I'm convinced more than ever....

[Sekrah]

I've been handicapping 12+ years now and I've become convinced more than ever that Class Handicapping, with a sprinkle of pace (quick peeks at early fractions) defeats Speed Handicapping.

The only thing Class Handicapping needs is someone to come along and revolutionize the way class is looked at the same way Beyer and Ragozin did for speed figures. As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs)

Not saying you can't win with Sheets/TG, you certaintly can, you won't find better final time adjustments, but I'm convinced more than ever that Class is King and the claiming market is much more efficient and reliable than voodoo track variants based on a ridiculously small sample size of races.

[illinoisbred]

I've been handicapping 12+ years now and I've become convinced more than ever that Class Handicapping, with a sprinkle of pace (quick peeks at early fractions) defeats Speed Handicapping.

The only thing Class Handicapping needs is someone to come along and revolutionize the way class is looked at the same way Beyer and Ragozin did for speed figures. As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs)

Not saying you can't win with Sheets/TG, you certaintly can, you won't find better final time adjustments, but I'm convinced more than ever that Class is King and the claiming market is much more efficient and reliable than voodoo track variants based on a ridiculously small sample size of races.
Not to refute your point,but I think class, or any assessment of it is very track specific. Even if you don't want to use figures, I'd recommend a good starting point would be to construct par times for the tracks you play. Use a large sample[a couple of years], do all classes and conditions, avoid the so-called "standard" deductions for age,sex,state-breds, or nw2,3,etc.-they really don't work. After doing this ,you will have a pretty good idea of the class hierarchy of you track, which can be very useful in assessing class. If you play Hawthorne, you will know its not asking much for a fit f/m to move from 4,000 to 10,000,or reversely, its not much of a drop for a f/m from 10,000-4,000. Older maiden specials are particularily weak at Hawthorne. Its a full second jump to go from ms to nw2/nw1x allowance, but this gap doesn't exist with state-breds. These kind of things could be helpful in understanding "class" at your track.

[kenwoodallpromos]

That is the stated reason why they rely so heavily on claiming conditions to seperate out runners- it is supposed to be a reliable way to CLASSify the track stock.
IMHO one of the best ways to handicap is to consider what the track tries to do to equalize the competition and then "reverse engineer" the condition book according to the individual horse's record. At least in my theory; Unless there is/are factor(s) strong enough to mess up the book/class intent, like the effect of weather or mainainence on a runner. Very wet sand vs. very dry sand can mean a lot, just like runing at the beach.
That is one reason I like NYRA- the track is very consistent even in the worst eather, so their tracks are more class-reliable.
I honestly cannot say the same for some smaller circuits, or Plubber tracks in SoCal or Woodbine. NorCal, Keeneland seem to be more consistent at doing better at betting with the crowd along with the major dirt tracks in so far as the most expectedly consistent races (turf and dirt sprints).
But I throw out class when I know the track is sealed/rolled!
I would love to know a simple way to code the real current class of every horse!

[fmolf]

I like the bris ultimates as well... I like to look for what class level a horse was competive at in regards to his pace figures.....some early speed horses just do not have the class to run late at a certain level but finish well at lower levels.ditto for late runners in the faster races obviously the lower class horses cannot finish as strongly.the bris #'s help to determine this as well as the race ratings they supply help to determine which races might be better than others within the same class very helpful comparing open races to state bred races.

[the_fat_man]

Compare Lance Armstrong in his prime to another, less accomplished professional cyclist. Have them compete over a mountain race, where Armstrong EXCELLED. Have a slew of other riders WORK to get the other cyclist a nice SETUP and have Armstrong try to set the pace and WIRE the field, if you will. Or, have Armstrong get an unaided trip (or, at least, a trip significantly WORSE than the other cyclist). Guess what? The other cyclist wins the race.

So, while what you refer to as 'CLASS' trumps speed (and/or pace) figures, SETUP trumps CLASS. Especially on non speed biased tracks.

Until someone is able to QUANTIFY (MODEL) the events of a race, FIGURES won't be as affective as SETUP analysis.

[markgoldie]

I've been handicapping 12+ years now and I've become convinced more than ever that Class Handicapping, with a sprinkle of pace (quick peeks at early fractions) defeats Speed Handicapping.

The only thing Class Handicapping needs is someone to come along and revolutionize the way class is looked at the same way Beyer and Ragozin did for speed figures. As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs)

Not saying you can't win with Sheets/TG, you certaintly can, you won't find better final time adjustments, but I'm convinced more than ever that Class is King and the claiming market is much more efficient and reliable than voodoo track variants based on a ridiculously small sample size of races.
I have stated many times on this forum that one of the key failures of speed fig handicappers is they do not realize there is a class element to the earning of a fig number. I have been adjusting figs to class for many years with a reasonably good result. Things being equal, when you put a horse into a higher class, he will run a lower number than in a lower class. The speed-fig guru, Andrew Beyer, has never acknowledged in print that the speed fig is class-sensitive. In fact, he has stated the opposite. However, this proposition has been hedged a bit by the admission that figs earned in graded stakes are a special case and are somehow more potent than those earned in non-graded races. My question, of course, would be why this is not an admission that figs in general are class sensitive.

As for your handicapping methodology, its success is dependent on the tipping of the scales, so to speak, such that the majority of serious money is number-based. However, I try (in my own way) to have it both ways.

Briefly (because I have written this before), I add 2 points to a fig earned in a higher class if the horse is a speed type (any horse with 4 or more Quirin speed points) and 1 point if a non-speed type (3 or lower Quirin points) for each class higher than the current competition. I cap the adjustment at 10 points. I also use pace adjustments to the final-speed fig (which I won't detail here but which can be found in my earlier posts). IMO, this allows me to use both speed and class considerations when handicapping.

[Show Me the Wire]

Compare Lance Armstrong in his prime to another, less accomplished professional cyclist. Have them compete over a mountain race, where Armstrong EXCELLED. Have a slew of other riders WORK to get the other cyclist a nice SETUP and have Armstrong try to set the pace and WIRE the field, if you will. Or, have Armstrong get an unaided trip (or, at least, a trip significantly WORSE than the other cyclist). Guess what? The other cyclist wins the race.

So, while what you refer to as 'CLASS' trumps speed (and/or pace) figures, SETUP trumps CLASS. Especially on non speed biased tracks.

Until someone is able to QUANTIFY (MODEL) the events of a race, FIGURES won't be as affective as SETUP analysis.

There are very few Lance Armstrongs among horses. Horses are herd animals and react with instinct, thus their ability is a reflection of their instinctual act.

Good horses and decent horses win with set-ups, ie. sitting behind a speed duel, etc, classier horses overcome disadvantaged set-ups or trouble to win.

A simple definition to describe class is the horse's ability to be put in position to win and how the horse reacts the situation. A class animal is the one that overcomes disadvantaged trips to win.

[Tom]

It is always those who do not understand how to use figures that make general ( and ridiculous) statements about them. Two more in this thread. :rolleyes:

When someone who as proven themselves adept in both figures and whatever the other method is and can make an intelligent comment about them both, let me know. So far, I have only heard from those who think their way is best and have nothing to compare it to beside their own failures with the other.

Little boys think their "blessings" are just wonderful, until their first gym shower rocks their world! :D

[Handiman]

I believe it boils down to this.....before one can do anything or make any claims about class over or less than something else, what class is comprised of must be ascertained.

Some sing the mantra of class is speed. Others claim it's breeding. And then there are others who claim it's situational response. By it's very nature, class is esoteric and can not be painted with just one brush.

It's my contention that class, as a usable factor, must be decided on by the individual handicapper and then used in a way relational to other factors used by that handicapper resulting in positive results. And if you can not do this, then it doesn't matter what class is, because you as the handicapper can not count on class as a factor regardless of what it consists of or how it is constructed.

Bottom line is that class is not linear as is speed or maybe pace or even purse value. You now have my 2 cents on class, which might actually be over priced. :cool:

Handi :)

[Show Me the Wire]

I believe it boils down to this.....before one can do anything or make any claims about class over or less than something else, what class is comprised of must be ascertained.

Some sing the mantra of class is speed. Others claim it's breeding. And then there are others who claim it's situational response. By it's very nature, class is esoteric and can not be painted with just one brush.

