PDA

View Full Version : BRISNET or DRF ?


ICR
08-30-2017, 11:39 AM
BRISNET or DRF ?

OK, I know this is like Coke or Pepsi …. Or Nikon or Canon …. ( or even Ginger or Mary Ann ;);) ) ….
But which do most prefer and why ?

Does one offer more info, is one more accurate… are Beyer numbers better or worse than Bris Speed Figs ?
Would like to hear your thoughts

Thanks

GMB@BP
08-30-2017, 12:04 PM
Neither.

Timeform US is a superior product in just about every way, the information is better at a much better value.

The only thing I would say is that DRF Formulator is a tool that has features you cannot get with Timeform and is a little better for making notes of cards and races. But it is pricey. Also, Timeform PP’s expire the night of the racing so you can’t look at the past performances you purchased after the date.

But the pace and final, and the adjusted figures are just better. I think their charts are better. I think their trainer ratings are better that they generate.

linrom1
08-30-2017, 01:06 PM
RACE Stats Lens is the best. Basic DRF is a fine product; there are features that Bris offers that are superior to DRF such as AEI Index and sire progeny stats, it's almost FREE but it also has very poor quality control.

GMB@BP
08-30-2017, 01:33 PM
RACE Stats Lens is the best. Basic DRF is a fine product; there are features that Bris offers that are superior to DRF such as AEI Index and sire progeny stats, it's almost FREE but it also has very poor quality control.

Why is Race Stats Lens the best?

betovernetcapper
08-30-2017, 01:55 PM
I get the bulk of my data from HTR and the are the best. Now having said that I also use the Formulator from time to time for long range trainer stats & I like the layout of the DRF. I grew up using the DRF & I've grown accustomed to the layout. When I began using it you had to open the paper & then tear it in half. That was a long time ago.
I think TimeForm US is really elegantly done but I haven't developed a real feel for it yet.
The Lens product might be good but I don't have the energy or desire to go through the learning curve.
In answer to your question the Beyer figs are better then the Bris figs. Now if you want to compare the Beyer figs to TimeForm or Cramer figs it's not as cut and dried as the Beyer fig only reflects the final time & the other figures reflect additional aspects of the race like pace.
Ya pays your money & ya takes your choice.:)

letswastemoney
08-30-2017, 02:20 PM
BRIS PPs are free if you know where to look. That has to count for something.

linrom1
08-30-2017, 02:48 PM
Why is Race Stats Lens the best?

It has all the features of FORMULATOR and pace projections like TIMEFORM and True Odds algorithm; but, it's more expansive.

Personally I use Equibase Premium PPs. It's less expansive than basic DRF and Ultimate Bris PPs, and it has great Pace and Speed figures along with unique Turf Stats that separate fast and wet track conditions. In addition like Fromulator, it's linked to chart history BUT it also offers European race chart history and I also like how it's presented visually on the computer screen.

Since I mostly handicap stake race cards at $2.50/per card it's fair, I've also grown fond of it and since Equibase took over chart calling business, I find it more dependable than rest.

jasperson
08-30-2017, 03:02 PM
BRISNET or DRF ?

OK, I know this is like Coke or Pepsi …. Or Nikon or Canon …. ( or even Ginger or Mary Ann ;);) ) ….
But which do most prefer and why ?

Does one offer more info, is one more accurate… are Beyer numbers better or worse than Bris Speed Figs ?
Would like to hear your thoughts

Thanks
When bris first started up they had both their's and beyers speed figures. Sometimes beyers was better and sometimes bris was better. I couldn't tell which one was the better and didn't do a long term study of them. I use either one which ever I have available.
I will take Mary Ann.

ldiatone
08-30-2017, 05:09 PM
Neither.

Timeform US is a superior product in just about every way, the information is better at a much better value.

The only thing I would say is that DRF Formulator is a tool that has features you cannot get with Timeform and is a little better for making notes of cards and races. But it is pricey. Also, Timeform PP’s expire the night of the racing so you can’t look at the past performances you purchased after the date.

But the pace and final, and the adjusted figures are just better. I think their charts are better. I think their trainer ratings are better that they generate.
? now i am just asking. why do you think TimeformUS is so superior to drf or bris? what do you think the differences are?
thanks

cj
08-30-2017, 05:20 PM
It has all the features of FORMULATOR and pace projections like TIMEFORM and True Odds algorithm; but, it's more expansive.

Personally I use Equibase Premium PPs. It's less expansive than basic DRF and Ultimate Bris PPs, and it has great Pace and Speed figures along with unique Turf Stats that separate fast and wet track conditions. In addition like Fromulator, it's linked to chart history BUT it also offers European race chart history and I also like how it's presented visually on the computer screen.

Since I mostly handicap stake race cards at $2.50/per card it's fair, I've also grown fond of it and since Equibase took over chart calling business, I find it more dependable than rest.


If you think the pace and speed figures at Equibase are great, I'll just say good luck.

ldiatone
08-30-2017, 06:10 PM
If you think the pace and speed figures at Equibase are great, I'll just say good luck.
hi cj you to, and why do you think the figs are better? just asking
and let me throw this out does one think the figs are relative to each other??
drf, bris, T.US, TM, HDW,

cj
08-30-2017, 06:36 PM
hi cj you to, and why do you think the figs are better? just asking
and let me throw this out does one think the figs are relative to each other??
drf, bris, T.US, TM, HDW,

I've studied a lot of different figures available probably as closely as anyone. Most do a good job. I have not seen much of HDW or Trackmaster. Equibase, to be frank, stink. Here is a link to the best speed figures of the year:

http://www.equibase.com/static/statistics/eleaders.html

Until Saturday's Travers, Gormley was the top 3yo and even now he is one point behind. Gormley. And it came in the Sham stakes in January.

Richard's Boy is the second fastest dirt sprinter in the country.

There are lots like that, and it gets even worse as you go further down the class ladder. They don't get any human input I don't believe and they miss a lot of things.

ldiatone
08-30-2017, 07:00 PM
I've studied a lot of different figures available probably as closely as anyone. Most do a good job. I have not seen much of HDW or Trackmaster. Equibase, to be frank, stink. Here is a link to the best speed figures of the year:

http://www.equibase.com/static/statistics/eleaders.html

Until Saturday's Travers, Gormley was the top 3yo and even now he is one point behind. Gormley. And it came in the Sham stakes in January.

