Speed Figure Adjustments

[Zaf]

This is a question for those who make their own figures.

Do you adjust your figures ?

for weight carried ?

for being wide 2w, 3w, 4w etc. ?

biases ?

troubled trips ?

How much weight would each of the above carry.

Do you adjust the figures at the pace calls ?


I ask because I am thinking about making figures for a circuit. Its been a long time since I have done this. I used to make quirin type pace and speed figures without taking into account any of the factors I listed above. I would like to improve on what I have done before which was mediocre.

Any suggestions on how I can improve the accuracy of numbers I might create ?

This is why I am interested in how people adjust their figures.

Thanks ,

ZAFONIC

[chrisg]

I'll take a stab at this. I'm sure there are those that will absolutely disagree with me, but to each their own. I'm comfortable with my figures.

I don't adjust them.

I consider "weight carried" meaningless.

I don't adjust for being wide. I note trouble, but I don't change the figure.

Have yet to find a reason to believe in bias.

I prefer a horse that breaks well. I don't adjust the figure because a competent or clueless jockey rode. I may keep it in mind on occaision though.

Good luck:)

[cj]

I adjust very minimally for weight. A 10 lb weight swing would adjust 3 points on the Beyer scale for me. As for the others, I don't think you can quantify them in a number. I guess ground loss could be adjusted for if you had several hours each day to go over the replays about 40 times. If you are going to rely on the chartcaller, you might as well not bother. I have no idea how would quantify trouble or a bias. I'd rather just look at the number and use my best judgement.

[delayjf]

I posted this observation on another thread, that being that the run-up for one mile races at DeL Mar was @ 70-80 yards. Long enough in my opinion to allow some speedball to fly out of the gate and trip the beem several lenghts in front of some of the horses in the race. If the speed ball wins the race, no big deal. But if one of the slower breaking horses should rally to win, his time / speed figure would be artifically slow.

Now, I notice that the same situation exist at Santa Anita. Makes me wonder if simular run up conditions exist with other tracks.

Does anybody take this into account?

[cj]

This runup you are talking about varies from track to track. It is measured in some part by the early fractions. Races with a long runup (eg...CD 6f) will have very fast opening quarters. Races with little or no runup (eg...Pim 6f) have very slow first fractions. Your example of popping the gate and tripping the timer early is very rare. Even so, this horse is going to set a fast pace and make the closers look better anyway. No horse guns for the first hundred yards, trips the beam, then slows down to a more realistic pace. Just my observations.

Also, finding these differences between the tracks is a huge advantage when making figures for the internal fractions.

[Fastracehorse]

I adjust for wide trips, pace and class, surface switches, distance switches, and projected improvement for Lasix and improving youngsters.

I swear by adjusting speed figs - but there is more to handicapping that just speed figs - but believe me, it's nice to know how good horses are relatively.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

<I'm sure there are those that will absolutely disagree with me, but to each their own. I'm comfortable with my figures.

Your right :) :( :o :D ;) :p :cool:

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

I don't think 3 Beyer points is a minimal adjustement.

2 1/2 points is a length in a sprints.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

How long does it take a horse to run 80 yds??

A full second is only 2 Beyer points in routes. Even if the Beyer speed figs were off by 2 full points that shouldn't effect the accuracy of handicapping or wagering.

fffastt

[cj]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
I don't think 3 Beyer points is a minimal adjustement.

2 1/2 points is a length in a sprints.

fffastt

True, but how often do you see a 10 lb weight swing from race to race? Usually much smaller than that.

[Zaf]

Thanks for all the input guys, I really appreciate it. !!!

ZAFONIC

[delayjf]

CJ / FFast,

Agree with your observations. However; I';m not so sure it's as rare as one might think. Just yesterday I observed a horse breaking out of the gate at one mile and getting to the beam about one and 1/2 lengths ahead of the second horse. I'm not sure were the eventual winner was as the beam was broken, but if he was several lenghts back (3 or more) than his figure would be 3 lengths slower, how many points is 3 lengths? If you watch those races, it might surprize you as to how often it happens. The key is, where is the horse when the beam is broken.

My point is that in those cases, like other trouble, it's something to consider.

[Speed Figure]

At one mile 3 lengths would be 5 beyer points.

