Why use speed figures at all?

[Capper Al]

First of all, let me say that I may joining this forum as a regular member. I haven't figured out your vcash yet, but that will come in time.

Now about speed. Beyer, Free, and many more authors have documented that when a horse wins they usually improve by 9 or more speed points. This means the handicapper has to guess which horse is going to jump in speed making past speed unreliable because the horse with the highest speed figure might not necessary be the same one that improves in today's race. Just think about the numbers and forget that they are speed figures for a while. If a field of 6 horses has the following speed:

A: 89 B:90 C:84 D:92 E:86 F: 87


The lowest one C at 84 could win if the other horse ran back to their regular number and C improved by the statistical improvement of 9 points or more. C would rate a 93, 84 + 9. The variance is too much to get a handle on what's about to happen in the race. The contenders, generally, are close in their figures anyway making it even harder to use speed.

The best that speed might be able to do is act as an elimination. If a horse isn't within 10 or 12 points of the top horse, eliminate him.

[Cangamble]

You are assuming that they all have an equal chance to win. The horse with the highest number most likely has the highest chance of winning on average.
Probably the second or third highest horse in your example provides the best ROI.
Horses sometimes improve by 25 points, but that doesn't mean we should throw away our Forms and just use a Ouija Board.

[PaceAdvantage]

I haven't figured out your vcash yet, but that will come in time.

vCash is the Monopoly money we use to bet with in our free contests at P.A. Downs (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/vbookie.php?)

[kenwoodallpromos]

With Beyer's method, points are also given depending on the level (class) of the race; so if a horse drops for a win, it may not need to improve its speed figure at all. For non-claiming races I think your statement should be true for most races, especially for a 2-4 year old.

[Overlay]

This means the handicapper has to guess which horse is going to jump in speed making past speed unreliable because the horse with the highest speed figure might not necessary be the same one that improves in today's race.

I think the keys to addressing this are:

1) considering an average of speed figures from multiple recent races;
2) dealing with the relative rankings of the horses with regard to their competitors, rather than concentrating on a comparison of the speed figures themselves;
3) viewing the situation in terms of the probabilities associated with the various rankings (as part of a general approach of betting based on value), rather than as a guarantee that any one horse will win today; and
4) not treating speed as a stand-alone element, but giving it its proper weight in conjunction with consideration of other major handicapping factors such as condition and class.

I've found that, when treated in this manner, speed figures continue to have predictive reliability and significance.

[rastajenk]

I'm always amused by the anti-figurists and the way they create situations that prove their point in advance, ignoring all the other possibilities that could co-exist with their situations, or could exist in real life. In other, off-topic realms, these are known as straw man arguments, because they are as flimsy as a scarecrow.

Using the numbers in the original post, I would start off by assuming that B and D could be fit and ready enough to win, but I couldn't say D is clearly superior to B, or for that matter that B is superior to A. Nor could I eliminate any of them just off a single, last-race number. There is so much more to it than that.

[pandy]

I forget the actual stat, but I think that 80% of all races are won by a horse with one of the top 4 Beyers. Your point spread of 10 to 12 might be about right also, so for terms of eliminating horses, you could do worse. The bottom line is, if you bet on a horse that's a longshot (say 8-1 or higher) that recently ran one of the top 4 Beyers ( or Bris) or within 12 points, you have a much better chance of cashing than if the horse doesn't fall into those parameters.

[classhandicapper]

I think the keys to addressing this are:

2) dealing with the relative rankings of the horses with regard to their competitors, rather than concentrating on a comparison of the speed figures themselves;
3) viewing the situation in terms of the probabilities associated with the various rankings (as part of a general approach of betting based on value), rather than as a guarantee that any one horse will win today; and



Good insight. I think rank is probably often not appreciated enough.

If a horse is only 7 Beyer points slower than fastest horse, but there are 6 horses faster than him, he probably doesn't have as good a chance of winning as a horse that is 10 points slower, but who is the 2nd fastest horse. In the latter case, all that horse may need is a sub par effort or very bad trip from one horse to become the most logical winner.

[OTM Al]

Plus it is all about the context in which the fig was earned. I always discount big fig career tops that won by open lengths for example as horses that get loose on the lead get brave. Even Andy B's books will tell you that you need to consider the trip and the way the figure was earned. It seems that most critics of figs think they are some black box guide to picking a winner. Sorry to break the news to you, but......

[Overlay]

PA:

I see you contributed to this thread already, but might it not get exposure to a potentially bigger target audience over on the Handicapping board (among those who might not check the General Racing Discussion board as regularly or as thoroughly), since it does deal with an aspect of handicapping?

[Capper Al]

Thanks for all your comments. And believe it or not, in your own way most of you seem to agree. The fact that we need other attributes to figure a race only speaks to the weakness of speed. I especially agree with handling speed different for claimers and non-claimers.

The point still stands that when we read the PPs, and now know one of the horses will jump 9 or more points, makes the speed figures we are looking at of less value. And yes, I agree top speed last out has to be one of the most impressive stats out there, about 30%. Yet, it is seen by everyone and bet down. And yes, one of the top four speed figures will win about 80% of the time seems right. But also one of the trackman's top four will win about 80% of the time also. So of what value is speed? We could substitute one of the trackman's top picks for the top speed picks with the same results.

[eddie10]

you also have to consider early speed and best closing speed as a factor .etc

[Mike at A+]

What might also be interesting is to analyze the percent of horses that run increased speed figures from their last race in a typical race. Intuition would tell me that it is probably somewhere near 50% because there are only two possibilities (excluding a tie). A horse can run higher or lower. And if he runs lower, his chances of running higher in his next race are that much better.

That being said, in the original example, I'd need pretty attractive odds to put any money on "C" because even if he does improve, one would expect 2 or 3 of the 5 above him to also improve. But then you'd also have to consider what those 5 horses did in their last race compared to the next to last. If all 5 improved, the chances of a lower rating are that much greater.

Perhaps a moving average with some consideration given to standard deviation should be used.

[garyoz]

Thanks for all your comments. And believe it or not, in your own way most of you seem to agree. The fact that we need other attributes to figure a race only speaks to the weakness of speed. I especially agree with handling speed different for claimers and non-claimers.


It is all about form cycle not a specific speed figure. This whole topic has been dealt with in many forms on the PA Board. For example see this recent thread on Len Ragozin's book. http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38163. There are many other posts on this topic. It isn't that simple.

[PaceAdvantage]

PA:

I see you contributed to this thread already, but might it not get exposure to a potentially bigger target audience over on the Handicapping board (among those who might not check the General Racing Discussion board as regularly or as thoroughly), since it does deal with an aspect of handicapping?

Excellent catch. You are 100% correct.

[Capper Al]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlay
PA:

I see you contributed to this thread already, but might it not get exposure to a potentially bigger target audience over on the Handicapping board (among those who might not check the General Racing Discussion board as regularly or as thoroughly), since it does deal with an aspect of handicapping?



Excellent catch. You are 100% correct.


I'm not following this. Would you explain it? Thanks.

[nobeyerspls]

First of all, let me say that I may joining this forum as a regular member. I haven't figured out your vcash yet, but that will come in time.

Now about speed. Beyer, Free, and many more authors have documented that when a horse wins they usually improve by 9 or more speed points. This means the handicapper has to guess which horse is going to jump in speed making past speed unreliable because the horse with the highest speed figure might not necessary be the same one that improves in today's race. Just think about the numbers and forget that they are speed figures for a while. If a field of 6 horses has the following speed:

A: 89 B:90 C:84 D:92 E:86 F: 87

Didn't want to be part of a speed figure thread but my evil twin made me do it. My track buddies that use the beyers would tell you that the last race figure is not enough. Others use them as a reference point and employ other methods of handicapping to find the winner. Still others have ways of adjusting them. I hold that they have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races. In fact, my eyes never focus on that column unless it's after the race to find out if the 3/5 that was off the board was the "fig horse".
Let me give another example with a wider spread among the figures. A filly wins a 7f race and is assigned a 68 for the effort. She enters a modest 6 1/2f stakes race with eight other runners. Her highest figure on the page is a 71 and it is the lowest high number in the field. One filly has run a 92 and several others have been in the eighties. The question is, what should her odds be and what are her chances of winning?

[nobeyerspls]

You are assuming that they all have an equal chance to win. The horse with the highest number most likely has the highest chance of winning on average.
Probably the second or third highest horse in your example provides the best ROI.
Horses sometimes improve by 25 points, but that doesn't mean we should throw away our Forms and just use a Ouija Board.

Figure handicappers that I know usually toss a horse off a lifetime high and they look for horses with improving numbers. They couldn't give an answer to the scenario presented.
One of my highest paying winners ($155) came into a race off of two zero beyer races and I didn't need a Ouija board to find her. Don't know what figure she got for the win but if it was a 65 then that was the improvment.

[Capper Al]

Didn't want to be part of a speed figure thread but my evil twin made me do it. My track buddies that use the beyers would tell you that the last race figure is not enough. Others use them as a reference point and employ other methods of handicapping to find the winner. Still others have ways of adjusting them. I hold that they have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races. In fact, my eyes never focus on that column unless it's after the race to find out if the 3/5 that was off the board was the "fig horse".
Let me give another example with a wider spread among the figures. A filly wins a 7f race and is assigned a 68 for the effort. She enters a modest 6 1/2f stakes race with eight other runners. Her highest figure on the page is a 71 and it is the lowest high number in the field. One filly has run a 92 and several others have been in the eighties. The question is, what should her odds be and what are her chances of winning?

This is the question on the floor. If speed figures vary so much, why use them? In my way of thinking if one is going to crunch numbers then the numbers that they crunch should be consistent and dependable, or why crunch them?

[Overlay]

I'm not following this. Would you explain it? Thanks.

All I meant was that you had started this thread on the General Racing Discussion Board, and it had seemed to me that it really dealt with a topic related to handicapping that was more suited to the General Handicapping Discussion Board. Moving the thread to the Handicapping board (as PA has now done) will mean that you'll be more likely to receive comments/feedback from board members whose primary interest is on the handicapping side of horse racing, and who might possibly have missed or overlooked your thread if it had remained on the General Racing Discussion board. (I wanted to make clear that I was not criticizing you or the subject of the thread itself in any way.)

[maxwell]

Why use speed figures at all?

Why use traffic signals in an intersection? Why use floss after you brush?

Speed figures do a better job than a watch AND they speed up the process of elimination. I want to hit horses with an 9/1 average so I use "respectable pars". It might look something like this:

New York

Gr.1 - 97
Gr.2 - 94
Gr.3 - 91

Speed figures allow you to draw a line in the sand. How you hook the figures into running lines and factors is the trick.

The numbers are not perfect, but saying a 6f. race run in 108.2 has to be that fast is less perfect. That's the point of speed figures.

[nobeyerspls]

This is the question on the floor. If speed figures vary so much, why use them? In my way of thinking if one is going to crunch numbers then the numbers that they crunch should be consistent and dependable, or why crunch them?

The numbers are subjective. When they don't correlate with a horse's past after a given race they will be adjusted, usually downward. You will be told that "the track changed" when you know that within the twenty-five minutes between races the weather conditions and harrow depth were the same. Also, they are often changed after a race so there should be two columns, one for the original beyer and one for the changed one.
I used the term "practical" intentionally as it is my ongoing quest to find live longshots and the figures haven't helped my in that task. You will not find winners like Sarava, Volponi, or Birdstone using the numbers. I want to bet a little to win a lot. Taken at its most extreme that means betting $20 or less to win $10,000 or more. It takes that rare handicapping version of a perfect storm to do it but if you've done it once, you want to do it again.
Keep in mind that I am discussing beyer speed figures and not pace figures. There are some very good handicappers on here who have found a way to compute and employ pace figures that at times will identify a winner at a decent price.

[maxwell]

Make that: floss BEFORE you brush.

Time for my mornin' cupajava. :D

[cj]

The numbers are subjective. When they don't correlate with a horse's past after a given race they will be adjusted, usually downward. You will be told that "the track changed" when you know that within the twenty-five minutes between races the weather conditions and harrow depth were the same. Also, they are often changed after a race so there should be two columns, one for the original beyer and one for the changed one...

You are lumping all figures into one, which couldn't be further from the truth.

[The Judge]

Speed figures in skilled hands is a powerful weapon. The question you are asking is one that handicappers are always face with Scott said it best "How Will Your Horse Run Today" thats the question that has to be answered with an opinion and money.

If you look at a horses entire past performances thats showing in the Racing Form it becomes clear that your horse ran the races listed. He is all those running lines not just one. Normally one of those lines will be good engough to win todays race "if" the horse can only run back to that race. What one will he run today and why? To answer those question you will more then likely have to look past the last line. Speed figures in skill hands can certainlly do that.

[Overlay]

You will not find winners like Sarava, Volponi, or Birdstone using the numbers.

I agree with you if you're referring to the use of any particular number in a vacuum, and if your objective is to narrow a field down to the most probable winner to the exclusion of the other horses racing, and without regard to its odds. But if you factor speed in with other handicapping areas, you can arrive at an estimation of the relative winning chances of each horse in the field that will reliably indicate when winners like the ones you mention are being sent off at odds which are higher (perhaps much higher) than they deserve to be (even if they are nobody's idea of the one horse that is likeliest to win the race), and are therefore worthy of some degree of support from a pari-mutuel standpoint.

[garyoz]

The numbers are subjective. .

Highly debatable. The question is internal validity (consistency within the measure for an individual figure maker) as well as external validity and reliability. The golden days were pre-Beyer (1991) when The Sheets ruled. In my experience, it is a rare professional player who doesn't use high quality figures. My experience is also that most critics of The Sheets, Thoros, Xtras, CJ's figs, have limited experience in using them and don't take the time to investigate how to use them in form cycle analysis.

But, this debate is well tread ground on this board and why rehash?

[cj]

You will not find winners like Sarava, Volponi, or Birdstone using the numbers.

Funny! You pick the one race in the country that they run the distance once, at least at that class.

[GaryG]

Speed figures in skilled hands is a powerful weapon. This is absolutely true. For an unskilled player to say that figures are not valuable is like someone that can't drive saying that Ferrari is useless. As Mark Cramer said: All races are prep races. The key is in the interpretation.

[PittsburghPhil]

First of all, let me say that I may joining this forum as a regular member. I haven't figured out your vcash yet, but that will come in time.

Now about speed. Beyer, Free, and many more authors have documented that when a horse wins they usually improve by 9 or more speed points. This means the handicapper has to guess which horse is going to jump in speed making past speed unreliable because the horse with the highest speed figure might not necessary be the same one that improves in today's race. Just think about the numbers and forget that they are speed figures for a while. If a field of 6 horses has the following speed:

A: 89 B:90 C:84 D:92 E:86 F: 87


The lowest one C at 84 could win if the other horse ran back to their regular number and C improved by the statistical improvement of 9 points or more. C would rate a 93, 84 + 9. The variance is too much to get a handle on what's about to happen in the race. The contenders, generally, are close in their figures anyway making it even harder to use speed.



The best that speed might be able to do is act as an elimination. If a horse isn't within 10 or 12 points of the top horse, eliminate him.

To say "Why use figures" is to say "why use final time?" Why bother timing the races at all? Speed figures are just adjusted final times, but not completely adjusted. Track variant is one of many adjustments you can make to a figure. Pace and ground loss are two more. Etc.

A better question to ask is "what is the odds value of one Beyer point?" The answer is about 2-2.5 percent, as in an 80 should beat a 79 about 51 percent of the time.

Since I'm not an "authorized encyclopedia" around here, and since some who might be able to best answer your questions don't post here, I'll leave you with that. I also think the rebaets you guys are getting are enough of an edge to overcome.

[nobeyerspls]

You are lumping all figures into one, which couldn't be further from the truth.

I am only addressing beyer speed figures, not pace figures, as I pointed out to the guy who started the thread.

[DanG]

To those who say speed figures are nonsense, to me its one of the following…

A)You don’t know what your talking about…or

B)You don’t know what you’re talking about. :)

That’s not a knock against you at all; it’s just that ANY factor in horse racing that has perfect linear statistical evidence cannot therefore be labeled as “nonsense”. Virtually every reasonable adjusted figure will produce results where the 1st ranked animal will win more often than the 2nd etc…This simple fact proves any factors statistical relevance.

That’s not saying they are “the truth and the light” as Andy Beyer’s famous quote proclaims, as they are only what you make of them.

I will say…if you have never attempted to make your own figures, I highly recommend the process for at least one meet on your local circuit. It is VERY educational regardless if you continue it or not.

The quest for the “perfect figure” is energy (IMHO) that would be better spent in the interpretation of “good” figures. There are currently several very good figure sources that we are all aware of. Are some better than others?...Of course, as in every profession there must be a pecking order, but in the end it’s the application of the # that determines your success / or lack of.

PS: My partner who just retired NEVER used speed figures and was a significant winning player. Nothing (other than breathing) :D HAS to be used in this game, but to say figures are “useless” or however you want to negatively characterize them, is just naive IMHO.

[nobeyerspls]

Funny! You pick the one race in the country that they run the distance once, at least at that class.

I tried to list high profile examples that people could relate to. I should have thought of the distance angle as a fresh horse in the Belmont is often underbet. I could have used the 2nd race at Ellis yesterday as it was a surface handicapper's dream. The high beyer horse there ran 3rd.
Go back to the example I posted earlier on this thread about the filly stakes race. It's a real-time example from the current Saratoga meet.

