Using Bris Pace Figures for Ability Times?

[jeebus1083]

I know that ability times are usually calculated by using the 2nd call time and adding in the turn time, so if I am using Bris Pace Figures, is it practical to take the difference between the E2 and E1 figures and add it to the E2?

Example:
Horse runs an E1 of 75, and an E2 of 83, meaning the pace fig turn time would be +8. If calculating an ability time, (E2 of 83) + (TT of +8) would equate to an ability figure of 91.

I guess my question is, could this work to produce an ability calculation?

[bigga 1]

I basically ignore E1 because it has no relevance if at E2 the horse is doing the par.Example,if the race is being run over 6f and the race par is 80-90-82(85).Horse#1 does 95-85-80(80),horse#2 does 80-95-80(85),regardless of what horse 1 does't really matter if horse 2 is doing a faster speed at E2.

[Spiderman]

I do it the old school way by calculating turn-time and come home time, using the actual times and fractional distance gain or loss. This is usually done in the second view of pps, along with video replay. Decimal times are preferred, when available. Utilize the standard of 5 lengths = 1 full second and fractions are prorated. The first stage is obvious toss-outs and highlighting positive angles; the third stage is final selection.

[bigga 1]

Why give yourself a headache bris does everything,all you have to do is do your handicapping.Bris takes into consideration times and bias,so you don't have to refer to all the unecessary noise,just focus on figures and all other handicapping elements,keeping it simple, this game is about athletes and if you don't train you can't win.

[Tom]

Jeeb....yes- that works. I used to do it all the time when I was using BRIS.

Another handy thing I did was add the TT (E2-E1) to the LP number. It would downgrade late closers and upgrade those who started their run in the second call.

I had pretty good luck doing that.

[raybo]

What exactly is this "ability" figure supposed to tell you? Turn time is relative to both, how fast the first call was run and the time to the 2nd call.

"Ability", IMO, must not only include E1, TT, and E2, but also LP. It makes little difference how fast a horse runs early if it can't finish. Is your "ability" figure supposed to measure how fast a horse can run early and still finish the race? If not, what good is it?

I'm not trying to incite a riot here, just trying to understand what you're trying to achieve.

[CBedo]

Glad to see someone (Tom) actually answered the question.

I agree with Tom, and jus wanted to add, that if you think about it logically, ability = 2 * E2 - E1. So if you think that a horse that goes 75-83 gets the same ability score of a 77-84 or a 73-82. Do you think all three deserve the same ability? If so, then the methodology makes sense.

[Spiderman]

Why give yourself a headache bris does everything,all you have to do is do your handicapping.Bris takes into consideration times and bias,so you don't have to refer to all the unecessary noise,just focus on figures and all other handicapping elements,keeping it simple, this game is about athletes and if you don't train you can't win.

Not quite sure that bris includes run-up time at various tracks which accounts for pace times. Also, I've seen E1, E2 and LP #s out-of-balance with actual times. I can calculate the turn-time and finishing times, very quickly, in my head, and it's done only for the contenders. There is a definite edge to having times displayed in hundreths.

[CBedo]

There is a definite edge to having times displayed in hundreths.I'm all for accuracy, but don't kid yourself when we are dealing with mechanical timers, faulty timers, bad assumption for changing lengths to time, and inaccurate chart callers.

[Spiderman]

I'm all for accuracy, but don't kid yourself when we are dealing with mechanical timers, faulty timers, bad assumption for changing lengths to time, and inaccurate chart callers.

I know what you are saying, particularly the Gulfstream timers. Bris would have the same problem.

[bigga 1]

I guess i must handicap horses differently.Although bris gives more information about jockey,trainer and horse the bottom line is using these figures to give you an indication whether the athletes in question are coming into form or declining in form.....common sense handicapping and keeping it simple.

[Spiderman]

I guess i must handicap horses differently.Although bris gives more information about jockey,trainer and horse the bottom line is using these figures to give you an indication whether the athletes in question are coming into form or declining in form.....common sense handicapping and keeping it simple.


Those are the main reasons why I use bris, ultimate pps for 11 years. The best wins, though, have come from reading between-the-lines.

[bigga 1]

Those are the main reasons why I use bris, ultimate pps for 11 years. The best wins, though, have come from reading between-the-lines.
Thats exactly what i'm trying to say.....Common sense handicapping. :jump:

[CBedo]

I know what you are saying, particularly the Gulfstream timers. Bris would have the same problem. My implication was that separating horses by hundredths seems to make almost no sense.

