Speed rating poll. Did your horse fail to win because of speed rating

[jasperson]

I know that speed rating can be inaccurate,but I still think they are usable.
Here is my question? What percentage of the time was the speed rating the primary cause of your horse not Winning?

[thaskalos]

According to my calculations...the speed rating causes me to lose my bet 58.7% of the time.

[Fingal]

I said zero because I don't look at a speed rating as the final deciding factor.

As Shakespeare said-

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- Hamlet 1.5.167-8

[Greyfox]

According to my calculations...the speed rating causes me to lose my bet 58.7% of the time.

100 % of my losses are due to the fact another horse (or horses) earned a higher speed rating in the race.

[therussmeister]

I said 0% because it is my job to know the strengths and weaknesses of the figures I use.

[PhantomOnTour]

I applaud everyone who has voted in this poll so far, because I can't figure out what the OP is asking in the first place.

[Some_One]

Yea it sounds like another 'I bet the horse with the best figure, it lost, the figures must be wrong' thread.

[Overlay]

I take speed figures into account as one of a weighted variety of handicapping factors that I use to assess the winning chances of each horse in a field -- not just automatically selecting the horse that rates highest on any one factor, or using the factors as elimination criteria to narrow the field to a single horse.

Although speed figures are very influential in my determination of a horse's overall chances, my approach serves to remind me that no horse (in my opinion) ever has a 100% guaranteed assurance of winning any given race (no matter how superior it may appear to be with regard to speed, class, condition, or any other variable), and that the final separation criterion always comes down to whether the horse's odds make it worth a bet in light of my calculation of its likelihood of winning. (And, in my experience, it would be more difficult for horses that appear markedly superior on speed to offer betting value.)

Since I don't use factors as "go/no-go" standards, it rarely surprises me or leaves me unable to account for a race outcome when a horse that appeared to have had the best speed in the field fails to perform as expected.

[Red Knave]

According to my calculations...the speed rating causes me to lose my bet 58.7% of the time.
Of course everyone knows that 87.246% of statistics are made up on the spot.



(good one :) )

[Valuist]

As if trips and riders weren't enough. Now bettors can blame a horses loss on a numerical rating.

[Valuist]

100 % of my losses are due to the fact another horse (or horses) earned a higher speed rating in the race.

Unless your horse was DQ'd from first.

[Greyfox]

Unless your horse was DQ'd from first.

Dang. You've got a good point there. I should have said 99.9%. :D

[ultracapper]

Are you sure of that 99.9% number? That's 1 out of 1000. What is the true DQ rate of winning horses? Just another of those 87.4% statistics that are made up. :D

[DJofSD]

Are you sure of that 99.9% number? That's 1 out of 1000. What is the true DQ rate of winning horses?
I thought he was quoting from his records.

[ultracapper]

No kidding. there's a record kept out there for everything by somebody.

[ultracapper]

BTW DJ, love your tag quotes. The implications of the Einstein quote on handicapping is very profound.

[FocusWiz]

As if trips and riders weren't enough. Now bettors can blame a horses loss on a numerical rating.Until this thread, I did not know how much this rating affected how the horses subsequently ran. Perhaps the horses should not be allowed to read the past performance charts.

[ultracapper]

The day I open my form and see those printed numbers running around in a circle is the day I bet on the numbers. Until then, I'll watch the horses run around the track and bet on them.

[HUSKER55]

The ones that nail my butt are where the horse has the last 3 outs of 35, 41,39 and then you notice a new no name trainer and all of a sudden the next race is 91 and the odds are 10:1 and the horse wins.

Amyone care to share how you handicap that?

[Some_One]

The ones that nail my butt are where the horse has the last 3 outs of 35, 41,39 and then you notice a new no name trainer and all of a sudden the next race is 91 and the odds are 10:1 and the horse wins.

Amyone care to share how you handicap that?

Variable change

[Nitro]

The ones that nail my butt are where the horse has the last 3 outs of 35, 41,39 and then you notice a new no name trainer and all of a sudden the next race is 91 and the odds are 10:1 and the horse wins.

Anyone care to share how you handicap that?You forgot to mention that this horse was 20/1 on the M/L and opened at 5/1 and later drifted to only 10/1. It may have also had a better jockey riding that day while running against familiar company at its favorite distance.
.
.

[thaskalos]

You forgot to mention that this horse was 20/1 on the M/L and opened at 5/1 and later drifted to only 10/1. It may have also had a better jockey riding that day while running against familiar company at its favorite distance.
.
.