[Capper Al]

All I meant was that you had started this thread on the General Racing Discussion Board, and it had seemed to me that it really dealt with a topic related to handicapping that was more suited to the General Handicapping Discussion Board. Moving the thread to the Handicapping board (as PA has now done) will mean that you'll be more likely to receive comments/feedback from board members whose primary interest is on the handicapping side of horse racing, and who might possibly have missed or overlooked your thread if it had remained on the General Racing Discussion board. (I wanted to make clear that I was not criticizing you or the subject of the thread itself in any way.)

Thanks Overlay. I thought it was something about where I posted. Sorry for the confusion. I'll learn my way around PA, sooner or later.

[nobeyerspls]

Why use speed figures at all?

Why use traffic signals in an intersection? Why use floss after you brush?

Speed figures do a better job than a watch AND they speed up the process of elimination. I want to hit horses with an 9/1 average so I use "respectable pars". It might look something like this:

New York

Gr.1 - 97
Gr.2 - 94
Gr.3 - 91

Speed figures allow you to draw a line in the sand. How you hook the figures into running lines and factors is the trick.

The numbers are not perfect, but saying a 6f. race run in 108.2 has to be that fast is less perfect. That's the point of speed figures.

When you say you want to hit horses with a 9/1 average what does that mean? Odds averaging 9/1?
What would your answer be to the exaple I cited in post#17?
Let's agree that raw times aren't useful.

[Capper Al]

Why use speed figures at all?

Why use traffic signals in an intersection? Why use floss after you brush?

Speed figures do a better job than a watch AND they speed up the process of elimination. I want to hit horses with an 9/1 average so I use "respectable pars". It might look something like this:

New York

Gr.1 - 97
Gr.2 - 94
Gr.3 - 91

Speed figures allow you to draw a line in the sand. How you hook the figures into running lines and factors is the trick.

The numbers are not perfect, but saying a 6f. race run in 108.2 has to be that fast is less perfect. That's the point of speed figures.

What I highlighted with is the one area that seems a creditable use, eliminations. After that the question still remains, why use them? I'll even agree that the highest speed figure might be the most likely to jump that 9 points or more needed to win. What we should be after at this point is not the speed figure, but which horse will out perform and jump his speed rating in his PPs in order to win today. This nulls and voids any speed figures in the PPs. So why use speed figures at this point?

[Capper Al]

Speed figures in skilled hands is a powerful weapon. The question you are asking is one that handicappers are always face with Scott said it best "How Will Your Horse Run Today" thats the question that has to be answered with an opinion and money.

If you look at a horses entire past performances thats showing in the Racing Form it becomes clear that your horse ran the races listed. He is all those running lines not just one. Normally one of those lines will be good engough to win todays race "if" the horse can only run back to that race. What one will he run today and why? To answer those question you will more then likely have to look past the last line. Speed figures in skill hands can certainlly do that.

What I highlighted is what I absolutely agree with. After using speed to eliminate horses, it changes from a primary factor into a secondary factor. You'll never find the sellers of speed figures admitting this. The Public even knows this in some way. The favorite wins on average year after year 33% of the time. The best the top speed can produce is 30%.

[Capper Al]

Highly debatable. The question is internal validity (consistency within the measure for an individual figure maker) as well as external validity and reliability. The golden days were pre-Beyer (1991) when The Sheets ruled. In my experience, it is a rare professional player who doesn't use high quality figures. My experience is also that most critics of The Sheets, Thoros, Xtras, CJ's figs, have limited experience in using them and don't take the time to investigate how to use them in form cycle analysis.

But, this debate is well tread ground on this board and why rehash?

I'm sorry. I'm new here. I followed one link that someone posted and didn't see the similarity. If you would so me were the rehash is, I'll drop the topic.

[Capper Al]

To say "Why use figures" is to say "why use final time?" Why bother timing the races at all? Speed figures are just adjusted final times, but not completely adjusted. Track variant is one of many adjustments you can make to a figure. Pace and ground loss are two more. Etc.

A better question to ask is "what is the odds value of one Beyer point?" The answer is about 2-2.5 percent, as in an 80 should beat a 79 about 51 percent of the time.

Since I'm not an "authorized encyclopedia" around here, and since some who might be able to best answer your questions don't post here, I'll leave you with that. I also think the rebaets you guys are getting are enough of an edge to overcome.

Interesting. There might be something to this. This circumvents handicapping with speed and speeds biggest problem of being bet down. This deserves further investigation.

[cj]

What I highlighted with is the one area that seems a creditable use, eliminations. After that the question still remains, why use them? I'll even agree that the highest speed figure might be the most likely to jump that 9 points or more needed to win. What we should be after at this point is not the speed figure, but which horse will out perform and jump his speed rating in his PPs in order to win today. This nulls and voids any speed figures in the PPs. So why use speed figures at this point?


Let's clear one thing up. Most horses DO NOT improve by 9 points to win. That is just an average. It includes plenty of horses that improve 40 and 50 points, or even more. It also includes horses that actually win while declining.

I think you will find most winners have shown the ability to win the current race in the fairly recent past. So, most likely those that "improve" are actually just finding a race where things go the right way with the trip, pace, and other factors.

P.S. Using red is considered very rude as it is hard on the eyes. Take the advice, or ignore, but at least now you have been informed.

[Capper Al]

To those who say speed figures are nonsense, to me its one of the following…

A)You don’t know what your talking about…or

B)You don’t know what you’re talking about. :)

That’s not a knock against you at all; it’s just that ANY factor in horse racing that has perfect linear statistical evidence cannot therefore be labeled as “nonsense”. Virtually every reasonable adjusted figure will produce results where the 1st ranked animal will win more often than the 2nd etc…This simple fact proves any factors statistical relevance.

That’s not saying they are “the truth and the light” as Andy Beyer’s famous quote proclaims, as they are only what you make of them.

I will say…if you have never attempted to make your own figures, I highly recommend the process for at least one meet on your local circuit. It is VERY educational regardless if you continue it or not.

The quest for the “perfect figure” is energy (IMHO) that would be better spent in the interpretation of “good” figures. There are currently several very good figure sources that we are all aware of. Are some better than others?...Of course, as in every profession there must be a pecking order, but in the end it’s the application of the # that determines your success / or lack of.

PS: My partner who just retired NEVER used speed figures and was a significant winning player. Nothing (other than breathing) :D HAS to be used in this game, but to say figures are “useless” or however you want to negatively characterize them, is just naive IMHO.

My question to the forum was why use speed figures at all. If you read through this thread you'll see that I agree with the findings like the top speed figure horse wins 30% of the time and speed does make sense for a good elimination. The challenge is to the importance of speed figures, where to use them, when, how, and what their importance or value is.

Here's a couple of things for you about what I'm talking about.


a.) If Speed Figures are so revered and used, and most players over the long run lose money, wouldn't challenging their premise make sense?


b.) If you think you know anything about handicapping, a game that pays you if you know something that the crowd doesn't, then think again because most players know speed.

[garyoz]

I. The high beyer horse there ran 3rd.


Defined as last best, life time best, best 1 of last 3, best at distance, best at track or what? This is the problem, a simplistic interpretation of speed figures. Typically people who condemn speed or pace figures don't understand how to use them, or use them too simplistically. It is another thing to criticize them for pointing our underlays.

What counts is number the horse figures to run. Read the literatute on form cycle. Ragozin, Fotias, etc. Also very good information available at The Sheets, and Thorograph web sites. Jim Cramer has done great work at HDW on Projected Speed Ratings which are included in all their downloads.

In terms of this topic being rehashed, just do a search on "speed figures", or "The Sheets" "Ragozin" "Equiform" or other related terms.

[Capper Al]

Let's clear one thing up. Most horses DO NOT improve by 9 points to win. That is just an average. It includes plenty of horses that improve 40 and 50 points, or even more. It also includes horses that actually win while declining.

I think you will find most winners have shown the ability to win the current race in the fairly recent past. So, most likely those that "improve" are actually just finding a race where things go the right way with the trip, pace, and other factors.

P.S. Using red is considered very rude as it is hard on the eyes. Take the advice, or ignore, but at least now you have been informed.

Okay, first thing is that I don't want to be rude. I'll use blue and green from now on.

The 9 (or maybe 10 points, I'm going by memory) may be either the median or average increase of a winning horse from his last outing. This is a fact that many authors have verified.

[GaryG]

Look - speed figures are a valuable tool, as are pace figures, form cycles and other things. Forget about "last out Beyer". This has been made as plain as possible by those who know the subject. Learn the game and forget this nonsense.

[garyoz]

Okay, first thing is that I don't want to be rude. I'll use blue and green from now on.

The 9 (or maybe 10 points, I'm going by memory) may be either the median or average increase of a winning horse from his last outing. This is a fact that many authors have verified.

How about a source for the "many authors?" Also what's wrong with black? What you are saying isn't that important.

[DanG]

My question to the forum was why use speed figures at all. If you read through this thread you'll see that I agree with the findings like the top speed figure horse wins 30% of the time and speed does make sense for a good elimination. The challenge is to the importance of speed figures, where to use them, when, how, and what their importance or value is.

Here's a couple of things for you about what I'm talking about.


a.) If Speed Figures are so revered and used, and most players over the long run lose money, wouldn't challenging their premise make sense?


b.) If you think you know anything about handicapping, a game that pays you if you know something that the crowd doesn't, then think again because most players know speed.
All true and I wasn’t actually questioning your premise at all. I was really just addressing a few posts that appear from time to time questioning their basic validity completely.

Yes; IMO it’s a key component to learn what information / discipline is driving your local pools and how to exploit their information source. Without going through the entire thread, I think were in basic agreement.

[chickenhead]

To say "Why use figures" is to say "why use final time?" Why bother timing the races at all? Speed figures are just adjusted final times.

EXACTLY. Speed figures are useful for helping me to quantify the effect of other things on the horse. How did the pace in previous races effect the horse. How did the track effect the horse. How did the trip effect the horse. Speed figures are just the measure of time, to aid one in judging the effects of conditions on the horse, and development/form of the horse. I need some sort of benchmark to try to gauge the effects of these things. So when today rolls around, on this surface, with this pace, I can have some idea of who should run best.

So when the question is:

My question to the forum was why use speed figures at all. The challenge is to the importance of speed figures, where to use them, when, how, and what their importance or value is.

As far as I can tell, the only way to gauge any of the things I talked about above without speed figures is to have an intricate knowledge of every horse in every race....which means one or two circuits tops, watching every race, full notes, etc. Speed figures are a short hand that reduces the need for that. Or certainly a powerful addition to that.

[Capper Al]

Defined as last best, life time best, best 1 of last 3, best at distance, best at track or what? This is the problem, a simplistic interpretation of speed figures. Typically people who condemn speed or pace figures don't understand how to use them, or use them too simplistically. It is another thing to criticize them for pointing our underlays.

What counts is number the horse figures to run. Read the literatute on form cycle. Ragozin, Fotias, etc. Also very good information available at The Sheets, and Thorograph web sites. Jim Cramer has done great work at HDW on Projected Speed Ratings which are included in all their downloads.

In terms of this topic being rehashed, just do a search on "speed figures", or "The Sheets" "Ragozin" "Equiform" or other related terms.

However, one gets their speed calculation from recent comparable races is fine for this discussion. It could be something like top speed last race, top speed last two, top two out of last 3 races, etc.

About this discussion appearing elsewhere, did anyone come up with an answer? Maybe you could narrow my search and point me to the answer? After all, that's what we are all after isn't it?

[GaryG]

I think this guy is just yanking chains....I am out of here.

[Capper Al]

EXACTLY. Speed figures are useful for helping me to quantify the effect of other things on the horse. How did the pace in previous races effect the horse. How did the track effect the horse. How did the trip effect the horse. Speed figures are just the measure of time, to aid one in judging the effects of conditions on the horse, and development/form of the horse. I need some sort of benchmark to try to gauge the effects of these things. So when today rolls around, on this surface, with this pace, I can have some idea of who should run best.

So when the question is:



As far as I can tell, the only way to gauge any of the things I talked about above without speed figures is to have an intricate knowledge of every horse in every race....which means one or two circuits tops, watching every race, full notes, etc. Speed figures are a short hand that reduces the need for that. Or certainly a powerful addition to that.

This makes sense to me. Speed serving as a short cut view to the other factors that will become more important. After eliminations, speed should lose it's focus and became not a primary factor but a secondary. I believe most fans end up using speed all the way to the window, not in the way you mentioned.

[Capper Al]

How about a source for the "many authors?" Also what's wrong with black? What you are saying isn't that important.

You could have just said that any color doesn't work. I thought a different color would be easier to separate the quote. No harm intended on my part.

[Capper Al]

How about a source for the "many authors?" Also what's wrong with black? What you are saying isn't that important.

Speed to Spare by Joe Cardello, a DRF publication page 25, "The average winning Beyer figure was 10 points higher than its figure from the preceding race; the median winning figure was 7 points higher." You didn't believe that the average winning figure would be lower than its previous race, did you?

[rastajenk]

This makes sense to me. Speed serving as a short cut view to the other factors that will become more important.
There, you just answered your own question, "why use speed figures at all?"
After eliminations, speed should lose it's focus and became not a primary factor but a secondary.
Why, just because you say so? If other factors work for you, good, but why knock what others do if it works for them?
I believe most fans end up using speed all the way to the window, not in the way you mentioned.
I believe most fans don't use speed at all. Most don't use a Form or even a program, except to match up a name, a jockey, and a number. Rather presumptuous to speak for what "most fans" are thinking. Even if the odds reflect some kind of speed rating ranking, that doesn't mean most fans are using speed; it just means that the speed ratings are describing some of what has gone before rather accurately.

[DanG]

I believe most fans don't use speed at all. Most don't use a Form or even a program, except to match up a name, a jockey, and a number. Rather presumptuous to speak for what "most fans" are thinking. Even if the odds reflect some kind of speed rating ranking, that doesn't mean most fans are using speed; it just means that the speed ratings are describing some of what has gone before rather accurately.
This may be true in head count, but does that represent the majority of the money bet?

[rastajenk]

Hard to say, for sure. But that's my impression based on two years as a mutuel clerk and several years in track management. Maybe the inference that bettors are taking wild-ass guesses is a little over the top, but I'm pretty confident that "most fans" don't use "speed," as in ratings, as their primary weapon of choice.

[garyoz]

Hard to say, for sure. But that's my impression based on two years as a mutuel clerk and several years in track management. Maybe the inference that bettors are taking wild-ass guesses is a little over the top, but I'm pretty confident that "most fans" don't use "speed," as in ratings, as their primary weapon of choice.

You need to measure as a percentage of handle.

That winning Beyer statistic quoted by the blue text guy also seems high to me, but he did find a cite. What it does speak to is why you have to use form cycle, not last race. Can't use the same decision rule for every horse.

And yes, I think he is trolling, (agreeing with Gary G).

[nobeyerspls]

To those who say speed figures are nonsense, to me its one of the following…

A)You don’t know what your talking about…or

B)You don’t know what you’re talking about. :)

That’s not a knock against you at all; it’s just that ANY factor in horse racing that has perfect linear statistical evidence cannot therefore be labeled as “nonsense”. Virtually every reasonable adjusted figure will produce results where the 1st ranked animal will win more often than the 2nd etc…This simple fact proves any factors statistical relevance.

That’s not saying they are “the truth and the light” as Andy Beyer’s famous quote proclaims, as they are only what you make of them.



I always know what I am talking about and in this thread I am only referring to beyer speed figures. Once again, I hold that they have no practical application in handicappinug thoroughbred races. I can't get anybody to answer the question I posed in post #17.
Let's review the stakes race for fillies at Woodbine today. The 1/5 favorite was coming off a 2nd place finish in a stakes race against colts. She was assigned an 86 that day, an effort that closely matched her prior race figure of 88. The 2nd choice ran a 79 and was undefeated. The others in the race were much lower. So which of these fillies would win. Probably that "double fig" horse if you read Andy's book. But wait. What happened? A filly coming off a lowly 55 won the race. How can that be. The "truth and the light" burned money. Why, because people who rely on digitized performance don't know what they're talking about. And oh yeah, a filly with a 67 ran third, not the 2nd choice.
Keep using the bsf's. You won't be ahead of me in line when I cash.

[GaryG]

Why, because people who rely on digitized performance don't know what they're talking about. And oh yeah, a filly with a 67 ran third, not the 2nd choice.
Keep using the bsf's. You won't be ahead of me in line when I cash.Talking smack!!! I love it! You must be a very wealthy gentleman by now....:eek:

[phatbastard]

I some times wonder about validity of beyers......I enjoy listening to the Siro's seminars every morning as the repartee and validity of those involved are opinions I pay some attention to.

that said...Crist has been bemoaning the bsf's alotted to 4.5 f races @ CD all season, others on the show have been complaining about BSF's assigned races @ Delaware......

Crist's paper is the place everyone gets the fig's from...so if the big kahuna of the supplier of the info doubts his own publication, why should a guy grinding numbers everyday to earn his lunch.....

I firmly believe that this is no an exact science, as we all have evolved thru years of trial and error, and at this time realize what WORKS BEST for us


best of luck to all.....

[Capper Al]

There, you just answered your own question, "why use speed figures at all?"

Sometimes writing to a thread can be therapeutic.

Why, just because you say so? If other factors work for you, good, but why knock what others do if it works for them?

