Does anyone use Beyers or other speed figures on Cushion/poly tracks?

[so.cal.fan]

I'm not sure I'm right, yet, but I'm leaning toward the fact that Cushion/poly tracks should have custom figures, just like turf courses?
We have researched video tapes of races on the Hollywood, Santa Anita and the Del Mar artificial tracks.
While many people think turf breeding is a good key, I can't really agree, at this time.
The stride of winning horses on cushion tracks is a long, somewhat lower stride than turf runners.
Most winners have a very effective long stride.
This isn't always the case on a dirt track.
So, I'm wondering if we need to be using a different type of speed figure, or is a speed figure even relevant?
Any opinions? I'm undecided and open to all.

[Robert Fischer]

At sprints they are as relevant as any beyer , but only when comparing races on the same brand of surface.

There are several brands of synthetic-turf.

Velocities are better than speed figures on turf or synthetic turf beyond 7 or 8 furlongs. The important section of the velocity becomes the kick home portion. This isn't limited to the last quarter - you have to look at the replays for this class and distance-it could be the last 4 furlongs when they ask the animals. This is because almost all decent turf or synthetic race beyond a mile the closing portion will be faster than the gallop-out portion for the top finishers.

Even raw velocities are worthless when trying to compare across different brands of fake turf or real turf and dirt etc... but just like you know a 100 beyer is great for an 8.5furlong race at churchill downs .. you should know that a 56 feet per second is great for a final quarter at Santa Anita or at Del Mar 54.5 may be the equivalant for a 8.5 furlong race...

Dirt is a little better for a beyer or single speed adjusted speed figure. Dirt runners tend to finish slower than they started, even at the route distance, so a beyer can be as useful as velocity on dirt. Often moreso because the beyer is an adjusted figure.


Hard to beat the public off of velocities or figures alone, but they are another tool that you should understand.

[so.cal.fan]

Thanks, Robert.
Very interesting.

[Robert Fischer]

i didn't really say this , but a horse could be well suited to a certain synthetic and not well suited to another synthetic.

For example the poly at Del Mar really favors pedigree & stamina at a route distance , but at Santa Anita's fast-cushion you need more final fraction speed

the pedigrees can be different as well.

basically you have to treat each different surface as a unique situation

[so.cal.fan]

Yes, Robert, we have found that to be true.
Del Mar is very unique.
I'm keeping track of the breeds and while it's not an absolute, there are some pattens emerging.
It would be the same with turf breeding.
We did notice at Del Mar, an unusual number of winning horses wearing rear wraps! There is a reason for that as well.
We also noted route maidens winning sprinting first time out.
We immediately picked up on that one, and proceeded accordingly.
If the race was 6 furlongs, we wanted a horse that had a best distance of 7 furlongs or better and so on.
We used Mike Helm's sire book. It was useful and I think more accurate than the Tomilson ratings.
Interesting stuff. All handicapping factors have changed a little.
Not as much as most people thing, however, so I encourage everyone to not go overboard on this. Just keep in mind the distance factor.
Watch those replays, on DVD in slow motion if possible....you will see more than ever before and it will put you on winners. I'm sure of it, at least here in So. Cal.

[nobeyerspls]

i didn't really say this , but a horse could be well suited to a certain synthetic and not well suited to another synthetic.

For example the poly at Del Mar really favors pedigree & stamina at a route distance , but at Santa Anita's fast-cushion you need more final fraction speed


Absolutely right about surface preference.

If you read that article about the Woodbine surface in the Form last Friday you'd see that even the same synthetic isn't the same. Seems that they used the wrong wax content last year and had a lot of kick back. The solution then was to roll the track to make it tighter. Now with a different wax component they have to power-harrow it more frequently. It was noted that the day after they did that speed stopped and closers prevailed. So now we have cushion, tapeta, and poly with each poly being slightly different from track to track. Even better, the poly at the same track is different based on surface preparation.

