O.K. the prelimaries. I'm a big believer in calculating speed figures with a empirical base. (From what I've gathered here, its not done much anymore.) Obviously, thats difficult to do when you get a new surface with new dimensions and without a history like Hallandale. Nevertheless, I still feel better about calculating variants with an eye on recent history.

Now February 5th,

Arcadia:

3YO,F,MSW-22.78, 45.95, 1:11.36, 1:24.89
4^,20K,CL-23.44, 47.09, 1:11.82, 1:38.04, 1:44.81
3YO,F,32K,MCL-21.80, 46.07, 58.87, 1:05.41
4YO,16K,CL- 21.58, 44.63, 57.07, 1:10.35
3YO,100K-23.03, 46.82, 1:10.68, 1:36.39, 1:50.18
4YO,300K-22.27, 45.16, 1:09.62, 1:35.64, 1:49.24

Summary/Opinion: The Sham horses got some bad press for coming home slow, but were less than one second off 4 yr olds. The fractions in the Strub were a function of a very fast horse (Love of Mom) required to hoof it by some suicide pace contestors. The 1-2 finishers in the Strub came from far, far back. The Sham winner would have finished about a length behind Love of Mom.

Hallandale:

3YO,MSW- 23.45, 47.47, 1:12.53, 1:30.31
3YO,NW1X-22.96, 46.14, 1:11.38, 1:24.34
3YO,F,100K-22.90, 46.01, 1:10.12, 1:16.31
3YO,MSW - 22.39, 46.24, 1:12.38, 1:38.17, 1:51.49
3YO,150K-23.06, 46.05, 1:11.09, 1:29.90
3YO,F,150K-23.49, 47.85, 1:12.56, 1:37.85, 1:50.20
3YO,NW1X-22.71, 46.63, 1:12.13, 1:38.21, 1:51.03
3^,100K-22.73, 45.63, 1:09.37, 1:15.62
3^,500K-23.75, 47.33, 1:11.12, 1:35.81, 1:48.43
3YO,150K-23.03, 46.79, 1:11.55, 1:36.91, 1:50.14

So whats all the Hallandale mess mean? Well, St.Liam and Roses in May buried their 3YO competition more convincingly than Rockhard Ten and Imperialism did, but that couldn't have been much of a surprise. Which track was faster? The one where 16K claimers got 21:58 and 44:46 fractions or the one where all the 9 mark 3YO 5'8ths calls were about the equal or better of the best Stakes horses in the country?

I don't mean to imply anything. I'm really not sure.

CtC