You have two assumption here. The first that I'm knocking something. The second is that others have this thing working for them like the crowd is making money at the track. Both assumption are wrong.

I believe most fans don't use speed at all. Most don't use a Form or even a program, except to match up a name, a jockey, and a number. Rather presumptuous to speak for what "most fans" are thinking. Even if the odds reflect some kind of speed rating ranking, that doesn't mean most fans are using speed; it just means that the speed ratings are describing some of what has gone before rather accurately.

Whatever

[46zilzal]

I always know what I am talking about and in this thread I am only referring to beyer speed figures. Once again, I hold that they have no practical application in handicappinug thoroughbred races. I can't get anybody to answer the question I posed in post #17.
Let's review the stakes race for fillies at Woodbine today. The 1/5 favorite was coming off a 2nd place finish in a stakes race against colts. She was assigned an 86 that day, an effort that closely matched her prior race figure of 88. The 2nd choice ran a 79 and was undefeated. The others in the race were much lower. So which of these fillies would win. Probably that "double fig" horse if you read Andy's book. But wait. What happened? A filly coming off a lowly 55 won the race. How can that be. The "truth and the light" burned money. Why, because people who rely on digitized performance don't know what they're talking about. And oh yeah, a filly with a 67 ran third, not the 2nd choice.
Keep using the bsf's. You won't be ahead of me in line when I cash.
You cannot do that with developing babies who can improve overnight.

[Capper Al]

You need to measure as a percentage of handle.

That winning Beyer statistic quoted by the blue text guy also seems high to me, but he did find a cite. What it does speak to is why you have to use form cycle, not last race. Can't use the same decision rule for every horse.

And yes, I think he is trolling, (agreeing with Gary G).

Hey, it's the blue guy. What I'm trolling for is honest dialogue. You got your cite. Look it up. You'll find on that page that the author was quoting another guy's study. That makes two involved with that stat. And if you read further down the page, he talks about Mark Cramer's findings that the average horse returning to the same distance and surface, running without a layoff, runs plus or minus 10.9 points from their previous race. That's three authors on one page. Let's round off and say plus or minus 11 points. That's a lot of variability, and that was the whole point to this thread. With variability like that how can one be expected to gage the outcome of today's race on speed?

[Capper Al]

I always know what I am talking about and in this thread I am only referring to beyer speed figures. Once again, I hold that they have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races. I can't get anybody to answer the question I posed in post #17.
Let's review the stakes race for fillies at Woodbine today. The 1/5 favorite was coming off a 2nd place finish in a stakes race against colts. She was assigned an 86 that day, an effort that closely matched her prior race figure of 88. The 2nd choice ran a 79 and was undefeated. The others in the race were much lower. So which of these fillies would win. Probably that "double fig" horse if you read Andy's book. But wait. What happened? A filly coming off a lowly 55 won the race. How can that be. The "truth and the light" burned money. Why, because people who rely on digitized performance don't know what they're talking about. And oh yeah, a filly with a 67 ran third, not the 2nd choice.
Keep using the bsf's. You won't be ahead of me in line when I cash.

What you are talking about is where I would have liked to see this talk go. I value speed, but knowing the racing game and form cycles is just as important. I, like most handicappers, only wish we could see our way to horses like the one in your example in spite of an overwhelming speed figure. How would one make that decision? That's the question here.

[nobeyerspls]

You cannot do that with developing babies who can improve overnight.

A 2yo race might be a bad example but I wanted to illustrate the real problem with the figures. You see, it's not that a favorite gets beat by a longer priced horse, it's the wider spread in the odds caused by the figures. Before the bsf's this filly would have been the favorite, maybe even below even money but certainly not 1/5. The high number assigned gave those who value them added confidence.
Some guy walked up to the window and bet $50 to win absolutely certain that he would soon return to get $60 back.
The guy who ignored the figures (you know, the one who doesn't know what he's talking about) was right behind him betting $5 on the winner and getting $70 back.
I don't have any stats to prove it, but it seems that there are many more odds-on favorites and even more among them who lose. I know that shorter fields account for much of this but blind reliance on the figures certainly contributes.

[Capper Al]

A 2yo race might be a bad example but I wanted to illustrate the real problem with the figures. You see, it's not that a favorite gets beat by a longer priced horse, it's the wider spread in the odds caused by the figures. Before the bsf's this filly would have been the favorite, maybe even below even money but certainly not 1/5. The high number assigned gave those who value them added confidence.
Some guy walked up to the window and bet $50 to win absolutely certain that he would soon return to get $60 back.
The guy who ignored the figures (you know, the one who doesn't know what he's talking about) was right behind him betting $5 on the winner and getting $70 back.
I don't have any stats to prove it, but it seems that there are many more odds-on favorites and even more among them who lose. I know that shorter fields account for much of this but blind reliance on the figures certainly contributes.

I agree. Speed has been over sold as the solution. Speed has it's value but must be valued in the mix of other factors. Those of us who handicap in a mechanical method are more apt to use speed as a central factor. After all, as a single element, it probably has the highest correlation to the winner.

[DanG]

I don't have any stats to prove it, but it seems that there are many more odds-on favorites and even more among them who lose. I know that shorter fields account for much of this but blind reliance on the figures certainly contributes.
I think it was Ron Tiller who posted many years of winning odds ranges and it was remarkable how consistent they have been. Virtually little difference between today’s betting patterns as compared to 15 years ago as I remember it.

I agree with you that what is driving today’s odds on favorites is certainly figure based. Each decade that is becoming more evident.

Side note: Concerning the public and how long they take to exploit a profitable method. Ken Massa of HTR showed a study of his FR1 velocity rating for the last 10 years. (FR1 is the adjusted velocity at the 2f call in sprints, 4f in routes) If you bet it blindly into every single race you would get back .90 cents on a dollar. The interesting thing was this same rating produced a break even $1.00 10 years ago and lost almost exactly .01 cent per year since.

Not really relevant to the thread, but I thought it was an interesting study of the speed (or lack of) at which the public will eventually exploit a profitable situation.

[nobeyerspls]

I think it was Ron Tiller who posted many years of winning odds ranges and it was remarkable how consistent they have been. Virtually little difference between today’s betting patterns as compared to 15 years ago as I remember it.

I agree with you that what is driving today’s odds on favorites is certainly figure based. Each decade that is becoming more evident.



The is my 51st year at the track so I'm talking about comparisons between now and 30 or 40 years ago, not 15. 2/5 and 3/5 favorites were rare but they usually won. The shorter fields now will skew the data.

[DanG]

The is my 51st year at the track so I'm talking about comparisons between now and 30 or 40 years ago, not 15. 2/5 and 3/5 favorites were rare but they usually won. The shorter fields now will skew the data.
You could be right…

I think all of us would love to get in that time capsule and take on racing 50 years ago with our current knowledge. I’m sure gamblers will be saying the same thing 50 years from now.

PS: It would be an interesting prop bet on how many mid + tracks will be operating in 50 years. One thing is for sure though…Mary Lou Whitney will still be giving parties and Earlie Fires will still be riding the hair off claimers! :jump:

[098poi]

Speed figures of course should be used as an aspect of overall handicapping. Eliminations based on horses "too slow" to compete, and getting a feel for form cycles is common. BUT horses are not subatomic particles and speed ratings do not tell the whole story. Yesterday's 4th at Saratoga, the 2 miler. I observed (before the race) that the winner Touchdown Peyton had good closing numbers (my pace number) but I eliminated based on speed figures and running lines. In retrospect (handicapping is easier after the fact) the winner is the only horse who was never in a claiming race or State Bred race. As a relatively lightly raced 3 yo one could have made a case for class. The only other horse close was the 1 Oedipus O'Neal who has had some success in State breds. Oedipus didn't fire yesterday and the winner won with a running line of 3 2 3 4 2 1 (2miles), a line which bears no resemblance to any of his previous ones! So had I picked him based on his closing numbers I may have won but been wrong about the reason! :bang: Tough game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sjk]

What you are talking about is where I would have liked to see this talk go. I value speed, but knowing the racing game and form cycles is just as important. I, like most handicappers, only wish we could see our way to horses like the one in your example in spite of an overwhelming speed figure. How would one make that decision? That's the question here.

Your position seems to have shifted. The players who use speed figures in a significant way and enjoy success (several have posted above) are probably at a loss as to the answer to the original question since trying to do without a critical data element would leave a big hole in their methodology.

At the same time I would think almost anyone would agree that you cannot look at only one data element (speed figures for example) to the exclusion of others and expect to do well.

If there is any information that the public uses regularly and you do not and that information has predictive value that puts you at a big disadvantage.

I don't see where illustrations of isolated races does much good. I expect to lose 88% of the races and the fact that I may or may not have won a particular race is irrelevant.

[Capper Al]

Your position seems to have shifted. The players who use speed figures in a significant way and enjoy success (several have posted above) are probably at a loss as to the answer to the original question since trying to do without a critical data element would leave a big hole in their methodology.

At the same time I would think almost anyone would agree that you cannot look at only one data element (speed figures for example) to the exclusion of others and expect to do well.

If there is any information that the public uses regularly and you do not and that information has predictive value that puts you at a big disadvantage.

I don't see where illustrations of isolated races does much good. I expect to lose 88% of the races and the fact that I may or may not have won a particular race is irrelevant.

The question "Why use speed figures at all?" is rhetorical. I am not claiming to have a solution on how to bet against that big speed figure horse. I do know that this dialogue has gotten my nose back into my form cycle books. The point of the question is valid concerning all the variability of speed figures. Especially with the DRF publications always hailing BSF in almost everything they publish for their own self interest.

[Capper Al]

Speed figures of course should be used as an aspect of overall handicapping. Eliminations based on horses "too slow" to compete, and getting a feel for form cycles is common. BUT horses are not subatomic particles and speed ratings do not tell the whole story. Yesterday's 4th at Saratoga, the 2 miler. I observed (before the race) that the winner Touchdown Peyton had good closing numbers (my pace number) but I eliminated based on speed figures and running lines. In retrospect (handicapping is easier after the fact) the winner is the only horse who was never in a claiming race or State Bred race. As a relatively lightly raced 3 yo one could have made a case for class. The only other horse close was the 1 Oedipus O'Neal who has had some success in State breds. Oedipus didn't fire yesterday and the winner won with a running line of 3 2 3 4 2 1 (2miles), a line which bears no resemblance to any of his previous ones! So had I picked him based on his closing numbers I may have won but been wrong about the reason! :bang: Tough game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bingo! You hit the nail on the head. Horses aren't subatomic particles and plugging in a speed figure into E=MC**2 doesn't get you enough ROI to support your 30% or so winners.

[nobeyerspls]

You could be right…

I think all of us would love to get in that time capsule and take on racing 50 years ago with our current knowledge. I’m sure gamblers will be saying the same thing 50 years from now.

PS: It would be an interesting prop bet on how many mid + tracks will be operating in 50 years. One thing is for sure though…Mary Lou Whitney will still be giving parties and Earlie Fires will still be riding the hair off claimers! :jump:

With wagering and watching races moving to the computer we're headed toward virtual racing. The graphics will be quite good and the performance will be programmed to match historical data.
There will be a flat 5% takeout on all wagers as there will be no purse money or track overhead. No owners, no vets, and full fields. The "breeding" side will be virtual as well with sprint sires and turf sires part of the equation. Jockey/trainer stats will approximate reality and there will be the appropriate number of dq's. Eventually, a few race meets will be held in remote country locations before the last of the surviving thoroughbreds are on display in a zoo.

[DanG]

With wagering and watching races moving to the computer we're headed toward virtual racing. The graphics will be quite good and the performance will be programmed to match historical data.
There will be a flat 5% takeout on all wagers as there will be no purse money or track overhead. No owners, no vets, and full fields. The "breeding" side will be virtual as well with sprint sires and turf sires part of the equation. Jockey/trainer stats will approximate reality and there will be the appropriate number of dq's. Eventually, a few race meets will be held in remote country locations before the last of the surviving thoroughbreds are on display in a zoo.
I guess the only remaining question is…

Does the Zoo take betting? :)

[ArlJim78]

Your position seems to have shifted. The players who use speed figures in a significant way and enjoy success (several have posted above) are probably at a loss as to the answer to the original question since trying to do without a critical data element would leave a big hole in their methodology.

At the same time I would think almost anyone would agree that you cannot look at only one data element (speed figures for example) to the exclusion of others and expect to do well.

If there is any information that the public uses regularly and you do not and that information has predictive value that puts you at a big disadvantage.

I don't see where illustrations of isolated races does much good. I expect to lose 88% of the races and the fact that I may or may not have won a particular race is irrelevant.
that's a well written summary that I think pretty much nails it.

[Tom]

This is the question on the floor. If speed figures vary so much, why use them? In my way of thinking if one is going to crunch numbers then the numbers that they crunch should be consistent and dependable, or why crunch them?

The numbers are telling you how fast a horse ran a given race. They should not be consistent. Horses are not consistent.

[Tom]

A 2yo race might be a bad example but I wanted to illustrate the real problem with the figures.


But you didn't/ You only demonstrated that you have no idea how to use speed figures.

[Tom]

Here's a couple of things for you about what I'm talking about.


a.) If Speed Figures are so revered and used, and most players over the long run lose money, wouldn't challenging their premise make sense?


Faulty assumption. Most people mis-use speed figures and lose over the long run. So to challenge thier premise is to use speed figres correctly!

[Capper Al]

The numbers are telling you how fast a horse ran a given race. They should not be consistent. Horses are not consistent.

You got me here. I made an assumption that one would conclude if the numbers are inconsistent then they should not use them. Why make a prediction with unpredictable numbers? This might be something in the DNA of speed cappers.

[Capper Al]

But you didn't/ You only demonstrated that you have no idea how to use speed figures.

A good speed handicapper should know that they are walking on thin ice with 2 yos. They'll probably handicap differently here. I'll give you this one.

[sjk]

As Tom says, people who know what they are doing use them to make accurate profitable predictions.

Why should they stop?

[Capper Al]

Faulty assumption. Most people mis-use speed figures and lose over the long run. So to challenge thier premise is to use speed figres correctly!

This one we tie on. All that can be said is that speed cappers lose money in general. Who knows what the cure is? It could be better use of the figures, or dropping the focus from the figures, or just dropping the figures entirely. All we know is what they are doing isn't working.

[cj]

This is a good starting point. There are races where speed figures are a great indicator, and others where they are almost useless. Age and class have a big influence.

[Capper Al]

As Tom says, people who know what they are doing use them to make accurate profitable predictions.

Why should they stop?

If some are having success with them, good for them. I'm not knocking what works. I'm stepping back and looking at the big picture which doesn't look too good for speed handicappers. I enjoy reading Andy Beyer just as much as any speed capper, but when he wrote "Beyer on Speed" he was trying to justify why speed figures don't work. I'll bet the successful speed cappers take the focus away from speed and know what type races that they can play in. It comes back to understanding racing more than speed.

[chickenhead]

All that can be said is that speed cappers lose money in general.


All handicappers lose money in general. The takeout gets taken out, no matter how you pick horses. Therefore, as a population, all handicappers lose money.

[Capper Al]

All handicappers lose money in general. The takeout gets taken out, no matter how you pick horses. Therefore, as a population, all handicappers lose money.

You're right again. All handicappers in general lose money. I did not mean to only say that speed handicappers lose money. In time I'll get to every style capping and try to pin point their weakness. I am not a profitable capper myself, mostly do to fact that I carve action and bet on anything that I have taken the time to handicap. Since I don't have the answer, I'm trying to ask the right question and open dialogue. We can't keep handicapping on the same premise making the same conclusions and expecting a different outcome of profitability to appear. For speed the right question is how can one base their picks on unpredictable numbers and expect to predict, let alone make money?

[bettheoverlay]

Perhaps you're not looking at handicapping and wagering from the standpoint of probability. There are no absolutely precise figures. Speed figures, as with other types of figures, can help lead to understanding the probability of each horse's chances, and, sometimes, a logical, even winning wager.

[Tom]

You're right again. All handicappers in general lose money. I did not mean to only say that speed handicappers lose money. In time I'll get to every style capping and try to pin point their weakness. I am not a profitable capper myself, mostly do to fact that I carve action and bet on anything that I have taken the time to handicap. Since I don't have the answer, I'm trying to ask the right question and open dialogue. We can't keep handicapping on the same premise making the same conclusions and expecting a different outcome of profitability to appear. For speed the right question is how can one base their picks on unpredictable numbers and expect to predict, let alone make money?

I don't know anyone who is only a "_____handicapper." If you think you are going to beat this game using one factor, email me what tracks you are betting on so I can get in on the action! :lol: I use speed, pace, trips, trainers, jockey, pedigree, whatever the race calls for. My biggest hit yesterday was not a speed or pace play.

You shold spend more time time finding out what works than trying to prove things don't work.

And did Beyer tell you he was writting to explain why figs don't work? :lol:

[Capper Al]

I don't know anyone who is only a "_____handicapper." If you think you are going to beat this game using one factor, email me what tracks you are betting on so I can get in on the action! :lol: I use speed, pace, trips, trainers, jockey, pedigree, whatever the race calls for. My biggest hit yesterday was not a speed or pace play.

You shold spend more time time finding out what works than trying to prove things don't work.

