Bris Ultimate PP's question

[mikesal57]

Hello Guys...

I sent this to bris for a possible explanation on Thurs ...still waiting

Maybe someone here can give it a shot and explain..

To me it looks completely out of wack....
and to supply a product that doesn't make sense is not acceptable

thxs
mike

I need to clarify how your ratings are derived in the Summary section of the ultimate PP's

Below are 2 horses along with the Summary from the 10th race at Del May 11

The race is at one mile on the dirt

You show the E1 rating of the #4 as 80
clearly if you use the 2 races at exactly one mile dirt, it would be 84.5
if you use all 3 routes it should be 86.3
even if you average all his races it wouldn't be anywhere near 80

E1 for the #7 shows as 83
his avg for his 3 routes is 81.3
I have no clue on how is this done


I am a long time member and would appreciate your answer

thxs

michael salony


hers a dropbox link to a word doc cause pix are to big to put here




https://www.sugarsync.com/pf/D321328_78_268033335

[Spiderman]

I've come to ignore those numbers, prime power and whether a designated E type is still an E after running as a P or S for last few races and vice versa. It seems that those designations remain unchanged through the horse's career.

When I first started using bris, twelve years ago, I read the material in the library section. Nothing there to explain how their numbers are compiled. I do know that prime power is cumulative and a horse will receive a higher number if one in the same race goes on to greater glory.

[GameTheory]

Career average at exact distance (or within some parameter like "within a furlong" of exact distance)?

[mikesal57]

I've come to ignore those numbers, prime power and whether a designated E type is still an E after running as a P or S for last few races and vice versa. It seems that those designations remain unchanged through the horse's career.

When I first started using bris, twelve years ago, I read the material in the library section. Nothing there to explain how their numbers are compiled. I do know that prime power is cumulative and a horse will receive a higher number if one in the same race goes on to greater glory.

Thxs Spider...

but not to give a reasonable answer on how they do it ..is wrong
any middle school kid can see that this doesn't jive any way you try to figure it....

I will hound them till they do answer...or take it off :D

[mikesal57]

Career average at exact distance (or within some parameter like "within a furlong" of exact distance)?


yes GT...I see that...and it should be that

but the 2 horses I have up..dont figure..thier lifetime PP's are in front of us
even if you total their whole PP(sprints & routes)it dont jive

this is just simple math...why would Bris make it complicated

[GameTheory]

yes GT...I see that...and it should be that

but the 2 horses I have up..dont figure..thier lifetime PP's are in front of us
even if you total their whole PP(sprints & routes)it dont jive

this is just simple math...why would Bris make it complicated
Yeah, looking at some light-raced horses in your examples and some of my own files it would appear to be some sort of recency-weighted average using the exact (or very near) distance and discounting off-tracks. So the #4 uses the one recent 1m race and discounts the older ones, and the #7 uses the 2 or 3 recent routes, but is favoring the one at exactly 1m.

If they answer you, I imagine they will say something like, "It's complicated, and also proprietary. But don't worry, we worked it out so that it is a high-quality number."

[mikesal57]

Yeah, looking at some light-raced horses in your examples and some of my own files it would appear to be some sort of recency-weighted average using the exact (or very near) distance and discounting off-tracks. So the #4 uses the one recent 1m race and discounts the older ones, and the #7 uses the 2 or 3 recent routes, but is favoring the one at exactly 1m.

If they answer you, I imagine they will say something like, "It's complicated, and also proprietary. But don't worry, we worked it out so that it is a high-quality number."


LOL...I hope not GT

[Tom]

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=library

[mikesal57]

GT and Tom ..thxs

Bris answered me by sending me to Tom's link.....WOW

It looks to me that races within 90 days are used in the avg according to the explanation...

with that said take a look at MTR 5TH tonight..

Horse #1...last 3 races within 90 days and at same dist and class as today

E1 #'s are
90 last race
91 2 back
87 3 back

Bris's AVG Summary has E1 as 87

I give up...

http://www.brisnet.com/Promo/Free_PPs/mnrcomp0515.pdf


mike

[GameTheory]

GT and Tom ..thxs

Bris answered me by sending me to Tom's link.....WOW

It looks to me that races within 90 days are used in the avg according to the explanation...

with that said take a look at MTR 5TH tonight..

