WHAT EVERY HORSEBETTER SHOULD KNOW

[mamaluke]

Regardless of what computer or handicapping method one uses,it is essential to start with good speed figures or your handicapping or system will fail

Equibase numbers are wrong about 80% of the time and Beyer numbers are wrong about 40% of the time from my experiences over the years.You cannot win in the long run using a bad base and you will have a negative return

One must subscribe to a service with good numbers or learn how to make your own properly to be successful in this game.Even with a proper base it is difficult to be profitable unless one is patient and picks spots to capitalize on Equibase and Beyer errors

[illinoisbred]

I agree with you 100% Most publically available figures seem particularly poor when it comes to routes or turf races.Many correct for slow paces-what a mistake;but heres hoping they continue this foolish endeavor.

[markgoldie]

Regardless of what computer or handicapping method one uses,it is essential to start with good speed figures or your handicapping or system will fail

Equibase numbers are wrong about 80% of the time and Beyer numbers are wrong about 40% of the time from my experiences over the years.You cannot win in the long run using a bad base and you will have a negative return

One must subscribe to a service with good numbers or learn how to make your own properly to be successful in this game.Even with a proper base it is difficult to be profitable unless one is patient and picks spots to capitalize on Equibase and Beyer errors
Once you have the best possible speed figs, do you believe that any adjustments must be made to them? For example, Ragozin and Thorograph adjust for ground lost during the race. Is this critical in your opinion? Also, do you believe that the pace of the race somehow affects the final time of the race? And if you do, what adjustments should be made for the pace of the race in which the horse competed? And finally, Beyer has said that he believes that the class of the race in which the horse competes has no bearing whatsoever on the fig that the horse will earn. That is, a $10,000 claimer will earn the same fig on a given day if he were running in his own class or if he were somehow entered in a Grade 1 Stake. Do you think this is right? That no adjustment to a final fig should be made for the class in which the horse competed?

[andymays]

Once you have the best possible speed figs, do you believe that any adjustments must be made to them? For example, Ragozin and Thorograph adjust for ground lost during the race. Is this critical in your opinion? Also, do you believe that the pace of the race somehow affects the final time of the race? And if you do, what adjustments should be made for the pace of the race in which the horse competed? And finally, Beyer has said that he believes that the class of the race in which the horse competes has no bearing whatsoever on the fig that the horse will earn. That is, a $10,000 claimer will earn the same fig on a given day if he were running in his own class or if he were somehow entered in a Grade 1 Stake. Do you think this is right? That no adjustment to a final fig should be made for the class in which the horse competed?


I know that most people (Ragozin and Thorograph) believe ground lost is always a valid adjustment but I believe otherwise from my experience. If a Horse goes wide on a turn while being "used" then it's valid but when they are "walking" around a turn, say 25 and change first quarter at a two turn race (normal on two turn synthetic surfaces) it can be meaningless! I am not a figure player but I would guess each figure maker would have to watch each race and decide if the ground lost warranted an adjustment.

I guess I'm talking about "energy" lost being more important than ground lost! How do you measure "energy" lost?

[illinoisbred]

Yes,I believe pace does have an impact on final times.I also think its foolish to somehow correct for slow paces. Let the number[s] stand with some notation that the low figure was due to a slow pace. A good example which paid off for me was denim in sunday"s fifth at arlington.He figured to stay close to a very likely slow pace and still outfinish the come-from-behinders.His winning figure came out 3 or 4 lengths slower than his recent losing figures but I think this is what you want and need to know for future reference.Yes,he can run quicker,and if forced to early,those days he will get beaten by the paisano creek types.

[Light]

Equibase numbers are wrong about 80% of the time and Beyer numbers are wrong about 40% of the time from my experiences over the years.You cannot win in the long run using a bad base and you will have a negative return


A) First show me the data for this conclusion. As I've told CJ who says Bris figs are crap,how come the users of those crappy figs have won the DRF NHC contest almost every year. I've yet to get an answer.

B) You cannot always take figs at face value. For example positive class droppers figs must be adjusted or projected upwards before your analysis and contender selection. After doing that,you may find a horse ranked say 5th in SR's is now the top rated candidate. This goes for homemade or store bought figs.

