Average total pace using bris data

[jasperson]

Just because it was easy to do I averaged early pace, late pace, total pace and speed ratings using bris data. For total pace I added early pace and late pace and called it total pace. In almost all cases the top total pace horse was the top speed rating horse. I don't think that it is any surprised to anyone. What I am going try to see if the early pace average is predictive in sprints and the late pace in turf race and at tracks like the Fairgrounds. Also I may try linear regression to see if it is better than the averag for these factors.

[DRIVEWAY]

Just because it was easy to do I averaged early pace, late pace, total pace and speed ratings using bris data. For total pace I added early pace and late pace and called it total pace. In almost all cases the top total pace horse was the top speed rating horse. I don't think that it is any surprised to anyone. What I am going try to see if the early pace average is predictive in sprints and the late pace in turf race and at tracks like the Fairgrounds. Also I may try linear regression to see if it is better than the averag for these factors.

If you can include rail setting in your turf race analysis, it might help make the results more pertinent.

Good Luck

[thaskalos]

IMO, these BRIS pace ratings have major accuracy issues...especially the "late" ones.

[raybo]

Just because it was easy to do I averaged early pace, late pace, total pace and speed ratings using bris data. For total pace I added early pace and late pace and called it total pace. In almost all cases the top total pace horse was the top speed rating horse. I don't think that it is any surprised to anyone. What I am going try to see if the early pace average is predictive in sprints and the late pace in turf race and at tracks like the Fairgrounds. Also I may try linear regression to see if it is better than the averag for these factors.

Although I gave up using any of Brisnet's figures a while back, due to their inaccuracies, what you are doing confuses me.

If you're averaging EP, LP, the sum of EP and LP, and the speed rating, which also includes EP and LP, what kind of figure are you hoping to obtain?

I won't go into my determination that Bris figs are inaccurate, as I have done that in previous posts as have many others.

[Tom]

Try this, jas....

Speed rating + EP
Speed rating + LP

Model the two numbers - one is "early" the other is "late"
I used to add E1 + E2 and E2 + LP, but eventually settles on the SR as the common number. Actually, it worked pretty well, if you handicapped the race and chose representative pace lines, not just blindly using last race.

If I got a cluster of Early numbers, I looked at the Late composite.

[Light]

Try this, jas....

Speed rating + EP
Speed rating + LP




Not sure I understand how to do this. You get 2 ratings per horse? Then what do you do?

[Tom]

I looked at the higher of the two, and compared them to the running style.
I modeld which rating was winning more, and also looked at how much of a decline from the early to the late numbers.

I averaged them all out to a single figure, so a horse might get a 98 - 82 as his two numbers, or maybe a 87 - 88.

I used this method sitting in the stand at Finger Lakes, so I have only 4 basic dirt distances to worry about, and more often than not, the early number was winning. :D

[jasperson]

aIMO, these BRIS pace ratings have major accuracy issues...especially the "late" ones.
Maybe that is to compensate for the their inaccuracys of early pace.:D :D I am like the handicapper that said," I don't care if a trainer drugs his horses, I just want him to do the same every race.". So since the bris data is compute using software I hope the same inaccuracies are applied to each horse in the race. I don't believe any one race describes a horses ability I try to look at the entire body of past performance. I then look at the last one or two races to see if the horse is ready to repeat that performance level. There is a lot of discussion about who has the most accurate speed rating, pace rating and class rating. I have use Beyers, bris and equibase rating plus my own and I don't see much difference in any of them.

[raybo]

Try this, jas....

Speed rating + EP
Speed rating + LP

Model the two numbers - one is "early" the other is "late"
I used to add E1 + E2 and E2 + LP, but eventually settles on the SR as the common number. Actually, it worked pretty well, if you handicapped the race and chose representative pace lines, not just blindly using last race.

If I got a cluster of Early numbers, I looked at the Late composite.