And did Beyer tell you he was writing to explain why figs don't work? :lol:

I'm a comprehensive player that adjusts my play and formulas to distance, surface, and race conditions. To presume anybody who can respond to my posting is profitable is folly and highly unlikely. If you read Beyer's book, he is explaining what changed in racing to make speed not work an suggests strategies to overcome it. Why keep giving an alcoholic a drink when he demands he should have one? The same goes for losers. Why should we alude that speed or better speed figures will make them a winner?

[DanG]

I'm a comprehensive player that adjusts my play and formulas to distance, surface, and race conditions.
In all fairness as do good players who use figures.

[sjk]

If you only wanted the unprofitable players to reply to your thread you should have said so up front and saved us a lot of time.

[Tom]

Yeh, YOU were the one who said they didn't work. You were the one who said many things didn't work, YOU were the one who said you were going to cover them all in time.

I'm otta here. No time for nonsense. I gotta print my speed figs for Monday.

[robert99]

I'm a comprehensive player that adjusts my play and formulas to distance, surface, and race conditions. To presume anybody who can respond to my posting is profitable is folly and highly unlikely. If you read Beyer's book, he is explaining what changed in racing to make speed not work an suggests strategies to overcome it. Why keep giving an alcoholic a drink when he demands he should have one? The same goes for losers. Why should we alude that speed or better speed figures will make them a winner?

Once upon a time when players used class as a selection basis then a speed figure only player would win with larger payouts. Few were using the method so few got the same selections and PMU payout were shared with fewer people. Today, they win the same percentage of races but with smaller payouts and lose overall. "Speed" players that win today, often do their own figures - not because they are any better but they know what the horse has done in detail each race and previous races and how much it has been corrected and why. They also use a whole range of other handicapping factors pace, energy, trip, bias, breeding etc etc so that the picture they are getting tells the same story. They will look at all the horses in the race as composite body, not as individual horses doing their own thing. When it does all fit and the price is right, then a bet, when it does not then no bet, whatever the speed figure says and however much work put into that race. It is the confusing imprecision of any single data item that keeps the game alive. If not, a computer program would handicap winner after winner.

[jacob]

First Step: Read the Conditions Of The Race; ... and You'll find yourself eliminating up to 90 percent of money-burning losers and selecting more Probable Winners.

Physical Conditioning, Class and Trainer Intentions (trainer angles -- this is a business for them ... not a game.) are the most important factors in handicapping. Next, comes the upcoming race's Track Surface, Track Conditions and the Comparable Weight Assignments of the contenders.

I usually play one horse per race ... however, if there's a purse that warrants reasonable monetary incentive (purses) for the human connections, that's when I'll also incorporate speed, pace and stamina as a tie breaker in a effort to Separate True Contenders and Pinpoint the Probable Winner.

And if that fails, I pass the race.

Furthermore, when necessay, I sometimes use reliable handicapping software, but not on every horse in the race ... only on bona fide contenders.

[Capper Al]

If you only wanted the unprofitable players to reply to your thread you should have said so up front and saved us a lot of time.

No, I would have enjoyed the profitable to engage in honest dialogue. This is assuming someone out there is profitable. A lot will make claims to be profitable, or they might just be having a good year. You guys should have known that someone who could point the problem with speed figures and quote sources didn't just start handicapping.

The healthy solution would be for introspection into the premises we use to handicap. I actually seen a guy ( a winner ) come into a forum, announce to everyone that he has found a way to beat the game, told them that he plays chalk to win and would make about a 25% profit. He then proceeded to post his picks for 100 races. He posted a few races at a time over about a period of a month. To my surprise, he was almost tarred and feathered by the comments. He did do it. I think he was about 27% profitable.

The premises aren't sacred cows that are untouchable. If you are going to win you are going to have to challenge them. I plan to be profitable. So I plan to figure out what's not working. I'll hold off for a while before I'll pick on Early Speed. I realise this is stressful. I did appreciate your comments and have learned a few things. Some of you might of thought we were only talking about speed. We were talking about sacred cows and speed. Hope to see you around.

[Capper Al]

Once upon a time when players used class as a selection basis then a speed figure only player would win with larger payouts. Few were using the method so few got the same selections and PMU payout were shared with fewer people. Today, they win the same percentage of races but with smaller payouts and lose overall. "Speed" players that win today, often do their own figures - not because they are any better but they know what the horse has done in detail each race and previous races and how much it has been corrected and why. They also use a whole range of other handicapping factors pace, energy, trip, bias, breeding etc etc so that the picture they are getting tells the same story. They will look at all the horses in the race as composite body, not as individual horses doing their own thing. When it does all fit and the price is right, then a bet, when it does not then no bet, whatever the speed figure says and however much work put into that race. It is the confusing imprecision of any single data item that keeps the game alive. If not, a computer program would handicap winner after winner.

Absolutely on the money.

[Capper Al]

First Step: Read the Conditions Of The Race; ... and You'll find yourself eliminating up to 90 percent of money-burning losers and selecting more Probable Winners.

Physical Conditioning, Class and Trainer Intentions (trainer angles -- this is a business for them ... not a game.) are the most important factors in handicapping. Next, comes the upcoming race's Track Surface, Track Conditions and the Comparable Weight Assignments of the contenders.

I usually play one horse per race ... however, if there's a purse that warrants reasonable monetary incentive (purses) for the human connections, that's when I'll also incorporate speed, pace and stamina as a tie breaker in a effort to Separate True Contenders and Pinpoint the Probable Winner.

And if that fails, I pass the race.

Furthermore, when necessay, I sometimes use reliable handicapping software, but not on every horse in the race ... only on bona fide contenders.

I agree with you too. Race conditions are the place to start. You didn't mention speed, but I'll assume it will figure in there somewhere.

Skipping races now that's a difficult one for me. I accept the concept. But after typing in all my data into a spreadsheet, I'm playing that race.

[jacob]

Yes, I did when I Mentioned: "I usually play one horse per race ... however, if there's a purse that warrants reasonable monetary incentive (purses) for the human connections, that's when I'll also incorporate speed, pace and stamina as a tie breaker in a effort to Separate True Contenders and Pinpoint the Probable Winner."

[Tom]

Count me out of any future discussions. You not ony wasted my time, your use of blue is just plain rude.

I suspect you are seeking attention more than information.
You seem to be proud to be a loser.


Scotty.....engage IGGY!

[Capper Al]

Count me out of any future discussions. You not ony wasted my time, your use of blue is just plain rude.

I suspect you are seeking attention more than information.
You seem to be proud to be a loser.


Scotty.....engage IGGY!

Is green better? You are taking me all wrong. I'm pushing the boundaries of what we know or take for granted as true. When I stated that variability was the issue for speed, people wanted sources. That means they wanted to know or, at least, know the source of the statement. I'll keep shaking the foundations until I'm profitable. It can't be done by implementing our own personal version of BSF. If it could the big guns wouldn't be publishing books about speed. They would be investing at the track.

I'm really sorry that you feel this was. I appreciated that you offered to help me, and maybe you can at sometime. I would be interested in your implementation of speed. How you manipulate the figs. At this time I was discussing current speed figures in general. Please see posting #48 where I stated that I didn't care how someone came up with speed figs as long as they were current figs.

Again sorry about any misunderstanding. Hope to see you all the for the ride when we shake the foundations toward profitability. You sound like you would have a lot to contribute.

[Tom]

Ha ha.
Jolly joker.
I already know who you are.

[peter00]

Speed figures, simply tell us --- How fast horses have run in the PAST. Its vital to know. They Don't tell us how they were earned, or who they were earned against. They will be less predictive among rapidly improving young horses--on their way through their conditions---but still IMPORTANT. One factor among many(conditions of race,class,pace,ect.)

[nobeyerspls]

But you didn't/ You only demonstrated that you have no idea how to use speed figures.

I read some of Andy Beyer's material and I think that he devoted a chapter to the "double fig" horse, like the one that failed in my example. I've heard some say that Andy doesn't know how to use his own figures but I think that he's quite knowledgable about the sport in general and I applaud his attempt to digitize performance.
The point here is that real people, other than you or I, handicapped that race and many used the outstanding figures to make that "double fig" filly 1-5 and the winner with the 31 bsf deficit 13-1. I made no straight bets in the race but used both in pick 3's.
There is some irony here as I am a numbers kind of guy. I founded two investment companies, sold one and am still active in the other. A quotient that bears my name adjusts price earnings multiples for net cash per share and abnormal earnings growth rates.
If your position is that anyone who knew how to use speed figures would have avoided this horse you have to explain to me why she was 1-5.

[Pell Mell]

Like it or not or believe it or not, racing has been my sole source of income for many years. I'm not rich but I manage to feed myself and live in modest comfort.

Over 50 yrs. ago when first starting out, I asked a very smart oldtimer if he could have the answer to one question what would it be? His answer, "Who's going to run good today". Ever since that day I searched for the answer. I managed to find one certain type of horse that runs good 90% of the time. They may not win but are always in the hunt.

So, when I handicap, the first thing I do is look for these specific types. I only play cheap horses because the better ones can run good time after time but one seldom gets a price on these horses. Once I find my potential plays, I play most of them if the price is right, I use figures to get a handle on what they can do. Win or lose, most of my plays run to their best recent figure and sometimes it's not good enough to win but they still run their race.

As to the figures, I have tried many including Beyers, to judge if their figure would be good enough to win. My bankroll has proven to me, countless times, that the Beyers are totally useless! IMO they are absurd and have no idea why players rely on them. I am a winner but if I used Beyers I would be a total loser. To me, the proof is in the pudding and I have found the Bris figures to be the absolute best.

I hope and pray that the public continues to use the Beyers! :lol:

[nobeyerspls]

Like it or not or believe it or not, racing has been my sole source of income for many years. I'm not rich but I manage to feed myself and live in modest comfort.

As to the figures, I have tried many including Beyers, to judge if their figure would be good enough to win. My bankroll has proven to me, countless times, that the Beyers are totally useless! IMO they are absurd and have no idea why players rely on them. I am a winner but if I used Beyers I would be a total loser. To me, the proof is in the pudding and I have found the Bris figures to be the absolute best.

I hope and pray that the public continues to use the Beyers! :lol:

Nice to see a guy differentiate between figures. Tom who posts on here is very sensitive to negative comments on speed figures. I have only commented on beyer speed figures and you now state that they are useless but others are very good.
One thing I don't get. If Tom is making his own figures isn't he saying that he doesn't use bsf's?
Lastly, this is my 51st year at this. I don't make a living at it but I do show a profit. When you or I cash a nice ticket on a longshot we win the silent debate on figures that is present in every parimutuel pool.

[DanG]

From the peanut gallery…:)

I fail to understand why this discussion often falls into either / or.

There useless / there imperative…

I’ve read where the condition of the animal today is the key to cashing bets. OK…if you believe that to be true then why does the knowledge of how fast they have run in the past interfere with approach?

For example; If someone watched me handicap depending on when they saw the process they would either say I used trips, positional match ups, internal velocity, adjusted performance ratings, trainer / jockey reports, pedigree etc…Personally, I can’t tell you how much money & time being able to interpret good figures has saved me.

In fact I reversed the process of watching replays and numeric handicapping many years ago and it was a huge step forward. I found when I did the replay work first I became married to trips and visual impression and would often try to make their demonstrated ability fit my visual perception. (Assuming they had established form). Once I did the numeric work first the visual work took on the proper perspective, at least for me.

I understand completely that a profitable game can be built around choosing to use them…or not. But to me, to say their useless is based in the fact that every approach to someone is useless.

BTW: I haven’t read every post. If this is about Beyer #’s only I can’t offer an opinion as I don’t use them.

[classhandicapper]

From the peanut gallery…:)

I fail to understand why this discussion often falls into either / or.

There useless / there imperative…



:ThmbUp:

[rastajenk]

When you or I cash a nice ticket on a longshot we win the silent debate on figures that is present in every parimutuel pool.
And when you don't cash, do you lose the debate? And does that not happen more often than not, if you'll forgive the double negative? Cherrypicking examples of big winners or highly-bet losers isn't very convincing to me. Saratoga was known as the Graveyard of Favorites (or the Graveyard of Champions, take your pick) long before the Form began publishing Beyers. Why is that?

[Good4Now]

If favorites are made based on past record/accomplishment you now have them racing at an altitude they have never raced at previously as well as the concept that they mature at different rates. If they were ahead of the others previously have the others caught up OR even surpassed them?

[nobeyerspls]

And when you don't cash, do you lose the debate? And does that not happen more often than not, if you'll forgive the double negative? Cherrypicking examples of big winners or highly-bet losers isn't very convincing to me. Saratoga was known as the Graveyard of Favorites (or the Graveyard of Champions, take your pick) long before the Form began publishing Beyers. Why is that?

The answers to your two questions are yes and yes. But when I cash it is usually for more than the other guy gets when I lose. So maybe I win a debate by a vote of ten and lose the next one by a margin of two.
It takes a certain mindset to bet longshots as you have to be able to accept losing more races than you win. Further, a review of my records shows that for every three trips to the track I lose twice and win once. If I can keep that ratio intact, I can achieve a decent return because the loss exposure is low and there is no upside limit.
I didn't mean to cherry pick and I know I could post several examples from each track every day. This thread, however, is growing tiresome. It looks like several on here use speed figures effectively but not the beyer speed figures. No one tried to answer the example I posted in post #17.
As to Saratoga, it is not my favorite venue despite my love of longshots. I had a 38-1 a while back that got caught at the wire by a 30-1.
The number of 2yo maiden races and turf races might account for the graveyard of favorites thing. Also, stiff competition coming in from all over. Still it's a challenge and I get involved with the early pick 4 but avoid the races after the fifth.

[Tom]

You did not provide anywhere near enough info in Post 17 to warrant a reply.
Identify the race and I will comment on it.

[Capper Al]

From the peanut gallery…:)

I fail to understand why this discussion often falls into either / or.

There useless / there imperative…



You are right. All that's needed is to accept the variability and talk about getting around it. For example, I think most cappers would agree that one should be wary of speed figures for 2 year olds and maidens. Also, we should note that a horse 11 points down might still win and probably at a price.

[nobeyerspls]

You did not provide anywhere near enough info in Post 17 to warrant a reply.
Identify the race and I will comment on it.

It was the first Thursday of the meet, the Dancin Renee stakes won by a filly named Precise Lady. I think that it was the third race.

[GaryG]

It looks like several on here use speed figures effectively but not the beyer speed figures.The point of this thread, started by the red guy who became the blue guy, was about the value of figures, not those of Beyer. I am certain that the majority of board members use figures, either home made or purchased commercially. Many of these are long time winning players. If anyone doesn't want to use figures they are certainly welcome to use the method(s) of their choice. But don't tell me that it is not possible to win with figures. That has been proven again and again. This thread has been an exercise in futility.

[classhandicapper]

I think the complexities of making figures limits their accuracy. (wind changes, run up differences, track maintenance between races, one turn/two turn differences, weather changes, small sample sizes on some days, the impact of pace and race development on time, track to track comparisons etc..)

So IMHO, when people point to very small differences in figures as conclusive evidence that one horse ran better than another, I think they are sometimes overrating the effectiveness of figures.

On the flip side, moderate to greater differences are very meaningful and their ability to identify contenders in some of the less clear situations is almost indisputable.

[nobeyerspls]

The point of this thread, started by the red guy who became the blue guy, was about the value of figures, not those of Beyer. I am certain that the majority of board members use figures, either home made or purchased commercially. Many of these are long time winning players. If anyone doesn't want to use figures they are certainly welcome to use the method(s) of their choice. But don't tell me that it is not possible to win with figures. That has been proven again and again. This thread has been an exercise in futility.

I tried to make it clear that my comments were limited to beyer speed figures. In an earlier post I stated that some very good handicappers on here were computing and employing speed/pace figures with success. Now, the red guy/blue guy did not say that he made or purchased figures so it is logical to assume that he is referring to that beyer speed figure column in the form that my eyes never see.
You are right about the "exercise in futility" comment because on this thread, and in similar ones in another forum, no one has come to the defense of the beyer speed figures. For me they serve two useful purposes: they lead my wagering opponents astray and, on a windy day, the extra ink keeps the pages from blowing around.
However, when my live horse gets nipped at the wire by one I didn't bet, it just could be that some pace/speed figure guy found that horse where I could not. When that happens, the guy doesn't need my congratualtions because he has my money. But look at all those horses who are overbet by the public because of the bsf's. The irony here is that people making their own figures are confirming my opinion of the beyers.

[Bill Olmsted]

The real benefit of speed/pace figures is bestowed upon those of us who make our own variants and numbers--by hand--without the aid of a computer.

It's hard to explain to someone who has never burned the midnight oil, pen and paper in hand, making note of the variances between expected running times and actual times. But when you get down in the mud and wrestle with the results charts, comparing actual performace with expected performance,then you will know what it is to create real art. Computer generated numbers are crap in my opinon.

B :)

[pandy]

Beyers are not computer generated, but I think Bris figs are.

[Bill Olmsted]

It is the process, not necessarily the final result (the speed figure itself) that is most important. If you blindly use the Beyers or BRIS numbers or my numbers or anybody's numbers--no matter how good they are--you will miss out on the big picture. It is the context that matters, how the numbers were earned and under what circumstances.

[GaryG]

The real benefit of speed/pace figures is bestowed upon those of us who make our own variants and numbers--by hand--without the aid of a computer.

It's hard to explain to someone who has never burned the midnight oil, pen and paper in hand, making note of the variances between expected running times and actual times. But when you get down in the mud and wrestle with the results charts, comparing actual performace with expected performance,then you will know what it is to create real art. Computer generated numbers are crap in my opinon.