C) There are alot of other reasons why a top rated horse does not win with store bought or high quality figs. I can go though a list but I assume you're smart enough to know what's involved.

D) As far as a negative or positive return,there is more weight on money management with the type of bets played,odds of bets played and hit rate, rather than just betting a high speed rated horse from a quality source.

For these and other reasons I quit making my own figs years ago. Commercial figs are obviously not as clean as homemade or sanitized sources, but that edge is considerably reduced when you realize that most of the time horses dont run to your numbers,whatever the source. The speed numbers used just need to be in the ballpark to be used in conjunction with many other factors for an intelligent selection and betting strategy.

[mamaluke]

Once you have the best possible speed figs, do you believe that any adjustments must be made to them? For example, Ragozin and Thorograph adjust for ground lost during the race. Is this critical in your opinion? Also, do you believe that the pace of the race somehow affects the final time of the race? And if you do, what adjustments should be made for the pace of the race in which the horse competed? And finally, Beyer has said that he believes that the class of the race in which the horse competes has no bearing whatsoever on the fig that the horse will earn. That is, a $10,000 claimer will earn the same fig on a given day if he were running in his own class or if he were somehow entered in a Grade 1 Stake. Do you think this is right? That no adjustment to a final fig should be made for the class in which the horse competed?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have asked some good questions,and I will share my opinions

Accurate numbers are important as to see the entire development of a horse
as he progresses in his racing career
The average horse has about 12 lengths of development from the first race that set him back.A horse is not a machine and every move should be looked at in regards as it fits in to the development of the individual horse.Most horses do not develop new tops after they are 5 years old,unless "DUTROW MAGIC" or similar "magicians" take over a horsei. These "trainers" can repeat with good races and their horses do not bounce for two or three races after a top effort.
ENHANCERS (drugs) have made this game much harder for handicappers

I agree with you that Rogazin has great numbers as do a few other services
These good numbers should be used as a guide on whether the last races are good or bad in this horses form cycle and race career.I think Wide is important in the Rogazin numbers if the "WIDE" was a rare occurance and credit can be given to that horse.Also playing the horse with the fastest last race is hazardous as this horse is usually sent off as the favorite and an underlay
Pace in todays race is difficult to predict for me so I have no opinion on that.If one is good at it it certainly helps
This is a tough game and betting only when you think you have an edge on the public is the best strategy

[illinoisbred]

It really is uncanny how often len is right about that 12 lengths of improvement from the first setback.I've been checking that out for years and it seems to hold up.I have some problems with awarding more for wide trips.Too many times these horses are wide because of their running style.Also,I'm not sure its wise to string together races[the line] on pacesetting and hard pressing types.Each race for them presents different scenarios and energy requirements that to refer to poor efforts as bounces is a mistake.

[Imriledup]

Great speed figs is important, but at this point, all the biggest bettors have them and the horses with the 'best figs' are the ones who get bet down.

I believe that something that might be just as important as speed figs is the ability to sniff out horses who look bad on paper yet aren't as bad as they look. The public bets on horses who look good on paper for the most part, the winning player's job is to bet on horses who look bad on paper yet are good in real life.

[cmoore]

A) First show me the data for this conclusion. As I've told CJ who says Bris figs are crap,how come the users of those crappy figs have won the DRF NHC contest almost every year. I've yet to get an answer.



I was thinking the same thing Light..

[exiles]

A) First show me the data for this conclusion. As I've told CJ who says Bris figs are crap,how come the users of those crappy figs have won the DRF NHC contest almost every year. I've yet to get an answer.

B) You cannot always take figs at face value. For example positive class droppers figs must be adjusted or projected upwards before your analysis and contender selection. After doing that,you may find a horse ranked say 5th in SR's is now the top rated candidate. This goes for homemade or store bought figs.

C) There are alot of other reasons why a top rated horse does not win with store bought or high quality figs. I can go though a list but I assume you're smart enough to know what's involved.

D) As far as a negative or positive return,there is more weight on money management with the type of bets played,odds of bets played and hit rate, rather than just betting a high speed rated horse from a quality source.

For these and other reasons I quit making my own figs years ago. Commercial figs are obviously not as clean as homemade or sanitized sources, but that edge is considerably reduced when you realize that most of the time horses dont run to your numbers,whatever the source. The speed numbers used just need to be in the ballpark to be used in conjunction with many other factors for an intelligent selection and betting strategy.