Richard's Boy is the second fastest dirt sprinter in the country.

There are lots like that, and it gets even worse as you go further down the class ladder. They don't get any human input I don't believe and they miss a lot of things.
well i do think TM and Equibase are the same speed figures. some one will correct me if i am wrong. thanks for the input.

RunForTheRoses
08-30-2017, 07:30 PM
TM and equibase are same.

Even though beyers are flawed they have a human looking at them and I don't think bris does. You get some obvious off numbers with bris. For free they're not bad if you want to casually play. I like to get drf classic or formulator and tfus.

Stats lens has so much stuff and I'm not sure what is put into those stats. Bad stats can throw you off but I might give them another chance as they are the one perk with tvg

ldiatone
08-30-2017, 08:20 PM
TM and equibase are same.

Even though beyers are flawed they have a human looking at them and I don't think bris does. You get some obvious off numbers with bris. For free they're not bad if you want to casually play. I like to get drf classic or formulator and tfus.

Stats lens has so much stuff and I'm not sure what is put into those stats. Bad stats can throw you off but I might give them another chance as they are the one perk with tvg
now isnt Stats lens supported by Trackmaster? you can buy it on there site. is it there program?

ldiatone
08-30-2017, 08:29 PM
just from what i view. and if i am wrong correct me. after viewing a sample of the stats lens, it reminds me of TMs plus pro. just more clicking on plus pro. it does not give the true odds but it looks like a different format. plus its offered by TM

RunForTheRoses
08-30-2017, 08:33 PM
now isnt Stats lens supported by Trackmaster? you can buy it on there site. is it there program?

It is a TM/EQ program which if it uses their figures to make stats...

GMB@BP
08-30-2017, 08:43 PM
? now i am just asking. why do you think TimeformUS is so superior to drf or bris? what do you think the differences are?
thanks

I have been working with CJ's figures for quite a while now and have used them extensively and they tend to provide a better overall anaysis of a horses performance because they are adjusted for pace.

Plus having the pace figures of the running of the race allows you to deduce your opinions of why horses can be upgraded or downgraded thus allowing for more bets on underlays or just as important bet against underlays.

I also do not think the Beyer figures are as accurate as they used to be for the higher end horses (alw, stakes) and also I think the Beyer figures are useless on turf races.

linrom1
08-30-2017, 08:43 PM
If you think the pace and speed figures at Equibase are great, I'll just say good luck.

It depends how you use them? I look at both dirt speed and pace figures together and see if they're significantly higher than the competition. It works!

ldiatone
08-30-2017, 08:52 PM
I have been working with CJ's figures for quite a while now and have used them extensively and they tend to provide a better overall anaysis of a horses performance because they are adjusted for pace.

Plus having the pace figures of the running of the race allows you to deduce your opinions of why horses can be upgraded or downgraded thus allowing for more bets on underlays or just as important bet against underlays.

I also do not think the Beyer figures are as accurate as they used to be for the higher end horses (alw, stakes) and also I think the Beyer figures are useless on turf races.

ok thanks for the answer. makes sense

ldiatone
08-30-2017, 08:54 PM
cj does one have to buy races for the Printing icon to show? on the free daily i did not view the printing icon. thanks

cj
08-30-2017, 10:38 PM
cj does one have to buy races for the Printing icon to show? on the free daily i did not view the printing icon. thanks

I'll have to ask, I can't check it with account. I get the icon no matter what.

Tom
08-31-2017, 07:09 PM
Can't print on the freebies.

Secondbest
08-31-2017, 11:58 PM
Has anybody ever tried Pizzola' s post time daily? I know it's used for BM and valuecapper but I'm curious if anyone has tried it on its own?

Lemon Drop Husker
09-01-2017, 12:55 AM
Has anybody ever tried Pizzola' s post time daily? I know it's used for BM and valuecapper but I'm curious if anyone has tried it on its own?

What does it matter when Jockey/Trainer is 85% of the game?

ldiatone
09-01-2017, 03:07 AM
here is a oldie but goodie
https://youtu.be/ovC_-YPKJUY

Fox
09-02-2017, 04:56 AM
I'll go with TM and HDW over Bris or Drf, Coke in a bottle, Pepsi in can, Nikon, and Mary Ann.

eldee wins
09-03-2017, 01:18 AM
To they are the best. Ive compared them to beyers,brisket and timeform. Especially in high class races. Last weeks travers, west coast was a standout off is last race,compared to any one else's based on the track master/ equibase speed figure. I keyed on him for my pick 4 and made a large score.

thaskalos
09-03-2017, 03:19 AM
IMO...the guys at Equibase/Trackmaster should be arrested for impersonating the real figure-makers.

headhawg
09-03-2017, 08:59 AM
To they are the best. Ive compared them to beyers,brisket and timeform. Especially in high class races. Last weeks travers, west coast was a standout off is last race,compared to any one else's based on the track master/ equibase speed figure. I keyed on him for my pick 4 and made a large score.Sorry. I just can't trust someone's opinion if they only have four posts since 2008 and whose English is not his/her native language.

jasperson
09-03-2017, 01:30 PM
I did 3 tracks sat. and this is how bris speed figures did. I use the average of the last 2 races in my oddsline program because my data says that is the most predictive factor.

SAR GP Mth
1 $3.40 2 $3.60 5 $5.80
3 $5.40 3 $5.40 6 $6.00
4 $7.40 4 $2.80 7 $3.20
9 $14.40 6 $7.20
11 $2.70 9 $4.60
10 $10.00
I don't know who's speed figures are the best. I have used them all. My friend at the track use equibase and most of the time we have the same horse as the top speed. Bris's speed figures made a profit on the 3 tracks sat,but that doesn't always happen or I would be rich.

betovernetcapper
09-03-2017, 08:58 PM
Sorry. I just can't trust someone's opinion if they only have four posts since 2008 and whose English is not his/her native language.

