How "speed figs" factor into final odds.

[Stillriledup]

Ok, so many people purchase expensive speed figs from Ragozin and or Thorograph, some big bettors make their own, some fans just use beyer figs, but even if you DONT necessarily use Beyer (which are free with the purchase of the PPs) you are sort of "Forced" to see the number whether you like it or not if you use DRF.

For arguments sake and the purpose of this example, i'm going to assume the Beyer figs are "Accurate" (if you know them to be different from TG or Rag, please let me know) but i want to put some focus on the 6th race at SA on Feb 9th. The winner and betting favorite was the 12 horse, Moulin De Mougin. She paid 5.20 to win. Heading into this race, she had 7 lifetime Beyers, 5 of them were 79 or less and her last 2 were her best, 80 and 84.

The 2nd place finisher, Nickels Wild, had similar looking numbers, but her latest Beyer fig was 89, which was 5 pts better than anything the winner had ever run.

The 10th place finisher, Love Tale, had a beyer of 85 in her last win, which was 1 pt better than the winner had ever run. She, with the 85 Beyer, went off at 16-1 and wasnt competitive with a stalking trip.

In this race, the public was dead, solid, perfect, they had identified the best horse even despite that "best horse" never having run faster than 84 and being saddled with post 11.

So, my question is this. Are there some races where "Figures matter" and some races where they do not? Do people who spend 25 or 30 a day for the best figures on the market toss those figures in the trash on occasion and not use them all the time? If figures arent really a factor in determining winners or odds, why would people spend so much money to buy them?


Why would a horse like Love Tale, who ran an 85 in her last start, looked sharp on paper, be 16-1 when the favorite ran an 84 as her best number?

Why such a big discrepancy in price? I'm not suggesting Love Tale should have been co favored, but 8-5 vs 16-1 is a massive spread........and the public was correct, these 2 horses werent in the same league.

[letswastemoney]

I don't have the PPs in front of me, but Love Tale earned that number in a much lower class, so the public still factors in class as well.

[Stillriledup]

I don't have the PPs in front of me, but Love Tale earned that number in a much lower class, so the public still factors in class as well.

The 2nd place finisher (nickels Wild) was coming out of a grade 3 race losing to Customer Base, Stormy Lucy and Gulsary. The winner was coming out of a Nw1x and was on the wire with Oscillator...and yet, the winner and the 2nd place horse were 8-5 and 5-1, still, a pretty big margin considering the 5-1 shot had a better figure and earned that figure in a better race.

[Delta Cone]

Love Tale is a 5yo mare with 30 starts (31 after Sunday's effort) coming off a career top Beyer of 85 in a Clm 25,000 race. Her normal figures were in the mid 70s. The 85 just didn't fit with her entire history.

Moulin de Mougin, on the other hand, is a well-bred, lightly-raced 4yo from Richard Mandella's barn. Sunday was her second start following a 2-month break. It was easy to expect improvement from her. Add Gary Stevens to the mix and the public was clearly going to be on the horse.

The highest figures showing in any of the races listed in the pps for the field were an 89 by Nickels Wild, the 85 by Love Tale and the 84 by Moulin de Mougin.

[098poi]

The second place finisher broke her maiden on her EIGHTH try, her last race was her ninth race. The winner won in her second race and had been facing much tougher and was very competitive at this level coming in second in her last 2.

[Stillriledup]

Sure, i get the part that there were other reasons to like the winner, the humans surrounding the horse are hall of famers and whatnut, but i think the original question probably surrounds expensive speed figures...if you're just going to essentially ignore the figs and pour all your cash onto gary stevens because he's a human that you trust, maybe its a bad idea to spend 25 or 30 on fancy figs, after all, if you can just sniff out winners by betting on Gary or Richard, why not just save the money, use the Beyer figs and "tweak" your analysis according to other factors, like well bred horse, fancy jock, famous trainer, etc?

[Robert Fischer]

So, my question is this. Are there some races where "Figures matter" and some races where they do not? Do people who spend 25 or 30 a day for the best figures on the market toss those figures in the trash on occasion and not use them all the time? If figures arent really a factor in determining winners or odds, why would people spend so much money to buy them?


A figure isn't something where you just take the numbers and order them (by top, or avg. or whatever), and then expect that to be provided a complete insight into the race.

