Derby Beyers?

[Smarty Cide]

they out yet?

[sandpit]

AK: 103
Nehro: 99
MMM: 99
...and on down from there.

[Bruddah]

AK: 103
Nehro: 99
MMM: 99
...and on down from there.

I think those are generous. Just my opinion. :confused:

[Tom]

Me too. Very generous.

[RXB]

I have the same number. CJ has it just one point lower. Seven of the nine dirt races, my number is within one point of the listed Beyer figure-- the exceptions are races 1 & 3 where I think the listed Beyers are a few points too low.

[keithw84]

That's got to be one of the lowest KD winning Beyers ever, right?

[redshift1]

YEAR HORSE BSF
1987 Alysheba 104
1988 Winning Colors 113
1989 Sunday Silence 101
1990 Unbridled 116
1991 Strike the Gold 107
1992 Lil E. Tee 107
1993 Sea Hero 105
1994 Go for Gin 112
1995 Thunder Gulch 108
1996 Grindstone 112
1997 Silver Charm 115
1998 Real Quiet 107
1999 Charismatic 108
2000 Fusaichi Pegasus 108
2001 Monarchos 116
2002 War Emblem 114
2003 Funny Cide 109
2004 Smarty Jones 107
2005 Giacomo 100
2006 Barbaro 111
2007 Street Sense 110
2008 Big Brown 109
2009 Mine That Bird 105
2010 Super Saver 104

[Jasonm921]

Steroids gone=lower numbers.

[gm10]

I think his number should be higher. That was a powerful performance.

On the other hand, his Vinery Spiral BSF was 94 if I'm not mistaken. That I don't get. Surely that 94 is too high for a speed figure. The winning time was about 2 seconds slower than usual, on ground that didn't look anything out of the ordinary.

[Doza]

YEAR HORSE BSF
1989 Sunday Silence 101


This figure seems awfully low.

[Irish Boy]

Steroids gone=lower numbers.
True. Steroids were unheard of in 1989.

[Cratos]

I think his number should be higher. That was a powerful performance.

On the other hand, his Vinery Spiral BSF was 94 if I'm not mistaken. That I don't get. Surely that 94 is too high for a speed figure. The winning time was about 2 seconds slower than usual, on ground that didn't look anything out of the ordinary.

Please explain this: If the Beyer Derby BSF par value is 109 according to the DRF and the historical actual average final time is 2:02.24 over the last 60 years and last Saturday’s Derby went in 2:02.04 please tell me why the BSF dropped 6 points. Please don’t allude to the non-statistical variant as the reason why.

Having said that the following is my pre-race Derby final time projections:

PP HORSE PFT
9 Derby Kitten 118.34
2 Brilliant Speed 120.49
15 Midnight Interlude 120.86
16 Animal Kingdom 121.19
13 Mucho Macho Man 121.21
19 Nehro 121.26
1 Archarcharch 121.28
8 Dialed In 121.45
6 Comma to the Top 121.55
3 Twice The Appeal 121.74
7 Pants On Fire 122.04
17 Soldat 123.12
11 Master of Hounds 123.55
4 Stay Thirsty 123.83
5 Decisive Moment 123.98
12 Santiva 124.17
20 Watch Me Go 124.19
10 Twinspired 124.45
14 Shackleford 127.86

As you can see my 4-6 rankings by PFT ran 1-3 in the Derby. I was very locked in on Midnight Interlude because of Baffert. His horse had the fastest actual G1 time this year in the Derby preps at 1-1/8 miles and Baffert had been to the “big dance” and won; therefore I was very comfortable with him and Midnight Interlude.

My Derby Kitten selection was about greed. He had won his last race authoritatively and it was a G3 stakes like Animal Kingdom, but that race projected much faster than Animal Kingdom’s G3 race and therefore I put him ahead of everyone else except Midnight Interlude.

Archarcharch looked to have the class and style to pick up the pieces if the speed broke down. However he came up lame in the Derby and we will never know what could have been.

Brilliant Speed also had a very good PFT off of running and winning the Blue Grass on a synthetic surface; and again when compared to Derby Kitten PFT I choose the latter.

I am very impress with my predictive model even though it didn’t pick the Derby winner by PFT; it did have 4 of the first seven finishers and that was without any SSRV refinement.

[gm10]

Please explain this: If the Beyer Derby BSF par value is 109 according to the DRF and the historical actual average final time is 2:02.24 over the last 60 years and last Saturday’s Derby went in 2:02.04 please tell me why the BSF dropped 6 points. Please don’t allude to the non-statistical variant as the reason why.

I was not familiar with the BSF par for the KD - I was agreeing on the basis of the BSF that some previous winners had received (Super Saver 104??).

The way AK finished off the race was very impressive imo. His late speed was one of the best in recent KD history (the first mile wasn't as grueling as usual, it has to be said). He could be a very good horse.