This makes more sense as the speed figure already includes more weighting on early pace. E1 is included in E2 already, and speed is slanted towards early speed so, IMO, he would be putting too much emphasis on early speed by using EP (which includes E1), LP, total pace (EP+LP), and speed (which includes E1, E2, and LP). Add to that, the inherent inaccuracies of the figs, in the first place, and you've got a mess.

[Tom]

But, my records showed a profit doing it, and, as I said, I handicapped the pace lines and was at one track. And, I was not ,limiting myself to the top figure, either.

[Light]

Tom

Sounds like you are talking in the past tense,like you don't use this method anymore. So why would you abandon a method you say is profitable?

[Tom]

I now use HTR and CJ Pace Figures.
And hardly ever play FL anymore. I refuse to have to go to a track to bet it and I can't bet FL on the net, so screw them.

I used that method late 80', then I got into Sartin around 88-89?
Once I could bet at home, it was a no-brainer to abandon the track.

[jasperson]

Although I gave up using any of Brisnet's figures a while back, due to their inaccuracies, what you are doing confuses me.

If you're averaging EP, LP, the sum of EP and LP, and the speed rating, which also includes EP and LP, what kind of figure are you hoping to obtain?

I won't go into my determination that Bris figs are inaccurate, as I have done that in previous posts as have many others.
The 8th race at GP. Jessica is back had the best average total pace rating, so I looked at her average ep rating which was 3rd best. She was the e/p3 type, I thought she could maintain contact with the front runners. This was her 2nd start after a lay off so I was looking for her to improve off from that effort. I bet her to win and place at 13/1 and she almost won it. That is what I plan to use this data for. It is to find horses to bet that don't look so good in their last races and can be used in exotics

[Tom]

Here's an example of what I did.

Santa Anita, Race 9 6.5 Furlongs.

1 Serene...Presser....85-94
2 Word.....Presser....87-91 (Poly line)
3 Dani.....Closer?....93-94
4 Hot......EPresser...96-94
5 Pink.....Early......Not a contender
6 Angel....Closer.....83-90
7 Hope.....EPresser...84-90

Tandem last race for 3 and 4 - 4 duels with the winner
and still held of the 3

Looks like an early race.....unless the 5 goes, which it has done,
but can it go long enough to matter?

4-3-1

[Tom]

Top choice - 9/5, second choice, 5-1.
Who do you bet?

The 2 was the unknown - no exacta.

[thaskalos]

Top choice - 9/5, second choice, 5-1.
Who do you bet?

The 2 was the unknown - no exacta.I would bet the 5-1 second choice...with a "saver" bet on Serene...the 1 horse.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I do something similar to Tom.I still believe in the Sartinian importance of 2nd call,so;

-for E/P I add the 2nd call + 1st fraction

-for L/P I add the 2nd call + 2nd half(1st fr + 2nd fr)

To me each embodies their namesake concept better.I was never comfortable with the original definitions in Brohamer's book.When you confront 2 E horses the horse with a 67.2 E/P with a 56 speed figure will ruin a 68.4 horse with a higher figure.And late pace I used to use 2nd half time to evaluate closers as that's the 2 fractions they dominate.Adding 2nd call exposes the pretenders.

Then for a basic ability time I add E/P + L/P.To me it represents the overall ability of a horse early,middle,and late.I use these numbers to separate matchups.And in practice you'd be surprised how effective the number is.

[Fastracehorse]

I do something similar to Tom.I still believe in the Sartinian importance of 2nd call,so;

-for E/P I add the 2nd call + 1st fraction

-for L/P I add the 2nd call + 2nd half(1st fr + 2nd fr)

To me each embodies their namesake concept better.I was never comfortable with the original definitions in Brohamer's book.When you confront 2 E horses the horse with a 67.2 E/P with a 56 speed figure will ruin a 68.4 horse with a higher figure.And late pace I used to use 2nd half time to evaluate closers as that's the 2 fractions they dominate.Adding 2nd call exposes the pretenders.

