Early Speed

[hitbids]

If Quirin Speed Points aren't available, what constitutes a horse that may be desginated an E8? It seems I have read that they run in excess of 60 FPS but I am curious what others think. I am reading a lot of different information on Pace and welcome any thoughts are suggestions.

[Overlay]

Are you saying that you don't have visibility of the horse's running position and lengths ahead or behind at the first call of its latest races?

[Tom]

http://www.predictem.com/horse/quirin-speed-points.php

[SPEEDHORSE]

Can somebody illustrate how a horse can get 8 Quirin Speed Points?

[iwearpurple]

Can somebody illustrate how a horse can get 8 Quirin Speed Points?

How to Calculate Quirin Speed Points for Sprint Races

Note: Before any calculations, each horse in the race is awarded 1 speed point

From the three representative running lines you have selected for each horse:

1. Award 1 point for each sprint in which the horse was first, second or third at the first call.
2. Award 1 point for each sprint in which the horse was within 2 lengths of the leader at the first call. (Note: A horse can get a speed point for being first second or third at the first call AND a point for being within 2 lengths at the first call – for a maximum of two points per race.)
3. Award 0 points for any other sprint performance.
4. Award 0 points for any route performance, unless the horse was within 1 length of the lead at the first call. In this case, the race should NOT be used in the calculations at all.
5. Note: In seven furlong races, a horse can only receive 2 speed points if it led at the first call. Award only 1 point if the horse was second or third at the first call or was within 2 lengths at the first call.
6. Total up the points for each horse and add them to the 1 point the horse started with.
7. Award 1 bonus point if a horse was within a neck of the leader in each rated race.
8. Each horse will now have a total of 1-8 speed points. Write this number beside the horse in the past performances.

[Overlay]

For a horse running in a route race today, the horse earns eight points for leading at the first call in each of its three ratable races, or else being within one length of the leader at the first call of each of its ratable route races, or within three lengths of the leader at the first call of each of its ratable sprint races. (If the horse was not within three lengths of the leader at the first call of a prior sprint race, the horse receives a bye for that race, and it does not count as a ratable race in calculating the horse's speed-point total.) (Under Quirin's original procedure, you go back no farther than five races in the horse's record in an attempt to find three ratable races for it.)

[1ejp]

I'm trying to figure out which pts of call Quirin's speed point system uses in DRF PP's.

In sprint races it'll have no beaten lengths eg.

beyers = 40 post pos = 2 1st call = 6 2nd call = 715 3rd call = 48 fin = 26

40 2 6 715 48 26

Do you use the 6 or the 715 ?

I am new to handicapping in any detailed manner, so no laughing! :blush:

[thaskalos]

I'm trying to figure out which pts of call Quirin's speed point system uses in DRF PP's.

In sprint races it'll have no beaten lengths eg.

beyers = 40 post pos = 2 1st call = 6 2nd call = 715 3rd call = 48 fin = 26

40 2 6 715 48 26

Do you use the 6 or the 715 ?

I am new to handicapping in any detailed manner, so no laughing! :blush:




For sprint races, Quirin uses the first quarter call.

In the DRF pps, that would be the first call position to come with a lengths behind designation.

[1ejp]

So in the example I used, I would use 7th place by 15 lengths.

To figure this horses fractional time, I would add the 15 lengths (1/5 sec per length) to the 1st fractional time listed of the horse in lead?

So if the fractional time listed 1st is 22, this horse would be 25?

Thanks for any help!!

[thaskalos]

So in the example I used, I would use 7th place by 15 lengths.

To figure this horses fractional time, I would add the 15 lengths (1/5 sec per length) to the 1st fractional time listed of the horse in lead?

So if the fractional time listed 1st is 22, this horse would be 25?

Thanks for any help!!

Quirin does not deal with fractional times in the creation of his speed points.

He just eyeballs the first quarter positions of the horses...and assigns points in accordance to how close each horse is to the lead.

[Overlay]

So in the example I used, I would use 7th place by 15 lengths.

To figure this horses fractional time, I would add the 15 lengths (1/5 sec per length) to the 1st fractional time listed of the horse in lead?

So if the fractional time listed 1st is 22, this horse would be 25?

Thanks for any help!!
Right (assuming that you are using a five-lengths-per-second standard). However, as thaskalos said, fractional times are not considered in calculating Quirin speed points. You just use the horse's running position and lengths behind at the first call of the race.

[cj]

You won't find a bigger fan of Quirin, but you also won't find me doing math with an abacus. They QSPs were great, but they are pretty outdated.

[1ejp]

Do the fractional times listed coincide with the positional calls listed?