It's my contention that class, as a usable factor, must be decided on by the individual handicapper and then used in a way relational to other factors used by that handicapper resulting in positive results. And if you can not do this, then it doesn't matter what class is, because you as the handicapper can not count on class as a factor regardless of what it consists of or how it is constructed.

Bottom line is that class is not linear as is speed or maybe pace or even purse value. You now have my 2 cents on class, which might actually be over priced. :cool:

Handi :)

Class is esoteric when it is described as the ability to carry speed over an amount of ground with weight.

However, a functional determination can be made using speed figures and race elgibility conditions to quantify the ability of the field and the corresponding ability of the animal to secure a position to win from.

Of course the later part takes some knowledge about placement of the horse in the race at important segments.

[11cashcall]

I've been handicapping 12+ years now and I've become convinced more than ever that Class Handicapping, with a sprinkle of pace (quick peeks at early fractions) defeats Speed Handicapping.

The only thing Class Handicapping needs is someone to come along and revolutionize the way class is looked at the same way Beyer and Ragozin did for speed figures. As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs)

Not saying you can't win with Sheets/TG, you certaintly can, you won't find better final time adjustments, but I'm convinced more than ever that Class is King and the claiming market is much more efficient and reliable than voodoo track variants based on a ridiculously small sample size of races.



TG along with Bris pps can offer the handicapper a powerfully conformation
advantage.

[JohnGalt1]

William L. Scott's Performance Class Ratings work for me.

Three main reasons--

It forces me to look at and rate all races in the pp's.

PCR numbers work for all surfaces and weather conditions.

Few handicappers bother to create and use them.

Though important, class comparisons are only 25-33% of my handicapping.

[proximity]

As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs).......

didn't you just hit a 56-1 shot the other day based on tg figures??

and now three days later "bris are the champs".....:confused:

[Sekrah]

I'm glad you brought that up.

That 56-1, Rahystrada, that I threw into my exotics mix did have the fastest Thorograph figure last time out vs everyone elses last time out. However, if you were to use typical Thorograph/Sheets speed handicapping methodology and pattern reading, The 0 he ran in that Keenland race would have taken too much of a toll out of him. Rahystada would of been a tossout as the horse would have been forecast to "bounce.

In the same race, Rahystrada earned 121 BRIS Class Rating (winning the very strong 118 Race at Keeneland) which would put him right there with everyone else and a definite use at 56-1.

However, Thorograph numbers completely spit on Pleasant Strike who nearly wrecked my exacta ticket by getting nudged out for 2nd by Rahy's Attorney, who I used. Pleasant Strike's career top was a 1 and he was coming into the race with 4 consecutive 3's and wouldn't figure to improve any more late in his 5yo campaign, BRIS Class Ratings made Pleasant Strike a contender with his solid 2nd place finishes in a pair of Grade 3 races. He was a toss on Thorograph.

The 4th place finisher Wicked Style also looked more favorable on BRIS than TG, where he figured to "bounce" off his career top of 2.

My ticket in that was 4-6-10/1-4-6-9-10. Another longshot, #10 Cryptolight figured on Thorograph to be competitive. TG figs indicated to me that he was just as good on turf as on dirt, with him pairing his top in his last turf race. BRIS had that August 1st Mountaineer listed stakes turf race an extremely soft field with a RR of 115, the weakest field Cryptolight had seen in some time, and he still couldn't win despite a golden trip. If he were as good on turf as dirt, he would of won that race.

Anyway, this is one race and obviously one race shouldn't be used to judge one method or another. Anyone can pull a single race out and show one method outperforming the other. But I've gone back and forth between the services over the years, sometimes using them in conjucture with each other and my revelation this past weekend is that Class trumps Speed and that trying to forecast patterns and "bounces" based on very rough speed figures is looney tunes.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Cramer already showed after a huge survey that speed figures go up on drops and down on rises to the 6-8 point variety.

In the land of nearly all restricted races here in Ohio.Class moves are big.The subtle the better.

[proximity]

But I've gone back and forth between the services over the years, sometimes using them in conjucture with each other and my revelation this past weekend is that Class trumps Speed and that trying to forecast patterns and "bounces" based on very rough speed figures is looney tunes.

you'll be able to add an extra $25 a day to your bankroll now too. :)

[bisket]

a horse's class in relation to handicapping is basically at what level; allowance, stakes, claiming, maiden has the horse raced successfully at. now inside each one of these levels are conditions attached to each race: state breds, non winners of one, two, three for allownaces. claiming conditions can be non winners of a race for 1 year, 2 years, 6 months etc. the idea is to look and compare each horses WINS to other horse's WINS. this isn't horseshoes almost doesn't count. what distance did the wins come at. how did the horse do at similar distances. class and distance are the most important things to analyze for each horse as it relates the other horses in today's race. then move on to pace and speed to decide how a race will be run. try to get an idea in your head what the likely pace will be, and where every horse will likely be at each call. this is how a jock looks at a race. class and distance is how a trainer looks at a race. handicap a horses history, and current condition like a trainer. handicap the likely scenerio's of how a race will play out like a jock: this particular part of handicapping is where speed figs can be helpful. i don't use them though.

[cmoore]

SPI figures on the brisnet ultimate summary sheet can give you an idea of potential class of first time starters.

[maxwell]

I would imagine any player worth their handicapping salt is a class handicapper; it's part and parcel of the game. I guess I'm a speed handicapper due to the fact that I prefer to play only sprints ( I like to win or lose a.s.a.p ). But I would never leave out the class factor.

I think of myself as a speed / class / price player.

I would like to add pace handicapper to the mix. I keep saying I'm going to read Brohamer's take on the subject but I just might cave in and go with Randy Moss or something. What I would really like is to finish raking the bloody leaves before the snow flies. :)

[NYPlayer]

I'm glad you brought that up.

That 56-1, Rahystrada, that I threw into my exotics mix did have the fastest Thorograph figure last time out vs everyone elses last time out. However, if you were to use typical Thorograph/Sheets speed handicapping methodology and pattern reading, The 0 he ran in that Keenland race would have taken too much of a toll out of him. Rahystada would of been a tossout as the horse would have been forecast to "bounce.

In the same race, Rahystrada earned 121 BRIS Class Rating (winning the very strong 118 Race at Keeneland) which would put him right there with everyone else and a definite use at 56-1.

However, Thorograph numbers completely spit on Pleasant Strike who nearly wrecked my exacta ticket by getting nudged out for 2nd by Rahy's Attorney, who I used. Pleasant Strike's career top was a 1 and he was coming into the race with 4 consecutive 3's and wouldn't figure to improve any more late in his 5yo campaign, BRIS Class Ratings made Pleasant Strike a contender with his solid 2nd place finishes in a pair of Grade 3 races. He was a toss on Thorograph.

The 4th place finisher Wicked Style also looked more favorable on BRIS than TG, where he figured to "bounce" off his career top of 2...

...my revelation this past weekend is that Class trumps Speed and that trying to forecast patterns and "bounces" based on very rough speed figures is looney tunes.

I only use Ragozin, not TG, and I know enough about pattern reading to realize that not every horse is going to bounce. Although the winner probably did bounce of its TG "0", if the overall line suggested good condition then a "B" level race off of its top could have been predicted. The pattern you describe of four consecutive 3's on the runner up qualifies as a good condition read. Even if it hadn't run a "1" previously, the correct read would be that the 3's are a foundation, even on a 5yo.

But hey! Why by the sheets when when you can buy BRIS numbers cheaper and make a killing? Just remember to drop us a line from Easy Street when you make the big time.

[classhandicapper]

I've been handicapping 12+ years now and I've become convinced more than ever that Class Handicapping, with a sprinkle of pace (quick peeks at early fractions) defeats Speed Handicapping.

The only thing Class Handicapping needs is someone to come along and revolutionize the way class is looked at the same way Beyer and Ragozin did for speed figures. As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs)

Not saying you can't win with Sheets/TG, you certaintly can, you won't find better final time adjustments, but I'm convinced more than ever that Class is King and the claiming market is much more efficient and reliable than voodoo track variants based on a ridiculously small sample size of races.


90% or more of all the relevant information is already located in a variety of books, but no one has discussed that last 10% publicly or put it all together in one book that explains what class is, how to measure it, and how to profit from various applications.

I believe I could write such a book, but don't have the time, energy, writing skills, or motivation to do so. However, I would recommend Class Handicapping by Quinn as a decent start.