A figure is an instrument or a tool.

That figure tells you something specific. It's a bit of information that you can use within your total method for handicapping and wagering on that race.

By knowing the game, and knowing what specifically that figure can tell you, and knowing the quality of that figure, You can make an informed decision on whether or not having that instrument at your disposal is of value.


"Use good Instruments.
Some would have the subtlety of their wits proven by the meanness of their instruments.
’Tis a dangerous satisfaction, and deserves a fatal punishment"

- Balthasar Gracian

[thaskalos]

The 2nd place finisher (nickels Wild) was coming out of a grade 3 race losing to Customer Base, Stormy Lucy and Gulsary. The winner was coming out of a Nw1x and was on the wire with Oscillator...and yet, the winner and the 2nd place horse were 8-5 and 5-1, still, a pretty big margin considering the 5-1 shot had a better figure and earned that figure in a better race.

SRU...I might be in the minority on this topic...but here are my thoughts anyway:

There are many races where the figures only tell a minor part of the story. No less an authority than Beyer himself has publicly declared that the over-reliance on speed figures is the road to ruin. This game is so hard to beat not only because the average player lacks the skill to identify the better horses in the race. Our game is so difficult to beat mainly because the "crowd', in its collective wisdom, seems to possess the peculiar ability of making some decisions which cannot be substantiated by conventional handicapping means...and the "crowd's" opinion in such cases is justified a surprisingly high percentage of the time.

We are all aware of those instances where the obvious choice -- from a conventional handicapping standpoint -- is not getting the wagering support that its PPs warrant. We say that this horse is "ice on the board"...and experience tells us that it should be avoided -- in spite of its supposedly overlaid odds.

Well...I submit to you that the opposite is also of vital importance.

The horse that receives unusually strong support, IN SPITE of its lackluster record, is now showing us that the same forces responsible for preventing the "ice on the board horse" from winning -- in spite of its outstanding record -- are now favoring this supposedly UNDISTINGUISHED horse...who is seemingly facing superior competition in the upcoming race.

Just as we would be foolish to wager on the superior-looking horse that happens to be "ice on the board"...we would be just as foolish -- IMO -- to ignore the horse that's receiving much stronger betting support than its racing record warrants. The same forces are at work in both cases...but only in reverse.

If successful horseplaying were a cut-and-dried endeavor...then there would be a great number of winners out there. But there aren't...

[Overlay]

To me, the usefulness of any figure is tied to giving it its proper weight in the context of the entire record of each horse in the field, as part of the process of making an overall assessment of each horse's chance of winning in comparison with its odds. I'm interested mainly in knowing the probabilities associated with a horse's rank in its field as one piece of the puzzle. Also, while figures are important, they can be overridden or modified by considerations such as class and condition (among others), as well as by being overbet by the public. (There may be a figure source someplace out there where the top-ranked horse wins 100% of races at double-digit odds that never decrease over time, but I haven't found it yet!)

[CincyHorseplayer]

Completely skipped the thread and you know I respect you Stillriledup.It matters on most races but there are major whiffs on a regular basis concerning such things.My adopted home circuit is NY and connections and jockeys are bet so hard there are 7/2 shots and up are available,not regularly but plenty enough.I'll link em,but too tired tonight.

[PhantomOnTour]

When you said the winner's last two Beyers were her best, you left out an important piece of information:
one was before the layoff and one was after the layoff

This may be precisely why her odds were so low...the Sheets guys saw a lightly raced 4yr old who just equaled her lifetime best off the shelf, on the stretchout, with a lonnnnnnng set of stamina works. Those works gave reason to believe she would not be short or sore coming back relatively quickly in 3wks.
I don't use any Sheets (and we don't have their numbers) but didn't she have an Beyer explosive line?
She was supposedly ready to run a lifetime best off that line...I think.
Throw in the switch to Stevens, and she looks good.

You could make the same case for the 3rd place runner, #11.
Weren't her last two figures her best, one before and one after the layoff?
The runner up just ran a very nice 4th in a Gr3 off a MSW win...gotta use her.