A- BECAUSE DRF NHC IS NOTHING BUT A LOTERY, THE LUCKIEST PERSON WINS EVERY YEAR.BRIS #S ARE THE BIGEST JOKE IN HORSE RACE HANDICCAPING,EVERY SEMI SERIOUS HANDICCAPER KNOWS THAT.
B-CORECT

C-CORECT

D-CORECT

[Overlay]

Equibase numbers are wrong about 80% of the time and Beyer numbers are wrong about 40% of the time from my experiences over the years.

Be that as it may, as long as data from a large sample of races shows that an average of Beyer figures (despite their flaws) that are gathered in a uniform manner from horses' most recent races is consistently accurate and effective in ranking a field from top to bottom in terms of winning probability, and as long as that data is then considered as just one weighted component of a multi-factored probability-assignment model (rather than as the sole determinant of which horse to bet, which I would say is how the figures are most commonly regarded or employed), I'll continue to use them.

[Light]

A- BECAUSE DRF NHC IS NOTHING BUT A LOTERY, THE LUCKIEST PERSON WINS EVERY YEAR.BRIS #S ARE THE BIGEST JOKE IN HORSE RACE HANDICCAPING,EVERY SEMI SERIOUS HANDICCAPER KNOWS THAT.


If crappy figs are winning a lottery 9 out of 10 times,that just defies the law of crap.

[riskman]

Be that as it may, as long as data from a large sample of races shows that an average of Beyer figures (despite their flaws) that are gathered in a uniform manner from horses' most recent races is consistently accurate and effective in ranking a field from top to bottom in terms of winning probability, and as long as that data is then considered as just one weighted component of a multi-factored probability-assignment model (rather than as the sole determinant of which horse to bet, which I would say is how the figures are most commonly regarded or employed), I'll continue to use them.


So will I. Next-----

[Steve 'StatMan']

A) First show me the data for this conclusion. As I've told CJ who says Bris figs are crap,how come the users of those crappy figs have won the DRF NHC contest almost every year. I've yet to get an answer.

B) You cannot always take figs at face value. For example positive class droppers figs must be adjusted or projected upwards before your analysis and contender selection. After doing that,you may find a horse ranked say 5th in SR's is now the top rated candidate. This goes for homemade or store bought figs.

C) There are alot of other reasons why a top rated horse does not win with store bought or high quality figs. I can go though a list but I assume you're smart enough to know what's involved.

D) As far as a negative or positive return,there is more weight on money management with the type of bets played,odds of bets played and hit rate, rather than just betting a high speed rated horse from a quality source.

For these and other reasons I quit making my own figs years ago. Commercial figs are obviously not as clean as homemade or sanitized sources, but that edge is considerably reduced when you realize that most of the time horses dont run to your numbers,whatever the source. The speed numbers used just need to be in the ballpark to be used in conjunction with many other factors for an intelligent selection and betting strategy.

I'll agree with B, C & D although I have a good source for better local (Chicago) speed figures & trip notes.

On A - I believe most serious handicappers are online now, and should therefore have accounts with a good number of services, including BRIS. Since it doesn't cost money to have the account but not necessarily buy things, most online handicappers are likely considered BRIS Customers. I know I buy a few things from them, but usually use DRF's PPS, and occasionally BRIS PPs. But if I won the contest, they would be able to claim me as one of their customers - doesn't mean I used their PPS or any of their stuff to win the tournament, and doesn't mean I used the their figures. I tend to get results files from them, among other things. Now, if they were to contact me after the contest and offer me a little dough and make me wildly popular plastering my face everywhere, I'd probably give them a great quote to use like "If BRISNet doesn't offer it, you probably don't need it!"

Numbers are important, and knowing how much each point represents is even more important. The more general they are, and further removed the figure maker is from the track they make figures for, the more the risk of reliability (catching timer errors, etc.) and other things occur, though I suspect the top circuits (NYRA, SoCal) are covered by someone who actually follows and bets the races using those figures.

No matter what the figures say, IMHO any horse can find at least 2-3 lengths of trouble in any race, closers even more so. So best to figure that if a horse is a 75, and 2 lengths are worth 4 points, one could easily get a 71 to 75 out of the horse today, assuming it is able to run that type of effort again.