I am primarily a surface handicapper and I feared that the new artificial surfaces would take away that part of my game. The opposite is true. As these differences challenge the figure makers with getting the variant right, they provide opportunities for those who figure out the interaction between them and the nuances within them.

[alysheba88]

Not sure I understand the question.

All Beyer speed figures are about is an attempt to quantify how fast a horse ran. Looking at raw time and track variant. Why would surface matter?

I understand turf races can be tough, especially when only one on the card and are guessing on variant, but dont see why it would make any difference with poly.

Maybe I am not understanding the question and its really about how much do you emphasize Beyers

[john del riccio]

All polytracks are NOT created equally.....

I have no EMPIRICAL data (yet) but my opinion based on wagering results and looking at the figs everyday is that my figs hold are much more predictive at AP and WO as opposed to other Polytrack surfaces. I am honestly not sure why this is but I do know that I have had successful meets at both WO and AP buy HOL & TP (which I dont play that often) were less so.

John

[46zilzal]

This has to be considered a third surface behind dirt and turf.

[so.cal.fan]

Yes, I agree 46, it has to be considered as a third surface, because it is not like dirt nor is it like turf. Turf horses who are genuine good turf horses almost always have a long high stride. Dirt horses have a long low stride, so far we have noticed that the long dirt stride seems to be more effective on the synthetic, contrary to some earlier conclusions.
Distance breeding is a plus, especially at Del Mar.
As of right now, I'm thinking that times, fractional and final are not as important on the synthetic track as a visual analysis of the race is.
A long sustained run.......is very, very useful in selecting winners, regardless of the time they did it in. So far......that's where I'm at.....but this is so new, and subject to change......it's far from a conclusion.
I'm very interested in seeing the effect of a long rain on the new surface at Santa Anita. They did some repairs because it wasn't draining properly.

[alysheba88]

Again, what does that have to do with producing Beyers? Regardless of surface is there something in poly that makes timing a race and creating a variant scientifically impossible?

[so.cal.fan]

Well, it was pretty impossible, at this time, at Del Mar.
They were running 1/2 miles in 50 and change.
The times were all 20-30 lengths slower than the previous dirt track.
If you are using Beyer pars, they are useless.
I'm no speed handicapper and can barely divide 6 by 2, but seems pretty impossible to me.
Tell me where I'm wrong?

[Cangamble]

Where do you get velocity figures or how do you make them?
I do my own variants, and the farther the distance is over 7 furlongs, the more worthless speed figures are.
I've often wondered why wind speed during a race and daily rail/speed bias ratings aren't part of anyones past performance features.

[alysheba88]

Well, it was pretty impossible, at this time, at Del Mar.
They were running 1/2 miles in 50 and change.
The times were all 20-30 lengths slower than the previous dirt track.
If you are using Beyer pars, they are useless.
I'm no speed handicapper and can barely divide 6 by 2, but seems pretty impossible to me.
Tell me where I'm wrong?

I am not sure you understand how they calculate their speed figures. They look at final time and variant- which measures how fast/slow track played. They also make projections. All of which is the same regardless of any track surface you can think of.

[Robert Fischer]

They look at final time and variant- which measures how fast/slow track played. They also make projections. All of which is the same regardless of any track surface you can think of.
This is true, and at the same time the goal of the beyer or any figure is to be a handicapping tool.

If the process remains consistent than the quality of the figure itself will remain consistent regardless of surface or circumstance. However the value of the figure as a handicapping tool could fluctuate from race to race and things like surface could play a role.
This isn't limited to Beyers, they just happen to popular. A sheets or a thorograph for example may give a lot of credit to a Rags To Riches in the Belmont because she went wide - no matter that the pace of the race was slower than there natural cruising speeds thus allowing for "ground loss" to be made up without extraordinary effort. Or a final 4 furlongs velocity of 54 feet per second could be strong in some circumstances and in others it would be sub-par. The figures are supposed to be independant to the circumstances other than those included in the process of the figure, but they are often fit to the expected and perceived actual performance a bit as well...

