Bris Pace Ratings points per beaten length

[raybo]

I've been wondering about this for quite some time and, because of some recent handicapping changes, I find it important. Bris Pace Ratings are figured at 2 Pace points per beaten length, regardless of the distance of the race. This seems to be questionable, in my opinion, and I would like to know the opinions of some of you other handicapping veterans. Since, in longer races, horses of the same class are traveling at a slower speed than they would be in shorter races I would think that a beaten length would be worth more in the longer races because it takes longer for the horse to travel that length. Does this sound proper? If so, would it be better to use a sliding scale like Bris uses for beaten lengths to determine their speed numbers?

Thanks for your input.

[44PACE]

TPR uses 1 point per beaten lenght regardless of the distance, I have not had any problems with it. As long as it is consistant. Pay attention to the times when their ratings do not work very well i.e. , when you have a horse shipping from 1 track to another if their ratings are always either higher or lower then you will need to make an adjustment. Ex. Using TPR when playing Sam Houston I noticed that shippers from Lone Star always have faster or bigger ratings so i adjust their ratings downward.Lone Star is a very fast track compared to others in this area.


The power to make adjustments will dramatically improve your game.Just becouse someone else provides a rating doesn't mean that you can't make corrections to it as long as its needed. If the ratings are really really bad then there will be a need to look for other ratings.

[raybo]

1 point per length or 2 or 5, Istill find it hard to believe that a length in a sprint is the same as a length in a route.

[Bala]

Have to agree with 44PACE logic.

What is a length? In a set of PP's lengths behind is collected by an {experienced?} observer.

This may be easy if a horse is up close to the pacesetter/winner. If a horse is off the pace, you cannot possibly expect precision by the track observer. Instant replay may make is process a bit easer but it is still a best guess.

What is a length in :44 flat? What is a length in :46.1? What about the track configuration?

What about summer/winter racing.

Some say a length is 8 feet – others 10 feet. To many assumptions here. Is a closer at :44 just passing tired horses? A consistent methodology is the best we can have in an otherwise imprecise data gathering methods. Perhaps with future technology........



____________
Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor)

[robert99]

Have to agree with 44PACE logic.

What is a length? In a set of PP's lengths behind is collected by an {experienced?} observer.

This may be easy if a horse is up close to the pacesetter/winner. If a horse is off the pace, you cannot possibly expect precision by the track observer. Instant replay may make is process a bit easer but it is still a best guess.

What is a length in :44 flat? What is a length in :46.1? What about the track configuration?

What about summer/winter racing.

Some say a length is 8 feet – others 10 feet. To many assumptions here. Is a closer at :44 just passing tired horses? A consistent methodology is the best we can have in an otherwise imprecise data gathering methods. Perhaps with future technology........



____________
Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor)

Bala,

The photo finish camera timing strip technology is already here.
In UK, we use time lengths ie the judge just reads off the time differences recorded on the photo finish strip for each finisher as it crosses the line behind the winner. For flat racing, each time-length is 0.2 seconds. For jump racing it is 0.25 seconds. The important thing is the accurate time difference not a better guessed distance in feet.

[cj]

BRIS figures stink. Check out Magna Graduate's 116 from his win a few weeks ago at Aqueduct. That is the equivalent of about a 135 Beyer. Anyone really believe he is that good?

You really need to have at least some human input on these things, but it doesn't appear that BRIS does.

[skate]

I've been wondering about this for quite some time and, because of some recent handicapping changes, I find it important. Bris Pace Ratings are figured at 2 Pace points per beaten length, regardless of the distance of the race. This seems to be questionable, in my opinion, and I would like to know the opinions of some of you other handicapping veterans. Since, in longer races, horses of the same class are traveling at a slower speed than they would be in shorter races I would think that a beaten length would be worth more in the longer races because it takes longer for the horse to travel that length. Does this sound proper? If so, would it be better to use a sliding scale like Bris uses for beaten lengths to determine their speed numbers?

Thanks for your input.

you mention "because of some recent handicapping changes", this could be the reason for your situation.

the math is not an attempt to be exact, but i think you know this. being consistent is more important.
when doing my pace figures, i'll always deduct (9points in my case) for a sprint vs route.

my bottom, would be, not trying to be too exact with Pace figures and then blowing That Exactness on The Odds. you can not be exact on the odds, so as much as one trys exactness on Pace, jock, class etc., if one does not pay most attention to odds, then you blow your exactness elsewhere.

i overly stress this point to show "that to be exact with your pace, jock, etc. is futile".

yes, of coarse, the horse moves distance quicker in a 6f vs an 8f.

[delayjf]

Raybo,

According to the Bris website, Bris follows the same assumption that Beyer does with his point values per 1/5th second – as the distance increases, the value of 1/5 of a second diminishes. You are right that at the shorter distances horses are moving faster and therefore able to make up a beaten length (no matter what you definition of a beaten length is) but I believe that reality should be represented in the beaten lengths chart.

Bris claims that their pace numbers are pure velocity numbers not adjusted for distance- 45 flat for a first ½ mile in a sprint gets the same rating as 45 flat for the first ½ mile in route. I believe this is the same format that they use at Equiform.

Keep in mind the scale is tighter for the Bris than for the Beyer’s. I’ve heard some speed figure makers say that they prefer the tighter scale because for them, the way they read and interpret figures, its easier for them to discern form cycles. To each his own.

[raybo]

Thanks for your inputs. I asked the question as an attempted verification of my own thoughts on the subject. I use Bris data because they are as good or better than any others, for the price. I, of course don't use them "as is" to determine my choices but one has to start with the raw data from someone. What one does with that raw data is, of course, the bottom line. I am simply trying to start with data that is as accurate as possible, so that when I massage it I'm not comparing apples and oranges. With the frequency that today's trainers move horses from distance to distance, it is very difficult to get an idea of a particular horse's condition or ability to perform well, or poorly, at a particular distance and class. The statement Bris makes in their FAQ's regarding their pace figures made no sense to me long ago but I just put up with it until the present, as I now am zeroing in on an improvement to my procedures that nobody, to my knowledge is using. As the more knowledgeable players here know, if you use the same numbers everyone else uses, your chances of staying ahead of the game, to any worthwhile extent, is limited. In my opinion, it really doesn't matter how you handicap as long as it produces a profit that makes all the hard work worth it.