[Overlay]

Do the fractional times listed coincide with the positional calls listed?Here's a link to the BRISnet chart showing fractional timing points and positional points of call at the various race distances for BRIS past performances. (I would assume that the Form would be the same, although I may be mistaken.)

http://brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=calltimeschart

[Overlay]

Here's a link to the fractional times and points-of-call chart on the DRF website. (There appear to be some slight differences between the BRISNET and DRF charts.):

http://www1.drf.com/misc/pointsofcall.pdf

[raybo]

I agree with CJ on the Q points. While they can be used to measure a horse's determinedness to fight for the lead, or vice versa, the real "tell" is in their adjusted fractional velocities and preferred running style versus the field.

At best, in my opinion, Q points can be used for eliminations from contention.

[classhandicapper]

I agree with CJ on the Q points. While they can be used to measure a horse's determinedness to fight for the lead, or vice versa, the real "tell" is in their adjusted fractional velocities and preferred running style versus the field.

At best, in my opinion, Q points can be used for eliminations from contention.

For people that don't have access to pace figures or don't want to deal with fractions at all, combining running style with class works well. Since the average pace gets faster and the horse better as you move up the class ladder, a horse that has been showing similar running style speed at a higher class level will tend to be faster than one at a lower level.

[raybo]

For people that don't have access to pace figures or don't want to deal with fractions at all, combining running style with class works well. Since the average pace gets faster and the horse better as you move up the class ladder, a horse that has been showing similar running style speed at a higher class level will tend to be faster than one at a lower level.

I think the OP is referring to mechanical methods, combining running style and class (whatever that is), would be tough to include in a mechanical method.

However, if one uses running style and pace pressure, combined with fractional velocities (ranges) one can pretty easily include those in a mechanical win elimination method.

[classhandicapper]

I think the OP is referring to mechanical methods, combining running style and class (whatever that is), would be tough to include in a mechanical method.

However, if one uses running style and pace pressure, combined with fractional velocities (ranges) one can pretty easily include those in a mechanical win elimination method.

What I am suggesting is that if you want a mechanical method without fractions you could use the same kind of speed points/pace pressure to define the running styles etc..., but substitute the Class Pars for the fractions.

So a horse with 6 speed points earned in series of a NW1 races might rate below a horse with 5 speed points earned in a series of stakes races in terms of who was faster.

You can also refine it further by noting the races that were loaded with speed, neutral, or without much speed and using that information going forward as a substitute for fast/average/or slow paced races for the class.

That's what I do, but not in a formula. I intuit it. But you could put it all into a formula if you wanted though.

[thaskalos]

For people that don't have access to pace figures or don't want to deal with fractions at all, combining running style with class works well. Since the average pace gets faster and the horse better as you move up the class ladder, a horse that has been showing similar running style speed at a higher class level will tend to be faster than one at a lower level.
I am always confused about the true meaning of the phrase "works well" when it's used in a gambling context.

What exactly does it mean?

[Cratos]

For people that don't have access to pace figures or don't want to deal with fractions at all, combining running style with class works well. Since the average pace gets faster and the horse better as you move up the class ladder, a horse that has been showing similar running style speed at a higher class level will tend to be faster than one at a lower level.

So what? Parallel speed curves solves that issue especially with dx/dt and x being distance and t being time.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Quirin points are one of the best tools available for deciding how a race is run.

Once run styles are established pace numbers will separate the contenders from each running style group.On this site you have access to the best figure maker there is in Craig Milkowski at Timeform.It will change your perspective bigtime.Have fun with it!

[raybo]

There appears to be some misinterpretation of what Quirin early speed points actually measure.

They do NOT measure early speed!

Since they use only position at the 1st call (and/or beaten lengths at the 1st call), they cannot possibly measure inherent early speed.

So, if they do not measure early speed, what do they measure?

They measure the "likelihood" that the horse will "attempt" to lead or run at the front, or how hard the horse will try to do that, based on how he ran previous races (of a maximum of the last 5 starts).

Does the horse actually have the inherent early speed needed, in today's race, to get the lead or contend for the lead, without using too much energy early and compromising his performance late? That is the kicker. Just because the horse likes to run early, and has the tenacity to fight for it, can it actually succeed in getting the lead or contending? Only the early speed capabilities of the rest of the field can tell you that (ie, pace of the field). This is why sometimes a presser actually takes the lead against E and/or E/P horses.

So, used together, running style and Quirin early speed points are not enough to tell you who will be on the lead or in contention for the lead. One must use some sort of early speed measurement (good pace figures, or adjusted fractional times, or adjusted fractional velocities) to determine if that running style can be expressed in today's race, without compromising late energy availability.

I often find that horses who have an early running style and good Quirin points, without having the early speed capability to compete successfully against today's field, either don't affect the early running of the race at all, or they completely screw up the running of the race by running over their head early, and inciting a pace meltdown, that may not have happened had the horse not tried to do something it was not fully equipped to do, take the lead early or contend for the lead early against superior pace horses.