[ryesteve]

If crappy figs are winning a lottery 9 out of 10 times,that just defies the law of crap.Not if 95% of the entrants are using them...

[Steve 'StatMan']

Once other quick thought: Tap your finger on the table rapidly 3 times, as fast as you possibly can. The time between the 1st and 3rd tap, once you get good at it, will be roughly 2/5ths of a second, approximately 2 lengths. Note how very little time that is, and how easily something could happen to slow a horse down by just that little.

[markgoldie]

Yes,I believe pace does have an impact on final times.I also think its foolish to somehow correct for slow paces. Let the number[s] stand with some notation that the low figure was due to a slow pace. A good example which paid off for me was denim in sunday"s fifth at arlington.He figured to stay close to a very likely slow pace and still outfinish the come-from-behinders.His winning figure came out 3 or 4 lengths slower than his recent losing figures but I think this is what you want and need to know for future reference.Yes,he can run quicker,and if forced to early,those days he will get beaten by the paisano creek types.
Notations are possibly useful for pen and paper handicappers. However, those that use software programs may have a bit of a problem with notations, since often their main objective is to crunch out numbers for large groups of races and see if anything looks worthy of a bet. Such bet-worthiness made be decided by comparison to the ML odds of the horse, for example.

Some players maintain that there are just certain factors that cannot be reduced to a number or a number adjustment. I have touched on this before on this forum but have also had many person-to-person arguments over the subject.

My contention is that a number can ALWAYS be assigned to these so-called intangible factors simply because that's the way the human brain works anyway. When people are asked to describe intangibles in other settings, the most illuminating way to describe the intangible to a second party is through a numerical scale. For example, "How bad is your pain?" Well, pretty, kinda bad." "I'm not sure what that exactly means. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate it?" Or, "Man, that girl was pretty." "Yeah, how pretty?" "VERY pretty." "Well, on a scale of 1 to 10, how pretty?"

So it's the same thing with intangible notations. You have a note that the horse raced in a slow-pace race in his last. That's why the fig was low. But today he's in with a group that weren't in that race. So you want to give the horse extra credit. Well, how MUCH extra credit? Small, medium, or large? Medium? Okay. What's that mean? Was he better than these horses with 3-point higher figs? You see the point. Somewhere along the line you have to make a decision. And if you're making decisions based on non-verbal impressions and shadings, how do you ever get around to testing their accuracy? Worse, how do you know that you are applying them in some sort of systematic way over a course of time?

There is a HUGE problem in trying to handicap based on a partial number (like an unadjusted fig) and a head full of notes relative to shadings of circumstance. And my contention is that somewhere along the line you have to ask yourself how to quantify those shadings and that implies a number of some sort.

[LottaKash]

Be that as it may, as long as data from a large sample of races shows that an average of Beyer figures (despite their flaws) that are gathered in a uniform manner from horses' most recent races is consistently accurate and effective in ranking a field from top to bottom in terms of winning probability, and as long as that data is then considered as just one weighted component of a multi-factored probability-assignment model (rather than as the sole determinant of which horse to bet, which I would say is how the figures are most commonly regarded or employed), I'll continue to use them.

I agree with Overlay's point of view in this matter....

I firmly believe that as long as the Speed Ratings are consistent, that no matter who's ratings you may use, be it DRF, Beyer, Ragozin, CJ's, Bris, or Trackmaster, etc, they are just a relative number, that we may use to compare one horse to another...At least that is all they are to me, as I don't pin my hopes of winning a race just on that number alone....I don't trust them "that" much....Still, they do have their place in the handicapping-hierarchy, and one can never (in most cases) just ignore them either....

I rely more on where a horse is, in relation to the Pace-numbers of his last few races, and, with how he reacted to those numbers via his running lines, which usually will lead me to a good estimation as to where he may be in his curent "form-cycle"....It is only after this part is done that I will look to see how competitive he is, SR-ing wise....Still, they do go, somewhat, hand in hand...