B :)I have been making Quirin style numbers since 1988. When you make your own you know what went to each day's figs. The only difference now is that I use a spreadsheet instead of a loose leaf notebook. The drawback is that there is no possible way I could handle more than two tracks at the same time. Nobody by myself to blame if I screw something up. I like the Quirin figs because they give you a clear look at the race shape. You have to make sure and anticipate improvement, otherwise your figs just get smaller.

[Capper Al]

The point of this thread, started by the red guy who became the blue guy, was about the value of figures, not those of Beyer. I am certain that the majority of board members use figures, either home made or purchased commercially. Many of these are long time winning players. If anyone doesn't want to use figures they are certainly welcome to use the method(s) of their choice. But don't tell me that it is not possible to win with figures. That has been proven again and again. This thread has been an exercise in futility.

FYI, the red guy who turned blue uses BRIS's speed figures and modifies them. And I'll add this, the top speed figures are the most likely to be the horse that jumps by 9 or more points that day and win. So the correlation of top speed and the winner is about 30% which may be the best single factor. I have made this statement earlier in this thread. The question really is how to deal with such a wide range of variability in speed. For example, if one is trying to hit a trifecta with speed figures -- forget it. Of the three top speed figures there is almost a mathematical certainty that one horse will vary out and another vary into the top three finishes. It can happen that the speed figure horses would win, but will it be profitable is another issue. If someone uses speed figures and has found a niche to make a profit good for them. We are taking about current speed figures as a universal figure for beating the game with all non-maiden races. It ain't going to happen because speed figures vary too much. The question is then if not speed what should we use or use with speed to get a handle on the game?

[Capper Al]

I think the complexities of making figures limits their accuracy. (wind changes, run up differences, track maintenance between races, one turn/two turn differences, weather changes, small sample sizes on some days, the impact of pace and race development on time, track to track comparisons etc..)

So IMHO, when people point to very small differences in figures as conclusive evidence that one horse ran better than another, I think they are sometimes overrating the effectiveness of figures.

On the flip side, moderate to greater differences are very meaningful and their ability to identify contenders in some of the less clear situations is almost indisputable.

Absolutely Classhandicapper. And IMHO, the more I play this game the more I value form and class.

[Capper Al]

It is the process, not necessarily the final result (the speed figure itself) that is most important. If you blindly use the Beyers or BRIS numbers or my numbers or anybody's numbers--no matter how good they are--you will miss out on the big picture. It is the context that matters, how the numbers were earned and under what circumstances.

In that 'context' might be our answer. But who is going to tell us?

[Bill Olmsted]

All I know is... figures work for me.

Hey, different strokes for different folks.

B :)

[Bill Olmsted]

In that 'context' might be our answer. But who is going to tell us?

It is the answer.
But that answer is long and involved and requires a lot of keystrokes to fully explain.

B :)

[GaryG]

It is the answer.
But that answer is long and involved and requires a lot of keystrokes to fully explain.

B :)It is indeed the answer...pace and speed in combination. There have been numerous books written on the application of figures. There is no short cut. You have to do the work to understand this game. And there are no magic software programs....at least none that I have seen.

[pandy]

I did my own speed figures for all the major tracks for about 10 years, they appeared in a paper called Racing Action for 5 or 6 years. I agree that the process helped me understand the individual races better, but overall I don't think it was worth the time it took.

[Tom]

Hey Pandy - I used those RA figs at Aqu for as long as they were printed.
I did very well with them! :)

[RaceBookJoe]

Absolutely Classhandicapper. And IMHO, the more I play this game the more I value form and class.

When you combine form and class with speed and pace expecially in conjunction with "angles"..you have a great play. Unfortunately they end up on the low odds side of the equation. I think form and class are underplayed today compared to pace then speed. A phrase I like is "the man with the best knowledge has the best luck". You have to use all of your handicapping skills to win. Sometimes all you need is speed , sometimes pace or an angle. Every race is different.

[RaceBookJoe]

I did my own speed figures for all the major tracks for about 10 years, they appeared in a paper called Racing Action for 5 or 6 years. I agree that the process helped me understand the individual races better, but overall I don't think it was worth the time it took.

Are you the same person who came out with the "pro-simulcast system". I actually enjoyed that read and use it to a degree when I want to spot play at the racebooks. I have tweaked it a bit, made it a bit more selective and now get a better win/place% with lesser odds unfortunately. I dont mind though since I am pretty conservative.

[Capper Al]

When you combine form and class with speed and pace expecially in conjunction with "angles"..you have a great play. Unfortunately they end up on the low odds side of the equation. I think form and class are underplayed today compared to pace then speed. A phrase I like is "the man with the best knowledge has the best luck". You have to use all of your handicapping skills to win. Sometimes all you need is speed , sometimes pace or an angle. Every race is different.

You've got that right. The man with the best knowledge has the best luck. The knowledge is about racing and horses, not as much about numbers. The numbers are only the characters in the plot. I am a number cruncher by nature. My friend writes on the form and circles a few things. I call these fellows readers because they start with the race conditions and figure out the story from there. The generation before computers really had no other way to pick them. There are many folds to this analysis. Many old timers depended on visual inspection. They knew the art of handicapping, a little of this and a little of that.

[Light]

Aspiteri

You are right. Speed figures lie. But you cant handicap as good without them as with them.

Speed figs are more effective if you are aware of where a horse is in their form cycle.This takes much more skill than simply betting the highest number.

[RaceBookJoe]

Yeah, I would consider myself an "old-school" handicapper trying to incorporate "new-school" techniques. I have always tried to decipher the racing conditions, add my own speed figure and generic pace figures in addition to the above form/class ideas. My drf is pretty much marked up by the time I get ready to bet...circles/slashes/numbers etc. Speed was always my top priority though and went from there.....find the top speed of the race and see if he had any negatives. In depth pace, and turf racing is my new study. I havent gotten into the synthetic track study yet, but have had a decent Del Mar meet so far.

[RaceBookJoe]

Aspiteri

You are right. Speed figures lie. But you cant handicap as good without them as with them.

Speed figs are more effective if you are aware of where a horse is in their form cycle.This takes much more skill than simply betting the highest number.

Its not just speed figures that matter. Like you say, the form cycle can really play a big part. Also important was how the figure was earned. Did he fight the whole way, to the half or was he all alone to cut out his own fractions. I do notice though that even though many top speed figure horses lose, most low speed figure horses lose. So of course speed plays a part, it just isnt always the top factor.

[JustMissed]

The real benefit of speed/pace figures is bestowed upon those of us who make our own variants and numbers--by hand--without the aid of a computer.

It's hard to explain to someone who has never burned the midnight oil, pen and paper in hand, making note of the variances between expected running times and actual times. But when you get down in the mud and wrestle with the results charts, comparing actual performace with expected performance,then you will know what it is to create real art. Computer generated numbers are crap in my opinon.

B :)

Hey Bill, What do you do if a horse ships in from a track you know nothing about. For example,say you only play NY tracks and a horse is claimed and ships in from Louisiana Downs and has not raced in the 9 previous months and all those previous races were at various fairgrounds and cheap tracks around the country.

I'll assume you like to look at the last 10(ten) running lines.

Where the heck do you get the info for those 10 races and how do you find the time to do that for 8-14 horses per race on a 10 race card?

JM

[Tom]

Let me give another example with a wider spread among the figures. A filly wins a 7f race and is assigned a 68 for the effort. She enters a modest 6 1/2f stakes race with eight other runners. Her highest figure on the page is a 71 and it is the lowest high number in the field. One filly has run a 92 and several others have been in the eighties. The question is, what should her odds be and what are her chances of winning?

I would not have had that one. Her 16-1 seems at least close to what she whould have gone off at. What are her chances of winning - I would have not have made her a win contender. I would have used her in the bottom of exactas (two wins out of last three, won at the distance, won at the track).

What can I tell you? You gotta figure you're going to lose 6 or 7 out of 10 at least. This doens't prove anything about figures. It proves horses improve and decline.

[dutchboy]

Excluding maiden races: Did you know that last Sunday at Delmar if you had added the last 2 bris speed figures and bet the top 2 horses in each race you would have won every race and plus all multiple race bets in the last 4 races.

Pacific Classic showed Lava Man first, Student C 2nd ( won pd 48.80 ) Big B. 3rd and Awesome Gem 4th. Stu and Awe exacta pd 355.20 and the multiple race bets were very nice.

[Capper Al]

Excluding maiden races: Did you know that last Sunday at Delmar if you had added the last 2 bris speed figures and bet the top 2 horses in each race you would have won every race and plus all multiple race bets in the last 4 races.

Pacific Classic showed Lava Man first, Student C 2nd ( won pd 48.80 ) Big B. 3rd and Awesome Gem 4th. Stu and Awe exacta pd 355.20 and the multiple race bets were very nice.

It happens. Speed will get you 25% to 30% winners as a single factor. Probably no other single factor is better. It rarely pays well and not enough to make a profit over the long run.

[pandy]

Yes, that's my system. We ran it through a computer generated test using a huge result database and it came out with a loss of less than a half percent, and that was without using the rules regarding post position and trainer percentage etc. The guy who tested it for me said it was one of the best results he's ever had.

[pandy]

I think that's a valid point, no one factor picks as many winners as speed figures.

[nobeyerspls]

I would not have had that one. Her 16-1 seems at least close to what she whould have gone off at. What are her chances of winning - I would have not have made her a win contender. I would have used her in the bottom of exactas (two wins out of last three, won at the distance, won at the track).

What can I tell you? You gotta figure you're going to lose 6 or 7 out of 10 at least. This doens't prove anything about figures. It proves horses improve and decline.

Thanks for that response. I think that this is an example of the bsf's understating a performance so she did not really improve that much. Those who focus mainly on figures would use her huge beyer gap and lowest high beyer on the page to make her the first tossout.
By stating the reasons shown to use her on the bottom of exotics, you show that speed figures alone do not rule your handicapping methods.
I've been losing at least 6 or 7 out of ten for sometime now. The horizontal plays let me use more than one horse in races without a key runner so I can improve my chances. As to that filly, I used three in that race in a pick 3 and she was not one of them.

[Tom]

That horse had low numbers in BRIS and CJ's as well as Beyers. I didn't look at HTR numbers.

[garyoz]

Thanks for that response. I think that this is an example of the bsf's understating a performance so she did not really improve that much. Those who focus mainly on figures would use her huge beyer gap and lowest high beyer on the page to make her the first tossout.



How do you know how players use speed figures? Didn't know there were rules on how to use them.

[john del riccio]

The simplest benefit of what good figs provide are the ability to toss horses with a low probability of winning. They also provide hints of improving or declining form which allows the handicapping process to account for this when assessing value. One of my most consistent scenarios come about when a horse with
a strong last race speed figure is an early speed type who's pace figure(s) aren't superiror to the probable pacemakers in todays race. If this horse has shown no ability to rate OR when it has rated it didn't earn a speed figure as good as it had recently when it was done on or very close to the lead, this horse will almost always be overbet and many times simply doesn't reproduce that superior speed figure earned under optimal conditions.

John

[GaryG]

One of my most consistent scenarios come about when a horse with a strong last race speed figure is an early speed type who's pace figure(s) aren't superiror to the probable pacemakers in todays race. If this horse has shown no ability to rate OR when it has rated it didn't earn a speed figure as good as it had recently when it was done on or very close to the lead, this horse will almost always be overbet and many times simply doesn't reproduce that superior speed figure earned under optimal conditions.

JohnVery nicely articulated John....I agree 100% and love to see this situation arise.

[nobeyerspls]

How do you know how players use speed figures? Didn't know there were rules on how to use them.

Sorry, I stand corrected. I should have said that the people I know who use the figures would have tossed this horse.

[nobeyerspls]

How do you know how players use speed figures? Didn't know there were rules on how to use them.

I tried to edit my reply to you but the ten minute time limit expired. I have only discussed and critiqued the beyer speed figures on here and the people I know who use them would toss a horse with such a huge deficit and lowest high beyer speed figure on the page.
It looks like everyone using speed figures makes their own or gets them from someone else. Is anybody using the beyer speed figures? If not, should we notify the Racing Form publisher?

[GaryG]

I suggest that you get over your obsession with the BSF. They are not that important...really.

[cj]

I have come around. I agree, figures are useless. I think everyone, except me because I'm stubborn, should stop using them ASAP. Maybe someone should start a petition.

[Capper Al]

Here's a grade 1. Do your speed ratings and rankings and other comments that you might have, but do at least identify your top 3 speed horses. Also, let us know a few things about your speed figures like your data source and did you modify them or are they your own speed figures. Your top 3 speed horses may not necessary be your top 3 picks, but feel free to list your selections as well.

Saratoga - August 25th, 2007 - Race 8
King's Bishop S. - Grade: 1
Estimated Local Post Time: 4:55 PM Race Type: Stakes
Breed: Thoroughbred
Age Restriction: Three Year Old
Purse: $250,000
Distance: Seven Furlongs
Surface: Dirt

Post Horse Name Age Sex Weight Jockey Name

1 E Z Warrior (KY) 3 Colt 119 David Romero Flores
2 Spin Master (KY) 3 Colt 119 Garrett K. Gomez
3 Hard Spun (PA) 3 Colt 121 Mario G. Pino
4 Pauillac (KY) 3 Colt 117 Julien R. Leparoux
5 Longley (KY) 3 Colt 119 John R. Velazquez
6 Forty Grams (KY) 3 Ridgling 119 Edgar S. Prado
7 Teuflesberg (KY) 3 Colt 121 Robby Albarado
8 Most Distinguished (KY) 3 Colt 121 Rafael Bejarano
9 First Defence (KY) 3 Colt 119 Javier Castellano
10 Bold Start (KY) 3 Colt 117 Kent J. Desormeaux
11 King of the Roxy (OH) 3 Colt 121 Ramon A. Dominguez

[Fastracehorse]

Your example of speed figs shows a highly competitive race where any horse could win - irregardless of any improvement by any animal.

The advantage of speed figs occurs when there is a huge advantage by one horse that isn't easily discernible by the masses.

fffastt

[skate]

PA:

I see you contributed to this thread already, but might it not get exposure to a potentially bigger target audience over on the Handicapping board (among those who might not check the General Racing Discussion board as regularly or as thoroughly), since it does deal with an aspect of handicapping?

yep, cause if you dont move it over there, i might never see it.:eek:

[GaryG]

Is this a contest? What are the prizes?

[john del riccio]

In an effort to try & get this thread back on track, I will post the Kings Bishop figs as the ROTW.

John

[NYPlayer]

...Beyer, Free, and many more authors have documented that when a horse wins they usually improve by 9 or more speed points. This means the handicapper has to guess which horse is going to jump in speed making past speed unreliable because the horse with the highest speed figure might not necessary be the same one that improves in today's race...



...The best that speed might be able to do is act as an elimination. If a horse isn't within 10 or 12 points of the top horse, eliminate him.


What your saying is true, a horse's speed figure has a tendency to vary from race-to-race. What triggers the variation is a matter of debate in racing circles, but for me the matter is settled: the variation occurs because a horse's physical condition is ever-changing, influenced primarily by how hard it has run in the past and the methods of it's trainer. But you don't have to guess which horses will improve or decline. If you have accurate numbers, you can use them to assess a horse's condition trend, whether it is basically positive or negative, and then estimate whether improvement or decline is likely in today's race.

All of this was discovered more than 50 years ago by Len Ragozin, founder of "The Sheets". He wrote a book about ten years ago that you might enjoy entitled The Odds Must be Crazy. Of course, doing this kind of trend analysis can be tricky, and in the book I remember something Ragozin said that has stuck in by brain which is that The Sheets will often tell you which horses won't win rather than which one will. And while that may seem like a cop-out of sorts, these days, if you can throw out a high figure horse going off at low odds, you have an edge in that race.

[john del riccio]

What your saying is true, a horse's speed figure has a tendency to vary from race-to-race. What triggers the variation is a matter of debate in racing circles, but for me the matter is settled: the variation occurs because a horse's physical condition is ever-changing, influenced primarily by how hard it has run in the past and the methods of it's trainer. But you don't have to guess which horses will improve or decline. If you have accurate numbers, you can use them to assess a horse's condition trend, whether it is basically positive or negative, and then estimate whether improvement or decline is likely in today's race.



I think pace, post position, distance, track condition should be added to your list.

John

[Capper Al]

Is this a contest? What are the prizes?

No prizes. Maybe a contest between BSF, BRIS, Trackmaster, etc for their speed figures.

[Capper Al]

What your saying is true, a horse's speed figure has a tendency to vary from race-to-race. What triggers the variation is a matter of debate in racing circles, but for me the matter is settled: the variation occurs because a horse's physical condition is ever-changing, influenced primarily by how hard it has run in the past and the methods of it's trainer. But you don't have to guess which horses will improve or decline. If you have accurate numbers, you can use them to assess a horse's condition trend, whether it is basically positive or negative, and then estimate whether improvement or decline is likely in today's race.

All of this was discovered more than 50 years ago by Len Ragozin, founder of "The Sheets". He wrote a book about ten years ago that you might enjoy entitled The Odds Must be Crazy. Of course, doing this kind of trend analysis can be tricky, and in the book I remember something Ragozin said that has stuck in by brain which is that The Sheets will often tell you which horses won't win rather than which one will. And while that may seem like a cop-out of sorts, these days, if you can throw out a high figure horse going off at low odds, you have an edge in that race.