To be fair, I've tried handicapping with brisket & it's totally useless as a handicapping tool & if your a vegan, useless for anything. :)

ldiatone
09-03-2017, 09:11 PM
IMO...the guys at Equibase/Trackmaster should be arrested for impersonating the real figure-makers.
now now the figs are good. there are a few software programs that use them.

thaskalos
09-03-2017, 09:53 PM
now now the figs are good. there are a few software programs that use them.

IMO...the Equibase figures have been laughable ever since Trackmaster "recalibrated" them about a decade ago. When these figures were calculated on a smaller scale, and the 3-digit figures were practically unheard of, Equibase had the best speed figures around. But now that the figures have been recalibrated by using a different scale, and the 3-digit speed figures are commonplace...Equibase is the proud owner of the worst speed figures known to man.

I wouldn't recommend them to my worst enemy.

eldee wins
09-03-2017, 11:33 PM
I'm an American! Excuse me, I was typing fast, I was in a hurry. Don't knock them until you compare all 4 products side by side. That's what I've have done. Yes, I agree they were even better until they change them. I have hit many many big tickets especially using track master flash net product. Instantly narrow down contenders in minutes. Today, I posted my picks at delmar for the late pick4, I hit the late pick3 and late double. Using crappy equibase/track master product. But no,I don't win all the time. But who does!👍🇺🇸

Tom
09-04-2017, 11:43 AM
IMO...the Equibase figures have been laughable ever since Trackmaster "recalibrated" them about a decade ago. When these figures were calculated on a smaller scale, and the 3-digit figures were practically unheard of, Equibase had the best speed figures around. But now that the figures have been recalibrated by using a different scale, and the 3-digit speed figures are commonplace...Equibase is the proud owner of the worst speed figures known to man.

I wouldn't recommend them to my worst enemy.

Trackmaster had pretty good figs and pace figs up until that stupid decision to merge with garbage. I was buying daily results for a couple of tacks to get the numbers. After the change, I dropped TM and never looked back at it.

GMB@BP
09-04-2017, 12:52 PM
I honestly cannot use figures that have very little human input which Bris and TM do not have.

To each their own though, whatever it takes to win.

ICR
09-04-2017, 09:08 PM
A big thanks for all the input .... Guess there is more to handicapping data than just DRF or BRISNET ... Will have to look into them

And to those who would choose Mary Ann over Ginger .... Well great minds think alike :):)

jasperson
09-04-2017, 09:49 PM
[QUOTE=GMB@BP;2216205]I honestly cannot use figures that have very little human input which Bris and TM do not have.

To each their own though, whatever it takes to win.[/QU
Have you ever heard of human error? If humans have anything to do with it there are bias and prejudices and just plain errors that enter into it. I will take computer generated speed figures over any adjusted by humans. I can look at the speed figures for the last 4 race and his best speed at this distance and surface and have a good idea of what the horse is capable in today's race. That is all I require for speed figures.

GMB@BP
09-04-2017, 11:36 PM
[QUOTE=GMB@BP;2216205]I honestly cannot use figures that have very little human input which Bris and TM do not have.

To each their own though, whatever it takes to win.[/QU
Have you ever heard of human error? If humans have anything to do with it there are bias and prejudices and just plain errors that enter into it. I will take computer generated speed figures over any adjusted by humans. I can look at the speed figures for the last 4 race and his best speed at this distance and surface and have a good idea of what the horse is capable in today's race. That is all I require for speed figures.

To each their own like I said.

I have used the Timeform figures for the better part of 12 years and think they are just better.

Doesnt make me right and anyone else wrong, just my opinion.

Also to be fair, comparing Timeform-Sheets type numbers which include adjustments for various factors to say Beyer or Bris etc which are just a straight figure based on variant number is apples and oranges. So maybe its not a fair discussion.

ubercapper
09-05-2017, 01:09 PM
just from what i view. and if i am wrong correct me. after viewing a sample of the stats lens, it reminds me of TMs plus pro. just more clicking on plus pro. it does not give the true odds but it looks like a different format. plus its offered by TM

Stats Race Lens is not a TrackMaster or Equibase product, per se, as it was developed by Stats. It is sold via TrackMaster, Equibase and other (ADW) web sites so it makes sense it may be assumed it is a TM or Equibase product.

Stats Race Lens does have some elements of Plus Pro but that's just a small part. Stats (with 40 years of sports analytics experience) used their expertise for the True Odds module. Other elements are new such as the angles module, while others are enhanced from Plus Pro such as research and past performances as there are many more categories that can be looked at and filtered on or off.

I will be covering some of the features on this Thursday's webinar.

GMB@BP
09-05-2017, 01:25 PM
Stats Race Lens is not a TrackMaster or Equibase product, per se, as it was developed by Stats. It is sold via TrackMaster, Equibase and other (ADW) web sites so it makes sense it may be assumed it is a TM or Equibase product.

Stats Race Lens does have some elements of Plus Pro but that's just a small part. Stats (with 40 years of sports analytics experience) used their expertise for the True Odds module. Other elements are new such as the angles module, while others are enhanced from Plus Pro such as research and past performances as there are many more categories that can be looked at and filtered on or off.

I will be covering some of the features on this Thursday's webinar.

I will check it out, thanks for the heads up, where is this webinar located??

ubercapper
09-05-2017, 06:32 PM
I will check it out, thanks for the heads up, where is this webinar located??

https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/6997205522053246209

GMB@BP
09-06-2017, 04:32 PM
https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/6997205522053246209

Is this archived, with work no chance I can watch this then? Sorry to be a pain.

ubercapper
09-08-2017, 10:52 AM
Is this archived, with work no chance I can watch this then? Sorry to be a pain.

Yes they are all archived. Here's the link to last night's webinar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnvLU1Dz7UA

Previous webinars are here:
http://www.equibase.com/content/webinars/racelens-webinars.cfm

dav4463
09-08-2017, 12:03 PM
[quote=jasperson;2216468]

To each their own like I said.

I have used the Timeform figures for the better part of 12 years and think they are just better.

Doesnt make me right and anyone else wrong, just my opinion.

Also to be fair, comparing Timeform-Sheets type numbers which include adjustments for various factors to say Beyer or Bris etc which are just a straight figure based on variant number is apples and oranges. So maybe its not a fair discussion.