Then for a basic ability time I add E/P + L/P.To me it represents the overall ability of a horse early,middle,and late.I use these numbers to separate matchups.And in practice you'd be surprised how effective the number is.


Pace is very important to me - but i don't measure it numerically

every horse gets one whole speed fig - and then i evaluate pace set up

there are front runners, tactical types, and closers

by evaluating pace u want to know if your front runner can hang on, or your closer has enough pace to get up

i think this method is simpler, and i need time to try and evaluate form or sharpness of the animal

either way, everyone in this thread uses an ability #

fffastt

[Capper Al]

Tom,

Do you match Speed + Early pace with E and E/p running styles and Speed + Late pace with P and C styles, or the other way? I could see value in an early type with a good late pace.

I looked at the higher of the two, and compared them to the running style.
I modeld which rating was winning more, and also looked at how much of a decline from the early to the late numbers.

I averaged them all out to a single figure, so a horse might get a 98 - 82 as his two numbers, or maybe a 87 - 88.

I used this method sitting in the stand at Finger Lakes, so I have only 4 basic dirt distances to worry about, and more often than not, the early number was winning. :D

[Tom]

The running styles were made independent of the numbers - by my eye and interpretation. The closer? comment by Dani was because she had won on the lead and closing, and her numbers were high in both areas. that is why I made her the 2nd choice over the other 94 late's.

I used the wrong line for #2, the place horse - had I gone back a line to be closer to today's. The exacta would have popped off the page. So, even mis-evaluating the early pace completely, using the numbers did put me on a $13 winner.

[fmolf]

i average E1 and E2 then add to speed fig. for early rating and add LP to speed fig for late rating then average the two for total horse rating.so i end up with an early pace number alate pace number and a total pace number for each horse..then i analyze running styles to see who might fit the race.Choosing which races i only use races within the last 3 and no more than 45 days previous.by averaging E1 and E2 turn time or the second fraction is taken into account.

[raybo]

i average E1 and E2 then add to speed fig. for early rating and add LP to speed fig for late rating then average the two for total horse rating.so i end up with an early pace number alate pace number and a total pace number for each horse..then i analyze running styles to see who might fit the race.Choosing which races i only use races within the last 3 and no more than 45 days previous.by averaging E1 and E2 turn time or the second fraction is taken into account.

So, you are averaging 1st fraction and 2nd fraction, not E1 and E2? E2 includes the 1st fraction (start to 2nd call). This would be a valid early pace fig, maybe with a little weighting involved, but, not too bad. As I've stated earlier, the speed figs are slanted towards early pace, so if you include too much E1/E2 then you overdo early pace in your total fig.

[Tom]

How is the SR slanted towards early?

[mrroyboy]

for E/P I add the 2nd call + 1st fraction

-for L/P I add the 2nd call + 2nd half(1st fr + 2nd fr)

I am a little confused. What do you mean by 2nd half (1st fr+ 2nd fr?) Bris figures only have 3 ratings???

[raybo]

How is the SR slanted towards early?

Check some final times for same track and surface and class, similar variant, faster early fraction, but same mid and late fractions and you'll find that the horse with the faster earlier fraction gets a higher speed fig. Bris isn't the only fig maker that does this. I'm not saying it's wrong, but if early gets a higher speed fig anyway, why would you want to add much more early into a composite fig?

[raybo]

for E/P I add the 2nd call + 1st fraction

-for L/P I add the 2nd call + 2nd half(1st fr + 2nd fr)

I am a little confused. What do you mean by 2nd half (1st fr+ 2nd fr?) Bris figures only have 3 ratings???

Hidden calls. Turn time and 3rd fraction, I believe that's what he's referring to.

E2 includes both the 1st and 2nd fractions, turn time is just the 2nd fraction. LP includes both the 3rd and Final fraction. 3rd fraction is from 2nd call to the stretch call.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, Rod.

