Beyer figs [Archive] - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

f2tornado

04-08-2018, 02:13 PM

SA Derby 1:49.72
Wood Memorial 1:49.79
So a slow playing SA is as slow as Aqu after a winter type weather?
Seems impossible to believe and Justify was loose on an uncontested lead

This is why I'm careful taking speed figures hook, line, and sinker. I recall scratching my head at the 108 BSF Materiality got in one of the slowest Florida Derby renewals in history. The horse didn't so squat thereafter.

For whatever reason, horses crossing the line in the Santa Anita Derby in 1:48 or less have a high impact value for the Kentucky Derby win pool while horses crossing the line in more than that time traditionally have not fared as well. We shall see if that angle holds up this year. In contrast, horses running sub 38 final 3/8th miles in final prep tend to win about 7 in 10 Kentucky Derby renewals. There are not many of those this year so I will cautiously respect the top two from the Santa Anita.

LoneF

04-13-2018, 08:40 AM

The beyer numbers are ALOT less mathematical equation and ALOT more subjective opinion than you might think .

I remember just hearing one story from Andy Beyer that really caught my attention. He didn’t give a specific name for the horse or what track this happened at but the impression was given it was just a everyday average type of race nothing special about it.

Anyways horse A wins the race and is given a 72 beyer. Than a few races later at a similar distance horse B runs second in a slower time and gets a 90 beyer. He says he couldn’t figure out how it happened so he just completely tossed the 72 beyer out the window for horse A and pulled the 92 out of the air and gave that to horse A instead because he said it was just common sense that horse A should have a higher beyer than horse B. He said stuff like that happens all the time when making beyer numbers.

I am not saying beyer numbers are useless but for me they are just one of many pieces to the puzzle and personally I think that beyer numbers are far more helpful the cheaper the race is. In a 3200 claimer at Will Rogers Downs I am going to give much more weight to the beyer numbers than I will when handicapping the Kentucky Derby.

Watching race replays if I have the time is for me the single biggest handicapping tool.

f2tornado

04-13-2018, 09:28 AM

LoneF

04-13-2018, 10:25 AM

Speed figures are like weather forecast models. In general, they are not too far off the mark in the near term but occasionally are way off.

One problem with SA that day is there was only one other dirt route that day and it was the Oaks. Have fun putting together figures using comps from a stakes restricted to fillies and a couple sprints. The less data going into your model, the less accurate it is likely to be. While I do think SA is running a little slower this year I see Unique Bella ran a 6F fraction in 1:10.4 at the track this year and won the race. That was two seconds faster than Justify's plodding to the pole. Maybe he's just playing like American Pharoah did in the rebel but I doubt it against a horse like Bolt.

Further, Brisnet gave trounced Instilled Regard a 102 figure. He finished 11 lengths back in the 19th slowest Santa Anita Derby in history and achieved the same figure as American Pharoah's 11th fastest Arkansas Derby in history. Additionally, AP appeared to gear down toward the finish. I'm sorry, but Instilled Regard did not run even remotely as good as American Pharoah. As such, I'm completely tossing most speed figures from the race. Equibase scored the finish as par which makes the most sense to me. Like I said before, par in the Santa Anita is often still plenty good to contend in Kentucky but perhaps sets more realistic expectations.

Yeah I think relying heavily on numbers to handicap this years derby regardless of which set you decide to use ( beyers, brisnet or Equibase etc. ) is a big mistake.

Justify gets a 107 beyer for winning a slow Santa Anita derby where he got a easy pace scenario to work with and Good Magic gets a 95 beyer after a solid win in the Bluegrass and having to navigate a tough outside post.

Jerry Bailey ( one of the greatest jockeys ever and respected long time race analyst ) and Randy Moss and Laffit Pincay lll ( both also highly respected race analysts ) said Good Magic’s win in the Bluegrass was solid and showed he’s back in top form and they said Justify performance in the SA derby left them wondering if Baffert will even run Justify in the KY Derby, yet going off Beyer numbers you would have thought Justify ran the superior race.

CincyHorseplayer

04-13-2018, 10:53 AM

Regarding Justify I think the interpretations being thrown about are as wrong as many think his figure is. To me beating a horse like Bolt Doro who was likely to take a step forward off what I think was one of the best preps shorter than 9f in the San Felipe(the other being Audible's Holy Bull) makes the figure accurate. My route rating of that race was a 207. Good Magic's BC Juvenile was 199 by comparison. Bolt Doro had an incredible 218 in the Frontrunner and I think bounced off that one as a 2yo. 220 is the derby par and the closest horse to hit that this year was Flameaway in the SF Davis with a 209. I think he backed that up last Saturday and because of that I think Good Magic also improved off his 199. If Bolt Doro also improved and Justify beat him I think this puts both up near the derby par. I think both are better than the latter two. Anyway my interpretation of Bolt Doro's form cycle is what makes me believe in Justify.

CincyHorseplayer

04-13-2018, 11:03 AM

Yeah I think relying heavily on numbers to handicap this years derby regardless of which set you decide to use ( beyers, brisnet or Equibase etc. ) is a big mistake.

Justify gets a 107 beyer for winning a slow Santa Anita derby where he got a easy pace scenario to work with and Good Magic gets a 95 beyer after a solid win in the Bluegrass and having to navigate a tough outside post.

Jerry Bailey ( one of the greatest jockeys ever and respected long time race analyst ) and Randy Moss and Laffit Pincay lll ( both also highly respected race analysts ) said Good Magic’s win in the Bluegrass was solid and showed he’s back in top form and they said Justify performance in the SA derby left them wondering if Baffert will even run Justify in the KY Derby, yet going off Beyer numbers you would have thought Justify ran the superior race.

Good Magic had an easy trip too. Stalking 2 dueling leaders through solid fractions and picking up the pieces was gravy train. That he had a hard time losing Flameaway makes me think less of him.

reckless

04-13-2018, 11:41 AM

I was a Phase III Sartinista in the early 90s and I confess the Sartin thinking made me a much better handicapper. And, to add, I still use most of the lessons I learned to this day.

One of the nuggets from Sartin pertains to track variants and adjustments. Without going through it all, I'll just say this... my opinion only, of course.

-- Figure makers of all stripes are capable of making fast horses and sharp efforts 'slow' and make slow horses 'fast' by the way they 'adjust' for the track variant.

-- And yes, tracks do run faster or slower at times, but rarely by the sharp variance we are told by the popular fig makers.

-- Weather, slop, mud, drying out, etc. causes changes in the track speed surface, and I find this to be a more accurate way to determine such a change in the daily variant.

-- Track speed, today's race make-up and current form of true contenders will make for a more accurate variant than will par times or projections, imo.

Yes, the Santa Anita track may have played a bit slower than normal on Saturday but a talented improving horse such as Justify should have galloped home faster than he did as a result, especially since he had an uncontested early advantage. He didn't do such a thing.

Justify and Bolt d'oro may actually be slow horses, heaven forbid --ha-- and not the victims of a slow racetrack.

Tom

04-13-2018, 11:50 AM

If you use the WInner's Books from DRF, you can see what race Beyer breaks out for whatever reason. I look at them every week and note races that are "suspicious" for some unknown reason. When it comes time to use that race, I know to be cautious with it.

Example - Oaklawn is very tight - few changes to the figs. First time seldom gets revised.

NYRA, lots of revisions.

One thing for certain - at any track, raw times mean zero.

f2tornado

04-13-2018, 01:13 PM

Yes, the Santa Anita track may have played a bit slower than normal on Saturday but a talented improving horse such as Justify should have galloped home faster than he did as a result, especially since he had an uncontested early advantage. He didn't do such a thing.

Justify and Bolt d'oro may actually be slow horses, heaven forbid --ha-- and not the victims of a slow racetrack.

While I think many figures for the race are grossly inflated, Justify and Bolt did haul oats in the final 3/8th... as they should after running an arguably pedestrian first six panels. I'll will give them that much. Visually, Bolt did not look as sharp to me as he was in the San Felipe. The Equibase comp backs up that observation.

One thing for certain - at any track, raw times mean zero.

I hear you but the raw time is the one unmodified speed figure. It's a check on the computed figures. When Vino Rosso pulls a 102 Brisnet figure while winning the Wood in a fast time by recent standards and in nearly identical raw time to Justify's historically slow Santa Anita... while Instilled Regard was 11 lengths back pulling the same 102 (and the same as American Pharoah's Ark Derby) simply does not logically compute.

04-13-2018, 01:17 PM

SA Derby 1:49.72
Wood Memorial 1:49.79
So a slow playing SA is as slow as Aqu after a winter type weather?
Seems impossible to believe and Justify was loose on an uncontested lead

Aqueduct has certainly sped up a LOT in recent weeks. It was one of the slowest tracks I've ever seen over the winter. Meanwhile, Santa Anita has become a much slower surface, not just recently but for the past year.

It does go to show just how much the track superintendent can change a racetrack. If the Wood were run over the surface in place a month ago, they'd have run about FIVE SECONDS slower.

04-13-2018, 01:19 PM

One problem with SA that day is there was only one other dirt route that day and it was the Oaks.

There were three.

As I've mentioned, Santa Anita has been much slower the past year than it usually is. Historical comparisons using raw times will be pretty useless IMO.

04-13-2018, 01:26 PM

-- And yes, tracks do run faster or slower at times, but rarely by the sharp variance we are told by the popular fig makers.

Look at Aqueduct over the winter, or SA the past year. It can and does happen even when rain isn't a factor.

f2tornado

04-13-2018, 01:57 PM

There were three.

I stand corrected. Thank you.

As I've mentioned, Santa Anita has been much slower the past year than it usually is. Historical comparisons using raw times will be pretty useless IMO.

While I agree the track does seem slower, is it also possible the quality of competition isn't as good? I keep hearing about small field sizes at the track which can screw up the pace. Additionally, fields in many of the big races left a lot to be desired this meet.

For some reason, and perhaps coincidence only, the raw time in the Santa Anita Derby was a very strong predictor of Kentucky Derby performance over the past several decades. Horses that used the Santa Anita as final prep and crossed the finish line in under 148.0 were spotted wearing lots of roses in Kentucky while most of the others failed to bring home a trophy. Giacomo was one exception. Pioneerof the Nile came close, albeit against one of the weakest fields I can recall.

