After spending a few more hours this morning with the Belmont Stakes - I think I am done and ready with my ticket.
Now, I wanna work on The Met Mile. Is anyone interested in having the numbers for that race?
I am looking at Bolt D'Oro very heavily for this race. I think this just may be his favorite spot. He has some competition but just by all of the researching into this guys background, I think this is where he belongs and could run a serious race.
Lisa- I completely agree on Bolt. He should be fresh, and should relish the distance.. He'll also have a weight advantage and should be able to sit Midpack and get first jump on the closers. I love him getting Flo on his back too.
I would really appreciate the breakdown Lisa , thank you .....
also
how many 3 year olds have won the met Mile ? Just curious ?? If 3 year olds have won curious to see their schedule leading up to the Met Mile ?
Lisa ... When Tapwrit won the Belmont last year he was coming off the same sloppy track as Bolt this year , with a big difference in how each finished in that race ... Tapwrit finished 10 lengths behind .... Bolt finished 24 lengths back ??? Just something I noticed ....There is some talent in the Met ... I like Diversify a bit ( throw out last ) ... also first time trained by Baffert ...Dabster ... Bolt will be in my gimmicks ..as well ...
since 1891 ( no racing 1911 and 1912 ) 124 Races all toll
... there have been 17 ....3 year olds who won the Met Mile ....or 14 % chance of winning ....( Last 3 yr old to win 1996 )
...there have been 75 ... 4 year olds who won the Met Mile ...or 60 % chance of winning ( INCLUDING THE LAST 6 YEARS )
...there have been 19 ... 5 year olds who won the Met Mile ...or 15 % chance of winning
...there have been 11 ...6 year olds who won the Met Mile or 9 % chance of winning
...there have been 2 ... 7 year olds who won the Met Mile or 2 % chance of winning ...
Most wins by Jockey
5 John Velazquez (1996, 1999, 2010, 2012, 2014)
I would be interested in the Met numbers Lisa. I'm still deciding who to use with Hofburg, but he will be my key in the Belmont. I may give Free Drop Billy a chance underneath. I wish I could find an excuse for his Derby, but I can't.
BTW, I was at the Met Mile in 1982 when Conquistidor Cielo won. It was run on Memorial Day back then. Five days later he came back to win the Belmont. One of Woody's 5 in a row. The American thoroughbred ain't what he used to be.
Conquistador was a loaded monster. DP = 26-10-14-0-0 (50) DI = 6.14 CD = 1.24.
All speed and loaded all the way through. One thing about the Met Mile, loaded does well. I will post the numbers tomorrow. I am liking Bee Jersey and Bolt very much for this race so far. For the Belmont - Im set with Hofburg, Vino, Justify and Bravazo. I will box those 4 and throw Tenfold, Gronk and Blended Citizen on the bottom. The only way I will change that is if it rains.
Let it Ride - interesting about the 4 year olds and probability in the Met Mile. Now I like Bee Jersey even more.
Lisa ...
Looking forward to your numbers on the Met .... appreciate it ...
4 year old I'm looking at ... If he likes the track ??? McCraken ....GL on Bee Jersey , Asmussen solid ...
I posted the Met Mile Numbers. There is a new tab on the main menu on the Home Page.
"Spotlight Race Numbers"
No time to analyze the race, but Mare speed- high Brilliant and Intermediate numbers do well.
Points to Mind Your Biscuits, Bee Jersey, Bolt D'Oro.
Not sure about the weather though.
Lisa ...
Thank you Lisa !! ... I 'm still struggle understanding the points given to different generations for the different male horses ( Chefs , right ) ? Where can I find a list of Chefs that are in the Generations ? Then when a horse has the first 2 numbers like shared belief 2 - 2 ..that's considered good because they are passed down ?? Wow ... amazing , how people understand it ? I always thought the higher the number in the Dosage profile , the better , but that's not the case at all .... Thank you for all your time in trying to explain , everything , I really appreciate it ....