[classhandicapper]

I am always confused about the true meaning of the phrase "works well" when it's used in a gambling context.

What exactly does it mean?

In my case, it means adding a class component to the running style component is more predictive about who is likely to get the lead than just using running styles.

It becomes even more predictive if you beyond the class label and look at the horses that were in those previous races.

Ex 1.

1. Horse A and B both have 5 speed points for running style
2. Horse A has been running in MSW races and Horse B has been running in Maiden Claiming 17.5 races
3. It more likely that horse A is faster

Ex 2.

1. Horse A and B both have 5 speed points for running style
2. Horse A and B have both been running in MSW races
3. Horse A has been running in fields that were loaded with other early speed types
4. Horse B drew into a few fields where there were few other speeds
5. It more likely that horse A is faster

What you do with that information in terms of "value" is another issue.

[classhandicapper]

There appears to be some misinterpretation of what Quirin early speed points actually measure.

They do NOT measure early speed!



Their intention is to measure running style, but they do measure actual speed on a limited backdoor basis too. Slower horses that want to run on the lead will tend to earn fewer speed points than super quick horses that want to run on the lead. The very fastest horses actually get the lead more often.

However, I do agree that you also want to supplement them with either some kind analysis of fractions or some kind of comparative method like I am describing (where you look at WHO the horse has been showing speed against to determine who is fastest in a comparative way).

[classhandicapper]

So what? Parallel speed curves solves that issue especially with dx/dt and x being distance and t being time.

If there are 10 people here that both understand what you are talking about and want to go that route, I'd be surprised. That's great for you. The fewer people doing what you are doing the better for the values.

The point I am making is that there's huge school of people (Beyer being among them) that believe that making accurate pace figures or doing accurate fractional comparisons is fraught with even more peril than making speed figures.

Run-up issues, wind, rough starts, rails set at various locations, horses beating the gate, some sections of the track being faster than others (like a chute or the first turn), horses rating etc.. all make determining track speed, accurate fraction appraisal, and accurate speed appraisal more difficult than for final times.

So they look at running styles, quality of horse, and watch race development as an alternate method of getting the answer to the same question. I'm one of those guys that likes to look at things both ways because I think every approach has some strengths and some weaknesses.

Different strokes.

[PICSIX]

1st call position in most recent race does a good job of predicting which horses will go for the lead in today's race...IMO.

[PICSIX]

1st call position in most recent race does a good job of predicting which horses will go for the lead in today's race...IMO.

Top closers for same races.....

[Cratos]

If there are 10 people here that both understand what you are talking about and want to go that route, I'd be surprised. That's great for you. The fewer people doing what you are doing the better for the values.

The point I am making is that there's huge school of people (Beyer being among them) that believe that making accurate pace figures or doing accurate fractional comparisons is fraught with even more peril than making speed figures.

Run-up issues, wind, rough starts, rails set at various locations, horses beating the gate, some sections of the track being faster than others (like a chute or the first turn), horses rating etc.. all make determining track speed, accurate fraction appraisal, and accurate speed appraisal more difficult than for final times.

So they look at running styles, quality of horse, and watch race development as an alternate method of getting the answer to the same question. I'm one of those guys that likes to look at things both ways because I think every approach has some strengths and some
weaknesses.








Different strokes.

There are many people on this forum and those who visit this forum understand what I wrote. If we all think alike, we don't think at all. Also what I wrote was what you stated, but in mathematical terms. Handicapping horseracing is an quantitative endeavor and math is a very helpful and appropriate tool to use.

[classhandicapper]

There are many people on this forum and those who visit this forum understand what I wrote. If we all think alike, we don't think at all. Also what I wrote was what you stated, but in mathematical terms. Handicapping horseracing is an quantitative endeavor and math is a very helpful and appropriate tool to use.

I wholeheartedly understand and appreciate that some people (like you) want to use just math and fractions. I'm not familiar with that formula. Perhaps if you spelled it out in English for me I would know what you are talking about and could incorporate it into my thinking.

It's my view that measuring fractions accurately is way more difficult than measuring final time accurately.

I was only suggesting that there are alternate ways that work quite well that avoid all the difficulties of trying to measure time accurately and putting these things into neat formulas. Some people want to avoid formulas and fractions.

An extreme example that everyone might relate to was the 2013 Derby. By now, everyone knows the pace was very fast and collapsed. You could get there by examining the fractions or you could get there by looking at the quality of the horses on the pace, how they ran relative to each other, and how they ran relative to the closers. That's two different ways to get the same answer.

IMO there are huge holes in every singular approach to this game.

One possible solution is to look at the same thing in multiple ways.