[classhandicapper]

Compare Lance Armstrong in his prime to another, less accomplished professional cyclist. Have them compete over a mountain race, where Armstrong EXCELLED. Have a slew of other riders WORK to get the other cyclist a nice SETUP and have Armstrong try to set the pace and WIRE the field, if you will. Or, have Armstrong get an unaided trip (or, at least, a trip significantly WORSE than the other cyclist). Guess what? The other cyclist wins the race.

So, while what you refer to as 'CLASS' trumps speed (and/or pace) figures, SETUP trumps CLASS. Especially on non speed biased tracks.

Until someone is able to QUANTIFY (MODEL) the events of a race, FIGURES won't be as affective as SETUP analysis.

What you are suggesting is correct, but not relevant to the point being made.

Setup only trumps Class when horses are of fairly similar ability and the setup clearly favors one over the other.

In most races the major contenders are of similar ability, but sometimes the setup for multiple horses is also similar. In those cases fine line distinctions in ability can be made that will separate the horses. In other cases there are huge differences in ability that are hidden because of similarities in speed/pace and a misunderstanding of class.

If the core of your handicapping is setup/trip, you are still going to want to use some methodology for measuring ability or performance.

Some people use speed or a combination of pace and speed. Others use class. Then they supplement that core with aspects of trip and setup.

[fmolf]

speed and class are almost synonymous with each other.the higher the class races the higher the speed and pace figures.so a 10k claimer who runs 70's on the bris numbers will not be able to step up and run in 20k where 80's are needed to win the race.Even if a 10k horse jumps up and runs an 80 generally the pace is much slower in the lower class races.

[Saratoga_Mike]

speed and class are almost synonymous with each other.the higher the class races the higher the speed and pace figures.so a 10k claimer who runs 70's on the bris numbers will not be able to step up and run in 20k where 80's are needed to win the race.Even if a 10k horse jumps up and runs an 80 generally the pace is much slower in the lower class races.

succinct and correct.

[Cratos]

I've been handicapping 12+ years now and I've become convinced more than ever that Class Handicapping, with a sprinkle of pace (quick peeks at early fractions) defeats Speed Handicapping.

The only thing Class Handicapping needs is someone to come along and revolutionize the way class is looked at the same way Beyer and Ragozin did for speed figures. As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs)

Not saying you can't win with Sheets/TG, you certaintly can, you won't find better final time adjustments, but I'm convinced more than ever that Class is King and the claiming market is much more efficient and reliable than voodoo track variants based on a ridiculously small sample size of races.

In the handicapping of racehorses, class trumps every other parameter for the winning of a race because class simply defined is “a horse’s ability to consistently win at a given level under all conditions.” Speed figures, pace figures, pedigree, etc are just class determinants.

Take any top level horse and you will find that the reason for it being at the top is that it has all or most of all the determinants of class.

When a class horse is beaten by an inferior horse it is typically beaten by speed or distance, but even then those outcomes are never constant.

[Dave Schwartz]

Cratos,

And how do you define "class?"


Dave

[nalley0710]

I've noticed that in most of the probability studies done (Davis, Quirin, Nunamaker) that class was overbet more than even speed. But then again you can look at the odds and almost predict who had the highest last race speed figures without seeing the past performances. I circled winners for a lengthy period on a track years ago and noticed there were patterns that denote class that were hardly ever mentioned in books and are way under bet in mutuals. Although I never really follow the Kentucky Derby, some people at work wanted me to place Derby bets for them I suggested another horse based on these patterns that won. The next year I did the same and the horse came in second. This is a small sample set and may just be coincidental. I guess my point is that most of the material written in these books regarding class are dealing with the major tracks. If you play different tracks than these you can find class patterns specific to your track that have rarely been emphasized in print. I must state that I use a comprehensive method of handicapping and that every track I have played is very very different in what works in analyzing form and ability analysis. Shockingly different in my experience. This probably restates a lot of what other people have said. There have been a couple of books written on constructing class figures by Stuart Eaton and James Quinn. Bris Class ratings appear to be valid in the research I have done on the tracks I study. Good luck.

[Harvhorse]

As to ascertaining class of each horse, if you kepta a set of charts, and did key races you would soon learn the hierarchy of each class on the grounds. for example in NY at present time Independence War is probably the best sprinter, any horse who ran close up to him should do well. I ment to say best cheap climing sprinter.

[so.cal.fan]

The ability of a horse to carry it's speed over the distance of ground nature intended it to.

If you can correctly classify horses at the track you're playing , you'll have a winning meeting.

[Harvhorse]

Last Thu. at Aqu. there was a 6f cheap b race, I was scanning the board and I see the 2 horse is 5/2. This peeked my interest as I had made him 8/1. The horse is 4yo and 2/22 life time. does not fit the profile of a B race winner. I say to my buddy why is this horse 5/2 ? he proceeds to show me Bris Ultras which has this horse on top in every aspect. I tell him I don't care what these numbers say, this horse won't win. He went to the front ran well but fadded to 3rd. He had no class!!!

[Dave Schwartz]

This is, of course, a debate that has been going on for decades. I recall meeting more than one handicapper back in the 70's where the greeting ended with, "Do you follow class or speed?"

The problem I have is that every time I ask for the definition of "class" it comes back to me as a function of "speed."

Things like "can run to par for this level" certainly includes a "speed" component.


From my point of view, "speed" is about "speed numbers" and "class" is about numbers produced from the earnings box or about relative class levels (ultimately determined by pars).

My experience indicates that most of the so-called class approaches (at least as defined above) falls far short of a speed-number-based approach.

The issue with the "class advantaged" horse is that they are generally very obvious and generally go off at 4/5.


Just my opinion and I am very willing to be educated with a "class" method that works well.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[CincyHorseplayer]

Cramer already showed after a huge survey that speed figures go up on drops and down on rises to the 6-8 point variety.

In the land of nearly all restricted races here in Ohio.Class moves are big.The subtle the better.


I'm self plagiarising here but only because it's a relevant point.Class handicapping is meaningful.The subtle differences make money every day.

[Show Me the Wire]

This is, of course, a debate that has been going on for decades. I recall meeting more than one handicapper back in the 70's where the greeting ended with, "Do you follow class or speed?"

The problem I have is that every time I ask for the definition of "class" it comes back to me as a function of "speed.".................................................. ....................................

regards,
Dave Schwartz

Yes it is, but you leave of the very important qualifiers over an amount of ground and weight carried. Class has to do with stamina mixed with speed.

However, more really needs to be added to the definition to account for the ability to exhibit the speed over the amount of ground carrying weight against compitition.

[TrifectaMike]

This is, of course, a debate that has been going on for decades. I recall meeting more than one handicapper back in the 70's where the greeting ended with, "Do you follow class or speed?"

The problem I have is that every time I ask for the definition of "class" it comes back to me as a function of "speed."

Things like "can run to par for this level" certainly includes a "speed" component.


From my point of view, "speed" is about "speed numbers" and "class" is about numbers produced from the earnings box or about relative class levels (ultimately determined by pars).

My experience indicates that most of the so-called class approaches (at least as defined above) falls far short of a speed-number-based approach.

The issue with the "class advantaged" horse is that they are generally very obvious and generally go off at 4/5.


Just my opinion and I am very willing to be educated with a "class" method that works well.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Class - The degree to which a horse can overcome chaos.

Mike

[Cratos]

Cratos,

And how do you define "class?"


Dave


Dave,

In my earlier post I defined class as “a horse’s ability to consistently win at a given level under all conditions.”

However I will expand on that definition. Class is always post race determined; however it can be pre-race assessed.

The major determinants of class (not necessary in order) are:

SPEED – the ability of the horse to run fast enough to win consistently at a given level.
STAMINA – the ability of the horse to run the distance of the race and consistently win.
STRENGTH – the ability of the horse to tote weight at the pace and distance of the race; and win.
STYLE – the ability of the horse to adapt and negotiate the pace of the race and win.

The two most important indicators of class is consistency and winning. No matter how well a horse run at a given level, it must win at that level consistently to have class at that level.

There will be those who will argue that other things, for example winning on a off-track determines class and to that I say no, it only enhances a horse’s class.

Lastly, there isn’t any single metric in my opinion that will determine or quantify class. A favorite line from the legendary Pittsburgh Phil was “when you find class, bet it.” Class is the quintessential elusive butterfly.