Horse #1...last 3 races within 90 days and at same dist and class as today

E1 #'s are
90 last race
91 2 back
87 3 back

Bris's AVG Summary has E1 as 87

I give up...

http://www.brisnet.com/Promo/Free_PPs/mnrcomp0515.pdf


mike
Yeah, clearly they are not using a simple average of races within 90 days in a lot of cases. Could just be a bug. Your example all 3 races are on a sloppy-track, which in the other cases I looked at seem to be discounted, so maybe there is an alternate formula for that.

[mikesal57]

Yes..it sure looks unique instead of just a simple average :bang:

[speed]

You made me look. lol Funnier still is that all 3 of his races were at today's distance, class and even weight yet they give him a 75 LP. What makes this funny is that his last 3 LP's were 71,73,74. Wish i could do my checking account using this math.

By far the largest mistake they make is that they don't separate All Weather surfaces and fast surfaces. If a horse has 2 lifetime starts, 1 over a sloppy track and the other over a poly surface his lifetime numbers will show 1 start over wet surface, 1 over All Weather and 1 start over a fast surface. They lump poly and fast together which is very misleading when trying to see how a horse has fared over a fast track. If he has never raced over a fast dirt track but is 5 for 5 over poly, it will show that he is 5 for 5 over a fast track.

[mikesal57]

You made me look. lol Funnier still is that all 3 of his races were at today's distance, class and even weight yet they give him a 75 LP. What makes this funny is that his last 3 LP's were 71,73,74. Wish i could do my checking account using this math.

By far the largest mistake they make is that they don't separate All Weather surfaces and fast surfaces. If a horse has 2 lifetime starts, 1 over a sloppy track and the other over a poly surface his lifetime numbers will show 1 start over wet surface, 1 over All Weather and 1 start over a fast surface. They lump poly and fast together which is very misleading when trying to see how a horse has fared over a fast track. If he has never raced over a fast dirt track but is 5 for 5 over poly, it will show that he is 5 for 5 over a fast track.


LOL...crazy isn't it

I would like to know their thinking and who would benefit from this..
just a waste of time

[mikesal57]

If anybody is interested in why I perused this....

I'm a speed handicapper and was hoping that I could have used Bris's summary as a "quick" snapshot of who's the best early

We all know that "one line" doesn't make a horse but a AVG would do more justice

In my opening post the 4 was, by far, the faster horse than the 7 but Bris showed it otherwise ..and I missed an easy $13 winner

back to the long way :(


mike

[Dan H]

For the OP, isn't this seemingly flawed data exactly what you're looking for, an advantage over other paramutuel bettors. I, for one, use BRIS pace numbers and take them on faith. Now I'm curious if any re-averaging for the horses in you exemplar race would have made a difference at the windows.

[PhantomOnTour]

If their E1 numbers are all screwed up then shouldn't the rest be as well? Seems their turn time ratings and their deviation from par ratings (the +1 +5 numbers you'll see for the 1st and 2nd fraction)will be bad as well.
LP also.

[Light]

I'm a speed handicapper and was hoping that I could have used Bris's summary as a "quick" snapshot of who's the best early


IMO,I don't think E1,E2 etc pace figs,(wherever the source comes from) is as accurate regarding who will be the early pace setters as the "run style" in the "race summary" section. The E1/E2 pace ratings are all controlled by the jock,and the jock isn't going to go all out if he doesn't have to.What's important is the horse's ability to get the lead when it wants to vs different types of horses which is indicated by the horses"run style". Of course that isn't always accurate for sure, but whenever I've visually compared who gets the lead using E1,E2 vs "run style",the later wins.