04-13-2018, 02:03 PM

I stand corrected. Thank you.

While I agree the track does seem slower, is it also possible the quality of competition isn't as good? I keep hearing about small field sizes at the track which can screw up the pace. Additionally, fields in many of the big races left a lot to be desired this meet.

For some reason, and perhaps coincidence only, the raw time in the Santa Anita Derby was a very strong predictor of Kentucky Derby performance over the past several decades. Horses that used the Santa Anita as final prep and crossed the finish line in under 148.0 were spotted wearing lots of roses in Kentucky while most of the others failed to bring home a trophy. Giacomo was one exception. Pioneerof the Nile came close, albeit against one of the weakest fields I can recall.

If the competition had somehow gotten worse, we'd be seeing that in shippers performing poorly in my opinion when compared to the odds. I haven't seen that at all with SoCal dirt horses.

Look at My Boy Jack and Instilled Regard, for example.

Robert Fischer

04-13-2018, 02:04 PM

Justify gets a 107 beyer for winning a slow Santa Anita derby where he got a easy pace scenario to work with and Good Magic gets a 95 beyer after a solid win in the Bluegrass and having to navigate a tough outside post.

Santa Anita Derby was faster than the Bluegrass
Good Magic had a much easier task (running down allowance level performances) than playing catch-me-if-you-can in front of a stakes performance.
Bolt d'Oro ran faster than Good Magic and never really threatened Justify.
Santa Anita Derby did not have an easy pace scenario.
Beyers are not even supposed to even consider ground loss or pace

One problem with SA that day is there was only one other dirt route that day and it was the Oaks.

There were three.

As I've mentioned, Santa Anita has been much slower the past year than it usually is. Historical comparisons using raw times will be pretty useless IMO.

SA Derby 1:49.72
Wood Memorial 1:49.79
So a slow playing SA is as slow as Aqu after a winter type weather?
Seems impossible to believe and Justify was loose on an uncontested lead
Old Time Revival was loose on an uncontested lead in the Wood Memorial.

Does that somehow make the figure for Vino Rossi 'impossible to believe'?

It's fun to compare, and it's difficult to compare with the understanding that raw times are worthless without adjusting for variants, but trying to compare things like raw fractions and final 3/8 is a fools errand. You've got CJ here posting the timeformUS pace figs and final figure for all of these preps. Use it!

f2tornado

04-13-2018, 03:27 PM

You've got CJ here posting the timeformUS pace figs and final figure for all of these preps. Use it!

Which I appreciate but, I'm sorry, when Core Beliefs gets the same figure as Audible, Menelssohn, Vino Rosso, and Good Magic then I have to question the figure.

jay68802

04-13-2018, 03:38 PM

A few years ago a horse named Heati (or something close to that) ran in a OC 10000 6.5 f race at Delta Downs. When I was putting the results in for that day at I saw the final time and thought that's fast. I looked at the Bris figs for the race and at the Beyer figures for the race and they were similar. I the next race the horse shipped to FG and won at 15-1. I spent a lot of time on that race and knew that the figure the horse ran was right. If people want to disregard Justify's figure, I'm fine with that. Bet against him.

LoneF

04-13-2018, 04:34 PM

boys at tosconova

04-13-2018, 05:36 PM

One thing for certain - at any track, raw times mean zero.

i disagree with this.there was a time when it meant less, but now is not that time.

you have certain 3yr olds that will become chanpions of the future at many distances in these prep race/allow races.. in breaking down these races times are huge if they show something better/special than the other horses

unless i'm quoting you out of context in regards to track being slower than normal....sure comparing track A to track B in terms of raw time will/could/sometime/ is inaccurate and therefore the bigger picture is cloudy or just flat out wrong......i agree with that. ..but it's still a little grey regardless.

but raw times mean quite a bit if every track plays as normal

papillon

04-13-2018, 05:55 PM

This is why I'm careful taking speed figures hook, line, and sinker. I recall scratching my head at the 108 BSF Materiality got in one of the slowest Florida Derby renewals in history. The horse didn't so squat thereafter.

GP is my home track, when awesome figs are issued for slow-by-the-clock races they almost never hold up based on what those horses ever do again. Year after year after year. I think Thorograph uses the CYA caveat that the effort cooked the horse for good, but why don't fast times with fast figs cook all of these horses at GP and SA all the time?

Ouality Road was a fast horse, with very fast figs, and he never ran slow in his life. His time in the FL derby was fast enough to say, based on the Justify/Materiality defense, that GP must have been playing 2-3 seconds faster that day, but not a peep, and his body of work confirms his time. He had bad feet, but he never ran slow, spit the bit maybe, but never ran slow.

Game on Dude amassed 6-7 years worth of fast times and insulting figs, and year in, year out, Santa Anita was dismissed as never being even a par with what it had been before or after he ran there. Game on Dude was apparently the luckiest horse ever to live, Santa Anita never changed in 6 years, was illusorally fast for 6 years. But now it is slower than some pokey, never been fast track.

Has it become significantly deeper? Surely, Beyer, Thorograph, Timeform have enough pull to find out exactly how much deeper they've made it. If it isn't deeper, how in the world did it lose 3 seconds? Why hasn't there been a rash of bowed tendons, which accompanies horses that trained on shallow tracks as 2yos, but race on deep tracks as 3yos?

I mean no disrespect and these figs and the argument Santa Anita has slowed by 2-3 seconds may prove spot on, but the only objective measure of speed is time, when time is questioned, the burden always lies with the one saying 2+2=10.

Do we believe Spectacular Bid was running on a track 2-3 seconds faster than his time indicates in the Strub? Do we believe Secretariat was running on a track 2-3 seconds faster than his time indicates in the Belmont? Do we believe that Dr. Fager's mile record is bunk because he was running on a track 2-3 seconds faster than his time indicates? Or do you look at their amassed times over the course of their careers and say, their times look legit? Which is impossible with a 3yo, esp one that debuted in soring.

I admit Baffert winning is getting boring (I'm sure Euros feel the sam about O'Brian), but I have no problem being wrong and withvJustify proving to be the fastest slow poke that ever graced a track and being castigated for doubting that a track has slowed by 2-3 seconds, 1 second, 1.5 seconds, but 15 lengths?

Tom

04-13-2018, 06:17 PM

but raw times mean quite a bit if every track plays as normal

Without a good variant, how do you know if it is playing normal? We know Aqu is playing drastically different lately, and don't forget, it is a new surface, so we have no idea what normal is yet. There have only been a handful of 9 furlong races run over it.

And SA is playing slower. And again, very few 9 furlong races.
So now how do you compare the Wood and the SA Derby?
And what is normal for Maydan?

f2tornado

04-13-2018, 08:25 PM

Without a good variant, how do you know if it is playing normal?

Do the figure makers not question their calculated variant when beat to oblivion in a slow race Instilled Regard posts the same figure as American Pharoah? When Core Beliefs posts as big of figure as any other 9F prep winner this year? All hail Instilled Regard and Core Beliefs. According to the figure makers they are as good or better than the last Triple Crown winner. They are better than the Florida Derby winner and the two year old champ. Bet them with authority because the race figure cannot possibly be in error.

GMB@BP

04-13-2018, 08:32 PM

04-13-2018, 09:23 PM

Do the figure makers not question their calculated variant when beat to oblivion in a slow race Instilled Regard posts the same figure as American Pharoah? When Core Beliefs posts as big of figure as any other 9F prep winner this year? All hail Instilled Regard and Core Beliefs. According to the figure makers they are as good or better than the last Triple Crown winner. They are better than the Florida Derby winner and the two year old champ. Bet them with authority because the race figure cannot possibly be in error.

What has he run, three times? You think you know what he is already?

I also know that in races that are fast all the way around, horses that don't win tend to run their best figures. They are asked to give more than they are in most races.

I used to do a lot of running. I would always run my best times when in against superior runners I couldn't beat. I could never match those times in training or in races where the competition wasn't as good and couldn't set a strong pace.

I very much think that is something that happens in horse races also.

CincyHorseplayer

04-13-2018, 09:24 PM

All I know is Mendelssohn earned ever bit of his 106. I’ve rewatched that race a few times now he was just much the best against a field of horses that I think was solid when compared to other prep races and he was under wraps at the end.

No way Justify can hang with him. I don’t care what kind of inflated number they give him for the SA derby. Sometimes just watching the race with your own eyes tells you everything you need to know ..

Lone F first off I have enjoyed your overall input. We may disagree about Justify but like you I keep watching that replay of Mendelssohn. And man that is who looks like the superhorse! Plenty of solid posters on here believe their eye test. This is one I would encourage them to watch a few times. It's not would a 5K claimer would do with a bias in his favor. And for these lightly raced bunch of 3yo's he actually does have a resume. I believe he is the real deal too.

boys at tosconova

04-13-2018, 09:38 PM

Without a good variant, how do you know if it is playing normal? We know Aqu is playing drastically different lately, and don't forget, it is a new surface, so we have no idea what normal is yet. There have only been a handful of 9 furlong races run over it.

And SA is playing slower. And again, very few 9 furlong races.
So now how do you compare the Wood and the SA Derby?
And what is normal for Maydan?

obv there will be extremes from time to time. but mostly tracks perform up close or up to what they always do. SA performing slower is not the norm it's the exception

and it's obv that other tracks cycle these types of things as well. from day to day to possibly a meet.

how do you compare, you got me. but if i had to be down on a horse in the present day derby it's gonna be from SA and not a NY track. and i don't think any astute capper would argue that

i don;t place much emphasis in any speed figures as well. it seems like every jackass has a speed figure these days as well.

CincyHorseplayer

04-13-2018, 09:40 PM

What has he run, three times? You think you know what he is already?

I also know that in races that are fast all the way around, horses that don't win tend to run their best figures. They are asked to give more than they are in most races.

I used to do a lot of running. I would always run my best times when in against superior runners I couldn't beat. I could never match those times in training or in races where the competition wasn't as good and couldn't set a strong pace.

I very much think that is something that happens in horse races also.

CJ I just wanted to point out to everybody that you unofficially gave Mendelssohn a 128. Not everybody has known you and conversed with you for years to trust your judgement. But that tidbit should raise a brow for the uninformed.