When they verify each other (like in the Derby example) you can KNOW you are right. When they disagree, at least you know to temper your confidence.

When different approaches disagree, it's possible your figures/formulas are inaccurate or broke down or your subjective comparative analysis was flawed.

[1ejp]

I agree with classhandicapper. Quirin points should be used as a "part" of comprehensive handicapping.

Eg. In turf Alw routes Quirin points don't mean as much to me as the closing fractions,breeding and class.
But in a 6f 20k clm race Quirin pts take a higher place in my view of the race.

To me, they are a tool of the trade.

[cj]

I agree with classhandicapper.

I don't think I've heard that said or seen it typed before!

[classhandicapper]

I don't think I've heard that said or seen it typed before!

:lol:

Last time it happened was 1977. My father agreed with me that Seattle Slew would wire the Belmont, but his previous winner was Kelso.

[1ejp]

Who's your Daddy now? :lol:

Couldn't resist.....

[mountainman]

Fractions cluster and are a 1-dimensional read on early-speed. So I'm more interested in the quality and depth of a race's early tempo. I use formulator notes to record my perception of a field's speed content. Visual observations also factor in. Two speeds may post identical fractions in victory on the same card, but go about it differently. Perhaps horse "A" was hard sent early, whereas horse "B" led under a rating hold. That means "B" was quicker, but "A" the stronger finisher. Important info for me, since I subcategorize frontrunners as "swift" or "strong."

I acknowledge that there are well-conceived formulas (Quirin's, Klein's) helpful in identifying probable leaders. But I'm skeptical of their ability to produce flat-bet profit, because it's not PREDICTABLE leaders that pay long odds and inflate racing's much-ballyhooed roi on first-call leaders-it's the pace-setters nobody saw coming that pad that bottom line.

In my opinion, it's a confusion of cause and effect: Not all front-running winners score because they get the lead, some get the lead because they are destined to score. That's an important distinction, because early-speed isn't always an intrinsic trait, but sometimes an unpredictable by-product of sharpness and general superiority. And to attribute THOSE wins to some inherent running style only muddles the picture.

[classhandicapper]

In my opinion, it's a confusion of cause and effect: Not all front-running winners score because they get the lead, some get the lead because they are destined to score. That's an important distinction, because early-speed isn't always an intrinsic trait, but sometimes an unpredictable by-product of sharpness and general superiority. And to attribute THOSE wins to some inherent running style only muddles the picture.

We talked about this in another thread. I agree.

If you want to see this principle demonstrated, just follow the exploits of some of the "alchemists" in NY when they move a horse up. The horses often show dramatically improved early speed as part of the improvement and win wire to wire.

[raybo]

Fractions cluster and are a 1-dimensional read on early-speed. So I'm more interested in the quality and depth of a race's early tempo. I use formulator notes to record my perception of a field's speed content. Visual observations also factor in. Two speeds may post identical fractions in victory on the same card, but go about it differently. Perhaps horse "A" was hard sent early, whereas horse "B" led under a rating hold. That means "B" was quicker, but "A" the stronger finisher. Important info for me, since I subcategorize frontrunners as "swift" or "strong."

I acknowledge that there are well-conceived formulas (Quirin's, Klein's) helpful in identifying probable leaders. But I'm skeptical of their ability to produce flat-bet profit, because it's not PREDICTABLE leaders that pay long odds and inflate racing's much-ballyhooed roi on first-call leaders-it's the pace-setters nobody saw coming that pad that bottom line.

In my opinion, it's a confusion of cause and effect: Not all front-running winners score because they get the lead, some get the lead because they are destined to score. That's an important distinction, because early-speed isn't always an intrinsic trait, but sometimes an unpredictable by-product of sharpness and general superiority. And to attribute THOSE wins to some inherent running style only muddles the picture.

My reason for using running styles and early points isn't for the purpose of betting those probable leaders, it is for the purpose of identifying the composition of the field so as to find those disadvantaged by the field composite, and those likely to engage in early pace battles. All these identified horses are eliminated as win contenders in my program.

[classhandicapper]

My reason for using running styles and early points isn't for the purpose of betting those probable leaders, it is for the purpose of identifying the composition of the field so as to find those disadvantaged by the field composite, and those likely to engage in early pace battles. All these identified horses are eliminated as win contenders in my program.

That's what I do also, but manually.

I also look for horses that appear to be faster to every call.

[fmolf]

That's what I do also, but manually.

I also look for horses that appear to be faster to every call.
you can use speed points to accurately predict a pace battle forthe lead and eliminate any horses that do not have the inherent class capability to win the race.By this i mean the horse can only survive this pace duel if he has the ability to carry his speed furthest and is notcompromised by the cheap early speed.This of course is the question we're all trying to answer.Will this horse lead to the wire or will a late runner catch a fading frontrunner?