[Fastracehorse]

It's always good to look for new angles but alot of handicappers try and make minor factors seem majors.

I see that in fraction crunchers - turn times for ex..

You need to know who is the fastest and who is ready to run - other than that the rest are intangibles.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

I dopn't have and adjustement for that weight break either.

I see the 'add bug' as a powerful sign of trainer intent however.

fffastt

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by delayjf
CJ / FFast,

Agree with your observations. However; I';m not so sure it's as rare as one might think. Just yesterday I observed a horse breaking out of the gate at one mile and getting to the beam about one and 1/2 lengths ahead of the second horse. I'm not sure were the eventual winner was as the beam was broken, but if he was several lenghts back (3 or more) than his figure would be 3 lengths slower, how many points is 3 lengths? If you watch those races, it might surprize you as to how often it happens. The key is, where is the horse when the beam is broken.

My point is that in those cases, like other trouble, it's something to consider.

The above scenario happens more when you have a sprinter running against routers. Time the race from the gate and make sure the gate placement is correct. Gate placement is important!

Think about it if the run-up is shorter and the winner hangs on by a nose, what would happen if the gate was placed two lengths further back? Do you think the winner still would have won by a nose? I do not think so, I think he would have lost by at least a length.

Additionally, I think gate placement may cause incorrect times. I have perceived this result plenty of times.

This year at AP same distance races run on the same day and even with some races run back to back the gate placement varied and the variation could be up to 3 full lengths. Go figure. This discrepency allowed me to discount some fake times and eliminate some heavy favorites. I will give you an example, the race King Cielio won in 1:09 and change was a total fake time. The race was actually at least one full second slower.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Fastracehorse]

This shouldn't affect handicapping or wagering.

1 length to me isn't a big deal - I mean if I have 2 horses separated by 1 length - they are pretty much equal.

fffastt

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
This shouldn't affect handicapping or wagering.

1 length to me isn't a big deal - I mean if I have 2 horses separated by 1 length - they are pretty much equal.

fffastt

Possibly. Hypothetically, two horses in two separate races get caught at the wire and lose by a bobb running the same final time, are both horses equal in ability? I think it depends on the run-up. If one horse had a 4 length run-up and the other horse had a 1 length run-up, I think the horse competing against the 4 length run-up is better. To me a 2 or more length difference is huge in a game of noses, heads and necks.

Not trying to sway you from your thinking about run-ups not impacting your wagering decision, just throwing out some fodder in response to delayjf, who wants to hit baseball catchers' with bats.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Fastracehorse]

You are not swaying me.

What you are assuming is that each horse runs identical to his last race.

In horse racing - these small differeces aren't important.

As I've stated in this thread: It is the big factors that are important. The rest are trivia.

fffastt

[Dave Schwartz]

SMTW,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that a horse that comes from a race where there was a fast-breaking front runner (who does not go wire to wire) deserves something extra.

Do I have that right?

Dave

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
[B]This shouldn't affect handicapping or wagering.

1 length to me isn't a big deal - I mean if I have 2 horses separated by 1 length - they are pretty much equal.

[QUOTE]You are not swaying me.

What you are assuming is that each horse runs identical to his last race.


I answered your assumption that they are both equal.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Fastracehorse]

That wasn't my assumption - you own that one big guy.

fffastt

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by Dave Schwartz
SMTW,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that a horse that comes from a race where there was a fast-breaking front runner (who does not go wire to wire) deserves something extra.

Do I have that right?

Dave

Dave:

I am not saying to give any horse extra credit becuase of a fast breaking horse. What I am saying is run-ups vary and the run-up may effect the timing of a race. Personally, I have discovered many timing errors through hand-timing from the gate and watching for variations in the run-up on a daily basis.

The value of the sheet type speed figures is where they have an on-track observer who hand times from the gate and adjusts for the run-up. They believe it is important information as I do.

I am saying the timing from the gate along with the run-up adjustment adjusts for possible skewing of results becuase of a fast breaking horse.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Show Me the Wire]

fffast:

I apologize for assuming the words " they are pretty equal" to mean the next time they run it would not effect your handicapping or wagering becuase you believed neither horse performed better than the other. I guess I did not get your point.