Hey...Tom Ainslie was right: "After every race...another system is born". :ThmbUp:

[snickster]

I look at speed at the 2/3 point in the race and final time at the end of the race which basically is the speed rating since the 2/3 time and final time needs to be compared to the track that the race is ran as to whether it is a fast or slow track. For a 6F/6 1/2F/ 7F race I look at the 4F point and for a distance race I look at the 6F point as the main judge of class in most races and the final time as also an indication of the quality of class but not as important as the 2/3 point since if a horse is beat at the 2/3 point after contesting a hot pace he will get passed by much lesser horses. I value speed figures and 2/3 times much more than Beyers numbers which I really do not consider very much in my selections.

As far as the question of this tread I do not really understand but I guess it is asking if I bet on the highest speed figures how much does it turn up a loser. My answer is I do not bet on speed figures. I consider speed at end of the race as very important but speed at the 2/3 point much more important and there are a lot of other things I consider to make my final decision.

[MJC922]

Hey...Tom Ainslie was right: "After every race...another system is born". :ThmbUp:

That's a great line. Another 'track bias' isn't far behind.

[therussmeister]

Hey...Tom Ainslie was right: "After every race...another system is born". :ThmbUp:
After every race...another conspiracy theory is born.

[clemkadiddle]

Speed is how fast a horse runs; pace is how the horse runs fast.

The fallacy of speed ratings is that they are based on the flawed theory of parallel time which is nothing more than a chart of values based upon the logarithms of average feet per second. (I have already covered this in earlier posts.)

However, since they are published and I do not keep my own charts or make my own variants, I use them to calculate track variants...period. I then use the track variant in my pace calculations.

I will not use a speed rating directly to select a horse. Sometimes they work, but a lot of times they do not. When I see a horse running a sparkling speed rating, I tend to think that they will not repeat it. When I see that it was ran on an off track, I view it with even more skepticism...even after I use it to calculate the variant for my pace model. On those occasions, I generally discard the corresponding calculation unless I have nothing else. When I have nothing else, I tend to pass the race; there is nothing that says you have to bet.

[thaskalos]

That's a great line. Another 'track bias' isn't far behind.

Ainslie had the advantage of being an accomplished writer, along with being a great handicapping storyteller. There are many lines like that in his books. My favorite was his reply to all the handicapping system ads which used to flood our mailboxes, pitching those simplistic methods that were guaranteed to make us rich.

Ainslie wrote:

"Five minutes and you get a longshot. Five months, and you get an eviction notice". :)

A great man in the handicapping world...who has sadly been forgotten, and no longer gets the credit that he deserves. But I remember...and I have vowed to keep bringing his name up when appropriate.

[MJC922]

Ainslie had the advantage of being an accomplished writer, along with being a great handicapping storyteller. There are many lines like that in his books. My favorite was his reply to all the handicapping system ads which used to flood our mailboxes, pitching those simplistic methods that were guaranteed to make us rich.

Ainslie wrote:

"Five minutes and you get a longshot. Five months, and you get an eviction notice". :)

A great man in the handicapping world...who has sadly been forgotten, and no longer gets the credit that he deserves. But I remember...and I have vowed to keep bringing his name up when appropriate.

One heck of a book: Ainslie's Complete Guide To Thoroughbred Racing. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979. 1st Revised Edition

http://antiqbook.com/boox/aut/2721.shtml

I had the edition before and the one after, my uncle had the '79 edition above.. IMO that was Ainslie's best.

[ReplayRandall]

One heck of a book: Ainslie's Complete Guide To Thoroughbred Racing. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979. 1st Revised Edition

http://antiqbook.com/boox/aut/2721.shtml

I had the edition before and the one after, my uncle had the '79 edition above.. IMO that was Ainslie's best.


Tom Ainslie was a decent poker player when he played at Caesar's Palace in the late '80's. I dealt to him many times in the 15-30 seven-card stud games. A Good guy with many interesting stories that actually made games last longer on the graveyard shift. He also held a few seminars in the Racebook that were well attended by many of the best handicappers in Vegas........Good times.

[Nitro]

Hey...Tom Ainslie was right: "After every race...another system is born". :ThmbUp: Very Good analogy ! I was very surprised that anyone here would pickup on that. I could've certainly gone into more detail, but I didn't want be accused of Red boarding a fictitious race. :D

After every race...another conspiracy theory is born.Conspiracy - hell! It happens everyday and its called insider intentions: The most powerful tool at a players disposal. On Tues 12/16 the day I posted that hypothetical scenario above I made 4 bets at GP. All were related to my post.
GP Race #1 - #5 Bagration - M/L 20/1, OFF @ 9/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Dorochenko/Whitacre

GP Race #3 - #5 Little Baker - M/L 9/1, OFF @ 9/2 - Trainer/Jockey - Vaccarezza/Rosario

GP Race #7 - #6 I'm Sensational - M/L 15/1, OFF @ 7/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Escobar/Santiago

GP Race #8 - #5 Ice Festival - M/L 15/1, OFF @ 9/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Lynch/Prado
.
.