If the pace is slow in the last race and as a result a slow SR-ing was earned, so be it....Actually if I find a horse with a superior SR-ing, in his 2d to 3d last races, and a horse in his last race, was the victim or the creator of a slow pace, as long as he showed a good brush somewhere in that contest, that is enough for me to still rely on the superior pace effort of a previous recent race....Often enough if the pace and a horses's reaction to it, in the 2d or 3d back was brutal, or at least swift, yet convincing, then the slow pace in the most current race, just may be what the DR. may have ordered, and the relaxed pace and perhaps, combined with a single speedy brush, will maintain, what he already has in the tank from his previous exertions, as well as having a remedial effect on the physique of the horse....I love that pace-scenario....A slow SR-ing in cases such as these, doesn't bother me in the least...

Einstein had it nailed..."everything is relative"....:jump:

best,

[Light]

Not if 95% of the entrants are using them...

Once again a statistic is presented without proof. If I was to guess I would say most are using the DRF and Beyers. Until there is a poll at that contest as to who is using what,I'd say the jury is out.


But if I won the contest, they would be able to claim me as one of their customers - doesn't mean I used their PPS

All of the NHC winners claim they used a Bris product in the contest.

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=library#FAME

Scroll down to testimonials and you can read it for yourself.

[GameTheory]

Once again a statistic is presented without proof. If I was to guess I would say most are using the DRF and Beyers. Until there is a poll at that contest as to who is using what,I'd say the jury is out. But you are presenting a statistic with no meaning -- that all of the winners are using certain figures. Means nothing unless you know what percentage of contestants are using those figures, which is what ryesteve was getting at. And since you don't know that answer to that as you've just admitted, how many winners there were using such-and-such is completely meaningless.

[Light]

But you are presenting a statistic with no meaning -- that all of the winners are using certain figures. Means nothing unless you know what percentage of contestants are using those figures, which is what ryesteve was getting at. And since you don't know that answer to that as you've just admitted, how many winners there were using such-and-such is completely meaningless.

It is the originator of this thread who presented statistics without proof. I'm merely refuting the original premise of this thread,that you need sterilized speed numbers to beat this game. This would include HDW,CJ's,the Sheets etc.

Since the Bris are not considered stellar in their SR's by many here including CJ who calls them crap,I'm trying to bridge the logic of that with the contradiction of reality. That users of the crappy product are kicking ass in a national contest that includes people who use so called stellar information. This is one of the biggest farces in this industry. That you are a better handicapper with better speed numbers. Its more of a marketing slogan than reality and the NHC is proof.

[bisket]

the only speed figs i use are the track variant in drf. i use enhanced formulator drf pps. you can get the time the field traveled (leader) for each split, and you can get the time your horse traveled each split. the reason i only use track variant is because i just really want to know how fast the race was run in referance to 3 year best, and in relation to the rest of the races that day. i also pay close attention to how the horse ran in relation to the variant on a REGULAR basis. this method helped me to leave pyro out of the top 4 in EVERY exotic i played a couple years back in the derby. when everybody was in love with him including andy beyer. inspite of his impressive :rolleyes: wins he never raced much faster than the variant in every race he ran. this has held up to this day. FACT to keep in mind when deciding who you like for the derby. a grade 1 horse exceeds the track variant ALL THE TIME. you'd be suprised if you looked at this simple fact in march april and may every year how much money you can make!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Steve 'StatMan']

Some of the testimonals I read used BRIS products of course, but many they didn't mention anything about their Speed and Pace figures, some of which were or weren't included in the BRIS product they liked. But I thought the point being discussed was the utility and accuracy of Speed and/or Pace figures - and as you I think pointed out, how far off can they be if all the NHC contest winners were using them. I think their figs might be all right generally, and when I use their PPS, I use their figs for all but my home circuit, but to get the longer priced winners it takes to win a contest, betting high speed figures alone isn't going to win a contest like that - top figs are often too chalky, and so the Bris Customers likely made key decisions on things other than a direct use of a high Speed or Pace figure.

Bris products might help them win the contest, and maybe some other things as well, doubt BRIS is going to ask and tell us about other competitors. How much BRIS Speed &/or Pace Figures specifically helped, I don't know. How many other people used BRIS info to finish in or out of the money in the tournament, again, I don't know.

They used to announce at the chicago tracks that a winner of a race was "Bred in the State of Illinois" but then again, that was usually in a race restricted to Illinois Breds, so one of them had to win.