Len Ragozin is an interesting fellow. He does explain the variance as bounce. I have read the book and recommend it also.

[Capper Al]

Your example of speed figs shows a highly competitive race where any horse could win - irregardless of any improvement by any animal.

The advantage of speed figs occurs when there is a huge advantage by one horse that isn't easily discernible by the masses.

fffastt

I picked a race where I though they were likely to race to form and speed would be king. 2 or 3 points are not suppose to be statistically significant with BSF. If a huge advantage is needed that only supports the premise of this thread. Why use speed figures at all, if they are not discernible between contenders. Are you looking for a 9 plus or more advantage to out distance the variability? And if the speed figures would be so heavily tilled for a single horse like you are suggesting, wouldn't it be likely that other handicapping factors would be pointing to the same horse that out classes the field?

[INFRONT07]

GOOD POST;I AGREE.I dont know what the v cash is also.If YOU FIND OUT PLEASE LET ME KNOW.:)

[DanG]

I picked a race where I though they were likely to race to form and speed would be king. 2 or 3 points are not suppose to be statistically significant with BSF. If a huge advantage is needed that only supports the premise of this thread. Why use speed figures at all, if they are not discernible between contenders.
I realize its tough to gain a consensus, but I think we can all agree that one race (or several for that matter) do not prove anything.

Interesting exercise and much can be learned from it, but certainly not a definitive sample to base conclusions on.

Adding to the complexity when people discuss figures is 5 people using the same source can have 5 different takes on the paceline (or combinations of) to choose not to mention the other 300 variables that some apply to raw numbers.

Not trying to throw a wet blanket on any study, but this is a very difficult thing to test real time when interpretation is often key IMO.

[GaryG]

I dont know what the v cash is also.If YOU FIND OUT PLEASE LET ME KNOW.:)I was told the vcash can be redeemed at a cat house in Tampa.

[DanG]

I was told the vcash can be redeemed at a cat house in Tampa.
Gary,

I think the 'Mons Venus has a better exchange rate. :cool:

[46zilzal]

Find out what the masses use, then locate another avenue. Simple, you are in competition with the group. Don't use their methods.

[garyoz]

Len Ragozin is an interesting fellow. He does explain the variance as bounce. I have read the book and recommend it also.


A bounce is one type of variance. Typically after a lifetime or cyclical top or double top. Not all "variance" is a bounce. Often declining performance numbers (e.g. variance from a higher mean or moving average) are associated with physical problems--

BTW, I'm still not sure that a winning race Beyer figure on average is 9 points higher than the last race. I don't use Beyers, but that still seems too high to me, and too much of a generalization. It would be interesting to see what the standard deviation is. Probably has a huge variation, so as a mean average it might be accurate, but the margin of error would make it useless. So tossing around the "improve by 9" term is simplistic.

Any database guys out there with numbers? I guess the metric is winning race speed figure vs. the previous race speed figure. Still not sure what this proves. But it is cited alot in this thread. Guess it appeared in some DRF book, then it becomes gospel.

[the_fat_man]

It's hard for me to make sense of this seemingly ongoing discussion.

I just doubled my bankroll at the Saratoga meet (in a day over 4 weeks) with Ya Think in today's 3rd. I only bet turf.

Here's a horse that sprinted 1st out, then routed, and today dropped back into a shorter sprint with blinkers on. He had competition in some well bred firsters and Mott's 2nd time starter, 1st time turfer. And we all know how hot Mott has been. Ya Think won because he was able to outrun the Mott horse early and Kent D moved too soon on the turn on Mott's horse, and he was able to come again after getting passed in the stretch and win by 1/2 length at 4:1. (with a gift $39 exacta with Mott's horse.) I wasn't best here and won.

Yesterday, I made 2 bets:

Nehantic Cat (7:2): steadied for no apparent reason and then gunned after the pacesetters needlessly wide on the turn to lose it all by one length. I was definitely best here and lost.

and

Stormy Kiss (7:1): in a drive, chasing, the entire race, finally gets her head in front just before the wire, in a ridiculously game effort, and gets passed by a last mover. I was arguably best here and LOST.


There are many other examples of how the best (not necessarily the FASTEST) horse doesn't win.

Who'd have THUNK it?

NOTE: this is NOT a NEGATIVE POST about Figures.:jump:

[Tom]

It's hard for me to make sense of this seemingly ongoing discussion.


First, congrats on the bankroll. It don't git any better!

Let me give you an analogy of what this thread has been.

Do you just watch replays, or do you watch them, interpret them, dig into them, see who was benefited, who was hurt by the race?
Do you think that if I just started looking at replays, I could match your success? ( not bloody likely!:eek:)

But I will tell you, my big hit at the SPA did not involve figs very much, other than to tell me a firster would not have an easy time - it was the trip and added distance. You're contagious sometimes! :jump:

[njcurveball]

I just doubled my bankroll at the Saratoga meet (in a day over 4 weeks) with Ya Think in today's 3rd. I only bet turf.

.:jump:

Congratulations! Believe it or not, I have seen people using Speed Figures double their bankroll in one day and even one race.


Who'd have THUNK it?

NOTE: this is NOT a NEGATIVE POST about your wide sweeping success!

[the_fat_man]

Congratulations! Believe it or not, I have seen people using Speed Figures double their bankroll in one day and even one race.


Who'd have THUNK it?

NOTE: this is NOT a NEGATIVE POST about your wide sweeping success!

Really? Betting win/place and 2% of bankroll per?

Now, that's impressive.

[Capper Al]

I realize its tough to gain a consensus, but I think we can all agree that one race (or several for that matter) do not prove anything.

Interesting exercise and much can be learned from it, but certainly not a definitive sample to base conclusions on.

Adding to the complexity when people discuss figures is 5 people using the same source can have 5 different takes on the paceline (or combinations of) to choose not to mention the other 300 variables that some apply to raw numbers.

Not trying to throw a wet blanket on any study, but this is a very difficult thing to test real time when interpretation is often key IMO.

I agree that one race proves nothing statistically. It's more for fun and focus for our conversations. It will be interesting to note the different vendors speed figures.

[Capper Al]

A bounce is one type of variance. Typically after a lifetime or cyclical top or double top. Not all "variance" is a bounce. Often declining performance numbers (e.g. variance from a higher mean or moving average) are associated with physical problems--

BTW, I'm still not sure that a winning race Beyer figure on average is 9 points higher than the last race. I don't use Beyers, but that still seems too high to me, and too much of a generalization. It would be interesting to see what the standard deviation is. Probably has a huge variation, so as a mean average it might be accurate, but the margin of error would make it useless. So tossing around the "improve by 9" term is simplistic.

Any database guys out there with numbers? I guess the metric is winning race speed figure vs. the previous race speed figure. Still not sure what this proves. But it is cited alot in this thread. Guess it appeared in some DRF book, then it becomes gospel.

After I posted this a fan with a database tested for a small sample of 43 winners had found the median improvement to be 9 points like the book that I quoted earlier.

[Capper Al]

It's hard for me to make sense of this seemingly ongoing discussion.

I just doubled my bankroll at the Saratoga meet (in a day over 4 weeks) with Ya Think in today's 3rd. I only bet turf.

Here's a horse that sprinted 1st out, then routed, and today dropped back into a shorter sprint with blinkers on. He had competition in some well bred firsters and Mott's 2nd time starter, 1st time turfer. And we all know how hot Mott has been. Ya Think won because he was able to outrun the Mott horse early and Kent D moved too soon on the turn on Mott's horse, and he was able to come again after getting passed in the stretch and win by 1/2 length at 4:1. (with a gift $39 exacta with Mott's horse.) I wasn't best here and won.

Yesterday, I made 2 bets:

Nehantic Cat (7:2): steadied for no apparent reason and then gunned after the pacesetters needlessly wide on the turn to lose it all by one length. I was definitely best here and lost.

and

Stormy Kiss (7:1): in a drive, chasing, the entire race, finally gets her head in front just before the wire, in a ridiculously game effort, and gets passed by a last mover. I was arguably best here and LOST.


There are many other examples of how the best (not necessarily the FASTEST) horse doesn't win.

Who'd have THUNK it?

NOTE: this is NOT a NEGATIVE POST about Figures.:jump:

First of all congratulations on your good meet at the SPA. For reading about your victory, it looks like to me that you used those other factors. This has been the point to this thread. If speed is unpredictable then what is? Ultimately, I'm not negative on speed figures either. They just ain't what they are made out to be.

[GaryG]

I'm not negative on speed figures either. They just ain't what they are made out to be. No they are not. You have to know how to use them. Then they are all of that and more.

[Capper Al]

Those of you taking part in posting your speed figures for race 8 at Saratoga this Saturday, please post to identify the source data ranking.

For example:

My Speed - 8:102 1:100 3:97
BRIS - 7:97 6:94 8:93 (BRIS is my source and this row is based on BRIS Speed not mine. Raw data, so to speak.)
My picks - 8-4-5
Anything else may follow
Class - 4-7-5
Pace - 2-3-7
etc.

(These aren't my picks.)

Thanks

[njcurveball]

Really? Betting win/place and 2% of bankroll per?

.

WOW! That sounds like a ton of confidence in your opinions! So you started with $100, bet $2 a race and now you have $200 after a week! :jump:

Now, that's impressive.

I guess it isn't the same as having a $200 bankroll and betting $20 win on a 40-1 shot with good figures.

You must be right!

[garyoz]

After I posted this a fan with a database tested for a small sample of 43 winners had found the median improvement to be 9 points like the book that I quoted earlier.

Why didn't the fan post? Reminds me of Harry Reid's fictional friend during the immigration bill debate.

Median is not mean. We need mean plus standard deviation from a meaningful sample. Personally, I really don't care....beyer stuff. I have more of an academic interest.

My gut tells me that race prior to a winning race and the winning race is more closely correlated than 9 points--but that is opinion--and we all know about opinions not supported by data. It could be an issue of scale, and the Beyer's go to 120 or something, while the Ragozin or TG numbers tend to be between -3 and 30 or so. In other words, Beyer uses a scale that is 4 times the range or so of The Sheets or TG. So maybe a 9 point Beyer move is equal to a 2 point Raggie move. So we really aren't talking about magnitude, just scale. Maybe someone has looked this issue.

Jim Cramer's (HDW) projected speed rating is a terrific metric. I have eye-balled the last race Cramer speed rating and his PSR's and they seem much more closely correlated than the equivalent of a 9 point Beyer move--perhaps there is greater reliability in the Handicapper's Data Warehouse numbers--and the bottom line of this thread ties back to the validity and reliability of the Beyer numbers?

[Fastracehorse]

First, congrats on the bankroll. It don't git any better!

Let me give you an analogy of what this thread has been.

Do you just watch replays, or do you watch them, interpret them, dig into them, see who was benefited, who was hurt by the race?
Do you think that if I just started looking at replays, I could match your success? ( not bloody likely!:eek:)

But I will tell you, my big hit at the SPA did not involve figs very much, other than to tell me a firster would not have an easy time - it was the trip and added distance. You're contagious sometimes! :jump:

It sounds like your big hit did involve figures - allbeit indierctly.

'Til your next big one.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

I picked a race where I though they were likely to race to form and speed would be king. 2 or 3 points are not suppose to be statistically significant with BSF. If a huge advantage is needed that only supports the premise of this thread. Why use speed figures at all, if they are not discernible between contenders. Are you looking for a 9 plus or more advantage to out distance the variability? And if the speed figures would be so heavily tilled for a single horse like you are suggesting, wouldn't it be likely that other handicapping factors would be pointing to the same horse that out classes the field?

It's like most handicapping factors: The most extreme example of any factor is the most reliable. That may or may not be obvious.

A 9-plus point advantage is useful but these types still get beat often. It isn't uncommon for there to be 20-point advantages - the key being value. It is a sad reality that most tb races are competitive - meaning pick a few contenders in the race and roll the dice - hopefully most of us don't like craps.

'the fat man' bet a 4-1 today and won. The horse was a nice play at the odds but the race was a bit scary as he already alluded to - especially since there was a heavily bet firster. The price made it worth it.

It is possible other factors point towards high speed fig horses that aren't heavily bet. Look at 'the fat man's' hoss - there are 'cappers who play these types without the aid of figs. I have an adjusted fig - it answers questions like: 'Will this dropper fit in here?'

Since I adjust my own figs I find good bets based on speed figs alone - but they are most potent when alligned with other handicapping factors.

fffastt

[classhandicapper]

Adding to the complexity when people discuss figures is 5 people using the same source can have 5 different takes on the paceline (or combinations of) to choose not to mention the other 300 variables that some apply to raw numbers.

The much more compelling argument against figures (and remember I am long time maker and user of them) is that 1 person with 5 different sets of figures will often have 5 different takes on the same race.

Everyone that uses figures should spend at least a few weeks armed with multiple high quality sources to see how often they would come to a different conclusion depending on which set they used.

Everyone should think about that carefully the next time they say horse "A" ran better than horse "B" because on their figures he was a length faster. ;)

[NYPlayer]

Really? Betting win/place and 2% of bankroll per?

Now, that's impressive.

When they're winning why would anyone bet only 2%?

[bellsbendboy]

Toss out the "fastest" five percent and the "slowest" five percent of ALL thoroughbreds. Whats left? Parity! Total unadulterated equality.

I do think accurate speed figures can give an advantage to the maker, but beware, the work involved is extreme and the opportunities quite limited. On turf, figuremakers have little clue. No service that I am aware of, understands the turf rail, the drainage systems or the timing eyes sufficiently, thus making their figures an educated guess and most, often they miss the boat entirely.

Changes of surface, geography, conditions, distance, weight, class etc. ultimately send figure makers into a nebulous area that calls for subjective conclusion. Boiling down a race to a number, or a few of them, is primitive at best, and misleading a large portion of the time. One mans opinion. BBB

[NYPlayer]

Here's a grade 1. Do your speed ratings and rankings and other comments that you might have, but do at least identify your top 3 speed horses. Also, let us know a few things about your speed figures like your data source and did you modify them or are they your own speed figures. Your top 3 speed horses may not necessary be your top 3 picks, but feel free to list your selections as well.


I use the Sheets and I think Hard Spun is a stand-out in this race. Not only does he have the best numbers, but he's extroadinarily consistent. Having said that, no horse is a "mortal lock" (per Andy Beyer, I believe), and there is a possibility of a small bounce, but I think that's unlikely.

I'd like to make him 6-5, but this a large field and several of these come close in terms of sheet figs, although none come close in terms of strength of form.

My second choice is First Defence (no pun intended). This horse has a top that comes close to Hard Spun, then bounced while winning his last race. The famed Frankel moves him up to a grade 1, so it looks like Frankel is fairly confident. The down side is that FD has a spotty race record, so he's obviousley had some physical problems, but he could be past that now at least temporarily.

Third Choice is King of The Roxy. This Pletcher horse has a ran a competitive number early this year, but has drifted since. His 2yo record featured two good races then a hard bounce. It just looks like he pays a price for the good numbers he's run, and basically that's not a good thing. However, it's been a while since he's run a top number, so he might just pull one off today.

I try to quantify my opinion in a race, so here's my oddsline -

EZ Warrier - 33/1
Spin Master - 16/1
Hard Spun - 2/1
Pauillac - 33/1
Longley - 24/1
Forty Grams - 16/1
Teuflesberg - 13/1
Most Distinguished - 16/1
First Defence - 9/2
Bold Start - 33/1
King of the Roxy - 8/1

Considering the depth of the field I'll probably make a triple keying HS & FD.

btw - here are the last three sheet numbers on the top horses (Lower is better and the most recent is first).

EZW - 17.75, 2.25, 10.25
HS - 2, 7, 2.5
Teufl - 8.25, 3, 1.25
FD - 8.25, 3.5, 11.75

Good Luck!

[Robert Fischer]

you have some inside info on the Zayat horse ??

I only see 2 possible true graded stakes level sprinters entered, and they are both 6-1 morning line. Both can easily falter.
Hard Spun makes 3 by way of versatility and natural quickness.

Most Distinguished has earned a spot 2nd through 4th on your single race exotic tickets.

[Robert Fischer]

...I wasn't best here and won.

... I was definitely best here and lost.

and

... I was arguably best here and LOST.


There are many other examples of how the best (not necessarily the FASTEST) horse doesn't win.




hogwash

[NYPlayer]

you have some inside info on the Zayat horse ??

I only see 2 possible true graded stakes level sprinters entered, and they are both 6-1 morning line. Both can easily falter.
Hard Spun makes 3 by way of versatility and natural quickness.

Most Distinguished has earned a spot 2nd through 4th on your single race exotic tickets.

EZ Warrier - No inside info. None is needed to make this horse a longshot. He ran poorly in a graded stakes at Del Mar after being on the bench for about six months. I'm sure that Zeyat and Baffert think this horse still has a career in stake races, but I guess the connections won't put this 1.2m purchase in a claimer anytime soon where arguably he belongs.

Most distinguished will very likely be on some of my tickets, but probably not in any exactas.