[Spiderman]

My implication was that separating horses by hundredths seems to make almost no sense.

Is a nose, head or neck difference less than 5 hundredths? Makes sense to me when it becomes a game of inches.

[Tom]

But you do not have that precision in beaten lengths for internal calls.
Might be a length, a length and a half, even two lengths, and then, is a length at Suffolk equal to a length at Delaware? If you look at the PPs, and see a horse win on the lead in 47 and then another race win on the lead in 45.4....you think you are going to be accurate enough ever to fully compensate for that spread?

I'd rather spent more time looking at other factors and saying the numbers are close enough.

[CBedo]

But you do not have that precision in beaten lengths for internal calls.
Might be a length, a length and a half, even two lengths, and then, is a length at Suffolk equal to a length at Delaware? If you look at the PPs, and see a horse win on the lead in 47 and then another race win on the lead in 45.4....you think you are going to be accurate enough ever to fully compensate for that spread?

I'd rather spent more time looking at other factors and saying the numbers are close enough.What he said.

[Spiderman]

But you do not have that precision in beaten lengths for internal calls.
Might be a length, a length and a half, even two lengths, and then, is a length at Suffolk equal to a length at Delaware? If you look at the PPs, and see a horse win on the lead in 47 and then another race win on the lead in 45.4....you think you are going to be accurate enough ever to fully compensate for that spread?

I'd rather spent more time looking at other factors and saying the numbers are close enough.

In a speed situation, three E types and I look for a closer. Sure, #s are not finite. Usually, a Suffolk horse would not get to stage two and concern myself about speed comparisons - just acknowledge that a speed type is in race. Where the hundredths are most useful is getting the finite number of a contender's come home time. PPs with fractions may have a horse running last quarter in 24 2/5, for example, but when I watch video with hundredths, I see that it was near 24.30 which is 1/2 length faster than given in PPs. I will compare the 2-3 other contenders; consider if they were wide, had trouble and make my selection, which includes several other factors.

[raybo]

Sorry to digress the thread, but, I would still like to know what "ability" means in this discussion.

[CBedo]

Sorry to digress the thread, but, I would still like to know what "ability" means in this discussion."Ability times" were talked about quite a bit by Dick Mitchell. I'm not sure if he coined the term or not, but usually you see them defined as the time to the 2nd call plus the turn time (time between 1st & 2nd call).

Don't get caught up in the semantics; whether it is a sign of true ability is irrelevant. It's just another rating factor.

[harness2008]

The crude version of Ability Times was initially discussed in William Scott's Investing at the Racetrack. The calculation was to add the half mile time to the turn time to come up with the ability time fig. Nothing earth shattering here, just another method that was used back in the day that has little merit.

[michiken]

If you do a advanced search for some of my older posts, I have calculated both ability time and turn time + speed using the bris figs. There are some pdf attachments that will show you examples.

When applying ability time, I developed a counter energy rating that measures is the horse ran too fast to the half. Contrary to popular opinion, front speed does not always carry thru the stretch. I look for early that is not a quitter.

One thing about bris pace figs - they are not calculated with a variant. You may see E2's around 95 one week and 85 for the same time next. You kind of have to follow your track to see what I mean.

I am playing around with a poly formula......

[raybo]

Thanks for the explanations all!

[bigga 1]

If you do a advanced search for some of my older posts, I have calculated both ability time and turn time + speed using the bris figs. There are some pdf attachments that will show you examples.

When applying ability time, I developed a counter energy rating that measures is the horse ran too fast to the half. Contrary to popular opinion, front speed does not always carry thru the stretch. I look for early that is not a quitter.

One thing about bris pace figs - they are not calculated with a variant. You may see E2's around 95 one week and 85 for the same time next. You kind of have to follow your track to see what I mean.