There are over 250 sires considered "Chefs." These sires were chosen because 1) They excelled in the specific distance category and 2) they are proven to pass down certain optimum distances to there champion offspring. Chefs only contribute to their specific distance categories. Low points basically means that the colt does not have alot of "chef" sires in their first 4 generations. A colt who has high points means they have alot of "chefs" in their chart. Having low numbers is not bad because the optimum distances that he receives does not get watered down.
I am writing more articles which deal with reading the numbers in a very simplistic easy wayand then it will get more advanced.
The most important thing to understand right now is that 5 digit profile:
Example: JUSTIFY - his profile is 5-6-8-1-0.
The 5 is in the Brilliant category which depicts the number he received from the chefs who passed down optimum distances of 4-6f.
The 6 is in the Intermediate category which depicts the number he received from his chefs who passed down optimum distances in the 7 to 9f range.
The 8 is in his Classic category --- 10 to 12f range
The 1 is in his Solid Category ---- 13 to 15f range
then he has a 0 in his Professional Category which means he has no chefs in his chart that were proficient in the 16f+ range.
Justify is fairly even in inheritance from the 4f to the 12f range. He is dominate in the Classic distance.
This does not take his mares into consideration. That is separate.
Lisa ...
You are amazing ... your patience is really appreciated .... I'm understanding it a bit more .....thank you .
I still need help finding out that just because a horse has lower numbers in a category does not mean it's bad ? That's where I will get confused , for sure ...
Your awesome .... Thanks !
Look at these 2 horses:
Shared Belief - 2-2-6-2-0 (12) Index = 1.40
Honor Code - 10-12-20-0-0 (42) Index = 3.20
Major difference in numbers. These numbers depict what the horse inherited from his chefs. Shared Belief obviously had less chefs in his chart than Honor Code. But just because Shared Belief did not have a ton of chefs, this does not mean his inheritance is bad. It actually gets more enhanced. He still inherited the blood from those specific sires in those specific distances. Shared Belief was all stamina but he still competed and won at shorter distances. He still received something from champions in the shorter distances. When a colts has low numbers, everything basically stays as it is. When a horse has a "loaded" profile like Honor Code, things tend to get watered down. I will go more in depth with another article soon. Dosage numbers are about optimum inherited distance. Basically it is all about POTENTIAL at the optimum distances he inherited.
If you look at the Indexes of these 2 - SB was all stamina but he won at short races. This tells you early on that he was running passed his numbers and had the potential to be a major champion.
Honor Code with his 3.20 index tells you he was loaded in speed and would have a little difficulty going extremely long. This however does not take into consideration the influence of the mares. In the cases here - Shared Belief gained an unbelievable amount of extra stamina from his mares which made his short early wins even that much more impressive. Honor Code gained alot of stamina from his mares but it got watered down from the high amount of chefs speed he inherited from his chefs.
Lisa ...
Great stuff !!! Again ...many thanks ....
250 Chefs which are all male horses .... then you do the Mare side ?? How many different mares make up the dosage on that side ? ... Probably a dumb question , but had to ask ?
also
the higher the dosage the more built for speed supposedly , right ?
the lower dosage ...more for stamina ....?
but in some cases the horse will run outside of those numbers .... is that where the mare side helps ?
These are not silly questions. There are a few thousand listed reines (mares) as opposed to only about 300 listed chefs (sires). The difference is that with the listed reines their criteria is only about being a source through their bloodline as being tested to pass through these champion qualities. These mares did not have to be champions like the Chefs. When you look at a colts chart, next to some of the mares names is an asterisk. If the asterisk it there next to her name it means that that particular mare is a listed Reines. Conversely, on a colts chart, if you see letters like (C) or (I) or (B) --- they stand for Classic, Intermediate, Brilliant etc. This means that particular sire is a listed chef and that is the category with which he passes to his sons.
The higher a chefs index goes the more speed inheritance he gained from those particular tested sires. The lower the index goes the more stamina.
For instance - a chef index of 7.00 means that the colt gained 7 times more speed than stamina through his inheritance.
Honor Code's chef index of 3.20 means that he gained 3.2 times more speed than stamina through his inheritance.
