Beyer Speed Fig Angle 11 of last 12 Derby Winners

[xfile]

Last 2 races average Beyer 100 or higher (L1+L2/2). This angle got 11 of the last 12 Ky Derby winners. This year's qualifiers:
BROTHER DEREK
SINISTER MINISTER
A.P. WARRIOR
SWEETNORTHERNSAINT
KEYED ENTRY
POINT DETERMINED

Pace burn out = SM, SNS, KE
Who's left = BOTHER DEREK, AP WARRIOR, POINT DETERMINED

[depalma13]

Like Now and Barbaro would qualify under that angle.

[xfile]

Like Now and Barbaro would qualify under that angle.

Like Now has been withdrawn from Derby consideration. Barbaro has an average of 99 which is one point short of 100.

[depalma13]

My bad on Barbaro. Had the numbers for his FOY and previous race flipped. Didn't know Like Now was out.

[Fred]

Beyer Speed Fig Angle 11 of last 12 Derby Winners

Who was the exception?

Freddy

[xfile]

Beyer Speed Fig Angle 11 of last 12 Derby Winners

Who was the exception?

Freddy

Giacomo

[JohnNUtah]

How did you come up with this and how did you retrofit it to come up with this 11 of 12 winners angle?

[xfile]

How did you come up with this and how did you retrofit it to come up with this 11 of 12 winners angle?

I did my research. It's a simple angle = Last 2 races average Beyer 100 or higher (L1+L2/2).

[JohnNUtah]

No, how did you decide to eliminate the horses due to pace burnout, do you have anything to base that on other than what you expect to happen on the front end?

[xfile]

No, how did you decide to eliminate the horses due to pace burnout, do you have anything to base that on other than what you expect to happen on the front end?

Lots to base it on including 30 years of experience. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that this year there will be a hot pace. This is handicapping = what we expect to happen. Do you have a crystal ball and can actually see the future?

[Fred]

Giacomo



Thanks

[JPinMaryland]

Lots to base it on including 30 years of experience. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that this year there will be a hot pace. This is handicapping = what we expect to happen. Do you have a crystal ball and can actually see the future?


Ummm, I think what the guy is asking is do you have an algorithm or whatever on how to throw out the ones that will get burned on the front end? It would seem a natural question given the context, i.e. you came out with a method for finding winners, is there a method in how to toss out the no hopers from the possibles??

I can imagine John's predictament since he's going to get several possible contenders under your method, he wants to throw some of them out.

As a suggestion one way would be to see which horses are runnigng slow final fractions.

[JohnNUtah]

Sorry I didn't word my replies more clearly. That was exactly what I wanted to know, I see he has a method for picking the likely winner, I wondered if he had a similar method for identifying the tosses. As far as the 30 years handicapping experience, I got that and then some, but this race is still the toughest to pick that I see just about every year. Of course a lot of that is the huge field.

Good Luck to all.

[Princequillo]

Lots to base it on including 30 years of experience. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that this year there will be a hot pace. This is handicapping = what we expect to happen. Do you have a crystal ball and can actually see the future?

You are ignoring closing times, a flaw. SweetnorthernSaint has the best closing times going into the Derby. You toss him as a early pace type - he does not belong there. Part 2 of your analysis is flawed.

[xfile]

You are ignoring closing times, a flaw. SweetnorthernSaint has the best closing times going into the Derby. You toss him as a early pace type - he does not belong there. Part 2 of your analysis is flawed.

He has a good closing time off of a slow split time. Any horse can run a fast last quater if he expends less energy early. In the Ky Derby, however, after he enjoys (g) a 1:09.4 six furlong split you will see him hit a wall bigger than the side of the Grand Canyon. I think some of you are not getting the reason for my post. It is not a know all cure all. Just a decent angle. It happens to solidify a contender who fits on several other angles and issues = Point Determined :cool:

[JPinMaryland]

He has a good closing time off of a slow split time. Any horse can run a fast last quater if he expends less energy early.

THe problem with this line of reasoning is that the relationship between the pace and the final fraction is not linear. So if a horse runs a final fraction in 25 after running say 1:10; it is not clear that if he runs say 1:11 he could finish in say 24 and if he runs 1:12 he finishes in 23.

It doent work like that. A good example is Alydar/Affirmed in the Belmont, they went the half in like 51 and closed fast but they did not run 22 or 23 in the final fraction. There is a limitation on how much faster you can finish by slowing down the pace.

[xfile]

It doent work like that.

First of all the word is spelled "don't". My question to you is what do you base your theory on? My theory is the same as the pace pioneers of handicapping. And you?:cool:

[JPinMaryland]

I guess it's based on real life examples.

Tell me what does the term "paceless race" mean to you?

To add something else. I am not saying that your statement literally read is wrong. It's not. What I said was "The problem with this line of reasoning is..."

So you are starting with an elementary statement and arguing to a conclusion that does not follow. Then you comeback and say "My statement/theory/whatever is paced on modern pace handicapping..."

Well actually your statement is very simple and could easily be derived from simple observations. That doesnt mean that the pt. you are driving at is correct.

Have a go at the question I present at the top of this message.