I am playing around with a poly formula......
Guys this is not as difficult as you make it out to be,ability time,turn time,spread sheets, all this means nothing to me in hanicapping a horse race.Bottom line is, its all about the fitness of the horse.Brisnet gives you great info,figures,statistics and other pertinent info,but it is still not the "Holy Grail", because you still have to use a whole lot of common sense.Horse's are athletes not machines so understand that they come into form and they go out of form.Generally speaking a horse that was no good as 2or3yr old is not going to a good or great 4yr old,just a few of the common sense theories that i work with,but there's a lot more out there. :cool:

[raybo]

Guys this is not as difficult as you make it out to be,ability time,turn time,spread sheets, all this means nothing to me in hanicapping a horse race.Bottom line is, its all about the fitness of the horse.Brisnet gives you great info,figures,statistics and other pertinent info,but it is still not the "Holy Grail", because you still have to use a whole lot of common sense.Horse's are athletes not machines so understand that they come into form and they go out of form.Generally speaking a horse that was no good as 2or3yr old is not going to a good or great 4yr old,just a few of the common sense theories that i work with,but there's a lot more out there. :cool:

Agreed, form is the great equalizer!

Common sense, horse sense, a good dose of either will take you a long way.

[CBedo]

The crude version of Ability Times was initially discussed in William Scott's Investing at the Racetrack. The calculation was to add the half mile time to the turn time to come up with the ability time fig. Nothing earth shattering here, just another method that was used back in the day that has little merit.Had a brain cramp. I forgot that Scott was the "ability" time guy.

As an aside, Scott was a pen name. His real name was Finley. I think he was the father of ESPN's Bill Finley.

[cj]

Had a brain cramp. I forgot that Scott was the "ability" time guy.

As an aside, Scott was a pen name. His real name was Finley. I think he was the father of ESPN's Bill Finley.

I think Mitchell also used the term, but for a different rating. I think that is the one the original poster was talking about.

[Light]

One thing about bris pace figs - they are not calculated with a variant.

Nice to hear from you again and you have posted some interesting stuff in the past. But I believe your above statement is incorrect. This is what the Bris website says on pace figs:

"ARE BRIS PACE RATINGS COMPARABLE ACROSS DIFFERENT TRACKS ?
Yes. Since the ratings are "fully adjusted" ( reflecting both daily and track-to-track variants), they are comparable across all North American racetracks."

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

[bigga 1]

Nice to hear from you again and you have posted some interesting stuff in the past. But I believe your above statement is incorrect. This is what the Bris website says on pace figs:

"ARE BRIS PACE RATINGS COMPARABLE ACROSS DIFFERENT TRACKS ?
Yes. Since the ratings are "fully adjusted" ( reflecting both daily and track-to-track variants), they are comparable across all North American racetracks."

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

100% :jump:

[raybo]

Yeah, I'm a Bris guy from way back and it has always been their claim that all their figs are "fully adjusted", of course none of us knows exactly how that "adjusted" part is accomplished.

Like I said, I'm a Bris guy, but I do not use any of their figs, for anything. I suggest that if you do use them, you better damn well know how to verify them.

[Tom]

Sartin also used the TT+2nd call time as his Factor CF - contender factor, in the dos program Contender Scan.


btw...Michiken's stuff = good things. Worth a search for it. :ThmbUp:

[bigga 1]

Does any one know how bris gets its data to compute the figures?

[raybo]

Does any one know how bris gets its data to compute the figures?

They used to state that their raw data came from DRF, probably from Equibase.

[bigga 1]

They used to state that their raw data came from DRF, probably from Equibase.
And how does drf or eqibase get their data?

[raybo]

I assume they get the data directly from the tracks.

[CBedo]

I assume they get the data directly from the tracks.Equibase employed chart callers.

[ldiatone]

Sartin also used the TT+2nd call time as his Factor CF - contender factor, in the dos program Contender Scan.


btw...Michiken's stuff = good things. Worth a search for it. :ThmbUp:
also AIO(cynthia publishing) computer program does calculate the AT for all the races both in a "time" and a numerical #.
i used to do AT free hand using TM's PP's as the Bl's and fractional times where already estimated.

[michiken]

My bad in misquoting that the pace figs are not adjusted. Per the bris website:

ARE BRIS PACE RATINGS COMPARABLE ACROSS DIFFERENT TRACKS ?
Yes. Since the ratings are "fully adjusted" ( reflecting both daily and track-to-track variants), they are comparable across all North American racetracks.

[michiken]

For your viewing pleasure here is a sample racecard from Turfway last week. Check the results and see how ability time faired vs late pace horses.

This is something I call Pace/CounterPace.

Ken

[raybo]

For your viewing pleasure here is a sample racecard from Turfway last week. Check the results and see how ability time faired vs late pace horses.

This is something I call Pace/CounterPace.

Ken

Hmmm, I came to no conclusion either way.

[michiken]

And here is the same card using good ole turn time + speed.