Having said that the following is my pre-race Derby final time projections:

PP HORSE PFT
9 Derby Kitten 118.34
2 Brilliant Speed 120.49
15 Midnight Interlude 120.86
16 Animal Kingdom 121.19
13 Mucho Macho Man 121.21
19 Nehro 121.26
1 Archarcharch 121.28
8 Dialed In 121.45
6 Comma to the Top 121.55
3 Twice The Appeal 121.74
7 Pants On Fire 122.04
17 Soldat 123.12
11 Master of Hounds 123.55
4 Stay Thirsty 123.83
5 Decisive Moment 123.98
12 Santiva 124.17
20 Watch Me Go 124.19
10 Twinspired 124.45
14 Shackleford 127.86

As you can see my 4-6 rankings by PFT ran 1-3 in the Derby. I was very locked in on Midnight Interlude because of Baffert. His horse had the fastest actual G1 time this year in the Derby preps at 1-1/8 miles and Baffert had been to the “big dance” and won; therefore I was very comfortable with him and Midnight Interlude.

My Derby Kitten selection was about greed. He had won his last race authoritatively and it was a G3 stakes like Animal Kingdom, but that race projected much faster than Animal Kingdom’s G3 race and therefore I put him ahead of everyone else except Midnight Interlude.

Archarcharch looked to have the class and style to pick up the pieces if the speed broke down. However he came up lame in the Derby and we will never know what could have been.

Brilliant Speed also had a very good PFT off of running and winning the Blue Grass on a synthetic surface; and again when compared to Derby Kitten PFT I choose the latter.

I am very impress with my predictive model even though it didn’t pick the Derby winner by PFT; it did have 4 of the first seven finishers and that was without any SSRV refinement.

That sounds very encouraging. What do you use for your PFT? Is it a type of weighted average of previous running times?

[cj]

The way AK finished off the race was very impressive imo. His late speed was one of the best in recent KD history (the first mile wasn't as grueling as usual, it has to be said). He could be a very good horse.


He could be, but I don't give any more extra credit for slow early, fast late than I do for fast early, slow late. Very good horses should be able to run more than that.

Of course his finishing time was fast. Didn't you guys go on about Uncle Mo's last 1/4 in his comeback race this season?

[Spiderman]

He could be, but I don't give any more extra credit for slow early, fast late than I do for fast early, slow late. Very good horses should be able to run more than that.

Of course his finishing time was fast. Didn't you guys go on about Uncle Mo's last 1/4 in his comeback race this season?

I calculate last quarter in 23.94; final half mile in 47.94.

[Producer]

For the derby, this was such an oddly run race. Half in 48.3, 6f in 113.2, then an extremely strong finish. There was a strong bias towards off the pace types and the jockeys knew it and really held back early.

For this reason I have a hard time using figures to really measure these horses performances.

Shackleford actually ran a monster race all things considered. He could be very tough in the Preakness if Flashpoint doesn't go.

[Cratos]

I calculate last quarter in 23.94; final half mile in 47.94.

We are in the same ballpark because I calculated Animal Kingdom’s last quarter in 23.83 seconds

[Valuist]

I always believe in making different variants for sprints and routes. The 2 turn dirt races on Sat at CD all had slowish fractional times.

The 2nd was a very strong NW1X won by Worldly over Bind. The fractions were 48 3/5 1:13 2/5 with a final time of 1:43 3/5. In the 13th, a solid Mdn Sp Wt field, the fractions were :49 1/5 1:13 3/5 with a final time of 1:45. Definitely a different surface than what Monarchos negotiated 10 years ago.

[BIG49010]

Shackleford actually ran a monster race all things considered. He could be very tough in the Preakness if Flashpoint doesn't go.

Just curious why you would think a horse that got away with easy fractions ran a monster race?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Cratos
Please explain this: If the Beyer Derby BSF par value is 109 according to the DRF and the historical actual average final time is 2:02.24 over the last 60 years and last Saturday’s Derby went in 2:02.04 please tell me why the BSF dropped 6 points. Please don’t allude to the non-statistical variant as the reason why.


Raw times and Beyer numbers - not the same thing, cannot compare. And to try to compare a racing surface 60 years ago to the one they ran over Saturday is nonsense. Call it what you want to, but it is what it is. And they were all out there before the race was run.

[philofbelloni]

Trakus is now clocking all CD races. They listed AK's mile at 1:37.75 and the finish at 2:01.59

[Tom]

Where did you find the Trakus data?
I can't find anything on their web page and a search there yielded no results.

[JPinMaryland]

Trakus is now clocking all CD races. They listed AK's mile at 1:37.75 and the finish at 2:01.59

that is remarkably close to what cratos calculated (only .02 sec diff). Cratos what methodology did you use?

I used beaten lengths and fractional times and got 24.1 for his final quarter.

[Tom]

I only have 12 10 furlong races at CD in my DB, but it looks like the first two calls were a bit slow but they picked it up at the mile - raw times, no variant.

[Producer]

Just curious why you would think a horse that got away with easy fractions ran a monster race?


I think the fractions are very deceptive. Being on the front was not at all the place to be on this day especially at 1 1/4. Regardless what the fractions were he was on the lead for most of the race and was very game even when giving it up late.