My point is that they were not pretty equal and that one horse ran a better race than the other and I would rather bet on the horse that ran the better race by 2 or more lengths next time. I still do not get your point about them being pretty equal after you espouse the fact it was my assumption regarding equality of performance..

If you would like to clarify for me fine if not that is fine too.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Show Me the Wire]

Dave:

According to Len Ragozin, IN THE ODDS MUST BE CRAZY, the winner should be given more credit in a race where the front-runner breaks the timing beam early and fails to win. Briefly it is Len’s position if a rabbit breaks the beam two lengths in front of the rest of the field and fails to win while the winner registers a final time of 1:12 1/5 the winner is penalized because of the rabbit. If the rabbit was not in the race the beam would have been broken 2/5 slower and the final time would have registered as 1:11 4/5. Therefore, the winner should be credited with running 1:11 4/5 and not the slower time

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[cj]

SMTW,

Here is my point. What you say is true about the final time. However, if a horse is quick enough to have a two length lead after the runup before tripping the beam, that horse is motoring. Two lengths in that short of a distance is a ton. Ever seen 1/4 horse racing? The Los Al announcer regularly uses the phrase "crushing the field" for a horse winning by 2. A closer should get up and beat him if he is any good. I am saying although his true time may be a little off, he was aided by the pace of the race. His figure or time is probably a more accurate indication of his ability than guessing much faster he would have ran if some plodder reached the beam first. If there is one thing in this game you do not want to do it is overestimate the abilities of a closer.

I'm contending that in your above example, without the rabbit, the closer would not have run 1.11.4.

[Show Me the Wire]

CJ:

It is Ragozin's example and the rationale for hand-timing races. I tend to agree with you about closers and overestimating their abilities and you probably are right, but what if the winner in Ragozin's example was not a closer. What if at the 1/4 pole in a 3/4 race he was on the pace even with the rabbit and prior to the 1/4 pole he stalked two lengths off the pace and he won at the wire by two lengths. In that scenario the winner would have tripped the timer for a 111 4/5 final time, becuase if the rabbit was not in the race the winner would have tripped the timer first or would have been in close proximity to the timer tripper.

The moral is the run-up can be important in determing the final time of the race.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[delayjf]

I'll bet some Chicago fans would love to take a bat to the one who blew it for them last night.

[cj]

delayjf,

email me your address. i remember you asked some questions but i can't find the thread. would love to talk 'capping!

[Fastracehorse]

<My point is that they were not pretty equal and that one horse ran a better race than the other and I would rather bet on the horse that ran the better race by 2 or more lengths next time.


I was saying that the run-up's effect would be negligible on wagering and handicapping for me.

Is there a difference technically - I'm sure their is - but pragmatically: I doubt it.

fffastt

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by delayjf
I'll bet some Chicago fans would love to take a bat to the one who blew it for them last night.

I enjoy using the quote function!!! It is so much fun.

Delayjf, this really belongs in the playoff thread, but I will answer you here. Yeah, Gonzo is starting to get nervous. The media and the rest of the fans are starting to realize he missed an easy groundball and made a costly error, People are saying an actual Cub player and not the fan is the real culprit.

After watching the replay at least a zillion times it is clear a few fans attempted to catch the ball all at the same time. It is unfair to blame the unfortunate individual the ball touched.

It would have been totally different if the rest of the fans tried to hold each other back and one fan intentionally disregarded the group conduct to his advantage. That was not the case, clearly most of the fans sitting in that area tried to catch the ball which would have caused the same result for Alou.

If Gonzo had shown the same zeal trying to catch the ball, the Cubs would be in the World Series.

What is your thinking abut the run-up issue discussion?

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[socantra]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
I was saying that the run-up's effect would be negligible on wagering and handicapping for me.

Is there a difference technically - I'm sure their is - but pragmatically: I doubt it.

fffastt

I'd have to agree. I forget who I got the quote from, but someone once said, "the search for moon launch precision in a horse race is akin to trying to nail jelly to a tree."

Been wanting to use that quote for years.

socantra........

[Show Me the Wire]

socantra:

Great qoute. However, I think Len Ragozin and Jerry Brown would disagree with you and fffast.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Fastracehorse]

Ragozin and Brown disagree?