[Robert Fischer]

EZ Warrier - No inside info. None is needed to make this horse a longshot. He ran poorly in a graded stakes at Del Mar after being on the bench for about six months. I'm sure that Zeyat and Baffert think this horse still has a career in stake races, but I guess the connections won't put this 1.2m purchase in a claimer anytime soon where arguably he belongs.

wow

have you seen the head-on from his race in the Bing Crosby over the del mar polytrack? He has a bad stumble, lucky he didn't pull a muscle ... he really stretched out when he went down

this is a horse that was in another class from Great Hunter and Noble Court.

prior to the Crosby baffert was confident talking about how he had gotten bigger and stronger as a 3yo. He was pushed in his last two works and has responded.

long-shot may be appropriate but if this horse is right, we have maybe the top west coast 3yo sprinter

[keilan]

EZ Warrier - No inside info. None is needed to make this horse a longshot. He ran poorly in a graded stakes at Del Mar after being on the bench for about six months. I'm sure that Zeyat and Baffert think this horse still has a career in stake races, but I guess the connections won't put this 1.2m purchase in a claimer anytime soon where arguably he belongs.

Most distinguished will very likely be on some of my tickets, but probably not in any exactas.


Boy do we see this race differently --- EZ Warrier is my key horse and you made him 33-1. :cool:

[Edward DeVere]

I'm a form cycles guy, using form cycles NOT based on speed figures.

HOWEVER, I DO bring speed figures in at the very END of my handicapping. If I've landed on what I believe to be a live horse, I want to know if my horse's expected improvement will be enough to beat his competitors at their current speed figures.

[john del riccio]

Toss out the "fastest" five percent and the "slowest" five percent of ALL thoroughbreds. Whats left? Parity! Total unadulterated equality.

I do think accurate speed figures can give an advantage to the maker, but beware, the work involved is extreme and the opportunities quite limited. On turf, figuremakers have little clue. No service that I am aware of, understands the turf rail, the drainage systems or the timing eyes sufficiently, thus making their figures an educated guess and most, often they miss the boat entirely.

Changes of surface, geography, conditions, distance, weight, class etc. ultimately send figure makers into a nebulous area that calls for subjective conclusion. Boiling down a race to a number, or a few of them, is primitive at best, and misleading a large portion of the time. One mans opinion. BBB

BBB,

Obviously, I don't agree with all of what you say, I have an open mind so please explain further. If you'd like to discuss a specific race, thats fine.

JOhn

[DanG]

The much more compelling argument against figures (and remember I am long time maker and user of them) is that 1 person with 5 different sets of figures will often have 5 different takes on the same race.

Everyone that uses figures should spend at least a few weeks armed with multiple high quality sources to see how often they would come to a different conclusion depending on which set they used.

Everyone should think about that carefully the next time they say horse "A" ran better than horse "B" because on their figures he was a length faster. ;)
Class,

I basically agree with what your saying, except for one little nuance. You start by saying it’s a “compelling argument against figures” and I would contend it’s an argument for them.

Watching races closely and having access to the sheets and HTR’s figures and been a tremendous advantage in NY in particular. Understanding what the sheet players are looking at (betting down) and be able to compare it to the adjusted velocity / visual performance places the racing in another dimension IMO.

If a serious new player was starting out and asked my opinion I would suggest three sources initially.



Purchase good numbers that are not adjusted in any way other than by variant and track to track equalization.
Purchase “performance ratings” from a reputable service that adjusts for more “subjective” criteria.
Make your own for at least one full meet.
I do not feel however, once you become familiar with the process and application that having multiple sources is necessary or even a good idea to be honest. Learning to use your source material is far more important than having access to massive amounts of contradictory data.

I do agree with your last point concerning really the “arrogance” of figure makers when they start making such fine line ¼ point distinctions and speak of them with such certainty. Virtually ALL quality figure makers work very hard to make their numbers as accurate as possible, but to claim them as one of the exact sciences is just not true.

Class, I’m sure you’ll agree as we have both made our own; my feeling is the best practitioners of using time / internal velocity are those who have been under the hood and learned to changed their own spark plugs. :)

[garyoz]

BBB,

Obviously, I don't agree with all of what you say, I have an open mind so please explain further. If you'd like to discuss a specific race, thats fine.

JOhn


John, the largest critics of figures have never used them (or at least good ones) (IMHO). Expecting actual evidence to support their rants is too much.

[coolbreeze3332000]

R9 SAR #9 Judges Pride, With the fiqures I came up with this horse had +13 Early speed advantage, and + 6 Mid speed advantage. Sure a horse could jump up and run a big race. But when a horse has that big of an advantage, and if it can relax, Very important! Than usally it can carry the speed. By the way the horse paid over 60.00. Breeze

[DanG]

R9 SAR #9 Judges Pride, With the fiqures I came up with this horse had +13 Early speed advantage, and + 6 Mid speed advantage. Sure a horse could jump up and run a big race. But when a horse has that big of an advantage, and if it can relax, Very important! Than usally it can carry the speed. By the way the horse paid over 60.00. Breeze
Shhhhh…;)

[bellsbendboy]

John: I covered some ground and am not sure what your comfortable with and what your not. My main point is that most figure makers use the time posted in the DRF and make adjustments that are often nebulous in nature.

As a traditional handicapper, I can read between the lines in the past performances and that is my edge. A good example is the one from "Breeze" regarding the bomb in the nightcap. Whatever figs he used it did not contradict the DRF which clearly showed this filly with serious early lick. Notice he did not add; that the rail was up, an apprentice rode (7 lbs off) and the field was awful for the level. I see you have posted numbers on the Kings Bishop, so I will post some analysis, here, as well but it will have to be tomorrow.

Gary Oz I do not know what sort of evidence would you like but I am a five decade handicapper, I worked on the backside at Churchill for almost twenty years, I spent a decade at Claiborne, then Overbrook earning my Masters at the University of Kentucky. I would humbly opine that I can read the DRF. BBB

[garyoz]

Gary Oz I do not know what sort of evidence would you like but I am a five decade handicapper, I worked on the backside at Churchill for almost twenty years, I spent a decade at Claiborne, then Overbrook earning my Masters at the University of Kentucky. I would humbly opine that I can read the DRF. BBB

As I said most ctitics of speed figures have never used good ones. Reading the DRF has little to do with The Sheets, Thorograph, Equiform, HDW, CJ's figs, Woodside Figs.

BBB I hope you make a lot of money reading the DRF--I just don't think that it is appropriate to trash approaches if you don't have quantitative evidence backing your criticism. Perhaps your use of an inferior product available in the DRF (Beyers) is different than the way serious players use better figs. There are many suppliers of excellent handicapping data in the marketplace.

[classhandicapper]

Dan,

I agree with you. There are definite advantages to understanding the methodologies of various figure makers and keying on situations where they often go wrong.

[RaceBookJoe]

I'm a form cycles guy, using form cycles NOT based on speed figures.

HOWEVER, I DO bring speed figures in at the very END of my handicapping. If I've landed on what I believe to be a live horse, I want to know if my horse's expected improvement will be enough to beat his competitors at their current speed figures.

That is probably the opposite of how I do things but still use speed and form cycle before my final decision. For the most part especially in a sprint race, I find what I think is the top speed or if close the top 2 or 3 speed horses. From there I check to see the form cycles of them and hope to be able to knock someone out. I will study your way this weekend and see if it points to the same horse that my way would select. Back to tinkering.

[DanG]

A good example is the one from "Breeze" regarding the bomb in the nightcap. Whatever figs he used it did not contradict the DRF which clearly showed this filly with serious early lick. Notice he did not add; that the rail was up, an apprentice rode (7 lbs off) and the field was awful for the level.

This isn’t directed at you per say Bells…

Sorry to get off-topic for a moment but that is an interesting statement. I caught the horse because of the velocity data in HTR and yet Steve Crist wrote in his morning blog that he would like people to write in with a valid reason to play the animal that he found inscrutable.

I just find it interesting (encouraging) that you say the clues were in the form and yet someone so close to the paper couldn’t see them. :cool:

[nobeyerspls]

John: I covered some ground and am not sure what your comfortable with and what your not. My main point is that most figure makers use the time posted in the DRF and make adjustments that are often nebulous in nature.

Gary Oz I do not know what sort of evidence would you like but I am a five decade handicapper, I worked on the backside at Churchill for almost twenty years, I spent a decade at Claiborne, then Overbrook earning my Masters at the University of Kentucky. I would humbly opine that I can read the DRF. BBB

And where did you learn more? I'm guessing the backside at Churchill over UK. I too am a five decade guy who can read a form. I have never felt the need to digitize performance but that might have a basis in my "ego adjustment" period as a breeder and owner.

[garyoz]

And where did you learn more? I'm guessing the backside at Churchill over UK. I too am a five decade guy who can read a form. I have never felt the need to digitize performance but that might have a basis in my "ego adjustment" period as a breeder and owner.

Why is this a competition? This is getting kind of petty. Can't we all get along?

[Tom]

Why is this a competition? This is getting kind of petty. Can't we all get along?

No!



:D

[Capper Al]

It sounds like your big hit did involve figures - allbeit indierctly.

'Til your next big one.

fffastt

That's the point here.

[nobeyerspls]

Why is this a competition? This is getting kind of petty. Can't we all get along?

How was that comment petty? I responded to a guy with both educational and hands-on experience and suggested that he learned more outside the classroom. I have never criticized those who make and/or use speed figures. My position is clear and concise. I hold that beyer speed figures have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races. With so many opting to make their own figures or use others, it seems like they agree with me.

Remember that I am mostly a $1 exotic player who labors among the vineyards of maidens of any class and non-winners of two. Quite often there is not enough data present for a figure player to use. I am lousy at older males sprinting in unrestricted races so I avoid those races like the plague. I know my strong suits and now, with better wagering techniques, I'm doing a good job exploiting them.
I believe that you and other figure players are doing the same. There is no right or wrong here. In a bit of irony, you and I could handicap the same race and take widely different path to the same horse.

[Capper Al]

It's like most handicapping factors: The most extreme example of any factor is the most reliable. That may or may not be obvious.

A 9-plus point advantage is useful but these types still get beat often. It isn't uncommon for there to be 20-point advantages - the key being value. It is a sad reality that most tb races are competitive - meaning pick a few contenders in the race and roll the dice - hopefully most of us don't like craps.

'the fat man' bet a 4-1 today and won. The horse was a nice play at the odds but the race was a bit scary as he already alluded to - especially since there was a heavily bet firster. The price made it worth it.

It is possible other factors point towards high speed fig horses that aren't heavily bet. Look at 'the fat man's' hoss - there are 'cappers who play these types without the aid of figs. I have an adjusted fig - it answers questions like: 'Will this dropper fit in here?'

Since I adjust my own figs I find good bets based on speed figs alone - but they are most potent when alligned with other handicapping factors.

fffastt

Data sources like BRIS and Trackmaster do a better job here for the racing fan. They supply numeric class figures that can be added to the speed figures. They are still variable too, and it's still a guess with the other products. A number cruncher like myself likes a clear mechanical method of adjusting speed with class.

[Capper Al]

BRIS Speed last race:

#3 Hard Spun 107
#8 Most Distinguished 101
#11 King of Roxy 99
BRIS Speed Avg for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)

#7 Teuflesberg 107
#8 Most Distinguished 102
#2 Spin Master 101
BRIS Best Back Speed for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)

#7 Teuflesberg 108
#2 Spin Master 106
#8 Most Distinguished 103
BRIS Prime Power Selections:

#3 Hard Spun 152.2
#11 King of Roxy 147.5
#8 Most Distinguished 143.2
***********************************************

My Speed figures:

#7 Teuflesberg
#3 Hard Spun
#2 Spin Master
My Selections (optional):

#3 Hard Spun (These are my spreadsheet selections -- Hard Spun?)
#7 Teuflesberg
#11 King of Roxy

[Capper Al]

I listed BRIS figures in my previous posting. Please if you have other speed figures do share them us. Thanks.

[keilan]

BRIS Speed last race:

#3 Hard Spun 107
#8 Most Distinguished 101
#11 King of Roxy 99
BRIS Speed Avg for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)

#7 Teuflesberg 107
#8 Most Distinguished 102
#2 Spin Master 101
BRIS Best Back Speed for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)

#7 Teuflesberg 108
#2 Spin Master 106
#8 Most Distinguished 103
BRIS Prime Power Selections:

#3 Hard Spun 152.2
#11 King of Roxy 147.5
#8 Most Distinguished 143.2
***********************************************

My Speed figures:

#7 Teuflesberg
#3 Hard Spun
#2 Spin Master
My Selections (optional):

#3 Hard Spun (These are my spreadsheet selections -- Hard Spun?)
#7 Teuflesberg
#11 King of Roxy



What would your numbers show if you adjusted for time and maturity? Your path from A to Z is a li'l too direct maybe.

[Capper Al]

What would your numbers show if you adjusted for time and maturity? Your path from A to Z is a li'l too direct maybe.

I like the idea. It needs work. I believe Quinn has published adjustments for age.

[garyoz]

This thread is hopeless. Should have been out of here long ago.

[bellsbendboy]

Garyoz: I am very familiar with thorograph and feel the ancillary data is excellent. As far as the actual numbers much less so. The other services I really know little about, but after reading "The odds must be crazy" I would never use The Sheets.

Dan: I think Crist is a decent capper but his approach, largely, is to buy horizontal wagers. It is nothing for him to put several thousand into a pick six pool. At some point laziness sets in.

NoBeyers: No question I have learned more by reading the form. Also, I find Beyers VERY reliable (do not read accurate) in both picking winners and eliminating losers. I would guess that some ninety percent of a pick four pool is money supplied by Beyer users. I feel I understand his figures better than most and that is an advantage. Congrats on being old and knowing your way around the DRF. BBB

[GaryG]

This thread is hopeless. Should have been out of here long ago.Yes....I got sucked back in as well. No more though...:mad:

[DanG]

Dan: I think Crist is a decent capper but his approach, largely, is to buy horizontal wagers. It is nothing for him to put several thousand into a pick six pool. At some point laziness sets in.

Bells;

I honestly don’t see the connection with horizontal wagers / bet size and perceived laziness. Maybe because I’m a horizontal better I’m too close to it and defensive. :)

I didn’t mention Steve’s missing the pace angle as a shot at him, I just found it interesting that someone so close to the source seemed unaware; especially after unveiling the Moss pace figs.

(Steve makes his own pace figures BTW, or at least he used to)

[Capper Al]

Garyoz: I am very familiar with thorograph and feel the ancillary data is excellent. As far as the actual numbers much less so. The other services I really know little about, but after reading "The odds must be crazy" I would never use The Sheets.

Dan: I think Crist is a decent capper but his approach, largely, is to buy horizontal wagers. It is nothing for him to put several thousand into a pick six pool. At some point laziness sets in.

NoBeyers: No question I have learned more by reading the form. Also, I find Beyers VERY reliable (do not read accurate) in both picking winners and eliminating losers. I would guess that some ninety percent of a pick four pool is money supplied by Beyer users. I feel I understand his figures better than most and that is an advantage. Congrats on being old and knowing your way around the DRF. BBB

I would like to see some Thorograph and Sheet figures posted for our race tomorrow. Reference post #205. These figures do vary from vendor to vendor and sometimes within a vendor. For example, BRIS has different speed figures for different products.

[Capper Al]

garyoz and garyG,

Good bye.

For the rest of us,

What we are trying to do is look at speed figures from different vendors objectively. Hope some of you care enough to share your numbers. Together we can take a look at how BRIS compares to BSF compares to Trackmaster compares to The Sheets, etc. My guess for race 8 tomorrow at Saratoga is that most of them will point to Hard Spun for current speed. We just don't know until we look at the numbers.

Thanks

[bellsbendboy]

Dan: Poorly worded about Crist. My point was that as a "celebrity" at Saratoga, with many activities outside handicapping, dinners, speaking engagements etcetera, he is stretched pretty thin. His ticket construction is complicated, yet very solid and that also takes a bit of time. In "Betting on Myself" he writes about his speed figures and makes a good case. I did not mean to take a shot at him at all. BBB

[DanG]

Dan: Poorly worded about Crist. My point was that as a "celebrity" at Saratoga, with many activities outside handicapping, dinners, speaking engagements etcetera, he is stretched pretty thin. His ticket construction is complicated, yet very solid and that also takes a bit of time. In "Betting on Myself" he writes about his speed figures and makes a good case. I did not mean to take a shot at him at all. BBB
Good point Bells;

Reading his blog has been enjoyable and he does go in 19 different directions up there.

[Kelso]

Purchase “performance ratings” from a reputable service that adjusts for more “subjective” criteria.


Dan,
Are 'performance ratings' the same as 'power' ratings? If not, would you describe them just a bit?

Thank you.

[Kelso]

From there I check to see the form cycles


Joe, Edward:

I know nothing at all about evaluating form, but often wish I had an insight when time comes to choose/toss. Can you recommend a good place to start the learning process on this subject?

Thank you.

[Kelso]

BRIS Speed Avg for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)
BRIS Best Back Speed for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)


Asp,
HS has a 93 rating for both categories ... from his only 7f race, at PHA 12-18-06.

[DanG]

Dan,
Are 'performance ratings' the same as 'power' ratings? If not, would you describe them just a bit?

Thank you.
Same thing Kelso. :ThmbUp:

[dav4463]

Beyers helped me zero in on a $26.20 winner at Remington tonight. I use them in my own way and it works for me. I use the Beyers to zero in on one, two or three main contenders and as long as I keep finding horses like this one, I will continue to use the Beyer figures. My main contenders in most races are the 2nd and 3rd best last race Beyer and the best Beyer from races 4-10 back in pp's. I then use class moves and poor connections or poor form to eliminate contenders and then look for a price. I look for a reason to eliminate the best last race Beyer...if I can't find one, I find a way to use the horse or pass the race.