I prefer DRF. I like the layout.

I also prefer Ginger!:)

Whosonfirst
09-10-2017, 10:16 PM
[quote=GMB@BP;2216528]

I prefer DRF. I like the layout.

I also prefer Ginger!:)

Sorry Dave, I couldn't resist after my wife showed me this.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/78/ff/57/78ff5711257aa513be4899f6a04bc56f.jpg

dav4463
09-11-2017, 03:34 AM
[quote=dav4463;2217648]

Sorry Dave, I couldn't resist after my wife showed me this.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/78/ff/57/78ff5711257aa513be4899f6a04bc56f.jpg

She was hot in her day!

soonboomer
09-11-2017, 11:40 PM
Has there ever been a unbiased published comparison between any of the competing figure makers? I used to make my own in the 80's and early 90's......seems like when several sources became available, a lot of the value was sucked out of speed handicapping.

VigorsTheGrey
09-12-2017, 02:22 PM
Just an idea: If the Daily Racing Form rotated their information 90 degrees and placed the binding along the 8.5 inch side that in effect would created a horizontal line 10 inches long (excluding 1/2 inch margins on each side)...

There would be about 2 more inches of white space available to include pace metrics similar to BRIS or other innovations...

I guess it just depends on the percentage of pixels now covered with ink, if rotating the information would make any difference...

We have a saying in Architecture that "form follows function" .....
If the function of the DRF printed publication is to provide buyers with the best information possible, they ought not to be limited by the format itself...

Also, many fans do not use more than 1 or 2 race cards, but the form contains many more cards of information....that is a lot of wasted ink and paper that patrons must buy in order to get what they need....it might be better to print each card individually at an incremental cost and let the buyer choose how many to buy...

...think of all the wasted ink and paper...and still no individual pace figures and pace fraction/ metrics for individual races like BRIS has...

If BRIS had a hard copy available of their format at the track, or if the DRF incorporated the latest pace metrics for individual races into their hardcopy,
I would be a very, very happy camper...

MPRanger
09-12-2017, 04:01 PM
well i do think TM and Equibase are the same speed figures. some one will correct me if i am wrong. thanks for the input.

You are correct. Trackmaster makes the figures for Equibase which are also the same as the Daily Racing Program.

I would hesitate to argue with CJ. I'm sure I could learn a lot from him. However, it doesn't seem right to say EB SF stink. I think they are fine.

I'm happy to use anyones figures interchangeably because they are all better than raw time. Plus, I don't consider speed figures to be predictive. They only show what a horse did under particular circumstances at a particular time. More important to me are the conditions the horse scored the figure under. Change the pace or the class and you will get a different SF. No?

cj
09-12-2017, 04:27 PM
You are correct. Trackmaster makes the figures for Equibase which are also the same as the Daily Racing Program.

I would hesitate to argue with CJ. I'm sure I could learn a lot from him. However, it doesn't seem right to say EB SF stink. I think they are fine.

I'm happy to use anyones figures interchangeably because they are all better than raw time. Plus, I don't consider speed figures to be predictive. They only show what a horse did under particular circumstances at a particular time. More important to me are the conditions the horse scored the figure under. Change the pace or the class and you will get a different SF. No?

Maybe stinks was too harsh. I probably don't follow them enough to make that broad of a statement. But I know there are flaws. Any figures the have Gormley's January Sham Stakes as the second best performance by a 3yo this year has some issues. Same goes for Richard's Boy being listed as the third fastest sprint this year, coming in a Cal bred stake where he barely nosed out Well Measured.

It is possible the figs are "good enough" when it comes to your everyday racing. I just can't put any faith in speed figures that are supposed to identify the fastest horses having hiccups like those mentioned above.

classhandicapper
09-13-2017, 10:45 AM
Has there ever been a unbiased published comparison between any of the competing figure makers? I used to make my own in the 80's and early 90's......seems like when several sources became available, a lot of the value was sucked out of speed handicapping.

That's the great dilemma. People want more and better information. But if it's good information, once it's public and gains widespread acceptance it loses value. From a gambling perspective you are probably better off trying to create your own metrics and then testing them. If you find something that works pretty well and it gets better prices, don't tell anyone what's in the special sauce.

cutchemist42
09-13-2017, 12:34 PM
Bris simply because of Whobets.

Timeform is my 2nd choice.....my only gripes being how the racw class is shown, the colour scheme, and I camt zoom in on the page on my Android.

DeltaLover
09-13-2017, 05:01 PM
That's the great dilemma. People want more and better information. But if it's good information, once it's public and gains widespread acceptance it loses value. From a gambling perspective you are probably better off trying to create your own metrics and then testing them. If you find something that works pretty well and it gets better prices, don't tell anyone what's in the special sauce.

The problem I see with all commercial figures is that “more and better information” is very difficult if not impossible to be justified based on the way the data is provided (either on paper or as part of a website).

The main issues I see are the following:

(1) Figure makers insist to keep their algorithms proprietary something that makes it impossible to detect errors on their creation of the form an opinion about the data flow and realize potential weaknesses and strengths.

(2) For most of them there is no way to download historical numbers in an electronic format so they can be used as parts of handicapping models. (Bris figures consist an exception to the rule if you have an extensive set of downloaded DRF files; testing them I decided that there is a lot of room for improvement so I quickly lost interest on them).

VigorsTheGrey
09-13-2017, 05:25 PM
No matter how well a metric is divised, there are inherent limitations based on the vagaries and vissicitudes of just being horses and humans...this is especially true when the two are combined into sets of even greater number...it is amazing that we get it right as much as we do....and there are only a few ways to win a race, and many more ways to lose..

soonboomer
09-13-2017, 10:34 PM
You'd have thought that sometime over the past 25 years someone would have looked at Beyer vs Bris vs Equibase over a set time period.......something like top number win % and average mutual.....same thing for top 3 exacta box and/or any other type of bet that interests you.

cj
09-13-2017, 10:42 PM
You'd have thought that sometime over the past 25 years someone would have looked at Beyer vs Bris vs Equibase over a set time period.......something like top number win % and average mutual.....same thing for top 3 exacta box and/or any other type of bet that interests you.