[gm10]

He could be, but I don't give any more extra credit for slow early, fast late than I do for fast early, slow late. Very good horses should be able to run more than that.

Of course his finishing time was fast. Didn't you guys go on about Uncle Mo's last 1/4 in his comeback race this season?

I saw that you rated Decisive Moment higher than Animal Kingdom in their Turfway race, although AK won the race. If you are not adjusting for how they run early/late, may I ask what the underlying reason was for this?

[cj]

I saw that you rated Decisive Moment higher than Animal Kingdom in their Turfway race, although AK won the race. If you are not adjusting for how they run early/late, may I ask what the underlying reason was for this?

You misread what I wrote.

[classhandicapper]

There was a strong bias towards off the pace types and the jockeys knew it and really held back early.

For this reason I have a hard time using figures to really measure these horses performances.

Shackleford actually ran a monster race all things considered. He could be very tough in the Preakness if Flashpoint doesn't go.

That's often the 64K question.

Sometimes we know the pace was either faster or slower than average or we know the track was either more or less tiring than usual, but if both are true it shifts everything away from the norms.

A slower than average pace could still be a negative on a very tiring track and vice versa.

In this case we are dealing with a 10F race (very limited sample). So IMO it's really difficult to evaluate the impact of that pace.

It looks like the flow may have been a little tougher on the front runners than the closers and that Nehro may have moved a little too early, but I don't think it was extreme.

On the flip side, what do you do with a horse like Dialed In?

He was more or less eliminated by being so far back in such a large field. He came home in 23.21 and 23.79. How much faster could he possibly go? In a smaller field he should be in better position and still be able to close well.

[gm10]

You misread what I wrote.
Ok. So what did you mean and why was the runner-up rated higher than the winner? Just curious.

[Fastracehorse]

True. Steroids were unheard of in 1989.

.....Arnold and Lou were on them years before this.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

I think the fractions are very deceptive. Being on the front was not at all the place to be on this day especially at 1 1/4. Regardless what the fractions were he was on the lead for most of the race and was very game even when giving it up late.

the CD dragstrip wasn't souped up this year like previous years ( forget the mud last year )

very fair strip

fffastt

[ManeMediaMogul]

True. Steroids were unheard of in 1989.

Believe me, steroids were heard of in 1989. Virtually every horse in the barn area was on them.

[Bruddah]

.....Arnold and Lou were on them years before this.

fffastt

I am sure you are correct fffast. What years did Arnold and Lou run in the Derby? (lol)

Just jerking your chain bro. When I read your post, my smart a$$ retort came to my mind. I have no dog in this fight, either way.

[philofbelloni]

Where did you find the Trakus data?
I can't find anything on their web page and a search there yielded no results.
Request T-Net access under the T-Net banner at the top of the page. I dropped them a note a few years ago and got access within a day. Historically, only have had Woodbine/DelMar/Keeneland in North America. They also have a few other foreign tracks such as Meydan, Deauville and one that escapes my mind in Turkey. With CD now in the fold I wouldn't be surprised to see other CD based tracks follow suite. Considering the financial states of MI and NYRA, I wouldn't expect those tracks anytime soon.

[cj]

Ok. So what did you mean and why was the runner-up rated higher than the winner? Just curious.

I do give extra credit for running faster early, or faster late. What is was saying is that both can be important, not that I didn't adjust for them. I didn't say I don't give ANY, I said ANY MORE.

[garyscpa]

Please explain this: If the Beyer Derby BSF par value is 109 according to the DRF and the historical actual average final time is 2:02.24 over the last 60 years and last Saturday’s Derby went in 2:02.04 please tell me why the BSF dropped 6 points. Please don’t allude to the non-statistical variant as the reason why.

It's not the non-statistical variant, it's the statistical variant, aka the track variant as calculated by the Beyer crew.

[gm10]

I do give extra credit for running faster early, or faster late. What is was saying is that both can be important, not that I didn't adjust for them. I didn't say I don't give ANY, I said ANY MORE.

Thx.

FWIW I think you should do the opposite sometimes.

[cj]

Thx.

FWIW I think you should do the opposite sometimes.

Well, depending on surface I do. I didn't want to get way too deep on this subject. It is a very tough call of whether to give extra credit for running fast early in a synthetic route. Had those two ran against each other on synthetics next out, the figures would have looked different.

[Rackon]

Believe me, steroids were heard of in 1989. Virtually every horse in the barn area was on them.

Not just race horses and body builders but LOTS of show horses were on them in the 80s, and I don't just mean QHs.

[outofthebox]

This figure seems awfully low.they ran over a muddy plowed field that day. Both SS and Easy Goer some of their lowest beyers of their career that day..

[Fastracehorse]

I am sure you are correct fffast. What years did Arnold and Lou run in the Derby? (lol)

Just jerking your chain bro. When I read your post, my smart a$$ retort came to my mind. I have no dog in this fight, either way.

....I don't think he was bred to go long

fffastt