[proximity]

i think lonny rowgazun should consider linking this thread as a testimonial on the "winning" section of the sheets' website!! :rolleyes:

[ryesteve]

Once again a statistic is presented without proof. I wasn't presenting that as a fact; I was just pointing out that your claim that 90% of the winners used them (which I could have complained was a statistic without proof, but didn't) has no meaning without the context of how many entrants in total use them.

[michiken]

Overheard from another thread:

It's not the SIZE of your figures, its HOW you use them!

[nobeyerspls]

Regardless of what computer or handicapping method one uses,it is essential to start with good speed figures or your handicapping or system will fail

Equibase numbers are wrong about 80% of the time and Beyer numbers are wrong about 40% of the time from my experiences over the years.You cannot win in the long run using a bad base and you will have a negative return

One must subscribe to a service with good numbers or learn how to make your own properly to be successful in this game.Even with a proper base it is difficult to be profitable unless one is patient and picks spots to capitalize on Equibase and Beyer errors

Please acknowledge that successful handicapping can be done with methods that ignore every speed figure of every kind from all the available resources.

[bisket]

Please acknowledge that successful handicapping can be done with methods that ignore every speed figure of every kind from all the available resources.
i would say this is a true statement, but to handicap a track you don't play on a daily basis. this would be difficult.

[fmolf]

How can bris figs possibly be as bad as evryone says they are and the company still be able to sell and market them successfully.I believe they are very useful in conjunction with their pace figures and all the associated pars that go with them.Maybe they are not exact enough for people who want to bet the horse who can run 5/100 of a second faster for 6f to me any of the large commercial producers of figures is as good as the next.so may i ask if their speed figures are so bad does this now make their race ratings bad, their class ratings bad,their numbers regarding the leaders pace in each race bad....their prime power ratings bad...All of these ratings are built upon their speed figures.

[schweitz]

How can bris figs possibly be as bad as evryone says they are and the company still be able to sell and market them successfully.I believe they are very useful in conjunction with their pace figures and all the associated pars that go with them.Maybe they are not exact enough for people who want to bet the horse who can run 5/100 of a second faster for 6f to me any of the large commercial producers of figures is as good as the next.so may i ask if their speed figures are so bad does this now make their race ratings bad, their class ratings bad,their numbers regarding the leaders pace in each race bad....their prime power ratings bad...All of these ratings are built upon their speed figures.

I've used Bris figs for the last 15 yrs or so and don't know if they suck or not. Don't care either---they work for me and I am not about to mess with whats working.

[fmolf]

I've used Bris figs for the last 15 yrs or so and don't know if they suck or not. Don't care either---they work for me and I am not about to mess with whats working.I am with you 100%...i have found them to be very good for me.Only complaint is the way they label running styles i prefer to ignore a lot of their styles and use my own running style analysis.

[schweitz]

I am with you 100%...i have found them to be very good for me.Only complaint is the way they label running styles i prefer to ignore a lot of their styles and use my own running style analysis.

Agree on the running style analysis--they are also too quick to assign a running style to a lightly raced horse.

[pandy]

Once again a statistic is presented without proof. If I was to guess I would say most are using the DRF and Beyers. Until there is a poll at that contest as to who is using what,I'd say the jury is out.



All of the NHC winners claim they used a Bris product in the contest.

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=library#FAME

Scroll down to testimonials and you can read it for yourself.

I believe that some of you are falling prey to Bris marketing hype. You have to realize that lying in advertising is common. Bris probably approaches each contest winner and pays them or gives them lifetime free pps and perks if they say they used bris figures.

[fmolf]

I believe that some of you are falling prey to Bris marketing hype. You have to realize that lying in advertising is common. Bris probably approaches each contest winner and pays them or gives them lifetime free pps and perks if they say they used bris figures.
That is quite possible.I still find them to be the best out there.That is just my opinion.Others may like drf...others still trackmaster platinum,which are very good as well.If Bris were truly marketing an inferior product or speed figs i doubt they would stay in business with them in this competitive info crazy market of todays racing game!That being said I agree other figures may be more accurate but for general handicapping i find them quite useful in conjunction with their total product and all their other numbers..

[raybo]

I have been a Bris data file user for many years. Do I like their pace and speed figs? No, not particularly. Can they be adjusted to the point that they are valuable? Yes. Most figures are adjusted, after the fact, anyway.