There's your tri...what an easy game :D

[CincyHorseplayer]

Ok, so many people purchase expensive speed figs from Ragozin and or Thorograph, some big bettors make their own, some fans just use beyer figs, but even if you DONT necessarily use Beyer (which are free with the purchase of the PPs) you are sort of "Forced" to see the number whether you like it or not if you use DRF.

For arguments sake and the purpose of this example, i'm going to assume the Beyer figs are "Accurate" (if you know them to be different from TG or Rag, please let me know) but i want to put some focus on the 6th race at SA on Feb 9th. The winner and betting favorite was the 12 horse, Moulin De Mougin. She paid 5.20 to win. Heading into this race, she had 7 lifetime Beyers, 5 of them were 79 or less and her last 2 were her best, 80 and 84.

The 2nd place finisher, Nickels Wild, had similar looking numbers, but her latest Beyer fig was 89, which was 5 pts better than anything the winner had ever run.

The 10th place finisher, Love Tale, had a beyer of 85 in her last win, which was 1 pt better than the winner had ever run. She, with the 85 Beyer, went off at 16-1 and wasnt competitive with a stalking trip.

In this race, the public was dead, solid, perfect, they had identified the best horse even despite that "best horse" never having run faster than 84 and being saddled with post 11.

So, my question is this. Are there some races where "Figures matter" and some races where they do not? Do people who spend 25 or 30 a day for the best figures on the market toss those figures in the trash on occasion and not use them all the time? If figures arent really a factor in determining winners or odds, why would people spend so much money to buy them?


Why would a horse like Love Tale, who ran an 85 in her last start, looked sharp on paper, be 16-1 when the favorite ran an 84 as her best number?

Why such a big discrepancy in price? I'm not suggesting Love Tale should have been co favored, but 8-5 vs 16-1 is a massive spread........and the public was correct, these 2 horses werent in the same league.

To the last paragraph I hate it too.The betting choice seems invincible.Doesn't have to do with any handicapping factor,if it's being bet it is a forcefield of doom.Tampa's been like that this year.I hate it.

[Stillriledup]

Great responses guys, thanks.

Maybe its possible that the winner was just terribly overbet and happened to win, at the top of the lane, the 2nd place finisher was moving on the leader strongly and the winner was behind her and pushed along.....and the winner kicked in and won...if the winner doesnt finish it off, the 2pf wins and pays 12 and change and people are thinking "the 89 beyer horse" just paid 12 bucks.

I did see the layoff line, but this is a 4 yo with only 7 lifetime starts, she doesnt seem to put a lot of races together before she needs a layoff, great training job by Mandella to keep her together, but when i see a horse like this, i won't look at her jan 18th line and say she "needed" the race, i think a horse like this can just as easily regress off a hard effort than to go forward.

She was a good second to Fanticola (last October) who's a high 80s type of horse who races well all the time (and raced well again later on this same card) and interestingly enough, the 2nd place finisher (Nickels wild) was on the wire with Gulsary on Dec 29th and Gulsary was on the wire with Fanticola on Jan 18th....so, with all these "company lines" there's a lot to suggest that Nickels wild and the winner were very comparable horses and yet, one of them was bet like she was far superior. Turned out the crowd got it right this time, hopefully next time they won't be so lucky!

[Robert Goren]

There is a way of looking at speed figures for picking winners. It is not only to project the average speed for each horse in the upcoming race, but also to predict the range of those figures. When you do that, you will find races where the bottom rated horse has a chance because it fairly close in rating and has a wide range and the top rated horse has a narrow range. That maybe what you have here. If you are going to use speed figures, it probably behooves you to learn the what effect the range of the projected number.

[Dark Horse]

Speed figures were lucrative when only a few people had them. Bottomline. If you have information that nobody else has, you can take it to the bank. If your information is no better than everybody else's, you're just another loser in the long run. Because the deck is stacked against you (in the form of the odds), and the closing lines already include that widely available information.

[pandy]

Although I do believe that published speed figures are factored into the final odds, I don't think speed figures are bet as heavily as many think. You can see on this board that there are handicappers who put more emphasis on pace, or class, or trainers, or current form, or computer analysis, etc., and so do a lot of other bettors.

[classhandicapper]

1. If you look at multiple sets of figures, you will see that they often disagree, sometimes substantially. It's not always clear where money might be coming from unless you have a set of all the major figures in front of you.