[ReplayRandall]

On Tues 12/16 the day I posted that hypothetical scenario above I made 4 bets at GP. All were related to my post.
GP Race #1 - #5 Bagration - M/L 20/1, OFF @ 9/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Dorochenko/Whitacre

GP Race #3 - #5 Little Baker - M/L 9/1, OFF @ 9/2 - Trainer/Jockey - Vaccarezza/Rosario

GP Race #7 - #6 I'm Sensational - M/L 15/1, OFF @ 7/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Escobar/Santiago

GP Race #8 - #5 Ice Festival - M/L 15/1, OFF @ 9/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Lynch/Prado.


Can't remember the last time I saw a M/L of 9-1? You sure about this?

[Nitro]

Can't remember the last time I saw a M/L of 9-1? You sure about this? I stand corrected. That 3rd race should read:
GP Race #3 - #7 Tea's Two Step - M/L 15/1, OFF @ 8/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Carrasco/Rodriguez
.

[cj]

Very Good analogy ! I was very surprised that anyone here would pickup on that. I could've certainly gone into more detail, but I didn't want be accused of Red boarding a fictitious race. :D

Conspiracy - hell! It happens everyday and its called insider intentions: The most powerful tool at a players disposal. On Tues 12/16 the day I posted that hypothetical scenario above I made 4 bets at GP. All were related to my post.
GP Race #1 - #5 Bagration - M/L 20/1, OFF @ 9/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Dorochenko/Whitacre

GP Race #3 - #5 Little Baker - M/L 9/1, OFF @ 9/2 - Trainer/Jockey - Vaccarezza/Rosario

GP Race #7 - #6 I'm Sensational - M/L 15/1, OFF @ 7/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Escobar/Santiago

GP Race #8 - #5 Ice Festival - M/L 15/1, OFF @ 9/1 - Trainer/Jockey - Lynch/Prado
.
.

Worthless posting after the fact. I mean really, what is the point of posting this?

[Tall One]

One heck of a book: Ainslie's Complete Guide To Thoroughbred Racing. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979. 1st Revised Edition

http://antiqbook.com/boox/aut/2721.shtml

I had the edition before and the one after, my uncle had the '79 edition above.. IMO that was Ainslie's best.



Agreed. After Picking Winners, the revised edition was the second handicaping book i bought. Probably have a hundred pages bookmarked..:D

Couple years back, purchased Ainslie's Complete Guide to Harness Racing off Amazon for a few bucks, and it's a great read, and resource, imo... :ThmbUp:

[Nitro]

Worthless posting after the fact. I mean really, what is the point of posting this?In case you missed it, the point was related to an intelligent comment by Thaskalos in response to my hypothetical scenario for the possibility of betting on a horse suggested by Husker55.

I realize how much this type of scenario must eat away at your ego, especially because I don't rely on "numbers". I happen to be very fond of playing this game based on reality. Please I can't even count how many worthless posts in my estimation I've seen of yours. Instead of posting all of that nonsense why not try posting some real valued selections based on that stuff. Try something like this:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showtphp?t=118996hread
or even something like this (if you can handle the big fields at Hong Kong)
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=118999
.
.

[cj]

In case you missed it, the point was related to an intelligent comment by Thaskalos in response to my hypothetical scenario for the possibility of betting on a horse suggested by Husker55.

I realize how much this type of scenario must eat away at your ego, especially because I don't rely on "numbers". I happen to be very fond of playing this game based on reality. Please I can't even count how many worthless posts in my estimation I've seen of yours. Instead of posting all of that nonsense why not try posting some real valued selections based on that stuff. Try something like this:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showtphp?t=118996hread
or even something like this (if you can handle the big fields at Hong Kong)
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=118999
.
.

Nobody wants to hear about wins after the fact, particularly when the post serves no purpose. It has nothing to do with anything else.

Nothing you could post would eat away at me. I do my own thing. I've posted many selections on this board over the years and on my old pace figures site. If you think what I post is nonsense, don't read it.

That said, you won't be posting blatant redboards here for no reason other than to bash figures (which are only part of my handicapping). Guys like you get tiresome.

[PaceAdvantage]

Please remind Nitro that I used YOUR FIGURES, cj, to pick the winner of the 2014 BC Juvenile Fillies (Take Charge Brandi). This was posted to TWO DIFFERENT THREADS ON THIS BOARD BEFORE THE RACE went off.

Thank you again for your excellent FIGURES.

[Tom]

And, among countless other score, I used those same figures to hit my biggest score ever, at Turfway park a couple of years ago.
A $600 exacta made up of two underlined horses.

As far as CJ making picks, he has made plenty of them over the years, here and PaceFigures.com.

Now, where is that bowing and scrapping emoticon.....:confused:

[JohnGalt1]

I believe speed figures are more valuable the shorter the race.

The fastest figure in quarter horse races is more important than other factors.

In marathons I don't even consider speed, but other things like class and form factors.