I remember seeing one from years ago but I don't remember the results. The toughest thing I think is defining the criteria. What do you use? Last race only, last race on surface, last race on surface at similar distance? Do you average figures?

The other problem is having access to the figures. Who is going to pay to buy PPs for all the data providers just to study the figures? You couldn't just buy a few weeks and have a real sample. I think you'd need at least a year, maybe more.

ubercapper
09-15-2017, 06:20 PM
I remember seeing one from years ago but I don't remember the results. The toughest thing I think is defining the criteria. What do you use? Last race only, last race on surface, last race on surface at similar distance? Do you average figures?

The other problem is having access to the figures. Who is going to pay to buy PPs for all the data providers just to study the figures? You couldn't just buy a few weeks and have a real sample. I think you'd need at least a year, maybe more.

This was done in the mid 1990-s by Sports Stats ( Jim Bayle) and it was going to be repeated around 2000 but it wasn't as (I believe) Jim was too busy gambling on sports full time.

There are references to it here on PA from years ago. It used simple metrics of best last figure, best average last three figures, best average last five figures and perhaps a few others.

At the time the win percentage for Beyer, Bris and TrackMaster (now the Equibase figure) was about the same. Again, if I recall correctly it was in the 28% range.

The difference was the TrackMaster figure had a slightly higher R.O.I. on all three metrics. This was fairly easy to explain as it wasn't in as much use at the Beyer figure or Bris figure.

ubercapper
09-15-2017, 06:22 PM
I remember seeing one from years ago but I don't remember the results. The toughest thing I think is defining the criteria. What do you use? Last race only, last race on surface, last race on surface at similar distance? Do you average figures?

The other problem is having access to the figures. Who is going to pay to buy PPs for all the data providers just to study the figures? You couldn't just buy a few weeks and have a real sample. I think you'd need at least a year, maybe more.

I forgot to add that at the time all three figure makers supplied the data for the study at no cost. That addresses your comment about who is going to pay, or at least who paid at that time.

Tom
09-16-2017, 11:25 AM
I have a copy of that study somewhere. I'll see if I can find it.

I think DRF SR+TV won.

pandy
09-17-2017, 09:06 AM
Just remember that regardless of which speed figures you use, some of the figures are wrong. Speed Figures are educated guesses and sometimes they guess wrong, very wrong. And it doesn't matter if the number is computer generated or done by a real person, they all have some bad numbers that are way off.

thaskalos
09-17-2017, 09:26 AM
Just remember that regardless of which speed figures you use, some of the figures are wrong. Speed Figures are educated guesses and sometimes they guess wrong, very wrong. And it doesn't matter if the number is computer generated or done by a real person, they all have some bad numbers that are way off.

In order to know for sure that all the speed figures out there "have some bad numbers that are way off"...don't we have to compare them to a set of speed figures that we consider "perfect"? Or are we using our OWN "educated guesses", to correct the "educated guesses" of others?

pandy
09-17-2017, 10:53 AM
In order to know for sure that all the speed figures out there "have some bad numbers that are way off"...don't we have to compare them to a set of speed figures that we consider "perfect"? Or are we using our OWN "educated guesses", to correct the "educated guesses" of others?

Since I did my own speed figures for many years, I know how the errors are made and sometimes I can spot a suspiciously high or low number. How you know for sure that the number on a particular race is bad, the horses coming out of that race run much different numbers. For instance, the figure maker gave the winner a 90, that horse comes back and runs a 75 and the race proves to be a negative key race with most of the horses running slower than they did in the "wrong" number race.

Of course, I don't think it's wise to put too much emphasis on one particular number, anyway. But with lightly raced horses, sometimes we have to. When Run Happy (Test) and Arrogate (Travers) ran those huge races at Saratoga, handicappers had to decide how much emphasis to put on those performances. But since they were both young and developing horses, it made sense to believe that they could indeed repeat that performance and that they were truly superior animals.

thaskalos
09-17-2017, 12:59 PM
Since I did my own speed figures for many years, I know how the errors are made and sometimes I can spot a suspiciously high or low number. How you know for sure that the number on a particular race is bad, the horses coming out of that race run much different numbers. For instance, the figure maker gave the winner a 90, that horse comes back and runs a 75 and the race proves to be a negative key race with most of the horses running slower than they did in the "wrong" number race.

Of course, I don't think it's wise to put too much emphasis on one particular number, anyway. But with lightly raced horses, sometimes we have to. When Run Happy (Test) and Arrogate (Travers) ran those huge races at Saratoga, handicappers had to decide how much emphasis to put on those performances. But since they were both young and developing horses, it made sense to believe that they could indeed repeat that performance and that they were truly superior animals.

IMO...the process of figure-making has taken an unfortunate turn for the worse in recent years. Instead of simply supplying the figures that the horses actually earn on the track...today's figure-makers are unduly concerned with whether on not these figures "make sense" when compared to the horses' prior efforts, and end up making "artificial adjustments"...thus bringing a certain "consistency" to these horses that I'm not sure is really there.

This game isn't as predictable as we'd like it to be...and horses run uncharacteristically bad (or good) races for a variety of reasons. When the figures indicate what the horses actually did...then the handicapper can evaluate the form-cycles of these horses...and he can use his OWN judgement when contemplating the up-and-down figures that these horses habitually run. But when artificial adjustments are made to "make sense" of these figures...then the figure-maker's "interpretive skills" take center stage...when the PLAYER'S interpretive skills should be playing the leading role in the handicapping process.

I view today's "projected figures" in the same light that I look at our two main political parties. I may be impressed by the theory that surrounds them...but I am largely dissatisfied when I see that theory being put into practice.

pandy
09-17-2017, 01:15 PM
IMO...the process of figure-making has taken an unfortunate turn for the worse in recent years. Instead of simply supplying the figures that the horses actually earn on the track...today's figure-makers are unduly concerned with whether on not these figures "make sense" when compared to the horses' prior efforts, and end up making "artificial adjustments"...thus bringing a certain "consistency" to these horses that I'm not sure is really there.

