage

David Jacobson claimed Our Entourage for $65,000 from Sunday's 6th at Saratoga. It may be a very long time until we see another a 3-year-old with so much going for him in for a tag again. This horse just does not look to me like he belonged in a claiming race (the race was actually a newfangled starter/optional claimer, where he only got to run by utilizing the tag. So he wasn't so much in a claiming race, as in for a claiming price).

Despite some of the captious comments I make here, I'm actually a nice person, and at least when I'm playing Monopoly, I'll give the person I'm dealing with more than a fair deal. That's what Our Entourage in for a tag looked like; as if Mike Repole was recklessly acting against his self-interest by running him. As if this was a gift to other owners. An attempt to become more popular.

With four straight off-the-board finishes before Saturday's race, although three in stakes and none by as many as 6 lengths, Our Entourage's stock was not where it was after he took a February 25 allowance at Gulfstream on the heels of competitive 5ths in the Remsen and Breeders' Futurity. But he had worked twice since his race four weeks before, and twice after his race five weeks before that. He's by Street Cry out of millionaire grade I winner Sand Springs.

Certainly, there have been plenty of 3-year-old claimers as fast as Our Entourage in for a high-priced tag before. He ran 2nd in the race on Saturday, and was only a 2-1 favorite.

I guess what sets him apart for me is the class he seems to have. That can be a hard thing to put ones finger on, and if it's that subjective, I suppose I shouldn't react quite so strongly. But to me, this horse in a claiming race is like batteries inserted the wrong way. It just looks funny. If Our Entourage is an an allowance horse and not a claimer, he's not guaranteed to turn into a stakes horse. But for aspiring stakes owners, an allowance horse is a better place to start than a claiming horse.

Sunday, August 19, 2012

The Alabama: a field that needed introduction

Tom Durkin needs to bone up on his race grades. In the Alabama, he called the Black-Eyed Susan and the Delaware Oaks grade Is. The Black-Eyed Susan was probably grade I for a few years, but many years ago. The Delaware Oaks probably offered a very large purse at one point (I guess it is offering one once again these days, come to think of it) but has been safely out of the grade I category for my 37 years, or at least the 31 or so that I've been a racing fan. This doesn't seem like the type of error a racing fan would make. So, did Durkin merely mean to say that Zo Impressive, In Lingerie, and Grace Hall were graded stakes winners, and accidentally said grade I winners? But why would he have been drawing special attention to graded stakes winners in a race like the Alabama?

Hollywood's announcer (or is that Betfair Hollywood's announcer?), Vic Stauffer, has added the "horse credential" element to his race calls this year (GRADE I winner Dancing in Silks has a neck on GRADE I winner Smiling Tiger). I hate the way Stauffer calls a race, merely filling names into his template. I tend to think he thinks people like what he does and chooses to do it that way, rather than that he lacks the ability to think on his feet. Although he exaggerates good performances, and sometimes even turns average wins into outstanding ones, he's actually not a bad watcher of races. But in any event, it would seem Durkin got the idea of burnishing the credentials of the Alabama's field from Stauffer.

On the topic of sports whoppers, though, I have to say that Durkin had nothing on New York Jets' announcer Greg Buttle last night, who said that Victor Cruz had once been cut by the Jets. Not only did he relate this, but he did so in detail, talking about Cruz's performance with the Jets, and how Cruz wasn't going to be able to make the Jets' team before he was jettisoned

It seemed unlikely on several fronts. When was the last time the Jets had a good wide receiver corps? That would certainly have to predate Eric Mangini, at least. They've generally been one of the easiest teams to make at wide receiver.

If Durkin had been calling the Jet game, though, I guess his whopper would have had Victor Cruz drafted. Maybe he'd be a fourth-round pick.

Monday, August 13, 2012

Things about All Star Heart that don't compute

The idea of this blog is that horse racing numbers and reference-book-type data tell a story. Which isn't to say that they gave you the story; indeed, they are about as effective as watching television with the sound turned down, I would say. My appetite is whetted, but I think I'm missing something.