2. Very few people (even more literal figure players like TG/Rag) just play the top number. Many are also looking at trips, trainers, bias, class, figure patterns etc... So just because someone is paying a premium for their figures does not mean they will dominate all their thinking.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Although I do believe that published speed figures are factored into the final odds, I don't think speed figures are bet as heavily as many think. You can see on this board that there are handicappers who put more emphasis on pace, or class, or trainers, or current form, or computer analysis, etc., and so do a lot of other bettors.

Good point Pandy.I remember having a conversation with you last winter,that bet factors were cyclical and this is just another example.If this was 1996 it would be doom.In 2014 it's not.

[Robert Fischer]

Maybe its possible that the winner was just terribly overbet and

If this specific race happens to be puzzling;

horse A - better horse her whole career, just ran in this same race last time as the favorite and ran very well. Expect her to be the favorite again today.

horse B - goofy horse that took forever to break her maiden. Then was entered way over her head. Actually ran OK in that race holding on until the real running started. Do Not expect her to be the favorite today over horse A. There's a slim chance she somehow is a different horse now, and this effort should tell you a lot.

[riskman]

This was a 9.0fur Turf Race for 4+yrM&F
Not as much emphasis by the public is put on speed figures for a route turf race. Class,pace ,running style would be main factors here. The pace shape seem to be honest, so personally I would lean toward class for the win
The 12,10, 9 had the best performance figures off my numbers.
If I bet the race, I would have used 9 for the win and box 9/10 exacta.

[JohnGalt1]

These are just my subjective opinions on speed/pace figures for the different races. And how I value them in my handicapping

Quarter horse speed figures are 90% of importance. Other factors 10%

Dirt sprints 60% and 40%.

Turf sprints 50-50.

Dirt Routes 40-60.

Turf routes up to 1 1/8 speed 30%, class 50%, other factors 20%.

Turf marathons 10%, final fractions 30%, class 50% and 10% for other factors.

[Stillriledup]

If this specific race happens to be puzzling;

horse A - better horse her whole career, just ran in this same race last time as the favorite and ran very well. Expect her to be the favorite again today.

horse B - goofy horse that took forever to break her maiden. Then was entered way over her head. Actually ran OK in that race holding on until the real running started. Do Not expect her to be the favorite today over horse A. There's a slim chance she somehow is a different horse now, and this effort should tell you a lot.

At what point in the betting, do you just figure that 5-1 is much better than 8-5 and start betting the 5-1 down hard so it gets closer to the 8-5 of the favorite? Its like the public decided together that the outside horse was the most likely winner and even though the 89 beyer vs better competition was staring them in the face, and 5-1 was staring them in the face, they just didnt take advantage of that situation, they sat on their hands....in a game where value is everything, in a game where you have to bet on overlays to survive, the winner was anything BUT an overlay and the 9 was sitting up there at 5-1 with a faster figure vs better competition and nobody bit.

[classhandicapper]

I just took a look at the race. I think it's fairly clear why they didn't bet Nickels Wild as heavily as that figure of 89 suggested they should.

Before that race, Nickels Wild had consistently run figures in the mid to upper 70s and struggled to break her maiden. She was basically an OK horse that wasn't showing a lot of improvement.

Her last race was a huge 89 in stakes company at 52.90 -1. That was a much bigger effort than she had ever run and not expected at all.

The public will almost always discount a big lifetime top at very long odds like that unless they see a good explanation (trainer change, equipment change, surface change etc..).

IMO, this is what the public was thinking as a group:

"We know that last effort was probably good enough to win, but we aren't convinced that the horse will duplicate it based on her prior efforts and the way the horse had been developing before that. So we'll bet her way more than she deserves off the rest of her record, but not as much as an assumption she's likely to duplicate her last race".

That's different than the favorite who was developing in a slow and steady way into the 80s and might even be expected to improve further.

I'm not making a comment on the values here. I'm just explaining what I think the public's thinking was.

[Stillriledup]

Good post Class.

They probably ran away from the 89 horse due to the "bounce" factor....or, they may have thought that her 89 was a "fluke" and she would regress to the mean, all possibilities.......but, you know, at some point, price needs to be your guide and it seemed that in this situation, the public didnt care about price, they "identified" the most likely winner and just bet her as if they knew the results in advance. They got away with it this time.