[46zilzal]

Class - The degree to which a horse can overcome chaos.

Mike
or PACE pressures in Today's, not any other, race. So called "class" then
only really matters in THIS contest, no other.

The horse doesn't know what MAN MADE class level he is running in.

[Gold9er]

yo got it right. except for young horses with 1 or two starts. then speed figures can be effective. i used to be a speed handicapping guru. but then i thought. if it was possible to go back in time and run the same race over 10 times, and the horses had the same form and post position, you would probally get 5 different final times. does one speed figure tell you how fast a horse is? probally not. i use speed figures to judge if a horse will bounce or not. i think form is the top factor along with class.
theres two things that i will throw a horse out for the win automatically.
1. caint pass anybody
2. ran top speed figure last time
these two work most of the time but not all the time.
then i use the horse with the best form along with class

[Tom]

Part of class is determination, or heart. Does the horse dig down when challenged, or give up? You can't put a number on that, but you can see it. When two horses duel to the wire, when one horse wants the early lead no matter what, you can see them digging in and fighting. They use speed to do it, but the speed is called by the desire.

That is one of the key things I look for in evaluating front runners - I much prefer a line like" 1-hd 2-hd 2-hd 1 no to one like: 1-4 1-3 1-3 1-2
The fomrer showing heart in duelling for the front end.

Class horses can be soundly beaten when they don't get thier pace or set up of surface or distance, but when they go down fighting, not quitting, and they may even overcome the obstacles and win or run close when they should not. Hard Spun comes to mind. PON in the Derby. Alydar! Sham, whom may have run himslef into the ground in the Belmont.

These are not machines, and all the abilit in the world won't get home a horse who gives up. Pyro struck me as a talented horse with questionable calss. He was capable of running big races, but he gave up to many time when everything was not just right for him. This might turn out to be Quality Road's legacy, too.

[fmolf]

class is a combination of speed stamina and form all interrelated.A horse may be fast enough due to good form to run @20k successfully today but next week may lose this form and only be competitive at 10k.....this is why horses climb and descend the claiming ladder everyday.As races go up in class so do the speed and pace figures needed to win these races.Heart and guts are good in a race horse but can be seen in lower level animals as well as the upper echelon stakes runners.What a lot of people mistake for no heart is no stamina.cheap speed dying.So the difference between a lower class animal is not how fast he runs as both could run a 21 to the first call.the classier animal will carry his speed a lot further.

[classhandicapper]

Cratos is on the right track.

Class is the simultaneous expression of all aspects of a horse's ability.

Think of it the way you might think of a basketball player for example.

What makes a basketball player great?

1. Shooting
2. Ball Handling
3. Passing
4. Defense
5. Rebounding
6. etc.....

The same of true of horses.

What makes a horse great?

1. Speed, brilliance, acceleration etc... (out of the gate, early, and late)
2. Stamina
3. Determination, courage, heart
4. Versatility (running style, conditions, surface etc...)
5. etc....

When we make pace and speed figures, we are attempting to measure an aspect of class or ability. It may be the most important aspect, but it's not complete. It's approximately like looking at FG%, 3P%, eFG, and TS% for a basketball player, concluding he's a great shooter, and stopping there without examining everything else. It's not complete.

The things that makes it tricky is that all not all horses have equal distributions of each aspect of ability just as every basketball player that's a great shooter is not also a great passer and vice versa etc...

Making matters even worse is that when horses run against each other the pace and race development impacts the final time of each competitor differently depending on how each horse ran within the race, how much overall ability each has, and what distribution of each component each has (that last part is critical and not well understood).

That means using speed figures alone to measure ability is practically laughable. Combining pace figures and speed figures is incrementally better but still not complete and much more open to accuracy problems.

The good news is that racing classifications tend to be reasonably efficient. That is, successful horses tend to move up in class, unsuccessful horses tend to move down and most eventually find the level where they belong even if their form improves, deteriorates etc...

Of course, you have to understand which classes are better than which, by how much, and how various performances at one level compare to those at another level to know how good the horses are.

That is not always a simple task when you are talking about claimers, allowance horses, state breds, a wide variety of restricted and conditioned claimers, claimers/alw races for 3YOs, older, 3 and up etc... that move in and out of each type of race. Then we also have to evaluate shippers from a variety of other tracks with similar and not so similar classing conventions, a different set of statebreds etc.... Finally, we have to deal with seasonal issues (field strength in winter vs. summer for example), the development of younger horses, strong and weak fields within the same class etc....

It's very complex, but that's why it's now profitable. People abandoned class handicapping because it was never defined or measure properly to begin with and because it's not easy to convert class into a number that could be marketed and sold like a speed figure.

But once you can classify horses properly, you are measuring ABILITY properly and can then move on to other factors like "a trip setup that may favor one horse over another", trainer, bias, recency, etc....

[Show Me the Wire]

Dave,

In my earlier post I defined class as “a horse’s ability to consistently win at a given level under all conditions.”

However I will expand on that definition. Class is always post race determined; however it can be pre-race assessed.

The major determinants of class (not necessary in order) are:

SPEED – the ability of the horse to run fast enough to win consistently at a given level.
STAMINA – the ability of the horse to run the distance of the race and consistently win.
STRENGTH – the ability of the horse to tote weight at the pace and distance of the race; and win.
STYLE – the ability of the horse to adapt and negotiate the pace of the race and win.

The two most important indicators of class is consistency and winning. No matter how well a horse run at a given level, it must win at that level consistently to have class at that level.

There will be those who will argue that other things, for example winning on a off-track determines class and to that I say no, it only enhances a horse’s class.

Lastly, there isn’t any single metric in my opinion that will determine or quantify class. A favorite line from the legendary Pittsburgh Phil was “when you find class, bet it.” Class is the quintessential elusive butterfly.

Here is an intelligent posting, one of many, by a person that understands horse racing. What impresses me is his undersatanding that a function of class is how the horse wins (style). :ThmbUp:

He is also correct about off-tracks.

[Dave Schwartz]

While I agree that it is an intelligent post, it is still not quantifiable.

IMHO, something that is not quantifiable is not usable.

[the_fat_man]

While I agree that it is an intelligent post, it is still not quantifiable.

IMHO, something that is not quantifiable is not usable.

'Class' as utilized by most is akin to 'bounce'. They don't know what it really is, can't quantify it, and certainly can't define it. They resort to it as an explanation as to why a horse didn't run 'predictably'.

The bolded statement is precisely why the game is CRUSHABLE to anyone (with the requisite skill, of course) playing the game in a way that's different than what everyone else is doing. And, for those 'quantifying' without a firm grounding in the 'basics' of the game, and there appear to be many: GOOD LUCK.

[Show Me the Wire]

While I agree that it is an intelligent post, it is still not quantifiable.

IMHO, something that is not quantifiable is not usable.

It is quantifiable. Maybe the esoteric definition is not, but class itself is quantifiable.

Don't ask me how, because that is my proprietary information.

[Dave Schwartz]

That is a good answer, SMTW.

Certainly one that holds me at bay, but permit me to ask this...

Somewhere in that combination of elements that produces for you a class number, is there not some reference to speed?

[rrbauer]

I've been handicapping 12+ years now and I've become convinced more than ever that Class Handicapping, with a sprinkle of pace (quick peeks at early fractions) defeats Speed Handicapping.

The only thing Class Handicapping needs is someone to come along and revolutionize the way class is looked at the same way Beyer and Ragozin did for speed figures. As of right now BRIS are the champs and I believe I would out-handicap any Sheets/TG player with BRIS PPs (with Race/Class Ratings+Pace Figs)

Not saying you can't win with Sheets/TG, you certaintly can, you won't find better final time adjustments, but I'm convinced more than ever that Class is King and the claiming market is much more efficient and reliable than voodoo track variants based on a ridiculously small sample size of races.

I haven't read another post in this thread, but don't confuse the sheets' brigade with other types of handicapping. There are some very good sheet players who have corralled the nuances of patterns, and do well betting from that, but those people are dealing with final-time numbers with nudges for ground-loss and weight-carried....and a whole lot of arrogance about what they perceive to be the nuts. There is NO intellectual basis for conversation with the sheets' brigade. Ask them!!

As to Class versus Speed, when a 3YO in June is kicking the crap out of a bunch of older horses who are 2 lengths in arrears with their tongues hanging out, panting, "slow down bro, we have bigger Prime-Power figs than you do", you need to note that and write down the result and rethink what you're describing as Voodoo! You are entitled to your opinion but be sure to bring a pocketful of money when you are backing that opinion.