All Star Heart is certainly one who makes me want to know more. First, there's her breeding. How is an Ascot Knight filly out of an unraced Devil Begone mare, apparently without successful siblings and without a win above maiden claiming, bred to Arch? How does this filly begin her career running 3rd, 5th, 12th, 8th, 10th, 6th, and 5th, losing four times at Woodbine, and not only eventually break her maiden at Santa Anita, but win five more races in Southern California, including the grade II Las Palmas? All Star Heart is in the conversation today because she came a nose short in the John C. Mabee of winning her second grade II  yesterday.

He's Had Enough not an idly chosen name

For shame, Del Mar bettors, letting the Reddam/O'Neill first-time starter with this name pay $20.60 Sunday. I don't think my imagination here is too far off the mark: the Reddams spending a good night or two thinking of a name which would be a good sequel to I'll Have Another, and then finding the right horse for it. Maybe they even knew this horse was special, and that started the special initiative to find a name. In any event, I have little doubt they were aching to bequeath this name -- wanted to spring it on the racing public and have it generate as much notice as possible.

If a whole slew of these plays on I'll Have Another have been coming out from the Reddam team, my apologies. They do campaign so many foreign horses they didn't name, it's possible the trend has eluded me.

Regardless, whether the name was a veritable clue or not, He's Had Enough was the goods. He won in terrible time, although that couldn't be said for the final 1/16th, but man was he powerful.

He qualified for a "behind" win, too, running 9th of 10 at the first call, if you remember my research piece. He fits the "behind" category trends beautifully, paying that good win mutuel, and not winning by a big margin.

He's a Tapit. One of his siblings is 5-year-old gelding Kindergarden Kid. Although claimed for $50,000 from his last start, Kindergarden Kid has had his moments, looking like he was maybe best when 4th (moved to 3rd via DQ) in this year's Grade III Ft. Lauderdale at Gulfstream.

Where the dam has really picked up since He's Had Enough sold for $200,000 last September, though, is with the 3-year-old filly Assateague, who's rung up good-margin turf wins in her last two at Keeneland Fall, and then off the layoff at Saratoga. She appeared a free-wheeling filly in her last and left the well-regarded Kitty Wine and Pianist in her wake.

There's some question, clearly, about whether He's Had Enough will play at Santa Anita on the dirt, and to get ahead of ourselves, in the Triple Crown picture. If turf is the only option at a track, I was wondering if Tapits could excel there. While Tapit is very much a dirt sire, he's had a couple of really nice turfers in Tapitsfly and Laragh, so I think they can.

Distance-wise, the quick read is that He's Had Enough will have no difficulty whatsoever.

Friday, August 10, 2012

Appeal of $150,000 maiden claimer mainly to 2-year-old buyers

This winter, I mentioned 2011's $150,000 maiden claimer for 2-year-old fillies at the spa. That post got a hit with this year's rendition being run on Monday. What stood out to me about the race this time was six of the eight fillies having sold as 2-year-olds (not surprisingly, all for under $150,000). The prices were probably fresh in the buyers' minds, while people who have a horse that's been in their hands since the horse was a yearling become removed from the horse's true value. The yearling buyer has more room to dream. Two-year-old buyers are practical people.

One could argue that the market's rating of yearlings is almost obsolete by the time the horses are 2-year-olds, train, and approach running That's a reasonable point of view. But certainly, many yearling buys are now worth less than $150,000. Yet, with the exception of a filly named Fierce, where were they in the specialty maiden claimer?

Why am I not surprised that the architect behind the lone yearling buy to $150,000 maiden claiming race transition was Wesley Ward? He has to be one of the more practical guys in racing. None the less because he was running Put It Back's half sib in the maiden claiming race and so flaunting the prestigious pedigree before anyone tempted.

Wise Dan's 119 weighting in the Fourstardave: a failure to appreciate the texture in form

The weighting in the Fourstardave is some of the worst I have ever seen. There is simply no excuse for not having Wise Dan as the highweight. As a track handicapper, you can't be so mechanical about weighting horses. I guess what the guy is thinking is that Data Link (121 lbs) and Get Stormy (120 lbs) are both grade I winners on turf, while Wise Dan (119 lbs) is just a grade II winner on turf. But as every involved racing fan with half a brain and a fully functioning set of instincts knows, Wise Dan is twice the horse that Data Link is. (He is also twice the horse Get Stormy was at Get Stormy's zenith, which is over a year's past). Can't this track handicapper read the racing form? Or better yet, couldn't he actually follow racing and make critical assessments as campaigns develop, and then file them away for later use?