[pondman]

...if you're just going to essentially ignore the figs and pour all your cash onto gary stevens because he's a human that you trust, maybe its a bad idea to spend 25 or 30 on fancy figs, after all, if you can just sniff out winners by betting on Gary or Richard, why not just save the money, ?

You are on the road to censorship...or banishment. How dare you say a horse won't run back to it's last speed rating?

An allowance race is right at the level were you should start considering who the horse is competing against. Try some of the older schoolbooks for races such as this one.

[Stillriledup]

You are on the road to censorship...or banishment. How dare you say a horse won't run back to it's last speed rating?

An allowance race is right at the level were you should start considering who the horse is competing against. Try some of the older schoolbooks for races such as this one.

That was a factor, the competition. The 2nd place finisher was on the wire with a horse who was on the wire with a horse who was on the wire with the winner.....these 2 were in the same league as of recent PPs.

[Pensacola Pete]

The Beyer/Rags/TG/etc. are subjective attempts to provide a universal number that represents how fast the horse covered that distance on that day at that track, such that can be used universally across other tracks, days, and distances. Being subjective (made arbitrarily by humans), they're prone to errors. That won't stop people from betting the highest of them or trying to fetch patterns from them.

[pondman]

That was a factor, the competition. The 2nd place finisher was on the wire with a horse who was on the wire with a horse who was on the wire with the winner.....these 2 were in the same league as of recent PPs.

Don't beat your head against the wall over one race. I would look at the characteristics of the 12. You'll see the same variables again and again at SA. Design your own method for playing Allowance races and try to depend more on other factors, beyond PP ratings as you climb the ladder.

[Sapio]

Thanks to poster, lansdale, who introduced me to TrifectaMike's posts, I believe TM has provided a mechanisim for testing the premise in the this thread.

Here is the post:

Originally Posted by TrifectaMike
A little gift for all of you from me....

P(N,R) = 1/N (1/R + ... + 1/N) ... A probability generating function... Dave is correct you probability need a Ph.D in math to figure this out (Don'r even try...just accept the equation)

N -> Number of horses in the race
R -> Rank of horse's odds on the board

Example:

N -> 10 horse field
R -> Horse A ranked (by odds) 7th on the board

P(10,7) = 1/10 (1/7 + 1/8 + 1/9 + 1/10) ... Probability of Horse A winning as ranked by odds by the public.

You need to think carefully about what the equation is modeling. You might say, but the probability is defined by the odds...What is this probability, P(N,R) saying to me.

Mike (Dr Beav)

If this equation is valid across ranks and field sizes, we can determine the effect of the factor (in this case speed) on the tote odds.

Here is how:

Rank all horses by their speed rating and use TM's equation to determine probabilities.

Rank all horse by tote-odds and use TM'S equation to determine probabilities.

The difference between the probabilities should be a measure of the influence of the speed rating on the tote odds.

Thomas Sapio

[Cratos]

Thanks to poster, lansdale, who introduced me to TrifectaMike's posts, I believe TM has provided a mechanisim for testing the premise in the this thread.

Here is the post:

Originally Posted by TrifectaMike
A little gift for all of you from me....

P(N,R) = 1/N (1/R + ... + 1/N) ... A probability generating function... Dave is correct you probability need a Ph.D in math to figure this out (Don'r even try...just accept the equation)

N -> Number of horses in the race
R -> Rank of horse's odds on the board

Example:

N -> 10 horse field
R -> Horse A ranked (by odds) 7th on the board

P(10,7) = 1/10 (1/7 + 1/8 + 1/9 + 1/10) ... Probability of Horse A winning as ranked by odds by the public.

You need to think carefully about what the equation is modeling. You might say, but the probability is defined by the odds...What is this probability, P(N,R) saying to me.

Mike (Dr Beav)

If this equation is valid across ranks and field sizes, we can determine the effect of the factor (in this case speed) on the tote odds.

Here is how:

Rank all horses by their speed rating and use TM's equation to determine probabilities.

Rank all horse by tote-odds and use TM'S equation to determine probabilities.

The difference between the probabilities should be a measure of the influence of the speed rating on the tote odds.