This game isn't as predictable as we'd like it to be...and horses run uncharacteristically bad (or good) races for a variety of reasons. When the figures indicate what the horses actually did...then the handicapper can evaluate the form-cycles of these horses...and he can use his OWN judgement when contemplating the up-and-down figures that these horses habitually run. But when artificial adjustments are made to "make sense" of these figures...then the figure-maker's "interpretive skills" take center stage...when the PLAYER'S interpretive skills should be playing the leading role in the handicapping process.

I view today's "projected figures" in the same light that I look at our two main political parties. I may be impressed by the theory that surrounds them...but I am largely dissatisfied when I see that theory being put into practice.

I agree. I prefer a basic speed figure based on final time and track variant. And if the figure comes up surprisingly low, leave it alone. So, the pace was slow and the race was slow, it happens. Let us decide how to deal with it. The adjustments that some figure makers add for ground loss for wide trips, I don't see how that makes any sense. On some days the rail is the worst place to be, and vice versa.

cj
09-17-2017, 01:41 PM
IMO...the process of figure-making has taken an unfortunate turn for the worse in recent years. Instead of simply supplying the figures that the horses actually earn on the track...today's figure-makers are unduly concerned with whether on not these figures "make sense" when compared to the horses' prior efforts, and end up making "artificial adjustments"...thus bringing a certain "consistency" to these horses that I'm not sure is really there.

This game isn't as predictable as we'd like it to be...and horses run uncharacteristically bad (or good) races for a variety of reasons. When the figures indicate what the horses actually did...then the handicapper can evaluate the form-cycles of these horses...and he can use his OWN judgement when contemplating the up-and-down figures that these horses habitually run. But when artificial adjustments are made to "make sense" of these figures...then the figure-maker's "interpretive skills" take center stage...when the PLAYER'S interpretive skills should be playing the leading role in the handicapping process.

I view today's "projected figures" in the same light that I look at our two main political parties. I may be impressed by the theory that surrounds them...but I am largely dissatisfied when I see that theory being put into practice.

Got some real life examples, particularly from recent racing? I'd like to investigate.

Franco Santiago
09-17-2017, 04:13 PM
Nearly every swinging d**k is making decisions based on speed figures. They provide no edge. Scrap them and do a lot better.

cj
09-17-2017, 04:46 PM
Nearly every swinging d**k is making decisions based on speed figures. They provide no edge. Scrap them and do a lot better.

Why scrap them? Instead, why not use them wisely? They are part of the equation, not the whole thing, or even the majority. But they have a place in the arsenal.

Franco Santiago
09-17-2017, 06:47 PM
Why scrap them? Instead, why not use them wisely? They are part of the equation, not the whole thing, or even the majority. But they have a place in the arsenal.

Because they do nothing but put you on what everyone else is on, which means you have no edge. There are so many other tools that one can use, I just don't see any reason to use one that provides literally no edge whatsoever. But, to each his/her own. I am sure there are those that can use them for an edge in SOME manner.

cj
09-17-2017, 08:05 PM
Because they do nothing but put you on what everyone else is on, which means you have no edge. There are so many other tools that one can use, I just don't see any reason to use one that provides literally no edge whatsoever. But, to each his/her own. I am sure there are those that can use them for an edge in SOME manner.

Again, it depends how you use them. If you are just picking the highest figures all the time of course you'll lose long term.

Franco Santiago
09-17-2017, 09:49 PM
Again, it depends how you use them. If you are just picking the highest figures all the time of course you'll lose long term.

Precisely. So, if you need to look for other than the highest fig to find value, why use them at all? The highest fig provides NO value, so what good it is it?

And I was a fig disciple. I thought they were the greatest thing ever. Not anymore. It was HARD to quit using them.

cj
09-17-2017, 09:57 PM
Precisely. So, if you need to look for other than the highest fig to find value, why use them at all? The highest fig provides NO value, so what good it is it?

And I was a fig disciple. I thought they were the greatest thing ever. Not anymore. It was HARD to quit using them.


I think in combination with trips, they are great for identifying form, whether improving or declining.

Franco Santiago
09-17-2017, 10:47 PM
I think in combination with trips, they are great for identifying form, whether improving or declining.

That seems reasonable. That's what I used to do. I only bet P4s these days, and for whatever reason - could even by my lack of proficiency at using them - I feel other things are better for finding value.

VigorsTheGrey
09-17-2017, 11:04 PM
Precisely. So, if you need to look for other than the highest fig to find value, why use them at all? The highest fig provides NO value, so what good it is it?

And I was a fig disciple. I thought they were the greatest thing ever. Not anymore. It was HARD to quit using them.

High and low figures are bright bobbing floats,
rising and falling on racing's vast ocean swell...

Tethered to crab pots below, we
need to find, hook and still, haul...

'Tis work, the pots heavy,
often, there's no crab at all...

Still, without these figures, these tell-tails
how could we ever taste that prized
and elusive crustacean....?

PressThePace
09-18-2017, 07:42 PM
High and low figures are bright bobbing floats,
rising and falling on racing's vast ocean swell...

Tethered to crab pots below, we
need to find, hook and still, haul...

'Tis work, the pots heavy,
often, there's no crab at all...

Still, without these figures, these tell-tails
how could we ever taste that prized
and elusive crustacean....?

Mind blown...

NY BRED
09-19-2017, 09:06 PM
So, with all the discussions until this point are there any opinions
on the Sheets ie; Ragizon/Thoro-Graph?

VigorsTheGrey
09-19-2017, 11:33 PM
Rumor has it that Agents of Jockeys use the Rags to book their lads and ladies on steeds now rounding into form...

There is more to form cycles than we give credit to...usually we look at the last race and expect improvement when if fact the best may lay behind until another cycle rolls around...is this what the Rags are addressing...?

RonTiller
09-23-2017, 01:32 PM
Just got around to reading this thread.

I remember seeing one from years ago but I don't remember the results. The toughest thing I think is defining the criteria. What do you use? Last race only, last race on surface, last race on surface at similar distance? Do you average figures?

The other problem is having access to the figures. Who is going to pay to buy PPs for all the data providers just to study the figures? You couldn't just buy a few weeks and have a real sample. I think you'd need at least a year, maybe more.
This was done in the mid 1990-s by Sports Stats ( Jim Bayle) and it was going to be repeated around 2000 but it wasn't as (I believe) Jim was too busy gambling on sports full time.