That is very, very good SMTW.




You can't do well in investments unless you think independently.

Warren Buffett






:cool:
fffastt

[socantra]

Originally posted by Show Me the Wire


Great qoute. However, I think Len Ragozin and Jerry Brown would disagree with you and fffast.



I don't doubt they would disagree, and that's fine. At the same time, it should be remembered that we are not dealing with machines that will reproduce the same mechanical performance every time out.

We're dealing with living, sentient beings, who are kept in a stall 23 hours a day and hauled out every few weeks to race against a different group of other highly interbred individuals, all with their own aches, pains, psychological problems, etc. After parading them around in front of the crowd, a hundred pound maniac with a whip jumps up and starts beating on them while they run. Just another day at the office, but I find I am better on some days than on others.

Each race is a different event wiht a different cast of characters, each of which influences the running of the race in different ways. If all that was required was precision measurement of past performances it would be an easy game to beat, and very boring.


socantra....

[alysheba88]

socantra,

I agree with you. The search for the "Magic number" is a futile one in my opinion. Speed figures are a fine tool, and one part of the handicapping process. Gives a better understanding of what happened in the past. However, there is no "Magic number" that can tell you what will happen in the future.

[Show Me the Wire]

How did my point about run-up lengths become the search for the perfect number to predict future performances? Yes the Sheet speed figure produser's would disagree with the sentiment run-up time is insignificant. If anyone doubts it read THE ODDS MUST BE CRAZY.

Any pace number or speed figure measures past perfromances against a specific group of horses, at a specific distance and on a specific surface, etc. Notwithstanding all of that you still can measure the perfprmance and have an idea if it is good or poor.

This is where your cognative skills should help. Based on past acts do you think the horse can run to its usual perfromance today.

Socantra, I especially think your assumptions are totally incorrect about horses not being consistent. Agreed horses are not machines, but they are consistent like any living thing What makes them inconsistent is the trainer's treatment.

If you believe each race is an independent event and it is, then the run-up is a measurable variable of that independent event which effected the result of the independent event.

Ta ta.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[cj]

No doubt the Sheets people disagree. Doesn't mean they are right. They also think lost ground should be added to the performance. I don't agree. Are they right? Am I? I don't know for sure. Of course, horses running wide are running farther. However, they are also not losing as much momentum. Horses running tighter turns have to lose more speed. Just my opinion. I'm just saying that because Raggy or JB say so doesn't make it true.

[Show Me the Wire]

CJ:

What you say is true, but ground loss is not necessarily a performance effecting quantifiable variable. Being wide may actually be where the firmest part of the track is and the configuration of the track influences if being wide is significant or not.

The fact is the run-up changes the distance of the race. If the starting gate is positioned differently for each race of the same disatnce then each race is run at a different distances and not the same distance.. That is a fact. How important is that fact is a matter of opnion.

I personally observed significant differences in the official published final times versus hand timing from the gate becuase of the run-up variations on the same card for the same distances. I think it is important and I happen to agree with Ragozin and Brown on this point.

My point is I stated a fact about run-ups and gave an example of how a race can be falsely timed due to the participation of a rabbit and then I am told I am not an original thinker, or horses are not machines (telling me that rotflol) or there is no such thing as a magic number. All things that are totally irrelevant to the fact that run-ups change the distance of the race.

Your post was the only one on point discussing that some sheet speed figure makers philosophy may not be true and I agree with you about ground loss.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[alysheba88]

Show me the Wire. Wasn't trying to single you or anyone out. Was just offering an opinion. Didn't mean to attack your efforts.

[delayjf]

SMTW,

I tend to agree with you. Not that the run-up distance has a huge affect on final time in every mile race at Santa Anita or Delmar, but it could.

I believe it's not necessarily how far ahead of the second place horse the speed ball is, rather how far ahead of the winner the speedball is. As a handicapper I'd want to know were all the horses are as the beam is broken. Not necessarily to adjust his number, but to at least qualify his number.

IMHO this is were the Sheets have an advantage over other numbers due to their hand timing of races. Wouldn't it be great if we could get a clocking function on a DVD player or VHS.