[Cratos]

While I agree that it is an intelligent post, it is still not quantifiable.

IMHO, something that is not quantifiable is not usable.

Dave,

I will attempt to respond to your assertion: “IMHO, something that is not quantifiable is not usable.”

I hope you don’t take this as an affront, but class is quantifiable; however it is non-parametric. Class is quantifiable by the consistency in wins that a horse have at a given level. For instance, Medalgia d’Oro won 7 of 15 starts at the graded level and missed finishing less than second in only 2 of those 15 starts; therefore Medalgia d’Oro is quantifiable a graded stakes horse. You can fit this example with many other horses and at different class levels.

However when I speak of class as being non-parametric I am saying that there isn’t any boundaries to class. Why, because variables that are subjective never have boundaries. For example good, pretty, etc are all non-parametric variables that are subjected to interpretation and therefore boundless.

Do we know whether Rachel Alexandra had more class than Man O’War or Secretariat? No we do not, however we can say that all three horses are quantifiably at the top of the graded stakes ladder.

I believe the issue here and I am not speaking for you; is that the inference is that we should be able to put a metric on a horse as Timeform has done with Sea-Bird by assigning him their all time high weight of 145 pounds or the Andy Beyer initial speed figure (later change) to Secretariat’s 1973 Belmont Stakes performance of 139.

It should be clear that both of those metrics are performance quantifiable, but class subjective because if a horse in the future is assigned 150 by Timeform; would that horse never having run against Sea-Bird (and never will) be 5 pounds better than Sea-Bird? The answer is no because the weight assignment would be all subjective. Giving a future Belmont Stakes winner a speed figure greater than 139 will have the same interpretation.

Again, class is quantifiable by wins at a given level, but it is non-parametric at any level.

[matthewsiv]

In my humble opinion speed ratings carry very little weight.

A cheap horse who likes to lead and has no opposition from the gate can run a
very large speed figure.

When you put the same horse in another race where he has to fight for the lead his figure is nowhere near as good.

Class is down to the consistency of the horse to win or be placed,or as Tom said heart or determination.

[46zilzal]

In my humble opinion speed ratings carry very little weight.

A cheap horse who likes to lead and has no opposition from the gate can run a
very large speed figure.

When you put the same horse in another race where he has to fight for the lead his figure is nowhere near as good.

Class is down to the consistency of the horse to win or be placed,or as Tom said heart or determination.
THIS very reason is why 2nd call pace times are as important, if not more so, than final time

[classhandicapper]

While I agree that it is an intelligent post, it is still not quantifiable.

IMHO, something that is not quantifiable is not usable.

What you and others are really saying is that you can't quantify it. ;)

I thought my basketball analogy explained the issues perfectly.

I can quantify it. Perhaps not perfectly and perhaps not in all situations, but well enough to have many profitable applications. Cratos is giving a good explanation of one technique. That is, consistency at a certain level. But there are many other techniques.

If you read my prior post, I explained what CLASS is and why all other methods of measuring ability (speed, pace, pace/speed combos etc...) are inferior. Those other methods are only measuring components of the whole and are often inaccurate measurements of that single component. That's a major problem.

IMO, it would be possible to create a CLASS number that is superior to pace figures, speed figures, and various combinations of the two, but a number like that would not be as accurate as superior knowledge of the quality of various fields relative to others and a subjective analysis of how horses ran within those respective races. That kind of thing takes a ton of research, experience, and the use of a variety of classing techniques. That's why it is rejected by most handicappers. It's hard, they don't know how to do it, so they conclude that the factor is not useful.

Handicappers are looking for one number that someone else will calculate for them and make their lives simple. :lol:

There is an old saying in accounting that is very relevant (it pertains to depreciation of assets).

"I would rather be approximately right that precisely wrong".

The most sophisticated pace and speed figures are calculated using a complex analysis of track speed, wind, run up, distance pars, beaten length charts etc...

What you get is a measurement that is "precisely wrong" in terms of measuring ability. It may be a very good estimate of some aspects of ability, but it's still not a complete or totally accurate measurement.

Why would anyone want to use something that is precisely wrong if there are superior alternatives?

Now I want to be clear, I do not reject numbers totally. There are applications of pace and speed figures that do a better job of measuring ability than any class analysis I could come up with to date even though the same accuracy and incompleteness issues exist. So I use them when appropriate.

Numbers are clearly very useful in races where the horses have little or no race record and have yet to sort themselves out.

Maiden races with lots of first time starters and other lightly raced horses range from horrible to groups that are all just a few races from stakes competition. Numbers often tip off the strength of those fields before the horses sort themselves out, but you have to be careful because of the general problems described previously.

[Dave Schwartz]

You are correct. I cannot quantify "class" as a number - at least not such that it comes anywhere near having the kind of return value that speed numbers do.

To me, "Quantify" means to express as a number. That is not what you indicated in your thread. At least that is not what I got from it.

I am not trying to be argumentative here.

If you can quantify "class" into a number I'd really like an education into how to do it.


Dave

[classhandicapper]

While I agree that it is an intelligent post, it is still not quantifiable.

IMHO, something that is not quantifiable is not usable.

To continue......

If you looked at the PPs of the Kentucky Derby and the typical Wood Memorial and Santa Anita Derby could you tell that the Derby is almost always the superior race and that the latter are suprior races to the winter 3YO stakes on the Inner Dirt at Aqueduct?

Of course you could.

You could tell by the overall records of the participants, how often they've won or finished close, against what class, by how much they won or lost, the typical pace and speed figures they earned in those recent races etc...

That's basic class handicapping.

The next step is to have an accurate understanding of the actual average gap between each of those stake types and how the various possible performaces within them compare to each other.

In others words, what's better a solid win in an average Wood or a 2nd in the Derby?

The next step is to be able identify strong and weak Derbys, Woods, etc... relative to the average.

The next step is look at the relative trips within races to evaluate performances.

Now if you do that every class on your circuit (as I identified previously) you'll have a great idea of where every horse fits and find loads of situations where claerly superior horses are not getting bet properly because their recent speed figures are not superior (and are actually sometimes lower) than other horses.

Then you can move on to possible changes in form, recency, race setup, distance, and other issues.

[Dave Schwartz]

Classie,

Yes, but that is still not a number. That is an anecdotal description of "A" is classier than "B" rather than "A" should be 8/5 and "B" should be 4/1.

What win percentage do you assign to each horse based upon that class analysis?


Dave

[classhandicapper]

You are correct. I cannot quantify "class" as a number - at least not such that it comes anywhere near having the kind of return value that speed numbers do.

To me, "Quantify" means to express as a number. That is not what you indicated in your thread. At least that is not what I got from it.

I am not trying to be argumentative here.

If you can quantify "class" into a number I'd really like an education into how to do it.
Dave

Dave,

I could probably do it, but I think it would be a step backwards from what I am doing now. I would be attempting to put a precise number on something that is often a little fuzzy and sometimes involves clear conclusions based on the relative performance of horses within the same race where any kind of number would fail miserably. But as I tried to explain, sometimes being approximately right is superior to being precisely wrong. I know it seems like I am talking in circles a bit, but it's not all that hard once you actually understand the pecking order at your track and where frequent shippers fit with the locals. The things is, few people know that stuff because they are too enamored with speed and pace figures that sometimes miss the boat.

[classhandicapper]

Classie,

Yes, but that is still not a number. That is an anecdotal description of "A" is classier than "B" rather than "A" should be 8/5 and "B" should be 4/1.

What win percentage do you assign to each horse based upon that class analysis?
Dave

Excluding all the other factors, I would typically wind up rating horses as "similar to others", "having a small edge", "having a large edge", or being a standout based on class and then making a rough line. I rarely get down to exact percentages. It has to scream before I bet.

Most of my class based bets are in situations where the public does not understand that a certain class is vastly superior to another. That typically happens when horses cross over. By "cross over" I mean they move from one type of race to another. Examples are open/statebred, claiming/allowance, open claiming/conditional claiming, shippers etc... in either direction.

Handicappers often don't understand how these horses fit when they move one way or the other (I find bets in both directions) . They also don't understand the gaps between various classes. Sometimes a single step up or down is huge and sometimes two steps is meaningless.