Poor Wise Dan, who's a question mark on the turf: in his first race on the surface, the 2011 Firecracker, he had failed to hit the board in his three previous starts, leading him to go off at 14-1. But he won the race hands down by almost 3 lengths.

Following a half-length win in the Presque Isle Mile on synthetic, he ran 1 1/4 lengths behind Get Stormy and 1 3/4 behind Gio Ponti in the Shadwell Turf Mile.

Then he got really good, with wins of 4, 3 3/4, and 10 1/2 in the Fayette, Clark, and Ben Ali, but it wasn't because he got off the turf! After all, he had been off the board three straight times at the beginning of the year on the same surfaces (Keeneland synthetic and Churchill Downs dirt) where he did his Best Pal impression.

Presumably, the handicapper has the approproiate respect for Wise Dan's current form. If he really wasn't as solid on turf, wouldn't he have run in the Whitney, where he could have perhaps put his connections in position to win the award for champion dirt horse, rather than running for two-thirds the money in a grade II?

Trois indeed for Sadler when it comes to turf 3-year-old fillies

Only a nose loss in the Honeymoon deprives Lady of Shamrock of a six-race winning streak on turf, but don't sleep on a couple of other John Sadler 3-year-old fillies in the turf division, Trois Aureole and Unusual Hottie. Unusual Hottie just won on Sunday, while Trois Aureole hasn't competed since July 8, so it will be Trois Aureole's turn next.

Stablemate pecking order isn't infallible

Grounds for comparing entrymates in maiden special weights are often quite factual. Assessing one horse vs. another in different barns is perhaps an apples to oranges process, but with horses from the same barn, we don't have to worry about whether a trainer usually works his horses quickly or slowly, and whether his mere name draws good riders. The trainer can be said to be removed as a variable. It's usually pretty clear which entrymate is the 'A' entrymate and which the 'B', and this is reflected in the betting. I've found that the appearance is almost always the reality.

But in Sunday's 6th at Del Mar, a 2-year-old filly maiden special weight, what looked like a decided advantage for one entrymate did not play out at all. The last three works for the Dan Hendricks duo of Christmas Secret and Miss Derek lined up. The most recent work was not a major speed trial, with both fillies getting in a a 47 4/5 gate work. But before that, Christmas Secret did not just beat Miss Derek, but apparently crushed her, recording a 1:11 4/5 to 1:13 1/5 advantage on July 19, and a 1:00 2/5 to 1:01 3/5 advantage on July 19. The public did not think the two fillies were close, making Christmas Secret the 2-1 favorite, and Miss Derek 22-1, the 9th choice of 10. Yet Christmas Secret never really got involved, while Trevor Denmark had Miss Derek a prominent part of the action in the stretch, before she checked in 4th by 1 1/2. If there was a sign the two fillies were more equal than the works indicated, the jockeys appeared a wash, with Alonso Quinonez , a 10% winner of 1.9 million this year, riding Christmas Secret, and Chantal Sutherland, a 12% winner of 1.8 million this year, riding Miss Derek.

What should we expect going forward? I wouldn't expect a big price on Christmas Secret next time; the half life on that 2.20-1 favoritism has got to be a race or two. I also wouldn't expect Christmas Secret to come back quickly. My guess is that something happened to her that didn't allow her to show what she can do. But Miss Derek's running well probably speaks very well for her talent, and I'd guess she can still be a very good filly.

Monday, August 6, 2012

Street Cry: A sire of sires, in the true sense of the term?

Street Cry may be on his way towards getting a remarkable yield from his horses at stud. Street Sense hasn't had the year it looked like he would have in the spring, but I remain extremely bullish about him. He's sort of been like a baseball team that has had the bases loaded every inning but hasn't scored a lot of runs. He's siring very talented horses, who have either gotten hurt or not come though yet. The jury is still out, but I think there's a lot there, and I think this would be a great time to buy a Street Sense.