[alysheba88]

How it is or is not used is another story.

But nothing mysterious about the way they are calculated. Have seen so many discussions over the years over "beyers" and what they purport to be about. I take them from what they are. An attempt to quantify how fast a horse ran in the past. Think they work perfectly fine in that regard.

I do not look at them as predictors of the future, I understand and do not care they do not account for pace (because again that is not what they are about- they are about final time and variant). People try making them into something they arent. And then argue against them.

Personally as a tool they have lost significant value since being made more publicly available but still can serve as some use, as long as you keep in mind they tell you how fast a horse ran, NOT how fast the horse will run today.

By the way I am not crazy about the whole projection method used- the whole how fast they "should have" run issue.

[Tom]

SoCalFan....I have had good results using turf and poly interchangably. I have also had real good results using late dirt ability on first poly.

[so.cal.fan]

Tom,
I think the reason we are having some good results with turf horses, is that they are used to running on surfaces where dirt doesn't hit them in the face, most are bred for distance and often high class breeding.
Late speed on dirt or polytrack was very important at Del Mar.
We spotted that right away. You needed a horse who was capable of running at least a furlong longer on dirt and could put up the best sustained run of a quarter or 3/8 of a mile.
Cheap cal breds bred for speed.....with conformation like quater horses were automatic throw outs at Del Mar and pretty much are at Santa Anita and Hollywood Park.
Workouts and workout patterns we all were used to using with good results are pretty useless now. Trainers are starting to work horses differently.
One of the leading trainers at Santa Anita commented that he is training his horses differently. If they train too fast, while it seems they are going easy....it takes too much out of them. Where horses needed 5 furlong works, they are only needing 4 in many cases.
It's intersting and very complex, because all these surfaces are different.
You're a good handicapper, Tom. I'm not surprised you figured it out fast.
Keep working on it, however. :ThmbUp:

[cj]

I absolutely use speed figures on synthetic surfaces. However, without pace figures to go with them, I find them sorely lacking. This is especially true in elongated sprints and routes.

I don't buy that there are these huge differences between the various brands of polytrack, tapeta, and cushion track. Of course they aren't exactly alike, just as no dirt courses are the same and no turf courses are identical. However, the general tendencies at all of the tracks is the same. There are some quirks from track to track just like any other surface, but mostly I'll accept any synthentic race as a good indicator when they show up at a different synthetic track.

[john del riccio]

I absolutely use speed figures on synthetic surfaces. However, without pace figures to go with them, I find them sorely lacking. This is especially true in elongated sprints and routes.

I don't buy that there are these huge differences between the various brands of polytrack, tapeta, and cushion track. Of course they aren't exactly alike, just as no dirt courses are the same and no turf courses are identical. However, the general tendencies at all of the tracks is the same. There are some quirks from track to track just like any other surface, but mostly I'll accept any synthentic race as a good indicator when they show up at a different synthetic track.

CJ,

I wish I was a database guy so I could prove my theory, my opinions are based soley on my observations. The different Poly surfaces seem to vary significantly from my perspective. In fact I think temperature has an even bigger effect on that artificial surface than on dirt.

John

[Gibbon]

From my personal observations and speaking with a couple “on the ground” sheet staff; looks to me synthetics are mostly similar. Difference may vary day-in day-out at the same track suggesting ground maintenance crews attempts to smooths surfaces has an disproportional effect. In my never to be humble opinion, virtuoso figure makers has some additional headaches but nothing insurmountable. High priced sheets work just fine with the notable exception of first time on new surface.

[Robert Fischer]

the one that stands out the most is Del Mar. It just requires a unique skill set to run the routes. It doesn't necessarily translate from other tracks.

Turfway / Woodbine have that terrible kickback which makes it hard to win off the pace without going wide. It seems like they are re-investing at Woodbine and made some changes..

