View Full Version : Breeder’s Cup Pace and Speed Figures
For those interested, this is what I came up with. Beyer scale, same as all the figures I posted before the big day.
Race Pace Speed
Distaff 99 100
JvFlly 97 99
Mile 117 105
Sprint 125 121
FMTurf 107 109
Jvnile 112 91
Turf N/A 112
Classic 123 121
delayjf
10-29-2003, 07:14 PM
Your pace figures confirm to me that the pace of the races had a lot to do with the outcomes.
Big numbers in the classic. Cajun Beat's race reminds me of War Emblem going into the Derby. Moral is, don't expect improving 3ry olds to bounce off tops efforts at least not at 20-1.
keilan
10-29-2003, 08:31 PM
Thanks for the pace numbers cj -- that certainly helps explain the BC results
Yes delayjf I agree those are huge pace numbers and they had a lot to say about the outcome on Breeders Cup Day.
3yo's, more than any other age group I think can get good suddenly and often produce 2 or 3 tops consecutively. And like we saw the price is often obscene.
witchdoctor
10-29-2003, 09:29 PM
Interesting comment about 3 year olds not bouncing. My father-in-law is best frieds with Joe Iracane who is one of Cajun Beat's oeners. Joe said he thought horse had a chance but he was worried about the horse bouncing. Even so, he said Joe reportly bet ALOT of money on his horse. That is alot more than I bet on him.
ceejay
10-29-2003, 09:39 PM
CJM's figs echo the Beyer's.
http://www.drf.com/news/article/51052.html
Figman
10-29-2003, 09:54 PM
Forget handicapping on Breeders' Cup Day! Look at this!
http://tinyurl.com/sy2r
Originally posted by ceejay
CJM's figs echo the Beyer's.
http://www.drf.com/news/article/51052.html
I usually stick pretty close to the Beyer's unless they "project" a figure like they did Shake You Down at Crc. My specialty is applying an accurate pace number alongside the speed number to provide a true picture of what happened.
Also, those pace numbers are for the leader, not the winner, as most of you have probably guessed.
I did a lot of thinking on the Beyer numbers last night (I know, I'm sick), and I came to the conclusion that they are too high on the dirt by about 3 or 4 points. Its just my opinion, not saying I am right. It's very subjective.
Here is my reasoning:
Very Subtle: Stellar and Lacie Girl were given a 97. Although both had run close to that in the past, it is doubtful they ran just as given the pace was 13 points faster than the speed figure. I think they probably ran a little slower.
Distaff: The toughest race on the card. Adoration's previous high was 100, so the Beyer of 101 makes sense. Saying the Beyer's are a high bumps her down to a 98 or so. Seems a little low, but I think it was a case of noone running particularly well.
Juvenile Filly: Halfbridled had previously run a 98 while cruising on a lone, easy lead, and winning just as easily. I know that 2yos can certainly improve, but I would doubt she could earn a 99 while 4 wide around both turns. I think a 95 is much more likely.
Sprint: Cajun Beat certainly ran a huge race. He improved from 104 to 113 for the last race. Many 3yos can match up or slightly impove new tops, but another 7 points seems unlikely. This is especially so given the pace of the race. I'm giving him a more realistic 117 with a pace of 121.
Juvenile: Another toughie...Action This Day ran a 79 in victory last out. This race had a suicidal pace that simply collapsed. These are by far the toughest races to do. Given my confidence in the previous couple races, I have no problem bumping this race down to an 88.
Classic: Pleasantly Perfect had a career best of 116 in the Goodwood last year with a similiar dream trip. I'm inclined to believe he ran closer to that, a 117 or so, than to think he ran a new lifetime best.
Like I said, all very subjective, and I'd love to hear others thoughts on the subject.
New figures:
Race Pace Speed
Distaff 95 96
JvFlly 93 95
Mile 117 105
Sprint 121 117
FMTurf 107 109
Jvnile 108 87
Turf N/A 112
Classic 119 117
Valuist
10-30-2003, 10:32 AM
I was just going to say that 121 for PP in the Classic looked a few pts too high. I noticed you didn't have a pace # for the Turf but I believe the pace was decent. That's why I thought Falbrav, who moved well before HC and Johar, was the best horse.
delayjf
10-30-2003, 12:07 PM
No doubt it was a fast pace on the Turf. The second and third fractions were 22 4/5 and 23 4/5, way to fast for a 1 1/2 mile race. I'm not saying Tin Man was the best horse, but given the pace, he took the worst of it.
I'm trying to make heads or tails about the performances of some of the horses.
Valuist
10-30-2003, 12:13 PM
Isn't The Tin Man trained by Mandella? The new NTRA theme: "just stay one step ahead of the testing process".
Speed Figure
10-30-2003, 12:52 PM
1C 2C SR SP CL
Adoration 99 109 97 103 118.94
"Race Figures same as above"
Halfbridled 95 104 97 99 114.73
"Race Figures" 98 106 97 99
Six Perfections 98 103 103 104 117.36
"Race Figures" 106 110 103 104
Cajun Beat 105 119 94 116 125.78
"Race Figures" 106 119 94 116
Islington 87 90 108 109 122.10
"Race Figures" 103 112 108 109
Action This Day 82 101 90 96 114.73
"Race Figures" 109 113 90 96
High Chaparral - - 102 112 125.26
Johar - - 108 112
Pleasantly Perfect 95 102 98 116 127.36
"Race Figures" 107 116 98 116
This is just my take on all the races.
I assume 1st Call and 2nd Call, but what do SR and SP stand for?
Speed Figure
10-30-2003, 01:30 PM
SR is a stretch run figure that rates only the last 2 furlongs of the race.