CincyHorseplayer

04-13-2018, 09:48 PM

obv there will be extremes from time to time. but mostly tracks perform up close or up to what they always do. SA performing slower is not the norm it's the exception

and it's obv that other tracks cycle these types of things as well. from day to day to possibly a meet.

how do you compare, you got me. but if i had to be down on a horse in the present day derby it's gonna be from SA and not a NY track. and i don't think any astute capper would argue that

i don;t place much emphasis in any speed figures as well. it seems like every jackass has a speed figure these days as well.

You do know that track has been torn up twice and added a new base so it's not the same track right? There is so much "smart" skepticism that looks over this basic piece of common sense.

boys at tosconova

04-13-2018, 09:55 PM

You do know that track has been torn up twice and added a new base so it's not the same track right? There is so much "smart" skepticism that looks over this basic piece of common sense.

obv that could attribute to it. but i don't know what you're trying to say.

CincyHorseplayer

04-13-2018, 10:04 PM

obv that could attribute to it. but i don't know what you're trying to say.

I'm not being derogatory Boys. It just seems apparent to me. I thought it did to everyone that follows this game. That's all.

boys at tosconova

04-13-2018, 10:08 PM

I'm not being derogatory Boys. It just seems apparent to me. I thought it did to everyone that follows this game. That's all.

i have no idea what you're talking about. and you refuse to explain yourself.

and from the look of it, it does in fact seem like a passive insult coming from you stemming from what i said over something.

CincyHorseplayer

04-13-2018, 10:39 PM

i have no idea what you're talking about. and you refuse to explain yourself.

and from the look of it, it does in fact seem like a passive insult coming from you stemming from what i said over something.

OK they tore the old dirt track out. Put in a new base. tried a synthetic surface. Added stuff to it. Tore that out. Added a new mix of dirt back. Now the track has been playing slow for over a year as has been noted by reputable figure makers. The historical comparisons IMO are irrelevant. If you want to be insulted OK. I think that is a moronic line of thinking all considered from above.

Anyway there you go!:cool:

jay68802

04-13-2018, 10:58 PM

What has he run, three times? You think you know what he is already?

I also know that in races that are fast all the way around, horses that don't win tend to run their best figures. They are asked to give more than they are in most races.

You will also find that a horse that does this is usually in his running style. He should be 2 lengths off the lead and runs there, he does not know that they are running 23 seconds for the first quarter, instead of 24 seconds. A horse runs as fast as the race is run, not as fast as the horse can run.

boys at tosconova

04-14-2018, 12:17 AM

OK they tore the old dirt track out. Put in a new base. tried a synthetic surface. Added stuff to it. Tore that out. Added a new mix of dirt back. Now the track has been playing slow for over a year as has been noted by reputable figure makers. The historical comparisons IMO are irrelevant. If you want to be insulted OK. I think that is a moronic line of thinking all considered from above.

Anyway there you go!:cool:

much better.

i think i quoted tom out of contex and it was done to me as well...this is a speed figure thread,...haha, good day

CincyHorseplayer

04-14-2018, 02:39 AM

i have no idea what you're talking about. and you refuse to explain yourself.

and from the look of it, it does in fact seem like a passive insult coming from you stemming from what i said over something.

Regarding Justify I think the interpretations being thrown about are as wrong as many think his figure is. To me beating a horse like Bolt Doro who was likely to take a step forward off what I think was one of the best preps shorter than 9f in the San Felipe(the other being Audible's Holy Bull) makes the figure accurate. My route rating of that race was a 207. Good Magic's BC Juvenile was 199 by comparison. Bolt Doro had an incredible 218 in the Frontrunner and I think bounced off that one as a 2yo. 220 is the derby par and the closest horse to hit that this year was Flameaway in the SF Davis with a 209. I think he backed that up last Saturday and because of that I think Good Magic also improved off his 199. If Bolt Doro also improved and Justify beat him I think this puts both up near the derby par. I think both are better than the latter two. Anyway my interpretation of Bolt Doro's form cycle is what makes me believe in Justify.

CincyHorseplayer

04-14-2018, 01:37 PM

much better.

i think i quoted tom out of contex and it was done to me as well...this is a speed figure thread,...haha, good day

We're horse racing fans and instead of spring fever we got Derby fever. We are peas in a pod brother!:ThmbUp:

04-14-2018, 06:07 PM

If the competition had somehow gotten worse, we'd be seeing that in shippers performing poorly in my opinion when compared to the odds. I haven't seen that at all with SoCal dirt horses.

Look at My Boy Jack and Instilled Regard, for example.

My Boy Jack again.

CincyHorseplayer

04-14-2018, 06:44 PM

My Boy Jack again.

Your work is done here CJ! Once you convince the masturbatory Derby fiends a Northern Dacer might win=they ain't havin it! Life is preferable through the narrow chinks of their cavern! I know. I stayed in those caverns a while!

GMB@BP

04-14-2018, 06:58 PM

My Boy Jack again.

just ran 1-2 by 10 in the older horse stake...you should lower your figures though, they aint performing

as an aside, City of Light was really good, rider kept him out in the middle of of the track and still won.

04-14-2018, 09:56 PM

just ran 1-2 by 10 in the older horse stake...you should lower your figures though, they aint performing

as an aside, City of Light was really good, rider kept him out in the middle of of the track and still won.

https://twitter.com/TimeformUSfigs/status/985335708276744194

SharpCat

04-14-2018, 10:28 PM

There were three.

As I've mentioned, Santa Anita has been much slower the past year than it usually is. Historical comparisons using raw times will be pretty useless IMO.

I've said I think Santa Anita is playing much slower and I mean much slower than I can ever remember. I have played it long enough to know even the cheapest horses can put up quick sectionals. The past year has been pretty much no can do.

I did a little checking to see if my opinion would change. Let's just say I confirmed my own opinion. It was nothing fancy or scientific but it was more than enough for me. Since were talking Derby I checked the 6F call for every 2 turn race including todays races on a fast track this meet at Santa Anita. It is 88 races and here is the break down.

1:10-1:10.99 1 race and just barely Unique Bella 1:10.95
1:11-1:11.99 10 races
1:12-1:12.99 42 races
1:13-1:13.99 25 races
1:14-1:14.99 10 races

I looked at sprint races and it just made the case even stronger.

Robert Fischer

04-14-2018, 11:00 PM

Signal-to-noise ratio varies inversely with the amount of Derby Fever.

I've lost track of whether the vocal minority actually doesn't believe in track variants or simply enjoys to troll for banter.

I've said I think Santa Anita is playing much slower and I mean much slower than I can ever remember. I have played it long enough to know even the cheapest horses can put up quick sectionals. The past year has been pretty much no can do.

I did a little checking to see if my opinion would change. Let's just say I confirmed my own opinion. It was nothing fancy or scientific but it was more than enough for me. Since were talking Derby I checked the 6F call for every 2 turn race including todays races on a fast track this meet at Santa Anita. It is 88 races and here is the break down.

1:10-1:10.99 1 race and just barely Unique Bella 1:10.95
1:11-1:11.99 10 races
1:12-1:12.99 42 races
1:13-1:13.99 25 races
1:14-1:14.99 10 races

I looked at sprint races and it just made the case even stronger.

GMB@BP

04-14-2018, 11:20 PM

I've said I think Santa Anita is playing much slower and I mean much slower than I can ever remember. I have played it long enough to know even the cheapest horses can put up quick sectionals. The past year has been pretty much no can do.

I did a little checking to see if my opinion would change. Let's just say I confirmed my own opinion. It was nothing fancy or scientific but it was more than enough for me. Since were talking Derby I checked the 6F call for every 2 turn race including todays races on a fast track this meet at Santa Anita. It is 88 races and here is the break down.

1:10-1:10.99 1 race and just barely Unique Bella 1:10.95
1:11-1:11.99 10 races
1:12-1:12.99 42 races
1:13-1:13.99 25 races
1:14-1:14.99 10 races

I looked at sprint races and it just made the case even stronger.

wow, that is crazy, I remember so many races in the 110+ range over the years

stuff like 23, 46, 109 happened regularly, now cheap horses walked home but they were doing it early in the race.

SecretAgentMan

04-15-2018, 12:00 AM

Magnum Moon received a 98 beyer

GMB@BP

04-15-2018, 12:12 AM

Magnum Moon received a 98 beyer

Feels light, what does that Give Accelerate and City of Light, 108ish?

Feels like those two threw down in a fast time and should have definitely been 110+. I feel like that was accelerates best race since he beat Arrogate and got like a 115.

SecretAgentMan

04-15-2018, 12:14 AM

Feels light, what does that Give Accelerate and City of Light, 108ish?

Feels like those two threw down in a fast time and should have definitely been 110+. I feel like that was accelerates best race since he beat Arrogate and got like a 115.

It does feel light, I was expecting a 103, but beyer puts out numbers based on his formula or whatever else he uses.

f2tornado

04-15-2018, 12:22 AM

Equibase figure was 105. This is on par with their figures for Wood and Bluegrass.

04-15-2018, 12:26 AM

Based on the clock alone the spread on points between the Oaklawn H and the Arkansas Derby should be about 14 points.

SecretAgentMan

04-15-2018, 12:29 AM

Based on the clock alone the spread on points between the Oaklawn H and the Arkansas Derby should be about 14 points.

I definitely think Justify is much better than Magnum.Moon

papillon

04-15-2018, 02:04 AM

Signal-to-noise ratio varies inversely with the amount of Derby Fever.

I've lost track of whether the vocal minority actually doesn't believe in track variants or simply enjoys to troll for banter.

So, if you question whether or not Justify really did run 1:12 instead of take on faith it was really 1:09, you should keep your mouth shut or you're a troll?

Well, here's hoping the faithful do not have to erase Justify from their memories, just as they have had to Materiality and Verranzano. It is not like we don't see this every year, it's just that people are very good of massaging their cognitive dissonance when the narratives they are invested in do not pan out overtime.

sigh.

f2tornado

04-15-2018, 08:56 AM

Signal-to-noise ratio varies inversely with the amount of Derby Fever.

I've lost track of whether the vocal minority actually doesn't believe in track variants or simply enjoys to troll for banter.