Ellis is partly correct - Jim Bayle initiated and oversaw a speed ratings study in 1999 (or 2000?). HDW was a part of the study, supplying Jim Cramer's speed figures to Jim Bayle every single day for 6 months. This was not a trivial task for any of the party's involved in the study. The files with the data were timestamped and it was up to each participant to post the data before the first race of the day. Likewise, it was up to Jim Bayle to retrieve the data before the first race of the day, to prevent all possibility of past posting data.

Also part of the study were Beyer, Thorograph, Ragozin Sheets and I believe the DRF style 3yb speed ratings (though there are inconsistencies in how THAT rating was made). BRIS chose not to be involved. I don't remember if Michael Pizzola was a part of the test but he may have been.

There were various metrics, like last race, best of last 3, best at surface (and other things like that) plus each vendor was allowed to supply a customized metric that could be programmed by Bayle and applied to all the different numbers. I only know that Jim Cramer did not provide any custom metric to test; I do not know what the other vendors did or did not do.

The motivation for Jim Cramer and HDW was to actually have an independent test to get the real facts. I cannot speak for the others but especially with respect to the Sheets versus Thorograph, there was certainly a rivalry (at times bitter) at play and both sides surely wanted to best the other. There were certainly bragging rights at play for everybody.

When the data study period was over (involving lots of work for 6 months for everybody involved), Jim Bayle stopped responding to calls and messages. It seemed he disappeared from the face of the earth and we were worried something might have happened to him. Several months later, a mutual acquaintance reported that Jim Bayle was alive and well in Las Vegas and had started a betting syndicate, specializing in long shots.

Jim Cramer was finally able to contact Jim Bayle and Bayle said he still had all the data but he was evasive about the elephant in the room - what the heck happened to the study and the data analysis he was going to perform and then publish? He said he was willing to provide the data to us or a third party (I don't remember which) but nothing ever came of that. It was just plain bizarre behavior, extremely disappointing and more than a little aggravating.

Jim Cramer contacted Len Ragozin to see if he would be amenable to hiring an independent third party to do the data analysis on the data Bayle had collected and Ragozin was agreeable to the idea. I still remember that conversation because Ragozin, being the good communist that he was, said it was only fair that he pay a bigger share of whatever the cost might be because he probably had more money ("From each according to their ability...").

We discussed having Barry Meadow take charge as the neutral third party and I believe I recall he was amenable to that, since Barry had published a very small speed ratings study several years earlier in his Meadow's Monthly Newsletter. However, we were never able to get access to the data so it did not matter.

The end result was no study was published by the person who set up and oversaw the study. I do not know if 1) he did the study privately and in the course of that found a longshot system from which he built a syndicate, or 2) he lost interest in the study immediately after a 6 month period of collecting the data and didn't feel the slightest obligation to contact the participants, or 3) he accidentally deleted all the data and was too embarrassed to admit it, or 4) something else.

So ended the great speed ratings shoot out.

Sigh...

Ron Tiller
HDW

pandy
09-23-2017, 01:48 PM
Wow, interesting story Ron, thanks for sharing.

ubercapper
09-25-2017, 11:16 AM
Ron,

Thanks for filling in the blanks from my recollection.

I do recall there was one study that was completed (which HDW may or may not have been involved in), or perhaps it wasn't fully completed but there was preliminary data made available to the participants, and another study (the one you refer to) that was never completed and maybe never even started as you state.

When I speak with Dave (Siegel) I will ask him to confirm there is some data around from the first study as I believe he still has a printed copy of the first study or the preliminary data.

Tom
09-26-2017, 11:18 PM
I found my study - from Sport STat, 1994.
Looks like I paid $45 for it!:eek:

March -June 1994, 199 races from HOL and 685 from other tracks (AP,BEL,CRC)

They showed the results of a few test for many different sources of figs - DRF SR+TV, Beyer, BRIS, Henry Kuck, speed and pace, Pugliese speed and pace, Ragozin, Thorograph, TrackMaster Power, Master Win Ratings, RPM Power Ratings, TIS speed and Pace.
Not any real data to analyze. Random results.

VigorsTheGrey
09-26-2017, 11:48 PM
DRF SR+TV, Beyer, BRIS, Henry Kuck, speed and pace, Pugliese speed and pace, Ragozin, Thorograph, TrackMaster Power, Master Win Ratings, RPM Power Ratings, TIS speed and Pace...and also HTR.

In the days of the San Francisco Gold Rush, merchants made fortunes selling durable goods to the miners and prospectors.

I just wonder if the real gold is in selling the various "sheets, ratings and softwares"...?

One would expect the authors of the celebrated options to all be millionaires by now from betting alone....how are they all doing in that Department?

Are Andy Beyer and the rest of them wealthy now as a result of their betting or mainly from selling their inventions...?

cj
09-26-2017, 11:55 PM
DRF SR+TV, Beyer, BRIS, Henry Kuck, speed and pace, Pugliese speed and pace, Ragozin, Thorograph, TrackMaster Power, Master Win Ratings, RPM Power Ratings, TIS speed and Pace...and also HTR.

In the days of the San Francisco Gold Rush, merchants made fortunes selling durable goods to the miners and prospectors.

I just wonder if the real gold is in selling the various "sheets, ratings and softwares"...?

One would expect the authors of the celebrated options to all be millionaires by now from betting alone....how are they all doing in that Department?

Are Andy Beyer and the rest of them wealthy now as a result of their betting or mainly from selling their inventions...?

For a guy that acts like he doesn't know anything about racing, you sure seem to have been following the game a long time.

VigorsTheGrey
09-27-2017, 12:09 AM
For a guy that acts like he doesn't know anything about racing, you sure seem to have been following the game a long time.

It is an honest and decent question with no innuendo or malice intended..

...if the systems and methods are excellent and work well, then one would think their authors would have over the years capitalized on wagering and for the most part, all be wealthy men, I mean that is the whole point of all these methods, isn't it, to win a lot of money...

...I'm not trying to be funny, cynical or intrusive here...I'm just wondering if the authors themselves were able to make good from betting on their own wares...?

