New way of making figures

[Valuist]

Is it possible that the current way of making figures is flawed? Do closers get too much credit in main track races? One mistake I've made is betting too many closers and stalkers on the main track. How about making figures based on the stretch call, and not the finish? Times would be used in the stretch call and beaten lengths also.

Advantages:
1.Speedballs who battle or press the pace but fade in the final furlong are given credit for solid races. I also think many riders ease up considerably the first moment the horse starts to tire. The result? A bad finish which is deceptive.

2.Closers who close on fast paces are penalized. If a closer wins a race and they didn't have the lead at the eighth pole, the race probably just fell apart and they didn't really deserve to win (speaking of the main track only).

3. Premature move horses are also rewarded. Those stalkers who make the big move on the turn to fight for the lead in the stretch but come up empty. Visually, those types are usually running impressive races.

Disadvantages:
1. Closers who close on slow paces are not benefitted. But these types are always going to be at the mercy of the trip gods.

2. Some distances, like 6.5 furlongs usually have a fractional time for 6f, not 5.5. In this instance I would think a combination of a 4f number and the final time would need to be used but you could still make beaten length adjustments from the stretch call.

[Faster]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Valuist
[B]Is it possible that the current way of making figures is flawed? Do closers get too much credit in main track races? One mistake I've made is betting too many closers and stalkers on the main track. How about making figures based on the stretch call, and not the finish? Times would be used in the stretch call and beaten lengths also.


don't know how you make your figs, and you are probably generally right --
by assigning greater impact value to early horses you may/may not increase your win ratio, but may also decrease your roi, as we know that closers generally pay more.
Another question would be "what is the winning running style at the track you are making your figs for?"

[Valuist]

Arlington is probably the most closer-friendly track that is running right now but even there speed can win. Arlington is usually more a function of a dead rail as outer drawn speed horses can do quite well.

Saratoga reminds me of Pim, the FG and the 7f Sportsman's. Pretty long straightaways with sharp relatively unbanked turns. Speed is very good but deep closers also can win. I don't know about Pim but at those other tracks, stalkers and pressers often get hung out wide and have rough trips.

I've played Dmr this summer also and from what I've seen you better be up close.

[delayjf]

Another problem is the inaccuracy of the data at the 1/8th pole. It's based on a estimation and not taken from the film strips that the finish line beaten length are derived from.

[Valuist]

But even the finish line can have problems, like that Arlington race last week. Equibase eventually fixed the problem but not until several handicappers pointed it out to them.

I have noticed some strange running lines re: the stretch. I have seen a few horses, 9th after the 1st call, 8th after the second, 2nd at the stretch but 7th at the finish (or something similar). Not impossible but questionable.

[Steve 'StatMan']

The call before the last quarter, often near the top of the stretch, is especially prone to errors.

HAW is a perfect example. The stretch is over 1/4 mile long. The grandstand is not a very long distance from the track. The chart callers, are looking from a ledge outside the pressbox, or out a window of the press box. There is not much of an angle for depth perception. Yet they need to call the order and margins from that difficult angle. Also, our two regular callers have dealt with this for many years - but when one of them has a day or week off, the fill in must now contend with a situation that may not be easy for them.

By now you may conclude, like I have, that the final quarter call may be the most subject to errors of all the calls. I don't ignore it, of course. But a couple lengths error +/- sure wouldn't surprise me now and then.

[andicap]

Valuist,

That's where an energy figure is so valuable. Why penalize a horse for being able to run the same final time as an early speed horse. They're all running on the same track.

Energy will tell you more than the final time or AP because if its too low you know the horse has no shot even with comparable figures.

Besides closers often look better than they should in SLOW paced races because they run these huge final quarters. After all closers are subject to the same rules of pace and energy used up as early speed horses. So some closer who tracked the usual 6 lengths behind a 48 instead of a 47 will run considerable faster in the last fraction and people will say, "Wow! what a great closer"
But if the closer tracks a 46 pace and stays the usual 6 lengths behind, his final fraction will suffer too because he's also running faster than he's comfortable with early on.

[cj]

Valuist,

I do things in a different way, but with a similar result as what you are looking for in a figure. I believe your thinking is dead on.

P.S. Just reverse that thinking when they cross over the main and step foot on the sod!

[Valuist]

CJ-

This would only be for the main track. Definitely doesn't apply toward turf racing. I agree those "E" types should be go-againsts when heavily bet on the lawn (i.e. Miss Vegas).

[cj]

Agreed Valuist,

I'm also saying instead to actually do the opposite on turf to a degree. Drop the first part of the race and make your figure. The win percentages are good, the payoffs can be HUGE.

Dirt, I combine pace and speed. The amount the pace contributes varies however. The smaller the field, the less the pace counts. More importantly, the farther back in the field, the less the pace counts.

Regarding the slow paced races, I have found that basing a horse's ability on any type figure earned in these races is a crapshoot. If I see a race with a shape of say 75-90 on the dirt, I will usually just look elsewhere to judge any horse from that race. If its a lightly raced horse with nothing more to go, let the tote be your guide!

[Tom]

There was a methods a few years ago - I think it was Steve Wolson in an earlier effort - that adjsuted the Beyer number to the stretch call. I used it for a season at Aqueduct on the iner and made a lot of money. Danged if I know why I stoipped using it. I'll dig it out and dust it off and see what is vcan do today. Pretty sure it was Wolson.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Bet your closer if the best horse on a slow par track or slow track, or when a fast track has a slow or very negative rail in the stretch. See 8-1 DM.

[OTM Al]

I think given your accurate assessment of how to judge that last piece of the race makes creating a new system around it not really neccessary. Knocking speed figs for not including them is incorrect because by their very nature speed figs only deal with final times, not pace and not trip or class changes for that matter. Speed figs are a great basis to start with but because they lack these ingrediants they cannot be an end all. Only by considering them such could we consider them flawed. I use them for a base but adjust according to the factors you mention, as well as a few others. For example, legitmate class drops get bonuses, while jumps get subtractions. Big margin wins get reductions. Those who were close up in the stretch get bonuses, especially if they are green. This actually might be a more productive way to go rather than building a whole new system. Study the changes in base figs that occur in these instances and use the changes as an adjustment to the figs.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Most horses have too few races to swear by figs w/o supplementing with other info.

[JohnGalt1]

When I do my pace figures I lower the final fraction figure. William L. Scott advocates this in Total Victory at the Track. His reasoning, if I remember, is that a gaining horse is passing and catching up to slowing horses, and that early speed should be rewarded.

He punishes deep closers that close more than 5 lengths. The chart I developed for myself gives horses only 7 gained lenghts (or 1 2/5 seconds) if they gain 9-10 3/4 lengths.