[mikesal57]

IMO,I don't think E1,E2 etc pace figs,(wherever the source comes from) is as accurate regarding who will be the early pace setters as the "run style" in the "race summary" section. The E1/E2 pace ratings are all controlled by the jock,and the jock isn't going to go all out if he doesn't have to.What's important is the horse's ability to get the lead when it wants to vs different types of horses which is indicated by the horses"run style". Of course that isn't always accurate for sure, but whenever I've visually compared who gets the lead using E1,E2 vs "run style",the later wins.


Correct Light.....

I do use "run style" also...many times you get an e1 leader that usually runs 3rd or 4th and he stills runs the same way
but when you have 2-3-4 horses that you label early , then the E1 ratings help immensely identifying the best one

mike

[Capper Al]

You're on to something. Here's what BRIS says:3) Avg Dist/Surf: Average speed and pace ratings for the horse specific to today’s distance and surface category.



a) El - The average pace rating for the horse from the start to the first call of the race for today’s distance and surface
category.

b) E2 - The average pace rating for the horse from the start to the second call of the race for today’s distance and
surface category.

c) Late - The average pace rating for the horse from the second call of the race to the finish for today’s distance and surface category.



d) SPD - The average BRIS speed rating for the horse at today’s distance and surface category.NOTE: Speed ratings surrounded by asterisks indicate that two or more races occurred at or near today’s distance and surface within the last 90 days and are included in the average.


Parentheses indicate that the race used occurred more than 90 days ago.

If there are no asterisks or parentheses, there was only one race in the last 90 days at or near today’s distance and surface category and the pace and speed ratings are for that race.

[Light]

mikesal57

If you have 3 potential pacesetters as you stated,and one is an E6 the other an E1 and another an EP7 wouldn't you consider the E6 the fastest? If however you have two E6's and an E5, aren't you still in the same boat of using artificially produced E1/E2's to determine who will get the lead? I would think in the latter case,you wouldn't want to bet any of them,although I know sometimes one can get away,but I think that's more smart jock vs idiot jock.

[mikesal57]

Light I don t use speed points to determine early horses
I use running positions in his PP's
if the horses runs 1's and/or 2's in a majority of his races at that distance at the 1st call..he's early

[mikesal57]

mikesal57

If you have 3 potential pacesetters as you stated,and one is an E6 the other an E1 and another an EP7 wouldn't you consider the E6 the fastest? If however you have two E6's and an E5, aren't you still in the same boat of using artificially produced E1/E2's to determine who will get the lead? I would think in the latter case,you wouldn't want to bet any of them,although I know sometimes one can get away,but I think that's more smart jock vs idiot jock.


lets take your E7 and E5...E1 most likely wont fill in as a true early

say the E7 just won a maiden 10000
the E5 has shown early vs 10000 nw2l

Who's going to be best early?

and this will lead into something else...class :eek:

mike

[Light]

I was just trying to pick your brain about the E1 pace call which I don't really give that much energy to,where as you seem to. Just to see if I am missing something there. The only time I have found the E1 to really bite me is on a speed biased track where the winner is the horse who pops the gate and the E2 fig is much less significant. Otherwise, I think any type of horse can run a fast E1 is you ask him to and that's why E1 is not that significant to me.

[mikesal57]

Light...your 2 for 2 !

yes you need a track were speed holds on
In one of Dave Schwartz videos he states that 40% of winners are usually challenging the lead by 1st call...Why dismiss that ?

How many factors has to happen for a closer to win?
How many factors does a speed horse need to win?

take a look at results at a track for a week...and see how many wire jobs there are and the prices , I'm sure you wont see many favorites

profile a track and I'm sure you'll find certain type races that speed wins most of the time..

A good friend of mine told me..what can you depend on more...a speed horse trying for the lead or a closer coming form behind

mike

[Tom]

Not to get off topic too far, not BRIS E1, but EV1 in HTR - first fraction - has been shown over and over in large studies to be pretty much the Holy Grail of factors. It is the basis of many profitable spot plays.

[mikesal57]

Tom ...I dont know about HTR...at what point of the race (sprint/route) is that EV1 from?

[Tom]

First fraction - same as BRIS E1.

[mikesal57]

thxs Tom

there you go...the "Holy Grail of factors"

1st call