I tend to find horses that were fairly well beaten in vastly superior races where they earned similar or slightly inferior figures to other horses. They go off at attractive prices because people are looking at the numbers alone and don't understand the class drop and actual ability of the horse. But it works in the other direction too. I sometimes bet against horses with superior figures that are taking a much bigger jump in class than people understand.

Of course there are other applications.

[Dave Schwartz]

Not to beat a dead horse but this is the classic problem of class - kind of like "form." It is very difficult to "quantify" (into a number).

In my software I have some "class" numbers. They are actually pretty good but nothing that resembles coming close to break even.

However, they point to winners that no other factors have. And that is part of your point, I think.

That is, they point to 4/5 shots (for example) who have not produced good, recent speed numbers yet have a decided edge on the field. And they must be obvious as the whole world has them but me. <G>


Dave

[senortout]

That is, they point to 4/5 shots (for example) who have not produced good, recent speed numbers yet have a decided edge on the field. And they must be obvious as the whole world has them but me. <G>(Dave Schwartz quote)

yesssssssssss!!!!!!!!!

That's what I'm talkin' bout!....my sentiments exactly. I mean it!...very first time on this forum I have felt a connection with another handicapper in such a epiphany-type moment....I just can't see most of these winners when they do win....but their class has obviously carried them through....

Dave, I just let these types beat me. I suggest you continue doing the same.

senortout

[Tom]

Dave, my take is that in order to be a "class horse" in the fist place, the horse will have some "numbers" somewhere to prove it. One way I use class is as a reason to go back on that horse. This week's Sim Weekly has a good article by Jim Quinn that combines speed and class.

[Pell Mell]

Excluding all the other factors, I would typically wind up rating horses as "similar to others", "having a small edge", "having a large edge", or being a standout based on class and then making a rough line. I rarely get down to exact percentages. It has to scream before I bet.

Most of my class based bets are in situations where the public does not understand that a certain class is vastly superior to another. That typically happens when horses cross over. By "cross over" I mean they move from one type of race to another. Examples are open/statebred, claiming/allowance, open claiming/conditional claiming, shippers etc... in either direction.

Handicappers often don't understand how these horses fit when they move one way or the other (I find bets in both directions) . They also don't understand the gaps between various classes. Sometimes a single step up or down is huge and sometimes two steps is meaningless.



I tend to find horses that were fairly well beaten in vastly superior races where they earned similar or slightly inferior figures to other horses. They go off at attractive prices because people are looking at the numbers alone and don't understand the class drop and actual ability of the horse. But it works in the other direction too. I sometimes bet against horses with superior figures that are taking a much bigger jump in class than people understand.

Of course there are other applications.

This post and others you made in this thread are closer to the truth than any I have read on this site.
However, I think you have revealed more than enough and think you should cease and desist. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Dave Schwartz]

Yes, wouldn't want you to give up any priceless secrets.

[Show Me the Wire]

Of course Dave, speed is a factor in class. I don't understand the question, what I am I missing, as final time over distance is easily quantifiable.

[Cratos]

Classie,

Yes, but that is still not a number. That is an anecdotal description of "A" is classier than "B" rather than "A" should be 8/5 and "B" should be 4/1.

What win percentage do you assign to each horse based upon that class analysis?


Dave

Dave,

I believe you are confusing quantifying with parametric. If you want class to be a single number, you can set up class as an index number by racetrack, race value, or any category you choose that will indicate a change in class magnitude over a period of time relative to a specific class point.

The DRF Purse Value Index (PVI) is one way of taking a single number and quantifying the class of a racetrack.

[Dave Schwartz]

Cratos,

Yes, that is one way to make a class number. Unfortunately, it will be a very weak one.

The idea is to make a strong class number.


Dave

[Cratos]

Cratos,

Yes, that is one way to make a class number. Unfortunately, it will be a very weak one.

The idea is to make a strong class number.


Dave

If you are referring to the DRF PVI as being weak (and I agree) all of the data is available to strengthen it as I have done in my database. It was a lot work and my assumptions had to be redress several times, but that is what statistical modeling is about; redoing assumptions to obtain a rational conclusion.

[classhandicapper]

Not to beat a dead horse but this is the classic problem of class - kind of like "form." It is very difficult to "quantify" (into a number).

In my software I have some "class" numbers. They are actually pretty good but nothing that resembles coming close to break even.

However, they point to winners that no other factors have. And that is part of your point, I think.

That is, they point to 4/5 shots (for example) who have not produced good, recent speed numbers yet have a decided edge on the field. And they must be obvious as the whole world has them but me. <G>


Dave


:lol:

Dave, that was pretty funny.

I agree that when a horse has a clear cut edge in class in a situation that the general public understands well, it will typically be a heavy favorite and not be a profitable situation. However, I think that's true of all major contenders that have a clear cut edge in anything.

If a horse looks like a major contender on form and he's clearly the only speed, he's usually going to be even money or 4-5 also.

If a horse looks like a major contender and he's trained by a super trainer in the middle of a red hot run or has a well known very favorable trainer pattern going for him, he's usually going to be even money or 4-5 also.

If a horse has standout speed figures off a series of races he's usually going to be even money or 4-5 also.

You get the picture.

That's why I said the idea is to find applications of the class factor that are not well understood (I gave you a few ideas). That way, you can find standouts that are 3-1 and major contenders that are 8-1. You aren't going to find several each day, but with a better understanding of class you will make better odds lines and find occasional standouts at nice prices.

[classhandicapper]

This post and others you made in this thread are closer to the truth than any I have read on this site.
However, I think you have revealed more than enough and think you should cease and desist. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

Thank you and sorry. Sometimes I can't help myself. I did hold back details though (as tough as that is for me). :lol:

I have a book in me, but I'm too lazy to write it. :bang:

[classhandicapper]

Cratos,

Yes, that is one way to make a class number. Unfortunately, it will be a very weak one.

The idea is to make a strong class number.
Dave

Dave,

You mentioned PARs in the beginning of the conversation. PARs are the way I got started as a class handicapper somewhere around 15-20 years ago after making speed and pace figures for about 10-15 years before that.

I don't know the year, but I just bought an IBM AT and Dbase 3+. I built a database of my pace and speed figures, by class, distance etc...

I also had a "key race" application where I could analyze how the first 3 finishers in any race did next time out and what all the winners did in their prior race.

Slowly, the relationship between the class PARs and how horses performed when they moved up and down started getting clearer so I could evaluate drops and move ups better. Then I added things like field size, my own estimation of whether the race was of average, above average, or below average quality, the number of contenders in the race, and other things that refined my ability to class the horses.

All these things brought it into sharper and sharper focus.

Then I started examining fields really carefully and could see how some horses that were well beaten had actually run much better than than it looked. The public did not grasp that.

I started making class numbers off that info, but stopped because it eventually became more of exercise in comparative handicapping that I kept adding to over time as I refined my understanding of bias, pace, and aspects of trip. That process is still ongoing.

Now it has evolved into something else.

I sort of know the types of situations the public screws up in and immediately look for them. If I find one I dig into the charts and prior races. If not I might look for another type of play like a trainer play, pace play, bias play, setup play etc...

[Show Me the Wire]

Me too, classhandicapper. The journey with speed figures and pars led to my quantifying class. When Jerry Brown was gracious enough to release speed figure pars for race conditions it definately was an eye opener.

I even started a thread back then called the "Key to the Mint" about the Gulfstream meet. You could nail every worthwhile MSW dropper and nail the MCL to MSW ranks. It was very profitable until I naively posted my findings on the board.

[George Sands]

When Jerry Brown was gracious enough to release speed figure pars for race conditions it definately was an eye opener.

Wasn't it Ian Meyers who did this?

[rastajenk]

My main problem with this thread is based on phrases like "winning consistently" and using the highest levels as examples. I have no particular argument with some of the concepts being kicked around except that they have only slightly alluded to the situations that are about 95% of North American racing; stuff like "non-winners this calendar year" or "non-winners of two in two years" or some other combination of non-winner stuff. At a lot of tracks, there aren't many "consistent winners" to use as reference points on a class scale, but there are still enough trends and profiles that describe the winners that do emerge from the muck to be useful. I guess that's the goal of Dave's quantifiable quest and the original poster's suggestion of a radical new rating?

What about trainer intent? Seems to me that can confound a class-based determination more easily than a speed rating one.