[CincyHorseplayer]

for E/P I add the 2nd call + 1st fraction

-for L/P I add the 2nd call + 2nd half(1st fr + 2nd fr)

I am a little confused. What do you mean by 2nd half (1st fr+ 2nd fr?) Bris figures only have 3 ratings???

Yeah I shouldn't have mentioned this in a BRIS discussion.When I say 2nd half it's turn time + 3rd fraction added to the 2nd call for L/P.

[raybo]

Yeah I shouldn't have mentioned this in a BRIS discussion.When I say 2nd half it's turn time + 3rd fraction added to the 2nd call for L/P.

Well, I almost got it right. :blush:

[CincyHorseplayer]

Well, I almost got it right. :blush:

There are so many ratings,and everybody has their quirks,it's hard to keep up with everybody's definitions.

[raybo]

There are so many ratings,and everybody has their quirks,it's hard to keep up with everybody's definitions.

Yes, I agree.

Bris gives you 4 calls: start to first, 1st to 2nd, 2nd to stretch, and stretch to finish. But they only give you 3 pace figs: E1 (start to 1st call), E2 (start to 2nd call), and LP (2nd call to finish).

Turn time fig is calculated: (E1-(E2-E1)). Ex.: E1 =90, E2=80. TT =(90-(80-90))= 100.

3rd fraction fig is difficult to get, because LP doesn't overlap any other fig. You would have to use the adjusted call times, and convert the 3rd fraction and final fraction to figs. I'm not a fig maker so don't ask me how to do that.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Yes, I agree.

Bris gives you 4 calls: start to first, 1st to 2nd, 2nd to stretch, and stretch to finish. But they only give you 3 pace figs: E1 (start to 1st call), E2 (start to 2nd call), and LP (2nd call to finish).

Turn time fig is calculated: (E2-(E2-E1)).

3rd fraction fig is difficult to get, because LP doesn't overlap any other fig. You would have to use the adjusted call times, and convert the 3rd fraction and final fraction to figs. I'm not a fig maker so don't ask me how to do that.

I use caveman adjustments with variants,from Brohamer's book.I don't know what the best technique is.It's an elusive,esoteric piece of info.I could use a computer program.The problem is I don't like anybody's definitions of things and I don't know how to write into excel a program to automate variants,if at all possible.I'm at an impasse with it in that regard.I wanted to ask Tom to compare the 2 E horses from the Turf Paradise race using my definitions of E/P and L/P but I don't know if he has the raw numbers to do it either??(Tom if so it's E/P=2nd call + 1st fraction and L/P=2nd call + 2nd half(turn time + 3rd fraction)).

[raybo]

(Tom if so it's E/P=2nd call + 1st fraction and L/P=2nd call + 2nd half(turn time + 3rd fraction)).

So, are you using "fps" for all your calcs? Or, adjusted times?

I assume "fps".

[CincyHorseplayer]

So, are you using "fps" for all your calcs? Or, adjusted times?

I assume "fps".

No FPS,just adjusted raw times.

[raybo]

No FPS,just adjusted raw times.

I see, so lower is better.

I use both, fps in the Sartin view, and adjusted times converted to figs, for the Distance Equalized view. Both of those for form determinations mostly. Then current form, running styles/Quirin speeds, pace pressure gauge, time away, and comments, with the figs and Sartin composites, for final determinations.

Tom's figs aren't looking too bad though, from what he's posted so far.

I agree with his statement that paceline selections are critical. That's where current form analysis/trainer intent comes in, assuming each horse has a representative paceline somewhere in its' past performances.

[Johnny V]

Yes, I agree.

Bris gives you 4 calls: start to first, 1st to 2nd, 2nd to stretch, and stretch to finish. But they only give you 3 pace figs: E1 (start to 1st call), E2 (start to 2nd call), and LP (2nd call to finish).