I have not read one post suggesting variants don’t exist. I don’t think it is trolling to suggest the Brisnet figure for the 4th place finisher beaten by 11 lengths in the 19th slowest renewal in history is somehow the same as American Pharaoh’s 11th fastest Arkansas Derby win in history. I don’t think it is trolling to scratch head when Core Beliefs gets the same TimeForm figure as Good Magic or Vino Rosso.

LoneF

04-15-2018, 10:45 AM

The speed figures for the Santa Anita derby were obviously inflated and a perfect example why speed figures should be treated as only a small piece to the puzzle.

Look at the Brisnet speed figures ....

Installed Regard 4th in the Santa Anita Derby 102

Vino Rosso wins the Wood 102

Noble Indy wins LA Derby 100

Good Magic wins Bluegrass 98

Is there anybody that with a straight face can say installed regard looked better running 4th in the SA Derby than either Noble Indy or Good Magic actually winning their races or just as good as Vino Rosso winning his ?

04-15-2018, 11:02 AM

04-15-2018, 11:05 AM

Based on the clock alone the spread on points between the Oaklawn H and the Arkansas Derby should be about 14 points.

Apparently the Magnum Moon Beyer was adjusted upwards 5 points for pace. That is a reach in my opinion. I have the pace as moderate but hardly crawling. I've been wrong before though.

f2tornado

04-15-2018, 11:14 AM

I didn't know speed figures were beauty pageants

Fair enough. Substitute his use of "looked better" to "ran the same as" or "as fast as". So, can anyone with a straight face think Instilled Regard, finishing a distant 4th in the 19th slowest Santa Anita in history, ran a race as fast as American Pharoah's 11th fastest Arkansas Derby on record? Do you really think the eleven length defeat was truly on par with Good Magic's Bluegrass or Vino Rosso's Wood?

04-15-2018, 11:34 AM

Fair enough. Substitute his use of "looked better" to "ran the same as" or "as fast as". So, can anyone with a straight face think Instilled Regard, finishing a distant 4th in the 19th slowest Santa Anita in history, ran a race as fast as American Pharoah's 11th fastest Arkansas Derby on record? Do you really think the eleven length defeat was truly on par with Good Magic's Bluegrass or Vino Rosso's Wood?

Yes, I can really say that. This kind of stuff happens every day in lower class racing, without the historical references of course. It is the very reason for speed figures.

Look what the Cali horses did in the Oaklawn Handicap. I doubt either of them looked very fast on raw times.

LoneF

04-15-2018, 11:50 AM

Fair enough. Substitute his use of "looked better" to "ran the same as" or "as fast as". So, can anyone with a straight face think Instilled Regard, finishing a distant 4th in the 19th slowest Santa Anita in history, ran a race as fast as American Pharoah's 11th fastest Arkansas Derby on record? Do you really think the eleven length defeat was truly on par with Good Magic's Bluegrass or Vino Rosso's Wood?

Yeah “ looked better “ was probably a poor choice of words but I am glad you still got the point I was trying to make.

f2tornado

04-15-2018, 12:03 PM

Look what the Cali horses did in the Oaklawn Handicap. I doubt either of them looked very fast on raw times.

Or alternatively, watch Unique Bella fail in the Apple Blossom.

LoneF

04-15-2018, 12:11 PM

I saw Installed Regard hopelessly lag far behind what was basically a dog and pony show by Justify and Bolt in the SA Derby.

In the Bluegrass I saw Good Magic break from a tough post against a solid field and put away a really good horse in Flameaway that always grudgingly gives up the lead in the stretch.

Yet, Installed Regard gets the better number ?

I don’t need Brisnet to piss on me and tell me it’s raining lol

04-15-2018, 12:37 PM

Or alternatively, watch Unique Bella fail in the Apple Blossom.

LOL, yeah, speed figures also are made to predict horses that won't break! Who knew!?

SecretAgentMan

04-15-2018, 02:29 PM

My Boy Jack received a 90 beyer

f2tornado

04-15-2018, 02:43 PM

My Boy Jack received a 90 beyer

Equibase figure a 99 which is a few points below their average for the race. I do think he will have an average pace to run at in Derby but likely to fall well short. I suspect 8.5 panels will be his ideal distance.

jay68802

04-15-2018, 05:42 PM

Yes, I can really say that. This kind of stuff happens every day in lower class racing, without the historical references of course. It is the very reason for speed figures.

Look what the Cali horses did in the Oaklawn Handicap. I doubt either of them looked very fast on raw times.

Raw times for the last 1 1/16 race for each horse in the Oaklawn Handicap, listed in random order, who is the fastest? The 11 and winner is not listed, had never run the distance.

1. 104
2. 105.6
3. 105.4
4. 102.55
5. 105
6. 104.55
7. 102
8. 102.4
9. 103.4
10.103.55

Afleet

04-15-2018, 06:22 PM

City of Light ran two 7F races in a row in 1:21.1 @SA-thats fast raw time
Accelerate ran 1 1/8 in 1:50 2/5 Feb 3@SA in the San Pasqual-slow time

04-24-2018, 11:17 AM

Raw times for the last 1 1/16 race for each horse in the Oaklawn Handicap, listed in random order, who is the fastest? The 11 and winner is not listed, had never run the distance.

1. 104
2. 105.6
3. 105.4
4. 102.55
5. 105
6. 104.55
7. 102
8. 102.4
9. 103.4
10.103.55

I missed this. What was the answer? Really the only time I ever see raw times is when watching a race and seeing them pop up on the screen,

jay68802

04-24-2018, 11:39 AM

I missed this. What was the answer? Really the only time I ever see raw times is when watching a race and seeing them pop up on the screen,

They are listed in order of post position. The 10 looks average here, but the figures make him stand out.

04-24-2018, 12:34 PM

They are listed in order of post position. The 10 looks average here, but the figures make him stand out.

Yep, and he finished 10 in front of the rest.

Tom

04-24-2018, 02:51 PM

Raw times are like raw meat.
Much better when properly grilled.

reckless

04-25-2018, 11:24 AM

Raw times are like raw meat.
Much better when properly grilled.

But often the raw meat is way overcooked and ruined.

Slow horses make for slow races which make high variants which make for high speed figures.

04-25-2018, 11:27 AM

But often the raw meat is way overcooked and ruined.

Slow horses make for slow races which make high variants which make for high speed figures.

It doesn't really work like that at all, except in the case of the old DRF Speed Ratings and Track Variants.

What makes high variants is slow races from fast horses.

Gerard02

04-25-2018, 12:01 PM

I always enjoy reading the posts in the Triple Crown Trail section, you guys toss around some interesting ideas. Keep it going. Thanks!

f2tornado

04-25-2018, 01:17 PM

It doesn't really work like that at all, except in the case of the old DRF Speed Ratings and Track Variants.

What makes high variants is slow races from fast horses.

True, but, were the fast horses truly fast or did they have an off day? The smaller the field (sample size) the larger potential error.

Or you could be Andrew Beyer and give Bolt a five point lower figure in the FrontRunner than the Zenyatta in spite of running 0.8 seconds faster at the same distance- on the same track- on the same day with no change in weather solely because he couldn't believe the top four finishers could improve so much.

This, my friends, is why I still look at raw times. People like Beyer can bull shmitt any number they want.

GMB@BP

04-25-2018, 01:47 PM

People like Beyer can bull shmitt any number they want.

You know CJ is the chief figure maker for Timeform US, right?

I have been pretty patient with your bullshit but now your insulting CJ and frankly the act is growing tiresome.

reckless

04-25-2018, 01:56 PM

It doesn't really work like that at all, except in the case of the old DRF Speed Ratings and Track Variants.

What makes high variants is slow races from fast horses.

How do you know when --and if-- 'fast' horses run 'slow' races?? I am not out to seek your methods or secrets, I promise. I also know you speak from experience having done variants and speed figures for many, many years, earning a good reputation. And, of course, I honestly do not question your post at all.

But I do not understand how and why many people are saying Justify ran lights out in the Santa Anita Derby, was the best race of the major preps, etc., etc. The Kentucky Derby is a well-acknowledged wide open race with many talented horses, yes. But there seems one constant I keep hearing -- and that is Justify being the fastest of the bunch, and by many lengths!

I don't buy this at all.

Here are the 3 year best times and Track Records of the tracks where the major final preps were run, at 1 1-8 miles. I'll list the 3 year best first, then the track record and finally the difference between the two.

Aqueduct 148.1... 147.0... (6 ticks slower)

Keeneland 147.3... 147.3... (no difference)

Oaklawn 147.4... 146.3... (6 ticks slower)

Santa Anita 147.0... 145.4 (6 ticks slower)

Gulfstream 147.2... 146.4 (3 ticks slower)

Fair Grounds 148.4... 147.3 (6 ticks slower)

Churchill Downs 147.4... 147.1 (3 ticks slower)

As I regularly harp, it's slow horses that are making for 'fast' races -- when adjusted, imo.

Now, let's look at the final times of the major final preps:

Louisiana Derby, Noble Indy 111.2 150.1.

Florida Derby, Audible 111.3 149.1

Blue Grass, Good Magic 111.4 150.1

Santa Anita Derby, Justify 112.3 149.4

Wood Memorial, Vino Rosso 111.2 149.4

Arkansas Derby, Magnum Moon 113.2 149.4

So, in my simple way of thinking, all prep winners could be considered capable of winning the Kentucky Derby and many agree that it is very wide open.

BUT, I'm not betting all of the them because ... of the major prep winners only four contenders won with the 6 furlong pace call time under 112.0:

Noble Indy, Audible, Good Magic and Vino Rosso.

Noble Indy's race was 6 ticks slower than the 3 year best; Vino Rosso 8 ticks slower; Audible 9 ticks slower ... then we have Magnum Moon 10 ticks slower, Good Magic 13 ticks, and Justify, the probable favorite and big fig horse(?) of the race, 14 ticks slower, wow.

Pletcher taking 3 of the 4 superfecta slots will not surprise me.

If there is any adjustment to be made my way is to adjust the final times best of each track to Churchill Down's 1 1-8 mile best time. If correct, Justify comes out even worse than just using the raw times since Santa Anita is still the 'fastest' of tracks.