Street Hero retired soon after he won the Norfolk as a maiden. Street Boss wasn't far from being Eclipse Award sprinter (favored in the BC Sprint), but he was never at the center of the American racing landscape the way Street Sense was. These two will have to do more of their own work than Street Sense to make it, but both are distinguishing themselves. To cite two Street Heros in particular, I like Del Mar maiden winner Gabriel Charles, and I like Churchill's June 3rd-place finisher, Anyriderill Do, although he doesn't seem to be in training right now, or at least working. The positive impression is mostly created in whole, though; it just seems the Street Heros can run. Street Boss has had a couple of showstoppers just within the last week, as Pletcher's Top Tier Lass aired on the turf at Saratoga last Monday, and Capo Bastone gave signs of being very good in a first-out score at Del Mar on Saturday.

What's intriguing is that Street Cry's 7th crop is only coming to the races right now. At least in North America, he doesn't have any right to be establishing a foothold as a sire of sires: I believe Street Sense, Street Boss, and Street Hero comprise his first opportunity. It's certainly too early with Street Boss and Street Hero to honestly say that the potential for Street Cry to be a rare sire of sires is apparent. But in my opinion, if as an investor in the breeding game, you don't use some imagination, you'll always be too late to the the dance.

A glut of Darley newcomers out of A.P. Indy mares

Darley seems to be trying to amass A.P. Indy mares and horses out of A. P. Indy mares. They started three such first-time starters at Saratoga on Saturday: Fortify, who was a clear winner; Joking, who finished resolutely and ran a close 3rd; and Thane, who ran 4th. Then at Del Mar on Saturday, they had another first-time starter out of an A. P. Indy mare, Modern, who checked in 3rd. Three different sires were represented among the four horses: Fortify and Joking, who did the best of the four, are both by Distorted Humor, while Thane is by Medaglia d'Oro, and Modern by Tiznow. Thane is particularly interesting to me, because he suggests the effort extends to yearling buys; the other three are homebreds.

The question is, what is Darley up to? The strategy would be more coherent if all of the A.P. Indy mares were being bred to one stallion, like Distorted Humor, but Modern shows they are not. Maybe Distorted Humor will get the bulk of the A.P. Indy mares, but it's not an exclusive deal.

The other head scratcher is that I didn't know A.P. Indy was a particularly outstanding broodmare sire; I remembered a post I wrote, quoting his percentage of stakes winners from foals, and it was 5.2%. I found a number of sires higher than that. You'd want to revolve your breeding strategy around the best broodmare sire you could, if you were going to focus on it.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Del Mar's opening day lacked oomph

You could have missed Del Mar's opening day without really missing anything. The Oceanside races had a number of respectable runners, particularly in the first division, which ironically ended up the slower. The 2010 Oceanside did showcase Twirling Candy, but the race restrictions against stakes winners in the Oceanside tend to have the effect of creating what looks like your typical overnight stake, but for 3-year-olds only. As for the rest of the card, two of the three non claimers or maiden claimers were for Cal-breds, and the other was at 5f on the turf, reducing its likely relevance.

If a good horse emerges from the card, it could be Ballard Ruler, who was a good ways the best taking a 2-year-old Cal-bred maiden special weight. In fact, he looked better than most of the open 2-year-old winners I've seen in California this year. Then Lakerville, the winner of the previously disparaged turf sprint, is now 3 for 4 with a 2nd. Running at 5f yesterday, he doesn't seem on the path to a stretch-out, but given my study of come-from-behind horses often transitioning to distance races well, and the distance-possible sire, Unusual Heat, I wonder why he isn't.

I just think Del Mar's management missed the boat with this card (even though Boat Trip was the favorite in the first Oceanside). When I see cards like this on special occasions, such as on the opening day of one of the year's premier meets, I just feel like the management doesn't understand racing, and sees it as mere facilitation of betting. The impression is that the quality of racing didn't even cross management's mind, or maybe that they don't understand what good racing is.

I look at opening days the way families and companies might look at having very important guests visiting. You're on display, and you should showcase the best product. If you're not going to run a couple of graded stakes, at least put some thought into the card, rather than giving the impression it's the product of a random-race generator.