And finally, Shared Belief, with a 1.40 chef index means that he only gained 1.4 times more speed than stamina through his inheritance.
When a colt does not gain a ton of speed from his chefs and beats up on horses who gained a ton of speed through there inheritance, especially at very short distances, means that the horse is special and will only get better as the distances get longer. (Sounds about right about Shared Belief, right?!)
The mares extra influence is the key. They must be added in to get the full picture of the colts inheritance.
Spent some time on the Met Mile last night. Bee Jersey - Limousine Liberal - Bolt D'oro - Mind Your Biscuits. I'll box those for in a trifecta. Hope the weather isnt crazy.
When doing statistical analysis, I think the population (n) is the total number of horses broken down by age. I don't think it's the number of years. In your example, what if the 2 seven year olds who won were the only seven year olds that ever ran in the race? I'm pretty sure you need to know how many total horses have ever run in the race and how they break down by age before you can say what their probabilities of winning are.
punter1211 minutes agoWhen doing statistical analysis, I think the population (n) is the total number of horses broken down by age. I don't think it's the number of years. In your example, what if the 2 seven year olds who won were the only seven year olds that ever ran in the race? I'm pretty sure you need to know how many total horses have ever run in the race and how they break down by age before you can say what their probabilities of winning are.
Should I take the Data away , bro ? ... What do you think ? Solid point ...I get it .... Appreciate the advice / input
No I think the point you're making is ok. I just don't think it's statistically valid. It's still interesting in a general sense.
I have a few thoughts on the Met. I don't see a lot of front end speed. If either One Liner or Bee Jersey clears and relaxes, they will be trouble. I don't like horses coming back from Dubai. Everyone says Biscuits is doing great, but I've seen too many of these returnees crash and burn before. He ran an incredible race in Dubai against one of the most speed biased tracks I have ever seen he closed from last. I would bet against him in normal circumstances, but as the probable favorite I will leave him out willingly. Awesome Slew is a very nice race horse. He draws outside the speed and should not have any traffic problems. He's worth a look.
Lisa, I've never considered dosage in races shorter than 1 1/8 miles. Do you find it effective in mile races; especially one turn mile races? I've always considered them more sprints than routes and tend to use more standard handicapping tools like pace, set-up, condition, etc.
I use the dosage figures of both the mares and the chefs in every single race I bet on. I like to know, especially in races 8f and under, which guys are packing the highest amount of speed. After I determine that, I go back to the PP's to see if they are in fact utilizing that speed and where they are using that speed. Then I line it up with the bias of the track. The most important place that I believe is a must to use the numbers is in short maiden races. 6 - 6.5f races. The number one thing I look for is that extreme high chef index and/or triads that lean to speed. The second type I look for is that overloaded profile. Points higher than 38.
What I have done with Graded Stakes races is tracked every single In The Money Horse for most all of the Graded Stakes Races, separated them according to bias and track conditions, analyzed the chef and mare numbers of those board hitters and looked for the pattern that seems to have the advantage in that race. All criteria are different for each distance and each track for each race.
The Derby has its own set of criteria - high chef index coupled with overloaded triads.
The Belmont has its own - Chef index between 2.10 and 3.00 coupled with Ascending Triads and low mare index.
The Met Mile Mile - Very high brilliant points in both the chefs and the mares profiles coupled with stamina coming from one or the other.
And on and on. Each race, no matter what the distance, has a specific advantage with both sets of numbers historically. Some of the percentages go as high as 75% to 85% with the winners all having that same criteria.
Personally, I believe that each colt (with the exception of the absolute superstars) has one optimum distance that they inherited through their speed/stamina balance from both sides. Once you know the optimum, be it 6f or 12f, once that horse finally gets to run at his optimum, regardless of what he did in his past races, will only be the time to bet him heavily.
What I have found to be the most important is that with each graded stakes race, no matter what distance, historically, the same type of both sets of numbers reappear and reappear over and over in that specific race.
Every single specific race has its own set of "rules" with the numbers, regardless of distance.