Dahoss9698
09-27-2017, 12:14 AM
For a guy that acts like he doesn't know anything about racing, you sure seem to have been following the game a long time.

Indeed. Also kind of odd a guy without an ADW is suddenly very interested in betting. :rolleyes:

VigorsTheGrey
09-27-2017, 12:26 AM
For a guy that acts like he doesn't know anything about racing, you sure seem to have been following the game a long time.
I was at Santa Anita when Vigors-the White Tornado-won the 1978 Santa Anita Handicap...

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-mozilla-002&hsimp=yhs-002&hspart=mozilla&p=vigors+the+white+tornado+santa+anita+handicap#id =1&vid=54410cd0e2e58fae73bb5231c95943f3&action=click

Speed Figure
09-27-2017, 12:35 AM
I was at Santa Anita when Vigors-the White Tornado-won the 1978 Santa Anita Handicap...

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-mozilla-002&hsimp=yhs-002&hspart=mozilla&p=vigors+the+white+tornado+santa+anita+handicap#id =1&vid=54410cd0e2e58fae73bb5231c95943f3&action=click
You were at Santa Anita in 1978, but you don't know anything about the DRF speed rating & TV?

cj
09-27-2017, 12:36 AM
It is an honest and decent question with no innuendo or malice intended..

...if the systems and methods are excellent and work well, then one would think their authors would have over the years capitalized on wagering and for the most part, all be wealthy men, I mean that is the whole point of all these methods, isn't it, to win a lot of money...

...I'm not trying to be funny, cynical or intrusive here...I'm just wondering if the authors themselves were able to make good from betting on their own wares...?


My reply had nothing to do with that question in particular, but more you flooding the board lately with stuff that seems like you just fell of the turnip truck and landed in an OTB.

VigorsTheGrey
09-27-2017, 12:38 AM
You were at Santa Anita in 1978, but you don't know anything about the DRF speed rating & TV?

I'm a slow starter but like Vigors I finish really well...:D

VigorsTheGrey
09-27-2017, 12:49 AM
My reply had nothing to do with that question in particular, but more you flooding the board lately with stuff that seems like you just fell of the turnip truck and landed in an OTB.

Let's face it, Cj it's been a slow couple of weeks on the board,
when there is a dearth of interesting stuff here to read, the natives inside my mind get restless, think of my posts recently as types of Hail Mary's or raindances...

I was happy to see my friend Thaskalos back from PaceVacation at least, but even he seems a tad flat lately...and as you know I'm not allowed to post in off-topic anymore (might I have a reprieve..? I promise..I'll be good).

VigorsTheGrey
09-27-2017, 06:05 PM
While better moods prevail, I was wondering if I might be reinstated into off-topic after many months of no access...?

cj
09-27-2017, 06:26 PM
While better moods prevail, I was wondering if I might be reinstated into off-topic after many months of no access...?

I saw you ask me that, wasn't ignoring you, but that is above my pay grade here at PA. Contrary to popular belief I have no power to ban anyone. I do give suggestions, but since Mike is much nicer than me they are usually rejected. :)

VigorsTheGrey
09-27-2017, 06:37 PM
I saw you ask me that, wasn't ignoring you, but that is above my pay grade here at PA. Contrary to popular belief I have no power to ban anyone. I do give suggestions, but since Mike is much nicer than me they are usually rejected. :)
And what would be your suggestions in my case, in case I might be a little confused by what you mean here or simply lack the ability to read between lines...:)

cj
09-27-2017, 07:01 PM
And what would be your suggestions in my case, in case I might be a little confused by what you mean here or simply lack the ability to read between lines...:)

There was no suggestion in your case, I don't do off topic very often. There was nothing between the lines here. I'm just restating that I don't have the power to ban people and never have. I also don't want it.

VigorsTheGrey
09-27-2017, 07:12 PM
Fair enough... I'll send Mike a pm...thanks cj.

PaceAdvantage
10-02-2017, 05:35 PM
Let's face it, Cj it's been a slow couple of weeks on the board,
when there is a dearth of interesting stuff here to read, the natives inside my mind get restless, think of my posts recently as types of Hail Mary's or raindances...

I was happy to see my friend Thaskalos back from PaceVacation at least, but even he seems a tad flat lately...and as you know I'm not allowed to post in off-topic anymore (might I have a reprieve..? I promise..I'll be good).So you're admitting you were just messing with us? Cause it was "slow around here...." ???? :rolleyes:

VigorsTheGrey
10-03-2017, 01:42 AM
So you're admitting you were just messing with us? Cause it was "slow around here...." ???? :rolleyes:

No, mike...just trying to create interest... I'm not the type of person that enjoys "messing" with people...I enjoy friendly dialogue with a little wit and a lot of humor mixed in...sometimes that is difficult to get in the racing side alone...so I was wondering if I might be allowed to venture out into the wider world of PA again...? It has been many months now since I was cut off and I have learned from watching the do and don'ts of off- topic posting here...what the sensitivities are exactly and what opinions are for the most part, not appreciated.... How about it...?

Tom
10-06-2017, 12:01 AM
BRIS vs DRF - looking at the JCGC Saturday, the BRIS Speed ratings must come from a random numbers generator. Total nonsense. Such lousy cards everywhere this weekend, I thought I'd save some $$ and just download a couple of races from Whobet and not bother with the idea of a good day of race, but after looking at the two I got, I guess watching re-runs of ER on satellite is now the game plan.:puke:

VigorsTheGrey
10-06-2017, 03:02 AM
BRIS vs DRF - looking at the JCGC Saturday, the BRIS Speed ratings must come from a random numbers generator. Total nonsense. Such lousy cards everywhere this weekend, I thought I'd save some $$ and just download a couple of races from Whobet and not bother with the idea of a good day of race, but after looking at the two I got, I guess watching re-runs of ER on satellite is now the game plan.:puke:

Tom, what do you think about Friday 6Oct cards for keeneland and Santa Anita... I thought they looked decent for some prices...?

Tom
10-06-2017, 07:16 PM
I don't look at Keeneland and Fridays are not days I play anywhere. The biggest prices I saw so far this weekend were for the DRF. :eek: Talk about yer BOMBS!