I sincerely cannot understand why Justify's slow time is so easily explained away as a 'slow' day, while not giving anything near similar consideration to the other contenders.

I know cj, that you and other figure makers use more sophisticated methods and all than I do, but I see a big opportunity by throwing out 3 of the horses that may get a big portion of the money -- out goes Justify, Bolt d'Oro and Magnum Moon.

This post became longer than I originally wanted, but horseracing does this to me. Sorry, but pithy I am not. Thanks.

f2tornado

04-25-2018, 01:58 PM

You know CJ is the chief figure maker for Timeform US, right?

I have been pretty patient with your bullshit but now your insulting CJ and frankly the act is growing tiresome.

Where in my post did I insult CJ? You're making crap up. Can a person not doubt the all mighty speed figures here? If they are the be all end all then the hell with handicapping. Smart players know true speed figures are only snapshots in time. I suggested Andrew Beyer pulls numbers out of his arse and he's effectively admitted such. I do not know the ins and outs of TimeForm and I therefore make no judgement on those figures as a whole. I do question the variant at Santa Anita and if I'm proved wrong then so be it.

PowerUpPaynter

04-25-2018, 02:13 PM

f2tornado

04-25-2018, 02:24 PM

Iv been on this board for a few years now. Why this year are we going to question all the figures?

Figures are commonly questioned. (https://www.usracing.com/news/features/beyer-speed-figures) It's nothing new this year.

04-25-2018, 02:29 PM

True, but, were the fast horses truly fast or did they have an off day? The smaller the field (sample size) the larger potential error.

Or you could be Andrew Beyer and give Bolt a five point lower figure in the FrontRunner than the Zenyatta in spite of running 0.8 seconds faster at the same distance- on the same track- on the same day with no change in weather solely because he couldn't believe the top four finishers could improve so much.

This, my friends, is why I still look at raw times. People like Beyer can bull shmitt any number they want.

I can't and won't try to speak for Beyer. I disagreed with him on the FrontRunner figure and discussed it here. But that doesn't mean I'm right every time I disagree with him. In fact, I'm sure I'm not. Could any figure bullshit a number? I guess so, but to what purpose? We do the best we can with the data given and it often isn't very accurate.

People cite raw times like they are set in stone. Anyone that believes they are always accurate isn't paying attention. This is particularly true of Trakus where I find timing errors nearly every day. There is a person pressing a button when the gate opens to trigger the system on. How accurate do you think that is, especially considering this is an "extra duty" and not the person's main job?

There are times fat fingered by the person entering Equibase data at least a few times a week. Some are caught, some are not. There are clock malfunctions with the beam system. If they aren't egregious, most are not caught by the limited QC system in place.

You know who does catch these things, even if they don't know the exact reason? Figure makers catch them. If you want to talk about people bullshitting numbers, try those that come up with times when there is any kind of problem. Those are usually comical.

I will concede that the smaller the sample size, the easier it is to be fooled. I personally try to be cautious and take the safe road on those days. But the Santa Anita Derby card was not one of them. There were three route races that day and four other dirt races. I'll stick to the route races. I looked at the top eight finishers in each and looked at the last four races each horse had run (or less if they had not race four times). There were 88 potential data points. I also use our pre-race Race Ratings, sort of like a class rating, for three more and a total of 91.

I throw out races that don't meet minimum criteria looking at things like surface, distance, days away, and finishing position. The last one, to clarify, is simply things like not using a figure for a horse that ran 8th last out and won today, or vise versa. There were 46 left from which I created the track variant. That is no small sample size for making speed figures on a race card, and this was only three route races.

04-25-2018, 02:30 PM

Iv been on this board for a few years now. Why this year are we going to question all the figures? Does anyone really only handicap based on last out beyers? Its certainly a piece of the puzzle tho.

It seems like the Santa Anita surface and perceived slow track has spawned this conversation. If anyone has real data proving or disproving the 'slow' track lets look at it one way or the other.

To anyone that makes figures it is painfully obvious. There are countless examples just this year of horses from California shipping out of town and running great despite seemingly slow looking (whatever that even means) final times.

Gerard02

04-25-2018, 02:32 PM

Very interesting thread. Some passionate beliefs. I incorporate speed figures into my handicapping as well as other factors. Mr. Caris got me more focused on Internal Fractions. I have really liked breaking down individual races and seeing the race within the race. Combine that with watching the replay and you can put things together. The tracks all play different. I believe that the Kentucky Derby can develop into a wide open race. Food for thought. Going back, we have seen the majority of winners come out of the major prep races who have either won or placed. There are those exceptions, like Animal Kingdom, but that’s what makes it a challenge, no?

04-25-2018, 02:51 PM

I sincerely cannot understand why Justify's slow time is so easily explained away as a 'slow' day, while not giving anything near similar consideration to the other contenders.

I know cj, that you and other figure makers use more sophisticated methods and all than I do, but I see a big opportunity by throwing out 3 of the horses that may get a big portion of the money -- out goes Justify, Bolt d'Oro and Magnum Moon.

I appreciate you taking the time but I bolded the part I found most important. This is exactly the issue with most of the questions. I really, truly, don't want to sound like a condescending ass. But in my case when people have questions I really try to answer the best I can. But many think they know more using methods that I know just don't hold up. And not only do they argue with me when I try to help, they try to tell me why I'm wrong. You learn a ton when you make figures for every track, every day. Any one that his tried this can confirm it. Hell, you learn a ton trying to do figures for one track for a few months.

What you will find is that things you think you know and are confident in when you make a number will make you look like a fool when the horses run back. Over time you figure out the races where this happens and why you made a mistake. You won't get them all right, that isn't possible. But you will do a lot better than using raw times. No speed figure maker wants to put numbers out that are crap and have customers use them to bet. You also won't have a job very long. Horseplayers aren't dumb and would figure out pretty fast if the numbers are crap.

As for throwing out the three horses you mention and seeing opportunity, great! There are plenty of reasons those three horses might not run well in the Derby. I particularly don't like Magnum Moon for a host of reasons. The best last race speed figure horses lose a lot more than they win every day at every track. But what they won't do is run poorly because there speed figures are wrong. They are one piece of the puzzle that too many people try to make out to be the only piece of the puzzle. The funny thing is as a speed figure guy most people assume I am betting top number horses all the time. Anyone that has listened to me on podcasts or on Out of the Gate or read some of the handicapping articles I've done would know this isn't true.

jay68802

04-25-2018, 02:55 PM

one thing is for sure though, The Sheets, Bris, Beyer, and Timeform have all agreed that the track was slow that day. How slow was it, up to the handicapper to decide. I came to the conclusion that Justify's numbers might be 2-4 points high, but that is just my opinion. Still it puts him in the top three for the Derby.

jay68802

04-25-2018, 03:12 PM

I can't and won't try to speak for Beyer. I disagreed with him on the FrontRunner figure and discussed it here. But that doesn't mean I'm right every time I disagree with him. In fact, I'm sure I'm not. Could any figure bullshit a number? I guess so, but to what purpose? We do the best we can with the data given and it often isn't very accurate.

People cite raw times like they are set in stone. Anyone that believes they are always accurate isn't paying attention. This is particularly true of Trakus where I find timing errors nearly every day. There is a person pressing a button when the gate opens to trigger the system on. How accurate do you think that is, especially considering this is an "extra duty" and not the person's main job?

There are times fat fingered by the person entering Equibase data at least a few times a week. Some are caught, some are not. There are clock malfunctions with the beam system. If they aren't egregious, most are not caught by the limited QC system in place.

You know who does catch these things, even if they don't know the exact reason? Figure makers catch them. If you want to talk about people bullshitting numbers, try those that come up with times when there is any kind of problem. Those are usually comical.

I will concede that the smaller the sample size, the easier it is to be fooled. I personally try to be cautious and take the safe road on those days. But the Santa Anita Derby card was not one of them. There were three route races that day and four other dirt races. I'll stick to the route races. I looked at the top eight finishers in each and looked at the last four races each horse had run (or less if they had not race four times). There were 88 potential data points. I also use our pre-race Race Ratings, sort of like a class rating, for three more and a total of 91.

I throw out races that don't meet minimum criteria looking at things like surface, distance, days away, and finishing position. The last one, to clarify, is simply things like not using a figure for a horse that ran 8th last out and won today, or vise versa. There were 46 left from which I created the track variant. That is no small sample size for making speed figures on a race card, and this was only three route races.

This game never quits on you that is for sure, this post gave me a "DUH" moment. Thanks for the education.

dilanesp

04-25-2018, 04:36 PM

If you had been making speed figures in 1979, you would have found that despite the fact he was running in the 1:49-1:50 range in his preps, Spectacular Bid was actually faster than Flying Paster, whose raw times were a second or two faster.

Santa Anita's surface is extremely slow this year. Justify's times are excellent in comparison to not only the other times on his raceday, but also to other times run throughout the meeting.

SharpCat

04-25-2018, 04:47 PM

It seems like the Santa Anita surface and perceived slow track has spawned this conversation. If anyone has real data proving or disproving the 'slow' track lets look at it one way or the other.

From page 3 of this thread.

I've said I think Santa Anita is playing much slower and I mean much slower than I can ever remember. I have played it long enough to know even the cheapest horses can put up quick sectionals. The past year has been pretty much no can do.

I did a little checking to see if my opinion would change. Let's just say I confirmed my own opinion. It was nothing fancy or scientific but it was more than enough for me. Since were talking Derby I checked the 6F call for every 2 turn race including todays races on a fast track this meet at Santa Anita. It is 88 races and here is the break down.

1:10-1:10.99 1 race and just barely Unique Bella 1:10.95
1:11-1:11.99 10 races
1:12-1:12.99 42 races
1:13-1:13.99 25 races
1:14-1:14.99 10 races

I looked at sprint races and it just made the case even stronger.

Afleet

04-25-2018, 06:40 PM

How do you know when --and if-- 'fast' horses run 'slow' races?? I am not out to seek your methods or secrets, I promise. I also know you speak from experience having done variants and speed figures for many, many years, earning a good reputation. And, of course, I honestly do not question your post at all.

But I do not understand how and why many people are saying Justify ran lights out in the Santa Anita Derby, was the best race of the major preps, etc., etc. The Kentucky Derby is a well-acknowledged wide open race with many talented horses, yes. But there seems one constant I keep hearing -- and that is Justify being the fastest of the bunch, and by many lengths!