[so.cal.fan]

After discussing this with the best handicappers in So. Cal.......these are the conclusions at this time:
1. Beyer numbers, sheets numbers, etc are pretty much meaningless.
2. One must watch videos, slowed down if possible to judge long strided closing moves.
3. Distance is extremely important........horses bred for distance, preferably in Ky. have an advantage.
4. Know the trainers well
5. workouts at this time are very deceptive, in fact, at Hollywood Park where they are running right now, they miss an unacceptable number of them....they put the horse down with an "generic" time. Be careful.
6. You need to be at the track live, it is an advantage.

All the cushion tracks in So. Cal, obviously Del Mar stands out like a sore thumb, are very different from the old dirt tracks at the same ovals.

I have no idea about other racetracks, the above applies only to So. Cal.

[Tom]

My HTR data would agree with you. There is no factor that is very powerful there. Speed figs are the best, 60% in the top 4, but that itself if pretty lousy. Hollywood is on my ignore list - actually, all of california is on my ignore list. The intial good results on poly have been replaced by randomness.
The best factor I can find in non-htr ratings is Jockey/trainer combo > 30%, hitting at 32% with a $7.9 average mutual. Other than that, is is alphabet soup - see what you can speel of all your factors.:ThmbDown: Looks like a Tampa Bay/Moutnaineer winter for me.

The only good thing about poly seems to be any paceline on it is an automatic throw out on dirt. I either use older dirt lines or nothing. The horses seems to come off poly in good shape, but their runnign lines are pretty much worthless in looking at pace.

[so.cal.fan]

Horses are winning from dead last, as far as 25-30 lengths off the pace at Hollywood. 3 of them won today.
I have to respectfully disagree with anyone who is using speed figures for these track surfaces. There just is not enough data to make pars.
We do not know what the effects of atmospheric conditions will have either, yet.
Again, seems a long lower (than turf) stride is most effective. The better bred to go long is crucial. There are only a handful of cal-bred sires who are effective long on these tracks.
A knowledge of jockey/trainer/owners is another major factor.
I understand that www.calracing.com can be used on certain new laptops, where you can slow motion the replay. This is the most important factor.
You can see how a horse is moving. Solid sustained late runs are producing winners.

[Show Me the Wire]

yes, recently horses are making impressive late sustained runs from the 3/8 pole. It seems most of these horses had great racing luck as the rail has been wide open for such sustained runs and holes have been opening in the lane so the horse can continue its momentum without encountering any traffic problems or having to go wide.

[so.cal.fan]

One handicapper I know, claims the Thorograph sheets do well.
However, that is a matter of interpretation, and I have heard others say just the opposite.
I am not familiar with the sheets, so I just don't know. However, if any figures are being based on sketchy data for making pars....how could they be accurate? Perhaps someone is doing this successfully, but I know of no winning player right now who is using any type of numbers at all.
I do know a winning player who are using the video replays who are making substancial profits, again, this is subject to individual interpretation, but the one man who is doing well with this, I know, has been a winning player for the last couple of decades.......bets large sums of money and in my opinion, over the last 40+ years of experience on the track....is the best handicapper I know or have ever heard of. Of course, I only know So. Cal. players, but I do know most all of them who bet serious money.
Most of the big winners are people of a very unique emotional make up, that is why, even though I know and many others know their methods.....we will never be able to get the same results......I know I won't. :bang:

[so.cal.fan]

I was just informed that there is a major problem with the Santa Anita track.
They may have to try to re-do the entire thing before the big meet starts Dec. 26.
Seems they put asphalt down, then put the wax cushion material on it, in 100+ weather...........wax melted into the asphalt......accounting for the incredible fast times.......big problem, because it won't drain properly.....soon as a big rain comes..........trouble.
Additionally, many horses are getting sore on the surface.
So......any of you making par times for the SA track....caution.
Wait until more information comes out.
This is very bad news for me, personally for a number of reasons.
:(