Monday, July 16, 2012

Time to take a serious look at Wesley Ward's raced 2-year-olds

Wesley Ward's 2-year-olds used to not have much relevance after extremely impressive debuts, but this year I see his horses building and improving in their 2nd and 3rd starts. The latest is The B's and E's, who had a surface he should have been able to handle May 21 at Woodbine on the synthetic, but could do no better than a 3rd and a 39 Beyer. Going 7f on the turf at Belmont Sunday, he was never threatened in the stretch, and paid $22.60. If Ward has changed his goals and is now making good on the alteration, that is not an easy thing to do. He's shown himself to be innovative, and being able to adjust seems a similar skill. It's also certainly possible that my previous impression of his horses and training, or the limitations I perceived, were not entirely accurate. If that is true, I'm happy that at least I've noticed they were not right.

Dynaformer has a career in a day

Easing back into regular blogging....Not only did the recently deceased Dynaformer have three graded stakes winners on Saturday, but they came at the rare American distances of 12 furlongs (Ioya Bigtime in the Stars and Stripes) and 11 furlongs (Point of Entry in the Man o'War; Starformer in the Robert G. Dick). All of these races were on the turf. Stallion owners would probably prefer their stallions to be known for some other specialty, but all graded stakes wins where the winners emerge healthy are unambiguously good. It's the same when you win a race as an owner; the habit of maintaining objectivity can become so ingrained that it's hard to observe a moratorium on the straight analysis until the next morning.

As far as turf routers go, these Dynaformer graded stakes winner are young (Point of Entry and Starformer are 4; Ioya Bigtime 5), so it's worth asking how they will do going forward.  Point of Entry is now a star, but I like the other Phipps' turfer, Boisterous, slightly better. Prime contenders Newsdad and Treasure Beach didn't contend in the Man o' War, leaving Point of Entry with less daunting horses to beat, and the pace was so slow early, the final 3/8ths were run in 33.85. Point of Entry was in position to take advantage of the slow pace. Yes, the Phipps had Point of Entry in the $600,000 race on Saturday, and Boisterous in the $200,000 Arlington Handicap, where he was 2nd, but stables have been wrong about horses before. I think they are both good horses, and they are close enough that I would expect them to reverse decisions if they faced each other much. Boisterous's banishment to Arlington might not have been such a negatove statement, either, not with the Arlington Million upcoming.

Starformer I really like. This was her first stakes win, but she'd never run a bad race in America on turf before, and she was classy in France, too. Since her other try going really long produced a three-length win in a Gulfstream allowance, it's possible the 10-furlong+ races are the only places she can be truly outstanding. (She is a Dynaformer, after all; wasn't their distance proclivity the original point of this post?) If she needs more than 10 furlongs, I don't know how many opportunities she's going to get at that in stakes competition as a filly. She might have to take on the boys.

The Ioyas just cannot be denied, so it was in a way not that surprising to see Bigtime step up, even while he paid $84,00. His time came out to be very fast in my judgment, too, although I won't state that with confidence, since I don't follow Arlington that much, or see that many 12 furlong races. Watching his race, I have to say that he still looked more like an $84.00 horse to me than a horse who is going to have this kind of success again.

It's interesting that after so many years of Dyaformer as a sire, his ability can demonstrate itself so unmistakably that I feel like I never properly appreciated it before.

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Research study, part V: Some final notes about behinders

One pattern with the "behind" winners was so pronounced that I detected it even though I wasn't formally charting it. I decided to go back and capture the information after the fact, which is that large payoffs are a staple of the "behind" firster winner.

In part II I spoke of my control group of 238 non-state-bred dirt sprint maiden special weights for 2-year-olds or 3-year-olds only, covering mid 2007 to mid 2008 (there were some other minor requirements; see part II). The median winner in that dataset went off at odds of 3.20-1; by comparison, the 50% mark of the "behind" winners was 8.05-1. 13.9% of the control-group winners went off at 10-1 or more; 40.7% of the "behind" winners did. For 20-1+, the percentages were 6.3% and 16.3%; for 40-1+, 1.3% (3 for 238) and 4.7% (4 for 86). The biggest longshot winner among the behinders was 1998 Gotham winner Wasatch, who took his Santa Anita debut after running 12th early at 108-1.