[Capper Al]

Asp,
HS has a 93 rating for both categories ... from his only 7f race, at PHA 12-18-06.

This does make me wonder if 7f isn't a good distance for HS. Maybe at PHA he got his win by just out classing the other horses?

[Capper Al]

Beyers helped me zero in on a $26.20 winner at Remington tonight. I use them in my own way and it works for me. I use the Beyers to zero in on one, two or three main contenders and as long as I keep finding horses like this one, I will continue to use the Beyer figures. My main contenders in most races are the 2nd and 3rd best last race Beyer and the best Beyer from races 4-10 back in pp's. I then use class moves and poor connections or poor form to eliminate contenders and then look for a price. I look for a reason to eliminate the best last race Beyer...if I can't find one, I find a way to use the horse or pass the race.

If it works for you then good. Your method sounds like what has been suggested in this thread that at best one has to play around the beyers. The BSF helped you narrow the field then you use your horse sense to figure the winner.

[nobeyerspls]

Here's a grade 1. Do your speed ratings and rankings and other comments that you might have, but do at least identify your top 3 speed horses. Also, let us know a few things about your speed figures like your data source and did you modify them or are they your own speed figures. Your top 3 speed horses may not necessary be your top 3 picks, but feel free to list your selections as well.



I don't have any speed figures as I don't make them or buy them and I never see the bsf column. I did "narrow" the race down to five runners and will pick Spin Master and Most Distinguished. I checked the weather forecast this AM and they are calling for thunderstorms, some severe. If the track comes up sloppy, my confidence in these two rises.
This looks like a tough spot for Hard Spun. If he beats this bunch at 7f I'll be surprised and impressed.

[Capper Al]

I don't have any speed figures as I don't make them or buy them and I never see the bsf column. I did "narrow" the race down to five runners and will pick Spin Master and Most Distinguished. I checked the weather forecast this AM and they are calling for thunderstorms, some severe. If the track comes up sloppy, my confidence in these two rises.
This looks like a tough spot for Hard Spun. If he beats this bunch at 7f I'll be surprised and impressed.

Thanks NoBeyersPls. I agree with your analysis. This is where it gets difficult for the number cruncher who understands racing, which way to go -- follow the numbers on my spreadsheet or use my horse sense. My track record suggests that I should stay with my numbers?

[Capper Al]

The idea of comparing speed figures from different vendors was a good one. It does take teaming. That's something constructive that could be accomplished in a racing forum. Why we use speed figures and don't even care if the ones we are using are the best or not makes me wonder. Good luck!

[Capper Al]

I don't have any speed figures as I don't make them or buy them and I never see the bsf column. I did "narrow" the race down to five runners and will pick Spin Master and Most Distinguished. I checked the weather forecast this AM and they are calling for thunderstorms, some severe. If the track comes up sloppy, my confidence in these two rises.
This looks like a tough spot for Hard Spun. If he beats this bunch at 7f I'll be surprised and impressed.

Thanks NoBeyersPls. I agree with your analysis. This is where it gets difficult for the number cruncher who understands racing, which way to go -- follow the numbers on my spreadsheet or use my horse sense. My track record suggests that I should stay with my numbers?

NoBeyersPls,

My spreadsheet selection, Hard Spun, won. Staying with the numbers paid this time. We'd be rich if we could know when to go with the numbers or get off the numbers.

[NYPlayer]

[color=black]

NoBeyersPls,

My spreadsheet selection, Hard Spun, won. Staying with the numbers paid this time. We'd be rich if we could know when to go with the numbers or get off the numbers.

It wasn't much of a win price, but the exacta and the triple had value. I would have preferred Spin Master to come in third, but keying the HS/FD, allowed me spread sufficiently underneath.

[NYPlayer]

[color=black]

NoBeyersPls,

My spreadsheet selection, Hard Spun, won. Staying with the numbers paid this time. We'd be rich if we could know when to go with the numbers or get off the numbers.

You can't know for certain when the top number will win. It's a matter of getting a price. Had Hard Spun been 3-1, betting him to win would have been a good thing. I liked First Defence also. If He had gone off at 7-1 or better, I would have bet him to win.

[Capper Al]

You can't know for certain when the top number will win. It's a matter of getting a price. Had Hard Spun been 3-1, betting him to win would have been a good thing. I liked First Defence also. If He had gone off at 7-1 or better, I would have bet him to win.


That's the problem. When my numbers have it, so does the public usually have it. There rarely is a price, and if there is then most likely I'm wrong about my selection. Essentially, we are talking about going with the flow or swimming upstream when we play against the numbers. Bottom line:

Favorite wins about 1/3 of the time
Second and third favorites combined win about 1/3 of the time
With an average field size of 8, that leaves the remaining third of the non favorites victories to be split up between 5 horses.
On average, 1/3 * 1/5 = 1/15 for a non favorite horse.
Either we have better numbers than the public, which is difficult when all the information available, or we play by another scheme. It's a tough game.

[nobeyerspls]

[color=black]

NoBeyersPls,

My spreadsheet selection, Hard Spun, won. Staying with the numbers paid this time. We'd be rich if we could know when to go with the numbers or get off the numbers.

Class players, some who don't look at any numbers including raw times, would have had this guy. Of course, in one sense, the bsf's are class based. Any way, as stated earlier, I was surprised and impressed that he won this sprint. Congrats to all who backed him. I skipped this race and the Travers so you get my respect but not my money.
As an aside, I had a first for me when I got a refund on a winner. The 2b part of an entry won an earlier turf race but was declared "purse money only" when the other half of the entry was scratched. I forgot that they did that.

[Capper Al]

Class players, some who don't look at any numbers including raw times, would have had this guy. Of course, in one sense, the bsf's are class based. Any way, as stated earlier, I was surprised and impressed that he won this sprint. Congrats to all who backed him. I skipped this race and the Travers so you get my respect but not my money.
As an aside, I had a first for me when I got a refund on a winner. The 2b part of an entry won an earlier turf race but was declared "purse money only" when the other half of the entry was scratched. I forgot that they did that.

I agree on the class factor for Hard Spun. I rated Hard Spun second in speed. My spreadsheets picked him because of class.

I disagree as far as Beyer figures being influenced by class. Actually, BSF only attempts to reflect speed as best they can. This is a good point in their favor since the handicapper knows he's only looking at speed. To the true speed handicapper class is speed. To the true class handicapper, class is a comparison to a field of horses where a particular horse can be competitive. Class is a measure of performance and outcome outside of speed. I prefer the class handicappers point of view on the definition of class.

[NYPlayer]

That's the problem. When my numbers have it, so does the public usually have it. There rarely is a price, and if there is then most likely I'm wrong about my selection. Essentially, we are talking about going with the flow or swimming upstream when we play against the numbers. Bottom line:

Favorite wins about 1/3 of the time
Second and third favorites combined win about 1/3 of the time
With an average field size of 8, that leaves the remaining third of the non favorites victories to be split up between 5 horses.
On average, 1/3 * 1/5 = 1/15 for a non favorite horse.
Either we have better numbers than the public, which is difficult when all the information available, or we play by another scheme. It's a tough game.


It's certainly a tough game, but there are still good value plays based speed figures. I've found the following scenarios condusive to getting value:

Form Cycle indications that a horse is very likely to run a new top number.
Form Cycle indications that a horse will run back to a good number. (eg Sar Race 11 8/25)
Form Cycle indications that a horse that has just run a new top number is likely to regress in the current race (this allows you to bet others, even slower horses)
Multiple contenders in a race that are approximately the same on speed (ie there is no figure standout), but one of them is going off at a higher than average price.
Of course, this requires that one jettisons a simplistic assumption about speed figures - that the last race is reflective of current form and is likely to be repeated.

I highly doubt any other method of handicapping is likely to out-perfom form cycle analysis with speed figures. I've used others my self, and all were found wanting.

[cj]

I agree on the class factor for Hard Spun. I rated Hard Spun second in speed. My spreadsheets picked him because of class.


You need to get new speed ratings.

[Capper Al]

It's certainly a tough game, but there are still good value plays based speed figures. I've found the following scenarios condusive to getting value:

Form Cycle indications that a horse is very likely to run a new top number.
Form Cycle indications that a horse will run back to a good number. (eg Sar Race 11 8/25)
Form Cycle indications that a horse that has just run a new top number is likely to regress in the current race (this allows you to bet others, even slower horses)
Multiple contenders in a race that are approximately the same on speed (ie there is no figure standout), but one of them is going off at a higher than average price.
Of course, this requires that one jettisons a simplistic assumption about speed figures - that the last race is reflective of current form and is likely to be repeated.

I highly doubt any other method of handicapping is likely to out-perfom form cycle analysis with speed figures. I've used others my self, and all were found wanting.

My best day was from form cycle handicapping with speed figures. When you're clicking on the cycles, the bucks roll in. Form cycle capping is an art not a science.

[Capper Al]

You need to get new speed ratings.


Saratoga Race 8 Saturday Aug 25
BRIS Speed last race:

#3 Hard Spun 107
#8 Most Distinguished 101
#11 King of Roxy 99
BRIS Speed Avg for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)

#7 Teuflesberg 107
#8 Most Distinguished 102
#2 Spin Master 101
BRIS Best Back Speed for Dist/Surf: (Where's Hard Spun?)

#7 Teuflesberg 108
#2 Spin Master 106
#8 Most Distinguished 103
CJ,

BRIS and I agreed on the speed as did many others with #7 Teuflesberg having the best speed. BRIS picked #7 Teuflesberg in 2 out of 3 speed categories. My spreadsheet did ultimately pick the winner #3 Hard Spun based on other factors, mainly class. And you say there is a problem with this? My sheets did a good job here. Like I said earlier, I find that I'm better off going with my numbers from my spreadsheets over the long run. This example points to that.

[ryesteve]

BRIS and I agreed on the speed as did many others with #7 Teuflesberg having the best speed.
Only if you ignore all of Hard Spun's races from this year in order to find a sprint. That's not really a fair comparison at all.

[john del riccio]

[b]
[/list]
BRIS and I agreed on the speed as did many others with #7 Teuflesberg having the best speed. BRIS picked #7 Teuflesberg in 2 out of 3 speed categories. My spreadsheet did ultimately pick the winner #3 Hard Spun based on other factors, mainly class. And you say there is a problem with this? My sheets did a good job here. Like I said earlier, I find that I'm better off going with my numbers from my spreadsheets over the long run. This example points to that.

Teuflesberg was comparable with several others but to say he had the best speed vs that group would be a stretch.

John

[losealot]

We could debate this forever...let's settle this with a "cott". Let's petition all makers of speed and/or performance figures to STOP making their figures for one year. STOP means they promise to STOP and not cheat by producing figures privately.

Anyone caught making and worse, using, speed figures will be sentenced to share a jail cell with Lindsey Lohan or Paris Hilton.

But to prove the worthlessness of speed figures, one brave soul must volunteer to be the guinea pig that will be FORCED to make and bet his own speed figures at least 50 races a week for one year. I will put my home, car, computer, shirts and cat at risk by volunteering for this odious and doomed task.

Look for me in one year. I don't think you'll find me in a homeless shelter.

[cj]

We could debate this forever...let's settle this with a "cott". Let's petition all makers of speed and/or performance figures to STOP making their figures for one year. STOP means they promise to STOP and not cheat by producing figures privately.

Anyone caught making and worse, using, speed figures will be sentenced to share a jail cell with Lindsey Lohan or Paris Hilton.

But to prove the worthlessness of speed figures, one brave soul must volunteer to be the guinea pig that will be FORCED to make and bet his own speed figures at least 50 races a week for one year. I will put my home, car, computer, shirts and cat at risk by volunteering for this odious and doomed task.

Look for me in one year. I don't think you'll find me in a homeless shelter.

Pay me about $120,000 and I'll stop for one year.

[grimm7]

Totally agree with you. I have been using Beyer Speed figures for the past 2 years to handicap races. To me they are useless alone as a handicapping factor. I am really souring on them as I see more horses win or in the money with inferior numbers. To me the trip the horse receives and the trainer intentions is more important than the speed figures. I read Beyers books and am still puzzled on how he arrives at his speed figures

[Fastracehorse]

Data sources like BRIS and Trackmaster do a better job here for the racing fan. They supply numeric class figures that can be added to the speed figures. They are still variable too, and it's still a guess with the other products. A number cruncher like myself likes a clear mechanical method of adjusting speed with class.

BRIS and Trackmaster do a better job than what for the racing fan??

Why do U need numeric class figures?? IMO speed measures
class and the class of the class.

In essence if U are measuring speed U are measuring class - they are intertwined. Example: If a foe dusts weaker and attempts tougher - his task is obviously tougher. U can say that 1): He wasn't pressured like he will be today so is his top-end projected speed fig good enough; or is he classy enough?? Or 2): He dusted weaker so easily that the step-up won't be a problem class-wise.

The above is just an example - there are different ways to look at adjusting figs and understanding the relationship between class and figs.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

Totally agree with you. I have been using Beyer Speed figures for the past 2 years to handicap races. To me they are useless alone as a handicapping factor. I am really souring on them as I see more horses win or in the money with inferior numbers. To me the trip the horse receives and the trainer intentions is more important than the speed figures. I read Beyers books and am still puzzled on how he arrives at his speed figures

What creating a speed figure does is delineate thier weakness. And like U said, underslines the power of training intent and trip handicapping.

But still, speed figs are fruitful. It's kind of like a teenager in a hot rod.

fffastt

[Bill Olmsted]

BRIS and Trackmaster do a better job than what for the racing fan??

Why do U need numeric class figures?? IMO speed measures
class and the class of the class.

In essence if U are measuring speed U are measuring class - they are intertwined. Example: If a foe dusts weaker and attempts tougher - his task is obviously tougher. U can say that 1): He wasn't pressured like he will be today so is his top-end projected speed fig good enough; or is he classy enough?? Or 2): He dusted weaker so easily that the step-up won't be a problem class-wise.

The above is just an example - there are different ways to look at adjusting figs and understanding the relationship between class and figs.

fffastt

Good point. Class ratings only confuse the issue and add yet another meaningless dumbed-down "rating" for handicappers to obsess over. I submit that you don't even need speed ratings. I do just fine with accurate daily variants. But hey, that's just me.

[john del riccio]

BRIS and Trackmaster do a better job than what for the racing fan??

Why do U need numeric class figures?? IMO speed measures
class and the class of the class.

In essence if U are measuring speed U are measuring class - they are intertwined. Example: If a foe dusts weaker and attempts tougher - his task is obviously tougher. U can say that 1): He wasn't pressured like he will be today so is his top-end projected speed fig good enough; or is he classy enough?? Or 2): He dusted weaker so easily that the step-up won't be a problem class-wise.

The above is just an example - there are different ways to look at adjusting figs and understanding the relationship between class and figs.

fffastt

Fast,

I'm not in agreement with all of what you say here.....

Lets say that a field of 25k runners has several drop downs, as well as horses that are in good form, there is no trouble at the start, or during the race. The fig the race gets is within reasonable bounds for this type of race.

There is another race of 25k runners with no drop downs, several horss stepping up in class, a few layoff horses, and there is trouble at th estart and during the running of the race. However, the fig this race gets is again within reasonable bounds. Are the class ratinsg for each of these races of no consequence ?

I agree that class and speed are related but they are not the same.

John

[Capper Al]

BRIS and Trackmaster do a better job than what for the racing fan??

Why do U need numeric class figures?? IMO speed measures
class and the class of the class.

In essence if U are measuring speed U are measuring class - they are intertwined. Example: If a foe dusts weaker and attempts tougher - his task is obviously tougher. U can say that 1): He wasn't pressured like he will be today so is his top-end projected speed fig good enough; or is he classy enough?? Or 2): He dusted weaker so easily that the step-up won't be a problem class-wise.

The above is just an example - there are different ways to look at adjusting figs and understanding the relationship between class and figs.

fffastt

Yeah, BRIS and Trackmaster's are better speed figures Mr. DRF. The fan has a way to compensate for class in their speed figs. NOT so with the DRF. Of course, a pure speed handicapper wouldn't see it that way. For the true speed capper class is speed. But I'm not a true speed capper and believe in class. If two horses run the same speed figure and one won at two classes lower and then the other, in most scenarios, I would take the horse that ran in the higher class and lost. I can mathematically express that with BRIS and Trackmaster, but not with the BSF in the DRF.

[Tom]

How do you mathematically adjust speed with "class", and why can't you do it with BSFs?

[chickenhead]

If two horses run the same speed figure and one won at two classes lower then the other, in most scenarios, I would take the horse that ran in the higher class and lost. I can mathematically express that with BRIS and Trackmaster, but not with the BSF in the DRF.

That is what pace figures are for.

[Capper Al]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspiteri
If two horses run the same speed figure and one won at two classes lower then the other, in most scenarios, I would take the horse that ran in the higher class and lost. I can mathematically express that with BRIS and Trackmaster, but not with the BSF in the DRF.

That is what pace figures are for.

Similar but not the same. With pace some choose to adjust the final time with the 2nd call time.

[Capper Al]

How do you mathematically adjust speed with "class", and why can't you do it with BSFs?

Unless DRF has added a class rating to their PP lines, there isn't any class figures to adjust their speed figures. BRIS has a library at

http://www.bris.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=library.

This might be of help.