The whole thing makes me wonder if the run up comes into play at other distances. I suspect that the of run up difference might be greater on the turf when you consider the changing rail position.

I also feel this might be the genesis of some "key races".

All in all, I think this demonstrates that one needs to "know thy track". Will a long run up affect every race, no. But knowing when it does can mean money in the bank.

About the baseball thing. In my posting, I was attempting to be sarcasstic. Actually I was rooting for the Cubs.

CJ
wilco

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by delayjf
SMTW,

The whole thing makes me wonder if the run up comes into play at other distances. I suspect that the of run up difference might be greater on the turf when you consider the changing rail position.


delayjf:

Depends on the track and especially on the turf, I have found many significant differences between the reported time and the actual running time at AP. I have found differences in excess of 1 full second.

About the baseball thing, I understood you were being sarcastic, that is why I put the little ditto in about catchers and bats. Yes, the Cubs choked again and retain the moniker of the lovable losers.

Alysheba88 (MW):

No offense taken, I get a little testy when the discussed point gets thrown aside for some enlightening remarks from poster's with the "magic number" that you can get from adjusting a commercial brand of speed numbers, which in turn elicits further off point responses.

I agree there is no such thing as a single magic number to predict future efforts, but I think fffast has repeatedly stated he has one. Who knows maybe I gave out one of his secret adjustments and he is trying to discourage anyone else from thinking along those lines?

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Fastracehorse]

<Socantra, I especially think your assumptions are totally incorrect about horses not being consistent. Agreed horses are not machines, but they are consistent like any living thing What makes them inconsistent is the trainer's treatment.

There are consistent horses but generally, horses are consistently inconsistent.


<I personally observed significant differences in the official published final times versus hand timing from the gate becuase of the run-up variations on the same card for the same distances. I think it is important and I happen to agree with Ragozin and Brown on this point.

What is significant to you?? 1 click??


fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

You can't do well in investments unless you think independently.

Warren Buffett

This quote elluded you??

fffastt

[karlskorner]

Never take investment advice from someone who is working

[Show Me the Wire]

fffast:

I am a Lemming, what can I say. Some day I may learn to think independently, but I doubt it.

Thank you for your participation in this thread.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

Perception is reality

[Fastracehorse]

I'm not saying you are a lemming.

But what I really think you should do is an IV study on the run up.

The sheets spurned your interest now prove them right, or wrong.

That is how I learn - usually I try something until I prove it futile.

fffastt

:eek: :cool: :D :) :( :o :p

[keilan]

SMTW and delayjf -- I tend to agree with much of what you both have stated.

Horses are extremely consistent/predictable if one understands form, race-cycles, allows for maturity etc. Most here understand that you were not saying that horses run the same race today that they ran 3 weeks ago.

Everyone that has played this game understands that the horse with the last best number isn't a lock on today's race, but the players with the best numbers stand the best chance of winning.

Adjusting for run-ups are part of the equation IMO if one deals with these kind of variables.

[Fastracehorse]

<Horses are extremely consistent/predictable if one understands form, race-cycles, allows for maturity etc.

That sounds like you mean horses can be predicted by handicapping. However, the gist was: Horses run consistently back-to-back-to-back.

BTW Keilan,

What are race cycles??

fffast

:rolleyes: :eek: :rolleyes: :eek: :rolleyes: :eek: :rolleyes:

[keilan]

fffast -- My apologizes, I was in a hurry when I typed my post. I meant either "form cycles" or "race patterns" doesn't much matter, take your pick.

Both SMTW and delayjf are knowledgeable horse players and I give them the benefit of the doubt. I don't for a second believe either one would define consistency to mean "horses run consistently back-to-back-to-back". Just my opinion fwiw.

Now have you any opinions on the Breeders Cup?

[Fastracehorse]

Hey man,

Save them for your boss.

:D

fffastt

[keilan]

ffast --I'm the boss

[Fastracehorse]

She said you were her little yes man.

:D

fffastt

[keilan]

fffast -- You have never met me or anyone in my family. There is absolutely no need to get personal or write about any member of my family in this way.

You want to have a little fun on the internet today, look somewhere else. Consider what I have said , or the next time I speak with you you won't have a silly little grin on your face.

[Fastracehorse]

No ill-will was intended.

fffastt