Thomas Sapio


Admittedly I am bias because I was and still am a big TM supporter and it is good to see someone got what he was posting; thanks for the TM renewal.

[letswastemoney]

I always have this feeling that most turf Beyers are just made up anyway, especially the graded stakes ones. You can't tell me with all those slow paced turf races that most of those turf Beyers in G1s are around 100.

[Robert Goren]

I always have this feeling that most turf Beyers are just made up anyway, especially the graded stakes ones. You can't tell me with all those slow paced turf races that most of those turf Beyers in G1s are around 100.I have the same feeling. In fact I am getting the same feeling with all Beyers numbers these days.

[classhandicapper]

I always have this feeling that most turf Beyers are just made up anyway, especially the graded stakes ones. You can't tell me with all those slow paced turf races that most of those turf Beyers in G1s are around 100.

He's unquestionably breaking turf races out when a pace was so slow it impacted the final time for the entire field. In those cases he's giving you a figure that best represents the quality of those horses rather than a figure that might mislead.

[HUSKER55]

I must be missing something. If a horse doesn't "fire" then why adjust the rating? The race is what it is, or so I thought.

Someone, throw me a rope.

Thanks!
:)

[aaron]

I must be missing something. If a horse doesn't "fire" then why adjust the rating? The race is what it is, or so I thought.

Someone, throw me a rope.

Thanks!
:)
The late Cary Fotias subscribed to the theory that the number is the number. If he needed to upgrade the horse's next race because of the slow pace in the last,he would do it while handicapping the next race and looking at the pace numbers.

[Tara73]

I just took a look at the race. I think it's fairly clear why they didn't bet Nickels Wild as heavily as that figure of 89 suggested they should.

Before that race, Nickels Wild had consistently run figures in the mid to upper 70s and struggled to break her maiden. She was basically an OK horse that wasn't showing a lot of improvement.

Her last race was a huge 89 in stakes company at 52.90 -1. That was a much bigger effort than she had ever run and not expected at all.

The public will almost always discount a big lifetime top at very long odds like that unless they see a good explanation (trainer change, equipment change, surface change etc..).

IMO, this is what the public was thinking as a group:

"We know that last effort was probably good enough to win, but we aren't convinced that the horse will duplicate it based on her prior efforts and the way the horse had been developing before that. So we'll bet her way more than she deserves off the rest of her record, but not as much as an assumption she's likely to duplicate her last race".

That's different than the favorite who was developing in a slow and steady way into the 80s and might even be expected to improve further.

I'm not making a comment on the values here. I'm just explaining what I think the public's thinking was.

Racing is a game of odds and probability. The smart money knew the horse with this kind of improvement was a bad bet. There is an inherit logic to stay away from horses like this that show this type of pattern. The odds reflected the logic.

[fmolf]

Racing is a game of odds and probability. The smart money knew the horse with this kind of improvement was a bad bet. There is an inherit logic to stay away from horses like this that show this type of pattern. The odds reflected the logic.
well said...the public consensus was showing their collective knowledge of older horses form cycles.

[HUSKER55]

thank you aaron!
:)

[classhandicapper]

The late Cary Fotias subscribed to the theory that the number is the number. If he needed to upgrade the horse's next race because of the slow pace in the last,he would do it while handicapping the next race and looking at the pace numbers.

I agree with that for experienced players that watch races and look at pace figures.

The counter argument is that most people don't do either. So giving them a low figure that was impacted by the pace would throw them off.

I've always asked that they give the real figure and highlight in a way that lets people know there was an extreme pace. That way everyone knows to take a closer look at it or ignore it, but I've had little luck convincing anyone of that.

[fmolf]

I agree with that for experienced players that watch races and look at pace figures.

The counter argument is that most people don't do either. So giving them a low figure that was impacted by the pace would throw them off.

I've always asked that they give the real figure and highlight in a way that lets people know there was an extreme pace. That way everyone knows to take a closer look at it or ignore it, but I've had little luck convincing anyone of that.
trackmaster pp's indicate trouble in a horses pp's and brisnet indicates extreme pacescenarios with a race pace number at 1st,2nd and late pace calls.These #'s are in relation to the race pars for the class of the race.I find them very helpful.

[Robert Fischer]

Its like the public decided together that the outside horse was the most likely winner...

That's an interesting strategy.