I don't buy this at all.

Here are the 3 year best times and Track Records of the tracks where the major final preps were run, at 1 1-8 miles. I'll list the 3 year best first, then the track record and finally the difference between the two.

Aqueduct 148.1... 147.0... (6 ticks slower)

Keeneland 147.3... 147.3... (no difference)

Oaklawn 147.4... 146.3... (6 ticks slower)

Santa Anita 147.0... 145.4 (6 ticks slower)

Gulfstream 147.2... 146.4 (3 ticks slower)

Fair Grounds 148.4... 147.3 (6 ticks slower)

Churchill Downs 147.4... 147.1 (3 ticks slower)

As I regularly harp, it's slow horses that are making for 'fast' races -- when adjusted, imo.

Now, let's look at the final times of the major final preps:

Louisiana Derby, Noble Indy 111.2 150.1.

Florida Derby, Audible 111.3 149.1

Blue Grass, Good Magic 111.4 150.1

Santa Anita Derby, Justify 112.3 149.4

Wood Memorial, Vino Rosso 111.2 149.4

Arkansas Derby, Magnum Moon 113.2 149.4

So, in my simple way of thinking, all prep winners could be considered capable of winning the Kentucky Derby and many agree that it is very wide open.

BUT, I'm not betting all of the them because ... of the major prep winners only four contenders won with the 6 furlong pace call time under 112.0:

Noble Indy, Audible, Good Magic and Vino Rosso.

Noble Indy's race was 6 ticks slower than the 3 year best; Vino Rosso 8 ticks slower; Audible 9 ticks slower ... then we have Magnum Moon 10 ticks slower, Good Magic 13 ticks, and Justify, the probable favorite and big fig horse(?) of the race, 14 ticks slower, wow.

Pletcher taking 3 of the 4 superfecta slots will not surprise me.

If there is any adjustment to be made my way is to adjust the final times best of each track to Churchill Down's 1 1-8 mile best time. If correct, Justify comes out even worse than just using the raw times since Santa Anita is still the 'fastest' of tracks.

I sincerely cannot understand why Justify's slow time is so easily explained away as a 'slow' day, while not giving anything near similar consideration to the other contenders.

I know cj, that you and other figure makers use more sophisticated methods and all than I do, but I see a big opportunity by throwing out 3 of the horses that may get a big portion of the money -- out goes Justify, Bolt d'Oro and Magnum Moon.

This post became longer than I originally wanted, but horseracing does this to me. Sorry, but pithy I am not. Thanks.

that a good post

04-25-2018, 07:15 PM

that a good post

The three year best is not a good measuring stick. It is a little better than the track record maybe. How many 9f races do people think are run on dirt at these tracks in a three year span?

dilanesp

04-25-2018, 07:38 PM

At some point, people need to stop obsessing about raw time.

Here's a vivid example.

The slowest Hollywood Gold Cup in history, going all the way back to 1938, was run by Game on Dude (2:04 flat) in 2012.

The fastest Santa Anita Handicap in history, going all the way back to 1935, was run by...

Game on Dude (1:58 flat) in 2014.

I assure you that Game on Dude did not get 6 seconds faster between age 5 and 7.

The 2012 race DID earn a lower speed figure-- not 6 seconds lower, but lower. But it was also run over a much slower synthetic surface, whereas the 2014 was run over a Santa Anita dirt strip that was one of the fastest in history.

There are a lot of disagreements about particular methodologies about converting raw times into usable numbers. Those disagreements are interesting. But-- YOU MUST AT LEAST USE ONE OF THEM. Track speeds vary, a LOT, and you have to use some valid methodology for adjusting times based on track speed before making handicapping conclusions based on them.

And you can't simply dismiss Justify as a slow horse when he's running his times over a surface that is quite a bit slower than Santa Anita was just a couple of years ago.

CincyHorseplayer

04-25-2018, 08:52 PM

I always use the 6% margin of error rule when I look at a race. My rule so...If the top figure is X then you accept as competitive in the race any figure within the 94 percentile. I find this rule to be at worst around 80% and normally around 87%. We keep hearing about Buckpasser X and RAN lines being the esoteric realities of this game and since 1990 RAN is only at 58%. Pedigrees change too. It may never be that good again in the next 18 years. But fast will always be good. It will always outperform nearly all other statistics. Top figure is not only what figure players look at. That perversion of thinking being applied by non figure players is as bad as pace players betting only frontrunners! I understand what is going on in pedigree. And as applied to the Derby it's not that complicated. The pedigree work I do with turf races take some real artful insight. Seeing how it is used here and the scorn by the same players against figures reminds of of someone trying to hit a hard ball with a wiffle ball bat. Looking for the next Giacomo to validate their entire being as their entire playing life revolves around this single race. Talk about outliers, stupidity, and BS! We've got a whole legion of players who embody all those virtues and they all try to preach to us this time of year. Cheers!:D

Afleet

04-25-2018, 09:42 PM

04-26-2018, 12:59 AM

not many which is sad, but the 6F, 1 1/16 would be relevant

Better but still not great. And all the preps shown in the example were at 9f.

CincyHorseplayer

04-26-2018, 07:45 AM

Better but still not great. And all the preps shown in the example were at 9f.

I know I'm going out of the way here but you talking about distances reminded me of this. How do you feel about the route distances for G1 races? I would like to see them get a little longer again. I think there should be very few G1 races run at 9f. They should be 10f. The mile is a specialty distance worldwide, IMO there is no reason for other races that are graded to be so hugged up to it. Much like how Belmont has run more turf races at 10-11 furlongs I'd like to see more dirt races run further too. It would long term improve the breed IMO. Where you at on this?

Gerard02

04-26-2018, 08:05 AM

I agree. More races should be longer distances.

Robert Fischer

04-26-2018, 08:07 AM

Was OBVIOUS to me watching live, that either the track was playing slow, or the fractions were malfunctioning/mis-timed.

Wasn't a suicidal pace, but it was a moderate-to-fast pace. There was a slight danger that Mike Smith was going to blow it by going too fast.
He didn't reach that point, but he flirted with it.

I'm watching the race with a bet down, and I'm saying "Easy, Mike... don't go too fast now... take it easy!... Why is he being so aggressive!?".

Believe it or not, I watch a lot of races.

Doesn't matter to me what numbers show up on the screen or whether they show up or not. I can kind of tell what's going on.

I think the figure makers did a great job. They should have. The card and the recent racing has shown the track has played slower. It's not like the track supposedly 'changed' between races xyz because they dragged the tractor or whatever...

Wiley

04-26-2018, 09:23 AM

Was OBVIOUS to me watching live, that either the track was playing slow, or the fractions were malfunctioning/mis-timed.

Wasn't a suicidal pace, but it was a moderate-to-fast pace. There was a slight danger that Mike Smith was going to blow it by going too fast.
He didn't reach that point, but he flirted with it.

I thought the same thing, why is Smith urging Justify on with a clear and easy lead early in the race. I assume Baffert told him to make him work some to get as much out of the race as possible, and maybe also see what he will have for a finish. Pretty bold move considering he had to finish one or two to make the Derby, or a ton of confidence in the horse.

depalma113

04-26-2018, 09:33 AM

f2tornado

04-26-2018, 11:42 AM

I thought the same thing, why is Smith urging Justify on with a clear and easy lead early in the race...

Adjusting the final clock by 2.2 (or just under a quarter second per panel) to match the time California Chrome won at (with support by equal Beyer and similar Equibase figures) yields a 3/4 fraction in 1:11.14 which is on par with the other preps short the Ark.

I don't recall a Derby with so many horses that finished strongly in final prep. I really think a horse will need to be within about five lengths of the leader at the 3/4 pole to pull off a victory. Ten horses in the gate ran a final 3/8th in 37.8 or less, none dramatically faster than the others. I'd normally not get too caught up in post draw but it is seemingly more critical this year given much of the field has the exact same style. Justify backers should hope he draws inside and placed near the front then it's just a matter of staying power through that final panel.

Robert Fischer

04-26-2018, 04:34 PM

Until someone can logically explain why Bolt d'Oro is not credited with a 113 Beyer in the Frontrunner, I am not buying any Beyer speed figure coming out of Santa Anita.

If they can arbitrarily drop a horse 13 points, they can certainly raise it too.

I don't know how to make a Beyer.

I would be interested if you laid it out.

One of the blessing/curses in Beyers is that they have seem to have a projection element, like a class element.

Bolt got a 103 and Solomini got a 90.

Both of those figures appear to 'fit' in hindsight. Doesn't mean that they were correct, just that they look sensible in hindsight.

If Bolt gets a 113 instead of a 103, does that mean Solomini should have earned a 100 instead of a 90? How does the scale for 2nd work if you change the winner's number?

I don't have any problem saying the Frontrunner was Bolt's fastest race.

I have it "3rd start G1 Front Runner S. 1 1/16M - Sharp effort. Broke with the pace, settled nicely just behind and outside the leader, pulled away from the field at the end of the far turn. Good energy in the stretch.".

I didn't really think it was a '113' level performance (today that basically means "WOW! this horse absolutely FREAKED!"), but if they gave him a 105 or 106 instead of the 103, I wouldn't have questioned the legitimacy.

dilanesp

04-26-2018, 06:59 PM

I don't know how to make a Beyer.

I would be interested if you laid it out.

One of the blessing/curses in Beyers is that they have seem to have a projection element, like a class element.

Bolt got a 103 and Solomini got a 90.

Both of those figures appear to 'fit' in hindsight. Doesn't mean that they were correct, just that they look sensible in hindsight.

If Bolt gets a 113 instead of a 103, does that mean Solomini should have earned a 100 instead of a 90? How does the scale for 2nd work if you change the winner's number?

I don't have any problem saying the Frontrunner was Bolt's fastest race.

I have it "3rd start G1 Front Runner S. 1 1/16M - Sharp effort. Broke with the pace, settled nicely just behind and outside the leader, pulled away from the field at the end of the far turn. Good energy in the stretch.".

I didn't really think it was a '113' level performance (today that basically means "WOW! this horse absolutely FREAKED!"), but if they gave him a 105 or 106 instead of the 103, I wouldn't have questioned the legitimacy.

