Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
"Equilize" is the wrong word to use in this context...as far as I am concerned. I don't subscribe to the theory that the figures of the best dirt horses must be equivalent to those of the best turfers...nor that the best routers must necessarily run equal figures as the best sprinters. At any point in time...a group of grass horses might be better than their dirt-running counterparts...or vice versa. That's the true nature of things... IMO. I, for one, don't need "equilization". I want ACCURACY.
|
I understand what you are saying and agree. I wasn't clear enough about what I am saying. By equalize I mean if we had a truly versatile horse he should run the same figures at 6F on the dirt, 12F on the dirt, 6F on turf, 12F on turf, 6F on synthetic etc..
It would be hard to find a horse that versatile, but there are plenty of horses with some versatility across distances and surfaces. On average those versatile horses should be earning similar figures across distances and surfaces. If they aren't, something is wrong with the charts or methodology.
I think a case can be made that changes in breeding have made it less likely to find as many 9F dirt horses that ares equally good at 12F now than years ago. On the flip side, the surfaces have changed. They are deeper. So that matters.
When I see a horse that has been very good at 9F and 10F stretch out to 12F and watch him draw off full of energy with a good closing time (American Pharoah), it's seems pretty likely to me he's also good at 12F. If his figure is noticeably lower than I expected, that suggests either a problem with the 12F chart or the figure for that race.
As to your point, turf Beyer figures at the top are a little lower than on dirt. I think that's probably sensible because dirt racing in the US is still #1 and we see many foreign turf horses come to the US and dominate the locals. That suggests they aren't as good as our dirt horses.