Well-bet, first-out behind-winners also occur with some frequency; 8.1% were even-money or less (although this includes one winner who was coupled), and 30.2% were less than 3-1. The corresponding percentages of winners in the control group, though, were 12.2% and 45.8%.

Since the control group consisted of all maiden special weights, and my study only of ones won by first-time starters, someone might say that I am looking at the difference in mutuel support between winners who have run before and those who have not, but I am positive that is at least 80% untrue. I didn't keep the results, but 15 years ago I studied how first-time starters did vs. how they were bet, and as a group, they run formfully. Well-bet first-out winners easily outnumber overlooked ones. If I had the odds distributions for the first-out winners representing the other styles, I would be able to prove this, but as I said, I did not collect odds initially, so settled for the control group of maiden special winners as an alternative.


As we know by scanning the odds board before many a maiden special weight, bettors make very strong determinations about the chances of various first-time starters, and these determinations are by and large accurate. But they seem to have a bit of a blind spot when it comes to horses who will be coming from off the pace. How this can be is at first curious; after all, the style category of a first-time starter is undeclared and undiscussed.

It seems a good assumption, however, that first-time starters who win showing early speed in fact have more early speed than first-time starters who win from behind. If training rated highly leads to mutuel support, then the type of AM performance suggestive of early speed is more likely to be interpreted in those terms than the type of morning performance suggestive of another type of quality. Indeed, the lukewarm support for off-the-pace debut winners must mean that the indications of it are largely overlooked in training.

This could be a result of first-quarter dullness not leading to impressive workout times, and fans therefore overlooking the the potential “behinder” winner, or it could mean that trainers and horse people themselves are fooled by the different presentation in training given by the behinder. Trainers, for example, might miss that they have a good chance to win with their behinder, and not talk the horse up beforehand.

If this is true, perhaps the nature of workouts simply does not give trainers an opportunity to gauge some qualities that will be very important on race day. Or perhaps they could do a much better job of projecting and looking past early speed. In any event, the horse who can run but can’t run so much early often goes under the radar.

Another theory for the “behinder” longshot mystery is that, for whatever reason, trainers pick certain horses to be ones they try to win first time out with, and certain horses to be ones they will give a race. Trying to win first time out means having the horse in position early to win. (My statistics in Part II show this is a smart move.) Betting on firsters is indicative of trainer intentions as much as ability of horse, this theory says. When the behinder wins, he overcomes a deficit in preparation that is reflected in the odds.


If this theory were true, however, “behinders” should be superior to debut winners employing other styles. But the evidence suggests more uniformity in future performance relative to debut style than behinder dominance.

Additionally, being behind early in the debut would seem to be all about trainer intention and not about the horse’s inclination. Yet reviewing the well-known “behinders” on my list, my impression is they were by and large known as closers for their entire careers. If their trainers recognized that coming from well off the pace would put them at a consistent disadvantage, they wouldn’t have allowed the style to endure, if they had an alternative (meaning that the horse had more natural speed).

One theory that occurred to me about why come-from-behind winners end up doing well, despite their high odds in their maiden scores, and their narrow margins of victory, is that they may have overcome a problem at the start. How does a horse end up at the back of the pack? Sometimes, through tactics, often through lack of speed, but often because he or she didn't break well. This is particularly true of first-time starters, as any racing fan knows. And winning after a bad start might be a sign of a good horse. The lengths lost at the start might compensate for the small margin over the runner-up at the wire.

When I was going back and collecting the odds data on the "behind" winners, I also noted whether the horse was noted in the short comment ending the horse's row in the Equibase chart to have broken poorly or had a bad start. By my coding, twenty-eight of the 86 "behind" winners (32.6%) incurred difficulty at the start. While some eventual winners begin poorly and recover position quickly enough to be mid-pack or better by the first call, I am certain the count of troubled starts would have been lower for the other style categories, particularly for "led" and "pressed."

Nine of the 28 "behind" winners (32.1%) who had trouble at the start went on to be graded stakes winners, a good percentage. However, the "behind" winners who started cleanly went on to be graded stakes winners 25.9% of the time themselves, a higher rate than seen for the other styles. So "bad starts" does not explain the ultimate competitiveness of the "behind" winners.