I am going on memory, but here are the steps I followed when I made speed figures as a teenager:

1. Start with a commonly run distance and class level and collect a large sample of data. For instance, at Santa Anita these days, you might use allowance optional claimer nonwinners of 2 at 6 furlongs. (Back in the 1980's I used $12,500 open claimers at 6 furlongs, but now there aren't so many of those.)

2. Take the mean of all times at that distance and class level and assign it an arbitrary number such as 70 or 80 or 90.

3. Now collect another large sample of data for the same class level at other distances. 5 1/2 furlongs, 6 1/2 furlongs, 7 furlongs, 1 mile, 1 1/16 miles. Each par time will get the same number that you arbitrarily assigned.

4. Now, at 6 furlongs, assign a point value for each 1/5 of a second (or nowadays, 0.20 seconds) interval. Such as 2 points.

5. That same point interval should be a different amount of time at the other distances, because the horses are traveling faster at the end of shorter races and slower at the end of longer races. So divide the .20 seconds by the par time of the 6 furlong race, expressed in seconds. Then multiply it by the par time for each other distance, and you will get the equivalent number of seconds for each distance. Based on that, you can construct a beaten time chart for each distance. Each 2 points will be .20 seconds at 6 furlongs, it will be a little less than .20 seconds at 5 1/2 furlongs, and it will be significantly more than .20 seconds at 1 1/16 miles, for instance.

6. Using the beaten time chart, you can construct a speed figure chart for each distance that assigns each time a number, by, for instance, going up and down 2 points for each .20 at 6 furlongs, and using the other numbers you just calculated with the other numbers. Those are your base speed figures.

7. Go back and take average base speed figures over large samples at various common class levels at the track. These are your par times. After you have a large number of par times, use those times to project the speed figures for races going forward. Compare the actual numbers run by winners to the par times, and average the differences out to create an estimate of whether the track is faster or slower than normal. This is your track variant. Add or subtract the track variant to your base numbers. These will be your preliminary speed figures.

8. Once you have a few weeks of speed figures calculated this way, instead of continuing to use the par times, start using the actual numbers run by horses in previous races to project what they will run in each race. Once again, compare the projected numbers to what they actually run. Use a par time when you don't have enough data. Once again, average these out each day to create an estimate of track speed, which is your track variant. Add or subtract the track variant to your base numbers. Now you are calculating real speed figures.

Gerard02

04-26-2018, 07:09 PM

Ill need to take a Motrin and read that again.

GMB@BP

04-26-2018, 07:11 PM

I don't know how to make a Beyer.

I would be interested if you laid it out.

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aketcA_hkoM

steveb

04-26-2018, 07:20 PM

I am going on memory, but here are the steps I followed when I made speed figures as a teenager:

1. Start with a commonly run distance and class level and collect a large sample of data. For instance, at Santa Anita these days, you might use allowance optional claimer nonwinners of 2 at 6 furlongs. (Back in the 1980's I used $12,500 open claimers at 6 furlongs, but now there aren't so many of those.)

2. Take the mean of all times at that distance and class level and assign it an arbitrary number such as 70 or 80 or 90.

3. Now collect another large sample of data for the same class level at other distances. 5 1/2 furlongs, 6 1/2 furlongs, 7 furlongs, 1 mile, 1 1/16 miles. Each par time will get the same number that you arbitrarily assigned.

4. Now, at 6 furlongs, assign a point value for each 1/5 of a second (or nowadays, 0.20 seconds) interval. Such as 2 points.

5. That same point interval should be a different amount of time at the other distances, because the horses are traveling faster at the end of shorter races and slower at the end of longer races. So divide the .20 seconds by the par time of the 6 furlong race, expressed in seconds. Then multiply it by the par time for each other distance, and you will get the equivalent number of seconds for each distance. Based on that, you can construct a beaten time chart for each distance. Each 2 points will be .20 seconds at 6 furlongs, it will be a little less than .20 seconds at 5 1/2 furlongs, and it will be significantly more than .20 seconds at 1 1/16 miles, for instance.

6. Using the beaten time chart, you can construct a speed figure chart for each distance that assigns each time a number, by, for instance, going up and down 2 points for each .20 at 6 furlongs, and using the other numbers you just calculated with the other numbers. Those are your base speed figures.

7. Go back and take average base speed figures over large samples at various common class levels at the track. These are your par times. After you have a large number of par times, use those times to project the speed figures for races going forward. Compare the actual numbers run by winners to the par times, and average the differences out to create an estimate of whether the track is faster or slower than normal. This is your track variant. Add or subtract the track variant to your base numbers. These will be your preliminary speed figures.

8. Once you have a few weeks of speed figures calculated this way, instead of continuing to use the par times, start using the actual numbers run by horses in previous races to project what they will run in each race. Once again, compare the projected numbers to what they actually run. Use a par time when you don't have enough data. Once again, average these out each day to create an estimate of track speed, which is your track variant. Add or subtract the track variant to your base numbers. Now you are calculating real speed figures.

that's a great post that i enjoyed reading.
i think though that you need somebody to take you under his wing and give you some guidance.
your 4 5 and 6 though are very very wrong.

dilanesp

04-26-2018, 07:32 PM

that's a great post that i enjoyed reading.
i think though that you need somebody to take you under his wing and give you some guidance.
your 4 5 and 6 though are very very wrong.

I am trying to remember something I did 30 years ago. I didn't go back and look at all my charts and calculations (a lot of which I actually kept!). I am sure I misremembered a bunch of stuff.

At any rate, if you want to make corrections to the methodology I posted, feel free to append them.

steveb

04-26-2018, 07:50 PM

I am trying to remember something I did 30 years ago. I didn't go back and look at all my charts and calculations (a lot of which I actually kept!). I am sure I misremembered a bunch of stuff.

At any rate, if you want to make corrections to the methodology I posted, feel free to append them.

you could probably put it all together off my post posts if you wanted to, or were intersted enough.
but i am confident that i have beyer and anybody else, covered where time is concerned.
basically speeds figures are nothing but percentage figures.
thus you should not use any fixed values.

if one winner runs 6f in 70 seconds and in the next race they run the trip in 71.
assuming the 70 second winner was worth a 100 then the 71 second winner was worth 86

but what if they run 74 and 75???
you way would have the same diff but it should not be.
if the 74 was 100 then the 75 is 87 rather than 86

what about if the race were run in 120 and 121 seconds over a much longer trip?
if 120 = 100 then 121 = 92

simple little sums to keep it all in proportion(70/71-.9)*1000= 86
(120/121-.9)*100 =92
that is ALL that beyers were when they were actually speed figures.....percentages

BUT if those times of 70 was for the winner and the next horse in the race run 71 then the above is WRONG, but that's basically what you are saying in your post even if you don't realise it.

Robert Fischer

04-26-2018, 08:33 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aketcA_hkoM

Doug knows his stuff. :ThmbUp:

jay68802

04-27-2018, 11:11 AM

I did this for Delta Downs for a long time. For par I would used all the races at a distance that were for older horse's in races from $7500 and up. Toss all outlier's, then used Beyer's chart and methods after that. I also weighted the average so that the most recent races carried more weight. Worked well, but I thought I still had problems with the variant. Figuring the variant is the hardest part of the process.

dilanesp

04-27-2018, 01:06 PM

CincyHorseplayer

04-27-2018, 01:22 PM

Boy another thread that has gone down the tubes by the red tape of the figs! Stan started out asking about the figs for the preps. Slow horses rarely win this race and maybe the top fig doesn't win much but competitive with top fig does. Cramer was right when he wrote Value Capping that high fig fundamentalism was rampant. Then. I think handicapping factors in general are cyclical but speed isn't one of them. Fast enough wins more than any other factor. It is relevant. And to to be able to talk to a figure maker in CJ, that he is accessible. Means a hell of a lot. Thanks CJ.

f2tornado

04-27-2018, 02:15 PM

Stan started out asking about the figs for the preps. Slow horses rarely win this race and maybe the top fig doesn't win much but competitive with top fig does.

How do you define "competitive with top fig"? I'll Have Another was 14 Beyer points behind Bodemeister. Barbaro was 13 Beyer points behind Sinister Minister who finished 16th. Giacomo was 25 points behind Bellamy Road and 13 points behind Afleet Alex. One oddball tidbit I did garner from Stanley's manual is no horse worse worse than 8th best overall Beyer on last dirt prep has won the roses. This includes bombers Giacomo and MTB.

If that trend holds up then your winner will be one of the following:
Justify (107), Mendelssohn (106), Bolt (102), Audible (99), Magnum Moon (98), Vino Rosso (98), Good Magic/ Noble Indy/Lone Sailor (95).

CincyHorseplayer

04-27-2018, 03:26 PM

How do you define "competitive with top fig"? I'll Have Another was 14 Beyer points behind Bodemeister. Barbaro was 13 Beyer points behind Sinister Minister who finished 16th. Giacomo was 25 points behind Bellamy Road and 13 points behind Afleet Alex. One oddball tidbit I did garner from Stanley's manual is no horse worse worse than 8th best overall Beyer on last dirt prep has won the roses. This includes bombers Giacomo and MTB.

If that trend holds up then your winner will be one of the following:
Justify (107), Mendelssohn (106), Bolt (102), Audible (99), Magnum Moon (98), Vino Rosso (98), Good Magic/ Noble Indy/Lone Sailor (95).

This post to me shows that you either don't play this game much or the way you look at figures is kindergarten level. I think I speak for many players on here that we are not instilled with awe of big figures. Maybe an eyebrow raise. I look at a race and think about what will win it. This race I say about a 105. If a horse is above the 95 Beyer he is definitely in the mix. Only because as spring 3yo's they can improve like that. Either way figures over time prove out. I already expanded on my 6% theory. That gets 80% and usually better % of winners. Competitive is good enough. While I think the pedigree work is good, it's nothing compared to figures. Fast enough will always win. If you make your life score off outliers you are hanging with the right guy in this guy. When I'm on track and getting my ass kicked I root for my boys around me and ride their wave of winning. Not going to listen to the Derby fig bashing with less effective stats being thrown around as truth and being preached to. This happens every year. I'm a 10 year PA vet. I'm skeet shooting what I think is BS on the TC threads. Because everyone else does it so often I feel obligated!