Again, I think it comes down to you as a handicapper seeing something that the public is missing (or not properly weighting).

If you are both seeing something like the speed figure (from this example) and you are both using that instrument to contribute to your total understanding of this specific race, it's going to be less likely that you are able to say "they are over-betting the horse with the greater win probability" with any certainty.

Unless you are of the belief that less than a handful of bettors made a large, irrational wager on the high-probability horse, there isn't much of a case to be made. Even suspecting that such a dynamic could be in play is not necessarily an advantage, because that money could just as easily have greater insight than yourself.

Relating to this specific example - if for some reason you thought the 5-1 shot was much the best in her previous out-classed entry, and you understood that the public doesn't see this, then you would certainly be looking to capitalize.

[pondman]

I always have this feeling that most turf Beyers are just made up anyway, especially the graded stakes ones. You can't tell me with all those slow paced turf races that most of those turf Beyers in G1s are around 100.
jockeys do BS with each other while they are riding, and collude to slow down the pace on the front end because it's a long race, until someone makes a move. It's a game to them in most races. If you ask a rider about this hocus pocus handicapping theory, most riders would think you were delusional.

[Stillriledup]

That's an interesting strategy.

Again, I think it comes down to you as a handicapper seeing something that the public is missing (or not properly weighting).

If you are both seeing something like the speed figure (from this example) and you are both using that instrument to contribute to your total understanding of this specific race, it's going to be less likely that you are able to say "they are over-betting the horse with the greater win probability" with any certainty.

Unless you are of the belief that less than a handful of bettors made a large, irrational wager on the high-probability horse, there isn't much of a case to be made. Even suspecting that such a dynamic could be in play is not necessarily an advantage, because that money could just as easily have greater insight than yourself.

Relating to this specific example - if for some reason you thought the 5-1 shot was much the best in her previous out-classed entry, and you understood that the public doesn't see this, then you would certainly be looking to capitalize.

It seems to me that once the horse who is the most likely winner is identified, the public decides that its ok to keep betting a horse like that down, which means to me that there is probably "piggyback" money on a horse like this. When a horse is 8-5 and has a fancy jock, nice breeding, a good trainer, etc the people who don't know the game can toss their 20s and 40s on that horse because the "big bettors" have already decided that is the correct horse.

Another phenomenon is that some horses just get bet hard to win for whatever reason regardless of their situation, when i handicap a race and i see a horse who got Pari Mutuel "crushed" in his previous race (bet way lower than i thought he should be bet) its almost always a lock that this same horse will get flooded with money again.

Today, in the 4th at SA, this favorite was pounded way beyond what i thought he would be the previous week, he won that race despite my best efforts to beat him, so coming into today, when i saw him in the entries, i knew in advance he would be bet like he couldnt lose...so, some horses are the 'chosen ones" and just get bet down irrationally, i feel its a really good idea to remember which horses get overbet because a lot of times, that info seems to be valuable going forward.

I could say that it was Bejarano and Dorfer, so maybe the public bet the connections, but not all Bejarano and Dorfer horses get bet this heavily, so there's some reason this horse was overbet last week and this week, there's a good chance he will be 1-1 or lower when he resurfaces, no matter who he's running against.

[ultracapper]

What's the difference between 89BSF and 84BSF anyhow? About 2 lengths? It wasn't hard to think the lightly raced, regally connected horse would make up that difference on a commoner like Nickels Wild. Most G3s in SoCal are 2 or 3 horse races with a half a dozen "fillers" looking for the bottom checks. It doesn't take much of a maiden run for some of those trainers down there to think they should "give him/her a chance. He/She earned it with that last one." As in the case of Nickels Wild, they didn't even bother to give her one N1X shot before "seeing what we got." Nickels Wild will be running in claimers before she clears N1X, if she ever clears N1X. They took a shot while she was at her best. The chance may never come with that horse again. There's a reason Greely and many others down there fire about 6% winners. When they get one, they milk it while they got it, and usually shoot too high. Every 2 year old Walther Solis ever trained has run in 5 stakes races.

[Robert Goren]

I want the unadjusted for pace speed figure. When you start adjusting for too many things you end up with a number that is worthless. Horses react differently to fast or slow paces. I prefer to try figure out how it effect the individual horse myself.