[Pell Mell]

What about trainer intent? Seems to me that can confound a class-based determination more easily than a speed rating one.[/QUOTE]

I think it's the other way around. When one has a good grasp of the class factors the trainers intent becomes apparent.;)

[Show Me the Wire]

Wasn't it Ian Meyers who did this?

Mr. Brown posted the pars on his board, after we (board members) pestered him. I am not sure about Ian Meyer's involvement, or his relation to the product. I am talking about ten years ago.

Pell Mell,

The pars reveal trainer intent. What I left out of my previous posting is that the wagering public seemed consistently misled by the speed figures, in assessing drops and class rises.

As an aside, I posted alot, back then, about using trainer intent in conjunction with a set of good speed figures.

[Ian Meyers]

Wasn't it Ian Meyers who did this?


Yeah it was, not that it matters. I did the research and found my post (from ten years ago) it in the internet archives.

George Sands has an incredible memory. I had forgotten all about it.

[Cratos]

My main problem with this thread is based on phrases like "winning consistently" and using the highest levels as examples. I have no particular argument with some of the concepts being kicked around except that they have only slightly alluded to the situations that are about 95% of North American racing; stuff like "non-winners this calendar year" or "non-winners of two in two years" or some other combination of non-winner stuff. At a lot of tracks, there aren't many "consistent winners" to use as reference points on a class scale, but there are still enough trends and profiles that describe the winners that do emerge from the muck to be useful. I guess that's the goal of Dave's quantifiable quest and the original poster's suggestion of a radical new rating?

What about trainer intent? Seems to me that can confound a class-based determination more easily than a speed rating one.

Without being confrontational you have missed the point of what “class” is in horseracing.

Your statement: "non-winners this calendar year" or "non-winners of two in two years" or some other combination of non-winner stuff” are conditions that a horse must overcome to arrive at “class” at a given level.

Your rejection by your statement “winning consistently" and using the highest levels as examples” again misses the most salient point of the entire argument.

If a horse cannot win consistently at a given level it is not of the class of that level. It very well might have the ability to win at a given level when the so-called “chips fall in its favor,” but that is not class; it is circumstance which is always a rare occurrence.

[Show Me the Wire]

Yeah it was, not that it matters. I did the research and found my post (from ten years ago) it in the internet archives.

George Sands has an incredible memory. I had forgotten all about it.

Sorry I did not give you the proper credit.

[Ian Meyers]

Sorry I did not give you the proper credit.

No problem, it wasn't anything ground breaking. I didn't even recall it.

I for one still think pars are very important in evaluating certain types of races, especially those with unknown quantities. The further below par the "knowns" have run, the more likely a stranger will win the race. IMHO it also helps in races where no one can run to par because pace becomes more important.

[NYPlayer]

We're all familiar with Zenyatta's win in the Classic. Many participants on this board and in the media thought she couldn't win because had never faced serious competition. Even Andy Beyer said it would require a "leap of faith" to believe she could win. Indeed, throughout her career, her owners were chided for how they presumably never took a chance with their champion mare.

So if class tells all, then how could she face the best male horses in the world which had either won or placed in the most prestigious races in the world, and win emphatically?

The answer is simple. She was faster and more consistent than the rest of the Classic field, and whereas she was typically 2-5 in those ostensibly cheaper races she came from, in the Classic she went to post at a generous 5-2. Some may be tempted to define her class in terms of her speed, but it's absolutely a function of physical development. She got good and stayed good.

[turfbar]

We're all familiar with Zenyatta's win in the Classic. Many participants on this board and in the media thought she couldn't win because had never faced serious competition. Even Andy Beyer said it would require a "leap of faith" to believe she could win. Indeed, throughout her career, her owners were chided for how they presumably never took a chance with their champion mare.

So if class tells all, then how could she face the best male horses in the world which had either won or placed in the most prestigious races in the world, and win emphatically?

The answer is simple. She was faster and more consistent than the rest of the Classic field, and whereas she was typically 2-5 in those ostensibly cheaper races she came from, in the Classic she went to post at a generous 5-2. Some may be tempted to define her class in terms of her speed, but it's absolutely a function of physical development. She got good and stayed good.

Simpler,she had best syn fig(Beyer).

T

[bisket]

We're all familiar with Zenyatta's win in the Classic. Many participants on this board and in the media thought she couldn't win because had never faced serious competition. Even Andy Beyer said it would require a "leap of faith" to believe she could win. Indeed, throughout her career, her owners were chided for how they presumably never took a chance with their champion mare.

So if class tells all, then how could she face the best male horses in the world which had either won or placed in the most prestigious races in the world, and win emphatically?

The answer is simple. She was faster and more consistent than the rest of the Classic field, and whereas she was typically 2-5 in those ostensibly cheaper races she came from, in the Classic she went to post at a generous 5-2. Some may be tempted to define her class in terms of her speed, but it's absolutely a function of physical development. She got good and stayed good.
the "best horses in the world" were not in the field

[Light]

No one has mentioned the obvious. When I started playing the horses in the early 80"s, it was very very difficult for a 10K claimer to go up against 16K claimers. Or a 16K claimer to go into allowance company. There was a definite division in quality of competition back then amongst the classes. Now horses intertact in the class heirarchy with greater ease. At cheaper tracks even sharp 4K claimers regularly romp in allowance company. Something totally unheard of when I started. The "class" factor has changed in meaning and complexity and is not as clearly defined as when Quinn wrote "class of the field."

[illinoisbred]

No one has mentioned the obvious. When I started playing the horses in the early 80"s, it was very very difficult for a 10K claimer to go up against 16K claimers. Or a 16K claimer to go into allowance company. There was a definite division in quality of competition back then amongst the classes. Now horses intertact in the class heirarchy with greater ease. At cheaper tracks even sharp 4K claimers regularly romp in allowance company. Something totally unheard of when I started. The "class" factor has changed in meaning and complexity and is not as clearly defined as when Quinn wrote "class of the field."
I agree. Talent has been diluted by the addition of so many more tracks running at any given time. Also, time of year makes a difference. Most of the allowance races at Hawthorne now are often full of recent claimers. Today, a filly who ran 2nd to RA[twice] last spring just held off a couple of good state-breds-granted it was only a prep to get ready for Oaklawn. Later on, a recent 5,000 NW3 took a somewhat weakish allowance race.

[Show Me the Wire]

Dilluted talent or is there another prominent factor causing the unprecedented class moves? You decide.

[illinoisbred]

Dilluted talent or is there another prominent factor causing the unprecedented class moves? You decide.
Oh, I'm sure what you're inferring plays a big part in quite a few move-ups.

[pandy]

When I ran track in high school, I ran faster against the weaker squads, slower against better, this was in the 200 meter dash. I found that when I ran against better fields, I was usually running in a closely-bunched group of runners and this created a tremendous amount of pressure. In fact, there were times where I couldn't stride fully or even move my arms all the way back because of close quarters. After a race against a tough squad, I was also much more fatigued, even though I ran slower than my best. This is one of the main reasons why horses bounce when moved up in class, or explode when dropped. It's simply much easier to run faster when allowed to relax into stride clear of other horses, or not too bunched up. That's why so many horses wake up when dropping into a mdn claimer.

[Light]

Good point Pandy. That brings to mind that even though horses cannot read the form or articulate like humans,they have consciousness, awareness and sensitivity of their surroundings and who they are racing against.

[freeneasy]

secrateriate was a champion before he ever stepped onto the track for his 1st race but secrateriate with a feather on his back couldnt beat a field of 10k claimers if he wasnt in condition. class is the condition a hores must have to preform up to and above its own standard or inherint abilities. thats what me thinks

[PaceAdvantage]

secrateriate was a champion before he ever stepped onto the track for his 1st race but secrateriate with a feather on his back couldnt beat a field of 10k claimers if he wasnt in condition. class is the condition a hores must have to preform up to and above its own standard or inherint abilities. thats what me thinksThat was a nice touch...misspelling Secretariat like that...bold move! :lol:

You're somebody to watch from here on out! :lol: :lol:

[fmolf]

Talent has been diluted and class ladder is more easily ascended nowadays but one only needs to look at the figs being run to determine if a horse can or cannot compete at that class level.Class for me equates to is this horse fast enough to compete at this level.there are so many different claiming races now that one needs to use pars to determine which race is a better race or which horses while staying at the 10k claiming price might be dropping in class.There are clm10000B,clm10000N2L,3L etc....clm10000N1Y,N2Y...Clm10000NW$.....clm10000N W@1mi.or over....you get my drift .Speed figures and pars help me to distinguish these levels.