CincyHorseplayer

04-27-2018, 04:11 PM

Speaking of pedigree and the derby. This Raise A Native run has been good but pedigrees change. Often abruptly. In the 1950's the Bay Ronald line dominated. Then was gone completely by the mid 60's.

Give me any 10 or 20 year period of time and I will give you the statistics by root sire lines. I did the male and female lines of every winner back to Aristides in 1875.

04-27-2018, 04:15 PM

CincyHorseplayer

04-27-2018, 04:25 PM

Thanks, I really appreciate that.

Needed to be said. Easy to do. Being able to rap with you and for everybody is a luxury. We are a small world. Love this place because the average player can talk to people they read their books and/or use their products. You are a fun guy anyway! I would like to hang with you in person so you don't have to omit curse words and in general humor oriented perversions! If the figure world is flat I'm going over the big waterfall with you brother!:cool:

f2tornado

04-27-2018, 06:07 PM

This post to me shows that you either don't play this game much or the way you look at figures is kindergarten level.

I've been playing since 1987 with a positive ROI. I'm certainly not making a ton of money but have fun winning here and there or wouldn't be a participant. I use speed figures, stats, angles, track bias, horse for course, J/T, gut feelings, breeding, and whatever else at my disposal. I asked a fair question and you did give me an answer in between a bunch of meaningless drivel. I know how most of the figures work and can tell you playing the best last out figure in any race will net a slightly better ROI, albeit still plenty negative, than playing the favorite. So, yes, the figures do a slightly better job than the public.

CincyHorseplayer

04-27-2018, 06:39 PM

I've been playing since 1987 with a positive ROI. I'm certainly not making a ton of money but have fun winning here and there or wouldn't be a participant. I use speed figures, stats, angles, track bias, horse for course, J/T, gut feelings, breeding, and whatever else at my disposal. I asked a fair question and you did give me an answer in between a bunch of meaningless drivel. I know how most of the figures work and can tell you playing the best last out figure in any race will net a slightly better ROI, albeit still plenty negative, than playing the favorite. So, yes, the figures do a slightly better job than the public.

I certainly am not trying to demean a lifelong player. But I think basic terms are being mixed up here. Being a speed figure player doesn't mean worshipping the figure hierarchy of a race. Being a pace player doesn't mean betting only frontrunners. You can scoff at this notion but it's real. Players take racing so less seriously that they develop almost Voodoo notions about the game. My figure percentile theory isn't theory. It works. If you play day in and day out. This is one race. I know the magnitude. Derby fever gets me but I never roll around on a denouncement speech. That's how you sound lately! So I'm telling you about it!:cool:

dilanesp

04-27-2018, 07:33 PM

Thanks, I really appreciate that.

CJ's posts here on time and figures are amazing.

f2tornado

04-27-2018, 07:34 PM

denouncement speech. That's how you sound lately! So I'm telling you about it!:cool:

I gave Beyer some hell in one post otherwise merely expressed some skepticism of the Santa Anita variant. It may be much a do about nothing but I tend to analyze stuff versus taking everything for granted like half of America sharing fake BS on Facebook. There was a stretch where anyone casting doubts on Justify was torn a new one like they were ruining some pump and dump Wall Street endeavor. I'm certainly not sold on him but respected enough to wager over and under a few of my choices in Pool 4. I've shared positive and negative thoughts on many contenders. Any Derby trail and summer classics handicapper knows a 3 year old can pop a big figure improvement at any time (Arrogate, anyone?) or take a dump going 10 panels which is why I look at much more than just the speed figures. My early wagering order is even posted in one of the threads for all to see.

reckless

04-27-2018, 08:48 PM

The three year best is not a good measuring stick. It is a little better than the track record maybe. How many 9f races do people think are run on dirt at these tracks in a three year span?

Since I was the one that posted both 3-year best and track records for the major Derby plays, I'd like to ask a few questions and make a comment or two.

What 9 furlong time (call it par, if you wish) did you --and the Beyer people-- use to compare Justy's Santa Derby performance against? There must be some sort of par, no? I assume it isn't 3 year best of track record, so what is it? Bill Quirin figs from an older generation compared horses to a $10,000 par +/- the day's variant. There should be a constant, no? I think there should be and 3 year best or track record are constants that I feel are, in fact, a good measuring stick.

I said earlier that slow horses make for slow times which equals to a slow (high) variant day, and that slower (higher) variant is added to make a slow effort faster. Got that? :lol:

So, it seems to me that Justify's time (speed figure) was upgraded because of the allegedly slow track. Am I mistaken here?

Why do you think the track was slow? On that day, there were three 2-turn races, at one mile, 8.5 furlongs and 9 furlongs.

The one mile race was run by $50,000 claimers who never won two races in their life. A very low grade class, imo... even with a $50,000 tag. That slow mile effort started the group thinking that the track was slow. Slow horse made for a slow mile race.

Then there was Justify's win ... 149.4 or so, after a pedestrian 112.3 pace time, no less. Also a slow race, imo, but the unbeaten winner had things his own way and while that advantage meant he didn't need to extend himself, 149.4 is a slow race, imo.

Two races later we had the S.A. Oaks for 3YO fillies which went down in 144.4 for 8.5 miles. Another slow race, imo.

What is most interesting in the Oaks race is that the winner, Midnight Bisou, ran much faster early than what Justify ran early. She went down in 23.2, 47.3, and 112.0 early before slowing; Justify's fractions were 24.0, 47.4, 112.3.

Gee, I could understand Midnight Bisou slowing down since she ran fast early, but Justify going slow?? He walked early and won in slow final time.

Yet, all I am hearing is that the Santa Anita Derby was the fastest race of all the preps and that Justify is lengths better than the other horses.

Now, I know Beyer figs are final time figs, but even TFUS' pace figs gave Justify way higher pace figs than Midnight Bisou received. Why was that?

Look, it doesn't mind me one bit that there's this Justify bandwagon rolling onward and upward, but why is it that Justify's slow effort is upgraded because of a perceived 'slow' track while the race winners of the other major prep races I posted does not receive any consideration of any kind?? Thanks, cj, and everyone.

04-27-2018, 10:00 PM

Since I was the one that posted both 3-year best and track records for the major Derby plays, I'd like to ask a few questions and make a comment or two.

What 9 furlong time (call it par, if you wish) did you --and the Beyer people-- use to compare Justy's Santa Derby performance against? There must be some sort of par, no? I assume it isn't 3 year best of track record, so what is it? Bill Quirin figs from an older generation compared horses to a $10,000 par +/- the day's variant. There should be a constant, no? I think there should be and 3 year best or track record are constants that I feel are, in fact, a good measuring stick.

I said earlier that slow horses make for slow times which equals to a slow (high) variant day, and that slower (higher) variant is added to make a slow effort faster. Got that? :lol:

So, it seems to me that Justify's time (speed figure) was upgraded because of the allegedly slow track. Am I mistaken here?

Why do you think the track was slow? On that day, there were three 2-turn races, at one mile, 8.5 furlongs and 9 furlongs.

The one mile race was run by $50,000 claimers who never won two races in their life. A very low grade class, imo... even with a $50,000 tag. That slow mile effort started the group thinking that the track was slow. Slow horse made for a slow mile race.

Then there was Justify's win ... 149.4 or so, after a pedestrian 112.3 pace time, no less. Also a slow race, imo, but the unbeaten winner had things his own way and while that advantage meant he didn't need to extend himself, 149.4 is a slow race, imo.

Two races later we had the S.A. Oaks for 3YO fillies which went down in 144.4 for 8.5 miles. Another slow race, imo.

What is most interesting in the Oaks race is that the winner, Midnight Bisou, ran much faster early than what Justify ran early. She went down in 23.2, 47.3, and 112.0 early before slowing; Justify's fractions were 24.0, 47.4, 112.3.

Gee, I could understand Midnight Bisou slowing down since she ran fast early, but Justify going slow?? He walked early and won in slow final time.

Yet, all I am hearing is that the Santa Anita Derby was the fastest race of all the preps and that Justify is lengths better than the other horses.

Now, I know Beyer figs are final time figs, but even TFUS' pace figs gave Justify way higher pace figs than Midnight Bisou received. Why was that?

Look, it doesn't mind me one bit that there's this Justify bandwagon rolling onward and upward, but why is it that Justify's slow effort is upgraded because of a perceived 'slow' track while the race winners of the other major prep races I posted does not receive any consideration of any kind?? Thanks, cj, and everyone.

Before I get too deep into this, you realize that Midnight Bisou came from well off the pace and certainly did not run faster early than Justify, right?

If you mean the leader's figures, the Santa Anita Derby got 140 pace figures early versus 135 for the Oaks. That isn't way higher. But I've always said you shouldn't compare pace figures across races at different distances and different surfaces. They tell a picture about the race shape. Horses are expected to run faster at a shorter distance. At Santa Anita, for example, the same horses would be expected to run the opening half mile 0.44 seconds faster at 8.5f than they would at 9f.

We do something called adjusted fractions which are more of a raw speed measure. Using those, the Oaks is the faster race early.

04-27-2018, 10:09 PM

As to the speed chart issue, we use speed charts which are based on much more science than the three year best or track records. Beyer has written books detailing his methods so I'm not going to rehash them here. I do something similar though I used a huge database to support everything I created.

I'll give one example...lets say at Mythical Downs the following are the three years bests for a track. Lets also assume that the races are all around one turn and that the run up is the same for all three distances.

6f: 1:10
6.5f: 1:16 2/5
7f: 1:21

This kind of stuff can and does happen all the time at all distances for a variety of reasons. Some tracks don't run distances very often, just as they don't the 9f races as I mentioned. Some tracks might card much higher class races at one distance than they do at others. A track might be crazy fast one day, as happened at Parx this year for a day. They ran some distances and others weren't run. That will totally skew and baseline created using ONE DATA POINT.

Would anybody think these are reliable and a good baseline? It would assume that horses that can run 1:10 would run the next half furlong in 6 2/5, but then the next half furlong in 4 and 3/5.

There is mounds and mounds of data out there from which better numbers can be found. That is why I would never use three year bests or track records.