Variant

[karlskorner]

According to Tom Ainslike (the godfather to us all) a variant is the difference between offical and normal racing times, caused by weather or track texture. either speed or track variant.

Where did you first learn of a variant, was it the DRF, whose definition is a number which shows how many points below or above par times for all races at the distance and on the same surface were that day. Jim Quinn describes the track variant as the measure of track-surface speed on a particular day. It is calculated as the average deviation betwen expected times, normally pars, and actual times for sprints and routes recpectfully. It is used to adjust running times to reflect track surface speed. Others have definitions that fit into the above. Bill Quirin came up with a chart 25 years ago, built around the thought that horses run different speeds at different times during the year and had a variant to fit that difference.

There are some out there that make their own variants. You have been told that there is such a thing as a "variant", either you read it numerous times in different texts, or the DRF, or it was built into a program you are using. But either way you believe there is a variant. The variant is built around Par times, certain horses will run a certain time in a certain race and variants are built around that number. Then explain why a $10,000 claimer can run the same distance and the same time some days, as an Allowance or Stakes horse.

Suppose you set that all aside and took the attitude that tomorrows race you are looking at you would use the same variant (say 17) for all the horses in the race, after all the published variant is for a race run 10 days ago under different conditons, but tomorrow you are going to offer all the horses a level playing field, by using the same variant.

Karl

[GameTheory]

I've paid absoluterly zero attention to variants for years, but I thought the DRF variant was based on the track record (not pars) for that distance, which means if a horse comes along and breaks the record, the base number would change for the future. Is that true?

[ranchwest]

I've always had more questions than answers about variants and I don't use them.

[PaceAdvantage]

GameTheory,

DRF Variants are based on the 3 year best time...not necessarily the track record....I think.....LOL


==PA

[ranchwest]

PA,

That's what I was thinking, too, but I haven't looked at the DRF Variant in a long time. If that is the case, then Thursday's card of maiden races gets the variant the same way as Saturday's card of stakes races. That makes no sense at all.

[FortuneHunter]

According to BRIS. Thier Pace and Speed figures include a "variant" component.

If you believe these figs are accurate they are nice because: Track, Varient, Distance adjustments are all rolled into 1 figure for early, middle, late points of call.

But you got to believe.

[Tom]

Yeah, there are a 100 reason whu it is no good. All reasonable.
But the proof is in the pudding - if you use it and are successful using it, who is right?
One thing for sure, the DRF variant isn't used by a lot of people anymore, so now we are talking wager value?
I would rather concern myself with the results of something rather than why it will or won't work.

Tom

[thoroughbred]

Originally posted by karlskorner
According to Tom Ainslike (the godfather to us all) a variant is the difference between offical and normal racing times, caused by weather or track texture. either speed or track variant.

Where did you first learn of a variant, was it the DRF, whose definition is a number which shows how many points below or above par times for all races at the distance and on the same surface were that day. Jim Quinn describes the track variant as the measure of track-surface speed on a particular day. It is calculated as the average deviation betwen expected times, normally pars, and actual times for sprints and routes recpectfully. It is used to adjust running times to reflect track surface speed. Others have definitions that fit into the above. Bill Quirin came up with a chart 25 years ago, built around the thought that horses run different speeds at different times during the year and had a variant to fit that difference.

There are some out there that make their own variants. You have been told that there is such a thing as a "variant", either you read it numerous times in different texts, or the DRF, or it was built into a program you are using. But either way you believe there is a variant. The variant is built around Par times, certain horses will run a certain time in a certain race and variants are built around that number. Then explain why a $10,000 claimer can run the same distance and the same time some days, as an Allowance or Stakes horse.

Suppose you set that all aside and took the attitude that tomorrows race you are looking at you would use the same variant (say 17) for all the horses in the race, after all the published variant is for a race run 10 days ago under different conditons, but tomorrow you are going to offer all the horses a level playing field, by using the same variant.

Karl

Karl.
Assuming that variants have some value then your supposition in your last paragraph would negate any value it had. Why pick on 17, you might as well say zero, because in your thought, all of the history of track conditon would not be taken into account. In other words, they would NOT be racing within a "level playing field", rather horses would be assigned finish times, turn times, etc. without regard to the slowness or fastness of the tracik in the horses' previous races. So your calculation cauld be way off.

Now as to the value of the variant itself. I guess the bottom line is that all methods are an ATTEMPT to get a handle on the track conditon. But, inherently, basically, there is no absolute way to calculate a variant. Here's the simple question to ask which will lshow how difficult it is to get a variant: "How can anyone tell whether the results of, say, a fast race, is due to the tracik being fast, or, rather, that by chance, the horses in the race were particulary fast. There is no way of separating horse capability from track condition. Attempts are made to use averages, but we all know that a particular race, is a particular race, and not an average.

Having said all this, I have to add, that while the variant calculation is essentially inaccurate, it does have some value. I have found that, over the years, I do better at predicting race outcomes by taking the variant into account than by ignoring it.

No one ever said that handicapping is easy. <g>

[karlskorner]

Throughbred;

I am neither for or against the use of a "variant", over the years I have played with other versions and my own, but could never satisfy myself as to the value, as there was to many questions, some of which you and others asked above. The use of "17" came about because a "0" didn't seem to work (don't ask me why), but it did much better than the published variant in DRF.

Authors such as Taulbut (his slide rule had a variant maker on the back side) Davidowitz, Quinn, Quirin, Dr. Sullivan and Beyer (whose variant is built into his fig) and numerous others felt that a variant had to be applied inorder to get a proper reading of the race.

I am quite certain numerous commerical programs use some sort of variant in their makeup and most of them are based on 3 year best time or pars. The making of a "true" variant has many facets. The word "variant" has many different meanings and falls into the same catagory as "bias".

Karl