Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Lyster
FTL:
Thanks for the continuing thoughts. Here are two more races done in this manner, the 9F turf race just before the derby and Friday's Oaks (I've only done three so far). The turf race went wire to wire as did the Oaks, or virtually so, and in both cases the winners PPs showed very near early lead with the ability to pass horses and/or gain lengths to a significant degree.
Take a look at these two races and see what conclusions or observations fit these situations.
Happy studies,
Bill
|
I chose to do the turf race just because it was on a different surface. Here are my conclusions.
POSITION (Top 5)
GET 2.2
SMART 4.2
MORYB 4.5
TEAKS 4.8
AL KHA 5.2
As you can see, there is a significant break between GET and SMART
POSITION (Bottom 5)
DOUBLE 6.3
STATEl 6.6
COURT 7.5
MEMOR 7.6
PRINCE 7.8
Everything else is between these two groups
TOP 5 based on speed at FIRST call
Get
SMART
MORYB
COURT
NOTE: The scratches eliminated 4 of the top 5 horses from this group, leaving GET as the sole survivor from the original group. This widens the gap between GET and SMART than the simple “rankings” would indicate. As I noted in my post on the Derby, the winner of ALL RACES come from the top 5 in this category. Because the 5th horse was so far removed from the top horse, I only listed the top 4 horses.
I think it is clear that given the big gap in first call position and the big gap in first call overall times, “GET” is by far the early horse that will go unchallenged.
As noted in my prior post, this analysis is in an effort to narrow the field to the winner and not the exacta, trifecta or superfecta.