[46zilzal]

We're all familiar with Zenyatta's win in the Classic. Many participants on this board and in the media thought she couldn't win because had never faced serious competition. Even Andy Beyer said it would require a "leap of faith" to believe she could win. Indeed, throughout her career, her owners were chided for how they presumably never took a chance with their champion mare.


NOT ME "Give your horse the CHANCE to be great and that is what the Zenyatta camp has decided. Preliminaries show, if you put in lines 6 and 7 from this one, the fastest she faced early in all of her late runs, she is two lines better than the field. BUT that is from far back..."

from Sartin Alums yahoo group

[cj]

When I ran track in high school, I ran faster against the weaker squads, slower against better, this was in the 200 meter dash. I found that when I ran against better fields, I was usually running in a closely-bunched group of runners and this created a tremendous amount of pressure. In fact, there were times where I couldn't stride fully or even move my arms all the way back because of close quarters. After a race against a tough squad, I was also much more fatigued, even though I ran slower than my best. This is one of the main reasons why horses bounce when moved up in class, or explode when dropped. It's simply much easier to run faster when allowed to relax into stride clear of other horses, or not too bunched up. That's why so many horses wake up when dropping into a mdn claimer.

I've always run faster when the competition was better.

In basic training, we had tryouts for a field day and I was trying the mile. In races against my group, I would win easily running in around 5 minutes. When we faced other squadrons, there was an elite runner that dusted me by half a lap, but I ran 4:30 trying to keep up.

Even at my advanced age, we had a 1500 meter race at my last base. When I ran it with some friends that couldn't keep up, I'd run in about 6 minutes even when going all out, or at least what I thought was going all out. When I ran against guys running 4:30, I ran in 5:15 while being dusted.

For the record, after a year and a half of retirement, I'd probably be lucky to hit 6 minutes again, but that is changing after the holidays!

[freeneasy]

That was a nice touch...misspelling Secretariat like that...bold move! :lol:

You're somebody to watch from here on out! :lol: :lol:

this has the scent of fish to it and iam on a hit list so ok iam going to go ahead and take a bite.
how is the obvious mispelling of 'secrateriate', sandwiched between the somewhat questionable endearing adjectives 'nice touch' and 'bold move' and this guy :lol:, so 'fall down funny' ? ask 100 people to spell it and 40-50 are going to get it wrong. seems unendearing and quite common but it sure seemed to bring out the laughs here. na that was the lead in protected by the laugh icon. the body or main thrust of this coded message or thought is in the next sentence "ur somebody to watch from here on out" with the double :lol: :lol: to give it a flexable enough appearence as something that happens to strike a person as double hillarious, and hey who am i to judge what strikes comedy in the hearts of man making me the bad guy
for having my suspishtions (gee now i know i spelt that wrong :lol: ) and opens the door for a wide open frontal assualt on the point-counterpoint.
so if u need to bait me into a confrontation that gets me kicked then i can beat it on down the line as good as the next guy. so there it is "its all in the water"

[PaceAdvantage]

Hey man, whatever you say....ROCK ON, DUDE!

And Happy New Year!

[freeneasy]

we both know that u dont like me and that this was pretty much a way, a wimpy little way, of reminding me and that u got ur jump boots on ready to pounce. sort of saying it without saying it. u thru a ghost punch. nobody saw it but it landed. any response on my part was an automatic lose/lose. u played it perfact and won. i look like the villian. so why did i respond? to let u know that after u dusted off the trap, baited it and set it in a cornor ur the one caught in it. but no worries cause only u and i know that. see u win again

[PaceAdvantage]

Not like you? I can't "not like" you that much...you've been here since 2002...

[Quackfan]

Well I guess this is a nice end to what was a very interesting an informative thread. See Ya All Later. :(

[PaceAdvantage]

Well I guess this is a nice end to what was a very interesting an informative thread. See Ya All Later. :(As long as the thread is still open, anyone is free to continue the discussion. If it's a very interesting and informative thread, nobody will notice the little speed bump anyway...

[newtothegame]

but, Ive never cared before so here goes....
After thinking about another post (how some here almost never post in the actual handicapping part of this forum), I felt that truly did apply to me. And not that I thought I had to....but handicapping is what brought me to this forum. So to Pace, and the others, I do apologize (although I am sure its not necessary). I will try to post more in the handicapping sections (and be fore warned, I will sound stupid in these areas) lol.

After reading this thread, let me say I am lost in some areas. I have a few questions.
1. In relation to class, as one poster put it, I do believe that horses do NOT know what purses they are running for. Horses, in my opinion are like athletes with "potential". They are trained "up" hopefully into a form cycle. It is still up to the trainer and owner to decide where to place those horses to maximize their profits or obtain a "larger" agenda (such as a prep race). Most every thread I have read in regards to this takes all of the horses attributes and attempts to quantify them to arrive at an end conclusion which is will he or wont he win. Here's my question......Where do the jockey, trainer, and or owner play into this? The horse is "built" for one thing...to run. The reason I ask this is at smaller tracks and even some larger tracks on off days when there are what seems to be smaller inconsequential purses, "weird" things happen. Just look at the threads where "I can not believe this horse was taken down", or "did anyone have the 100+ to 1 horse?".
Is it the contention that "those" things happen and its best to just move on?
Or, would a better solution be to try and figure when those "things" happen and try to get on the right side?
2. I know this is a bit off of the "class" thread but in regards to time, what times are we referring to? Is this the final time of a race?
I think final times are almost meaningless UNLESS its a front runner who gains the lead early, goes all out, and never relinquishes it. The reason I say this is every race is DIFFERENT. No two races are identical. So therefore, wouldnt strategies and race set up wind up different? This in itself would cause times to be different.
What I try to do is find the styles at which horses like to run at such as early front runners, horses that stay just off of the pace, closers, and deep closers. I try to figure out in my head what the race scenario will be like and then, go from there. Am I wrong in doing this?
3. back to class, can someone please explain form cycles a bit! Maybe I am looking at it and just not knowing the terminolgy.
I try to look at what levels a horse has been running at. Look at how the horse performed in those races and try to find consistency. If I see several recent races where there is consistency, I use that as the horses "form". is that right?
Thanks in advance...and I hope this doesnt sound stupid.....I will have MANY more questions in the near future...
And please....I am not in anyway trying to get anyone to reveal their deep dark hidden secrets....
I am just trying to get up to some of the terminology cause I would like to participate more in the handicapping sections. I just feel like a average blue collar in a world of computer white collar guys (no offense intended) when I read alot of the threads.

[newtothegame]

geeze....46, I thought for sure since you took a "stab" at us that dont post in handicapping sections would of at least addressed some of my questions since I agreed you were right and posted a few questions. And now, I am not joking. Those are sincere questions.....
anyone????
And they wonder why some of us dont post in handicapping??? go figure!!!

[PaceAdvantage]

geeze....46, I thought for sure since you took a "stab" at us that dont post in handicapping sections would of at least addressed some of my questions since I agreed you were right and posted a few questions. And now, I am not joking. Those are sincere questions.....
anyone????
And they wonder why some of us dont post in handicapping??? go figure!!!You didn't even wait 24 hours before writing this? Sometimes it takes a couple of days for people to catch up...it's a fairly active board, but it's not THAT active...

[nalley0710]

A lot of these handicapping priciples relate directly to equine nature. Horses being pack animals like humans, where they run in the pack is their pecking order in the group. The front horse is the leader of the pack. Some horses have a strong desire to lead and dominate no matter who's company they are running. This is just my opinion of what class is. What makes a CEO come out of retirement when he has more money than he will ever spend and take on that enormous workload and pressure again? I think several of these posts are correct at the same time. They are just seing the same picture from different angles. Just because a horse hasn't run at a higher class level doesnt mean it isnt going to be the only horse in the higher class race that internally has a strong desire to be the leader and dominate. I see speed, class, pace, and form as all interconnected variables that impact each other and makes horseracing the hardest and most fascinating speculative activity around. I try to always remember that each horse is a distinct individual with its own personality just like humans. The fact that so many talented handicappers posting here have varying ideas on what defines class is what makes a horse race possible with every horse getting bet.