SP is the speed figure of the race.
CL is a class rating of the race.
Speed Figure
10-30-2003, 02:01 PM
Islington's SP should be 108. Action This Day's SP should be 95.
Speed Figure
10-30-2003, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by speed figure
1C 2C SR SP CL
Adoration 99 109 97 103 118.94
"Race Figures same as above"
Halfbridled 95 104 97 99 114.73
"Race Figures" 98 106 97 99
Six Perfections 98 103 103 104 117.36
"Race Figures" 106 110 103 104
Cajun Beat 105 119 94 116 125.78
"Race Figures" 106 119 94 116
Islington 87 90 108 108 122.10
"Race Figures" 103 112 108 108
Action This Day 82 101 90 95 114.73
"Race Figures" 109 113 90 95
High Chaparral - - 102 112 125.26
Johar - - 108 112
Pleasantly Perfect 95 102 98 116 127.36
"Race Figures" 107 116 98 116
This is just my take on all the races.
Islington's SP was 108 & Action This Day's SP was 95
delayjf
10-31-2003, 11:49 AM
How likely is it that every horse except Adoration went off form in the distaff in the biggest race of the year.
Another possiblity, Looking again at Adoration, she was a lightly raced late maturing 4 year old that may have bounced a bit off her 100 beyer two races back, then improved slightly in the Distaff.
delayjf,
That is the only race that puzzles me. Either the track slowed considerably after this race, though that isn't likely looking at the first race as well, or they just didn't run very well. The clock doesn't lie...usually.
alysheba88
10-31-2003, 12:20 PM
That doesnt puzzle me. Not sure what you guys are getting at. Sightseek was the only one who consistently ran 105 plus Beyers. None of the other contenders did. Got Koko was coming off a lifetime best of 105 from what I recall. And Take Charge Lady was in the 101-102 range for the most part in recent months.
delayjf
10-31-2003, 03:46 PM
I don't have the form right in front of me so bear with me.
If memory serves, Adoration's race in the BC was the third off a 6 month layoff. In her first race back, he ran a new top speed figure(100). Her pace figure was slightly below his best. I think in she bounced in her next race a bit because she got about the same pace as the race before, yet ran much worst. She also had some trouble in the second race. Why the improvement, maybe she's a late bloomer, time will tell.
My point is simply that it is more plausible to believe that Adoration given the slow pace, was able to improve her speed figure to a 104-105 which is only about 11/2 lengths.
Sightseeker obviously bounced, or something. To date I have not read anything to suggest she had a physical problem in the race. She has never faired well at SA.
I could be wrong, but to me, this makes sence.
It makes sense, but not in conjunction with the teletimer for the race. The race was slow and not deserved of a 105 Beyer. This is the same thing the Beyer guys do when races don't make sense. They arbitrarily give it a higher rating, and they are wrong many times. Right sometimes too, but no value there. The value is going against the Beyer that is suspect.
Now that Belmont is over, I am going back through my db and reviewing my pars, pace numbers, etc-grudge work.
But if there were one word to describe the Beyer numbers I would vote for "random."
So many races that thier number makes no sense. One might thing that the track speeds up and lsows down ever 45 minutes!
This gets worse every year.
Really begining to thin the effort to use Beyer numbers is ot worth it. Just too many mistakes.
delayjf
11-01-2003, 12:09 PM
Tom,
do you use Cramers numbers and if so do you find them more stable? It will be interesting to see what the other figures show for the race Ragozin, etc. I'm not saying that this was the case, SA has had problems with its timer in the past.
BillW
11-01-2003, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by Tom
This gets worse every year.
Really begining to thin the effort to use Beyer numbers is ot worth it. Just too many mistakes.
You mean we are gravitating back to the pre-Beyer days where the public didn't have good speed data.?:o
... No wait! That could be a good thing :D
Bill
Originally posted by delayjf
Tom,
do you use Cramers numbers and if so do you find them more stable? It will be interesting to see what the other figures show for the race Ragozin, etc. I'm not saying that this was the case, SA has had problems with its timer in the past.
I use the Cramers converted to Sheet style figs (low is best) and displayed on the same type of "graph" as the sheets (or CJ's examples).
I find them hands down better than Beyers.
I use the Beyers to find pace ratings-key pace races-that type of thing because pace-of-race Beyers are available in Sim Weekly and Cramer numbers for every race are not easily obtained. Beside, I have doing this wtih the Beyers for many years-1993 or 94 - whenever they became available.
delayjf
11-03-2003, 12:47 PM
Tom,
Are you getting your numbers thru HTR, I wish KM would include the Cramer Pace number as well, maybe we can convince him. I was not aware that there were Beyer Pace figures in the Sim Weekly.
Originally posted by delayjf
Tom,
Are you getting your numbers thru HTR, I wish KM would include the Cramer Pace number as well, maybe we can convince him. I was not aware that there were Beyer Pace figures in the Sim Weekly.
There are no Beyer pace numbers - I make my own using the Beyer variants which I calculate from the Sim Weekly
Winner's Book section.
HTR does have the Cramer pace figures - in an old version of HTR2001 - I know the version of 12/6/02 has them - it the bottom screen of the drop down menu-the X Screen. It shows 1 paceline for each horse - the latest - and you can toggle through each horse to show which of th e10 lines you want. It give you pace numbers for 2F, 4F, Stretch, and final and then C90. KEn dropped the screen becasue he got zero response about it , so he made room for more popular stuff. I save ALL old versions, so I still use it to get pace numbers. I can email you this version if you want to use it. Just rename it and put it in the HTR directory and then you can use it same as the latest version.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.