Turn time fig is calculated: (E1-(E2-E1)). Ex.: E1 =90, E2=80. TT =(90-(80-90))= 100.

3rd fraction fig is difficult to get, because LP doesn't overlap any other fig. You would have to use the adjusted call times, and convert the 3rd fraction and final fraction to figs. I'm not a fig maker so don't ask me how to do that.
Using those turn time calculations it seems that if a horse ran a 80 E2 after a E1 of 90 he was slowing down. The E2 pace figure of 80 includes the E1 of 90 so if he ran a 100 TT his E2 it seems his E2 would be higher than 80 I would think.
The formula for turn time with Bris pace figures that I have seen is as follows: (E2*6)-(E1*4)/2. This formula was suggested by Bris according to Michael Nunamaker in his book Modern Impact Values.

[fmolf]

Using those turn time calculations it seems that if a horse ran a 80 E2 after a E1 of 90 he was slowing down. The E2 pace figure of 80 includes the E1 of 90 so if he ran a 100 TT his E2 it seems his E2 would be higher than 80 I would think.
The formula for turn time with Bris pace figures that I have seen is as follows: (E2*6)-(E1*4)/2. This formula was suggested by Bris according to Michael Nunamaker in his book Modern Impact Values.
you are correct about turn time using bris...I have had some success with averaging E1 & E2to get an average early pace fig.I believe you will see that most horses number is about the same...by doing this for the last three races it is easier for me to see if a horse is improving.This is just my method.the final thing i do is average in LP for a total final pace fig.

[mrroyboy]

Excellant I will fool around with these ratings this weeekend.

[raybo]

Using those turn time calculations it seems that if a horse ran a 80 E2 after a E1 of 90 he was slowing down. The E2 pace figure of 80 includes the E1 of 90 so if he ran a 100 TT his E2 it seems his E2 would be higher than 80 I would think.
The formula for turn time with Bris pace figures that I have seen is as follows: (E2*6)-(E1*4)/2. This formula was suggested by Bris according to Michael Nunamaker in his book Modern Impact Values.

I'm sorry the TT should have calculated to 70. Formula is not correct.

Bris states on their website that turn time is simply E2-E1. That just gives you the difference, not the turn time fig. To get the TT fig you must add or subtract the difference back into one of the other 2 figs.

I have never seen the formula you posted.It appears that formula might work for routes (6f x E2 minus 4f x E1, sprints might be 4f x E2 minus 2f x E1). New one for me.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I see, so lower is better.

I use both, fps in the Sartin view, and adjusted times converted to figs, for the Distance Equalized view. Both of those for form determinations mostly. Then current form, running styles/Quirin speeds, pace pressure gauge, time away, and comments, with the figs and Sartin composites, for final determinations.

Tom's figs aren't looking too bad though, from what he's posted so far.

I agree with his statement that paceline selections are critical. That's where current form analysis/trainer intent comes in, assuming each horse has a representative paceline somewhere in its' past performances.

I agree pacelines are absolutely critical.

And to take it one step further,so are picking lines to come up with the Quirin speed points numbers and running style.You have to be equally diligent in reading through past performance lines to rate races for those points.Some are way too deliberate about going through only the last 3 pacelines to determine early speed,but will then turn around and espouse how important picking the right paceline is.If you don't accurately assess the probable pace,you have a warped view of how a race is going to be run.For instance if you have a 6f race at level X,and you look at a horse's pacelines,you see a 3rd race from layoff,last race rateable,layoff race at higher class,the race before layoff was deteriorating form,before that sloppy track,before that 5f,before that a rateable race,before that the horse had a bad break,before that a route distance.I see a lot of horses like this.

You get my drift.I think the perception of the Quirin speed points and probable pace is it's a fun with numbers gimmick that deserves barely any thought.I think this is equally an important component as form/class assessment and speed/pace matchups & figures.It's the horseplayers version of mind/body/spirit or the holy trinity.