{"id":55542,"date":"2021-09-24T19:58:59","date_gmt":"2021-09-24T19:58:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/btb.ehorseracing.com\/?p=55542"},"modified":"2021-09-24T19:59:01","modified_gmt":"2021-09-24T19:59:01","slug":"future-stars-series-2-years-later","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/btb.ehorseracing.com\/?p=55542","title":{"rendered":"Future Stars Series – 2 Years Later"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Back in 2019, I launched a new series<\/a> for the BTB looking for the future stars of the Sim.  The concept was pretty simple: you have a stronger attachment to a horse when you \u201cget in at the ground floor.\u201d  Every good horse has to start somewhere.  So the series set out to catch the next great sim horses before<\/em> they became great.  For the first half of 2019, we focused on the 3yo allowance levels.  For the second half of 2019 (at least until the end of September), we moved down to the 2yo ranks.  Using a combination of past performances, siblings, and a little \u201cspecial sauce\u201d, we tried to alert you to which horses might take down the next Bluegrass Derby or Breeders Bowl.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, it\u2019s 2 years later. \nThe future is now.  Many of those\n2yo\/3yo have hit (and maybe passed) their peaks, and most have found their\nplace in this Sim world.  So how did we\ndo with identifying the future stars of the Sim?  In a word\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meh.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I was hoping for a Breeders\u2019 Bowl winner, a Sim Eclipse\nAward winner, or a Classic winner. \nI\u2026didn\u2019t get any of those.  But it\nwasn\u2019t a complete waste.  We did manage\nto ID a few G1 winners, and some other top tier runners.  But before we break down some of the real\nwinners from the group, let\u2019s take a look at the stats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Here are the total numbers for all horses in the Future\nStars Series following<\/em> their Future\nStars Series race (all numbers through September 20, 2021):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n Number of Races:\n <\/td>\n 5,084\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Wins:\n <\/td>\n 958 (18.84%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of ITM Finishes:\n <\/td>\n 2,494 (49.06%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Non-Graded Stakes Races\n <\/td>\n 570\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Non-Graded Stakes Wins\n <\/td>\n 80 (14.04%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Non-Graded Stakes ITMs\n <\/td>\n 213 (37.37%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Graded Stakes Races\n <\/td>\n 287\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Graded Stakes Wins\n <\/td>\n 25 (8.71%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Graded Stakes ITMs\n <\/td>\n 94 (32.75%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Average Finish\n <\/td>\n 4.25\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Average Odds\n <\/td>\n 8.44\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Average SP\n <\/td>\n 93.96\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n SP Standard Deviation\n <\/td>\n 13.13\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Maximum SP\n <\/td>\n 120.94\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The stats above aren\u2019t terrible. The 19% win percentage\nisn\u2019t too far off the 23% win percentage that the horses had in my 2019\nmid-year recap, and that was focused on 3yos who had much more of a race history\nthat the 2yos that made up the latter half of the series.  Plus, the crop of Future Stars horses did\ninclude 18 eventual graded stakes winners. \nSo we did manage to find some horses that would go on to the highest\nlevels of success.  So even if we didn\u2019t\nget a Breeders\u2019 Bowl winner or a Triple Crown champion, we did manage to ID a\nfew up-and-comers before they made the big time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But there were plenty of horses in our showcase races who,\nquite frankly, weren\u2019t very good leading into those races and who we didn\u2019t\nactually think would be the future stars of the Sim.  One way that I addressed that in the series\nwas to add a \u201cWatch Level\u201d.  This rating\n\u2013 High, Medium, or Low \u2013 was an indication of how likely I felt a horse was to\nstriking it big in the future.  One might\nthink that those classified as \u201cHigh\u201d watch horses would be better two years\nlater.  So how accurate was that?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n Watch Level<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n High<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n Medium<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n Low<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Races:\n <\/td>\n 2,104\n <\/td>\n 1,915\n <\/td>\n 1065\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Wins:\n <\/td>\n 449 (21.34%)\n <\/td>\n 351 (18.33%)\n <\/td>\n 158 (14.84%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of ITM Finishes:\n <\/td>\n 1,093 (51.95%)\n <\/td>\n 938 (48.98%)\n <\/td>\n 463 (43.47%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
Number of Non-Graded Stakes Races: <\/td>\n 372\n <\/td>\n 173\n <\/td>\n 25\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Non-Graded Stakes Wins:\n <\/td>\n  64 (17.20%)\n <\/td>\n 13 (7.51%)\n <\/td>\n 3 (12.00%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Non-Graded Stakes ITMs:\n <\/td>\n 153 (41.13%)\n <\/td>\n 53 (30.64%)\n <\/td>\n 7 (28.00%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Graded Stakes Races:\n <\/td>\n 227\n <\/td>\n 59\n <\/td>\n 1\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Number of Graded Stakes Wins:\n <\/td>\n 22 (9.69%)\n <\/td>\n 3 (5.08%)\n <\/td>\n 0 (0%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
Number of Graded Stakes ITMs: <\/td>\n 75 (33.04%)\n <\/td>\n 19 (32.20%)\n <\/td>\n 0 (0%)\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Average Finish:\n <\/td>\n 4.14\n <\/td>\n 4.24\n <\/td>\n 4.46\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Average Odds:\n <\/td>\n 7.00\n <\/td>\n 7.79\n <\/td>\n 12.45\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Average SP:\n <\/td>\n 98.53\n <\/td>\n 94.05\n <\/td>\n 84.76\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n SP Standard Deviation:\n <\/td>\n 10.81\n <\/td>\n 11.00\n <\/td>\n 15.77\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Maximum SP:\n <\/td>\n 120.94\n <\/td>\n 119.51\n <\/td>\n 120.51\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

From a trend perspective, the data does what you would\nexpect it to do.  The group of horses\nclassified as \u201cHigh\u201d watch level horses were, in fact, the best.  They had the highest winning percentage, most\n(and highest percentage of) stakes wins, the best odds and the highest speed\nfigures.  The \u201cmedium\u201d watch horses were\nsolidly in the middle, and the \u201cLow\u201d horses were far below the others (though\nthere was one exception in the \u201cLow\u201d category that will be discussed later).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

But the Future Stars Series wasn\u2019t an exercise in the\naggregate.  It was about pointing out the\nspecific<\/em> horses that would find\nthemselves at the top of the Sim leaderboard. \nAnd what better way to do that then by taking a look at the best from\nthe series.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To figure out who the best were, we assigned a point total\nto each race that a Future Stars Series horse ran immediately following <\/em>their Future Stars Series race.  Points were awarded in 3 different\ncategories: Race Type, Finish Order, and Speed Figure.  The baseline for Race Type points was 0, for\nallowance races; claimers were a -2, and stakes races were worth anywhere from\n4 (to an ungraded stakes) to 16 (for a G1). \nFinish order points were worth 4 points for a win, 3 points for a place,\n2 points for a show, and 1 point for a 4th<\/sup>, with an additional\nmodifier bonus for higher class races. \nSpeed figures were worth 2 points if the horse cracked a 100 SP (or, if\nthe horse was a 2yo, a 90 SP) and -2 points if the speed figure was below an\n80.  Then we subtracted 2 points if the\nrace was restricted to local-bred horses, and subtracted 4 points if the race\nwas a hot race.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So now, with 2+ years of races under their belts, let\u2019s take\na look at the top 10 horses from the Future Stars Series.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

#10 \u2013 Doomcrag<\/strong> <\/h5>\n\n\n\n

(Tapit x Danehill x Fappiano) \u2013 Owned by <\/strong>lenny15<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n