I believe this is the essence of successful fig users. One must know when the figs are wrong and when they are right. I know CJ doesn't assign a fig and then let it stand. Beyer also says that you must know how to use his figs (when they are accurate, as they are and when they aren't).

Personally, I use only numbers that come from the race: leader's and winner's times. I use the DRF variant, using my own method, to adjust the fractions and final time. IMO, this is one, of only a very small number of ways, to accurately view past performances.

IMO, anyone who uses commercially available figs as Gospel, is at a huge disadvantage.

[rokitman]

I believe that some of you are falling prey to Bris marketing hype. You have to realize that lying in advertising is common. Bris probably approaches each contest winner and pays them or gives them lifetime free pps and perks if they say they used bris figures.
I'm glad to see someone has a firm grasp of the obvious. Those contest winners saying they used BRIS is as meaningful as gold medal winners saying they ate Wheaties.

[jasperson]

Regardless of what computer or handicapping method one uses,it is essential to start with good speed figures or your handicapping or system will fail

Equibase numbers are wrong about 80% of the time and Beyer numbers are wrong about 40% of the time from my experiences over the years.You cannot win in the long run using a bad base and you will have a negative return

One must subscribe to a service with good numbers or learn how to make your own properly to be successful in this game.Even with a proper base it is difficult to be profitable unless one is patient and picks spots to capitalize on Equibase and Beyer errors

I don't know if any speedrating are accurate. At one time in the 80's I was making my own according to Beyer's book and then we got Beyers in the drf and bris come out with theirs. For awhile I compared them and most of the time they tracked each other. For turf races forget an accurate speedrating because how can you make a track variant out of 2 or 3 races one of which might be a sprint? As for Beyers speed he has said he has to make monthly adjustment to the I think the track variants caused by his projected speed adjustment. Tracks like Saratoga can vary from year to year and you have to use partimes from the previous year to compute this year tv or else you don't have a enough races to get a good average. Polytracks suffer from the effects of heat the changes during the day. I do look at speed rating but I don't take any of them as gospel.
Jack

[fmolf]

I don't know if any speedrating are accurate. At one time in the 80's I was making my own according to Beyer's book and then we got Beyers in the drf and bris come out with theirs. For awhile I compared them and most of the time they tracked each other. For turf races forget an accurate speedrating because how can you make a track variant out of 2 or 3 races one of which might be a sprint? As for Beyers speed he has said he has to make monthly adjustment to the I think the track variants caused by his projected speed adjustment. Tracks like Saratoga can vary from year to year and you have to use partimes from the previous year to compute this year tv or else you don't have a enough races to get a good average. Polytracks suffer from the effects of heat the changes during the day. I do look at speed rating but I don't take any of them as gospel.
Jack
when beyer himself says that any advantage of three points on his scale is meaningless that tells you all you need to know about their use.they are for general comparisons,for discerning if a horse meets the minimum speed requirements for the race.With bris i accept any fig within 5 points of their par figure as acceptable on speed.When bris first came out with their numbers and pp's i thought no way can they compete with the big bad drf,but they are doing ok i guess.Lots of handicappers are using them.

[dutchboy]

Yesterday I looked at a software program that attemps to rate horses on only three items. Class, Conditioning, Consistency.

They do not use any speed figures, pace figures, trainer or jockey stats, or angles.

[misscashalot]

Yesterday I looked at a software program that attemps to rate horses on only three items. Class, Conditioning, Consistency.

They do not use any speed figures, pace figures, trainer or jockey stats, or angles.

Sounds to me like they're on to something. Is it on line?

[dutchboy]

Sounds to me like they're on to something. Is it on line?

It is and they do put a previous day's card on the website for free. Today it was yesterday's Saratoga card.

They pick 4 horses in each race. 9 races and 4 horses per race. Of the 36 horses they had one 4th rated pick win which paid 22.60 and one 2nd rated horse win which paid 13.40

The other 7 races with 4 picks in each race did not have a winner so it does not look good. Not sure why they chose to post a card with such poor results. Either they are sincere and not trying to fool anyone with their great picks or their plan does not work very good. A random number generator with 4 picks per race should do much better than 2 wins out of 36 horses.

Maybe a profit would have been made it you had only bet the top 4 picks that were 5-1 or greater.