[JPinMaryland]

My theory is the same as the pace pioneers of handicapping. And you?:cool:

Actually the more I think about this statement, the more I think that it is cant be true. Mind you this is not your original statement that I criticized.

Didnt the pace pioneers say that "pace makes the race?" If this is true then doesnt it follow that certain horses might perform better than other horses at certain paces, but that at other paces they might lose to the same horses?

That would seem to follow from pace handicapping. If it wasnt true, then there would be no pt to pace handicapping whatsoever since horse A would always be a good bet to beat horse B, regardless of pace.

But that's not what happens, or so pace handicappers tell us. Okay then think about it. If there was a linear relationship between the time at first call and the closing fraction then pace would not matter in handicapping. Say for example horse a runs thus:

time at first call: 1:11....1:12......1:13.......1:14.......1:15
Closing fraction: 25.......24..........23.........22..........21

This would be the situation if there was a linear relationship between pace nd final fraction. If you look at it closely it makes NO DIFFERENCE what pace the race was run at the horse always finishes with the same time!

And so horse A woud always be more likely to beat horse B, since pace is irrelevant.

IT's funny you claim your theory is based on pace handicapping it seems that your theory is contradicted by anyone who studies pace.

[xfile]

The horse gallops the 6f split in a dog slow 1:13 and change and you tell me his final quater time is relevant??? My grandmother on a bad day could go out in 1:13 and change and come home fast (well not really). :cool:

[Tom]

The horse gallops the 6f split in a dog slow 1:13 and change and you tell me his final quater time is relevant??? My grandmother on a bad day could go out in 1:13 and change and come home fast (well not really). :cool:

When the [pace fall apart, yes. All you need is late. At 10 furlongs, a torid pace can kill anything on the lead or close to it.
The old 1 for 1 early late speed fig relationship is not always true.
At 8.5 or 9 fulongs, a horse mught run 100-100, 98-102, 102-98, but at 10 furlong,s the same horse might run 102-94, or be forced into a 106 - 82 shape. Once they quit, they are not much more of a pace influence than the poles are.

[Valuist]

[QUOTE=JPinMaryland]THe problem with this line of reasoning is that the relationship between the pace and the final fraction is not linear.

It isn't? I beg to differ. There may be no exact linear relationship but there's no question the horse who's a speed horse or presser who prompts a slow pace is going to finish much faster than the horse who set the fast pace.

With Sweetnorthernsaint, I've seen a number of pace figures and I believe they are all way too high for the Illinois Derby. For one thing, the low number of 1 1/8 mile races at Hawthorne makes any unprojected number questionable. Secondly, just watch the race. Besides SNS, there was one other main contender: Cause to Believe, who is a pure closer. CTB was actually up in 3rd at one point early on; that would never happen in a normal paced race. Why? Russell Baze said they were crawling and he had to put the horse into contention and he was right. So CTB gets a bad trip having no pace to run at and SNS enjoys the cozy slow pace and blows the field away.

The Derby Trial may give us more info. Mister Triester was on the lead at Hawthorne. We'll see what kind of pace he sets (if he is even able to set it) in the Derby Trial.

[JPinMaryland]

It isn't? I beg to differ. There may be no exact linear relationship...




So which is it? Do you agree with me or dont you? YOur statement is ambiguous.

Look at the example I gave with the pace and final fraction. If that were true there would be no need to worrry about pace; since the horse always speeds up in proportion to how slow/fast the pace was. His overall time would never change.

You claim to use pace as a theory and yet if you insist the relationship is linear, there would be no need to calculate pace.

What much faster do you think SNS comes home if he runs a 1:14? a 1:15?

[classhandicapper]

[QUOTE=JPinMaryland]With Sweetnorthernsaint, I've seen a number of pace figures and I believe they are all way too high for the Illinois Derby. For one thing, the low number of 1 1/8 mile races at Hawthorne makes any unprojected number questionable. Secondly, just watch the race. Besides SNS, there was one other main contender: Cause to Believe, who is a pure closer. CTB was actually up in 3rd at one point early on; that would never happen in a normal paced race. Why? Russell Baze said they were crawling and he had to put the horse into contention and he was right. So CTB gets a bad trip having no pace to run at and SNS enjoys the cozy slow pace and blows the field away.

I agree with you assessment of the Illinois Derby pace, but I find that typically when a pace is slow like that, it helps the fronmt runner win because the closers can't make up much ground in the fast final fraction. However, when they draw off really big in a fast late fraction, they are usually telling you that they were vastly superior to those closers. I think SNS was absolutely tons the best there regardless of the pace issues. How to translate that numerically is always a question mark because when pressed harder some will run slower and others will reveal that they actually had a ton extra in the tank.

[Valuist]

JP-

I disagree. I'd have to side w/Xfile.

The relationship isn't 100% linear. Its pretty simple really. If you're an early speed or pressing type and the pace is slower than normal, you are being helped. If you are a early speed type and the pace is faster than normal, you are not being helped. If you are a closer and the pace is fast, the performance should be downgraded. Likewise, if you are a closer and the pace is slow, you are being hurt.

Why must so many feel the need to quantify everything?

[JPinMaryland]

we are numbers freaks. :kiss:

[Tom]

Except that is not what we were talking about to begin with.

[JPinMaryland]

dont bogart that joint. :cool: