Wise Dan - 117 Beyer speed yesterday

[Leparoux]

117 yesterday in the Ben Ali at Keeneland. The first true eye popping performance of the year, IMO.

[redshift1]

117 yesterday in the Ben Ali at Keeneland. The first true eye popping performance of the year, IMO.

Fastest Beyer on synthetic?

[Leparoux]

Fastest Beyer on synthetic?
I was told that it is a Stakes record and Poly record.

[Grits]

As was stated after he crossed the finish line, "this IS a serious racehorse."

His performance was outstanding. Awesome would describe the way he moved. JV had a time pulling him up . . . thought he wanted to go around once more.

[lamboguy]

he's going to be real tough all year in the handicap's. one thing for sure, its nice to have that guy around.

[Striker]

I wonder if he goes in the Met Mile on May 28th at Belmont. That would be a great race against Calebs Posse and Jackson Bend.

[cj]

My initial thought is the figure is too high, especially using Beyer's methodology on synthetics.

The Ben Ali was the only of the three routes run with an honest pace. The 3rd race had a crawling pace, so slow that it is very doubtful the race's final time had much meaning. The 9th race was run with a very fast pace. Nobody was able to close and the winner drew away though slowing noticeably.

So, I'm thinking that based on final time, the variant for those two races is deflated, i.e. the track wasn't as slow as those two final times make it look. That, in turn, makes Wise Dan's figure too big. I'm not knocking the horse, he is a monster. I just don't think he is a 117 Beyer on polytrack monster.

On top of that, I just realized he took several more points away from the raw Beyer of the 9th race than he did the 8th.

[Leparoux]

I wonder if he goes in the Met Mile on May 28th at Belmont. That would be a great race against Calebs Posse and Jackson Bend.
The Stephen Foster at Churchill is up next for him.

[the little guy]

117 yesterday in the Ben Ali at Keeneland. The first true eye popping performance of the year, IMO.

Bodmeister's Arkansas Derby and Jackson Bend/Calebs Posse in the Carter notwithstanding?

[classhandicapper]

My initial thought is the figure is too high, especially using Beyer's methodology on synthetics.

The Ben Ali was the only of the three routes run with an honest pace. The 3rd race had a crawling pace, so slow that it is very doubtful the race's final time had much meaning. The 9th race was run with a very fast pace. Nobody was able to close and the winner drew away though slowing noticeably.

So, I'm thinking that based on final time, the variant for those two races is deflated, i.e. the track wasn't as slow as those two final times make it look. That, in turn, makes Wise Dan's figure too big. I'm not knocking the horse, he is a monster. I just don't think he is a 117 Beyer on polytrack monster.

On top of that, I just realized he took several more points away from the raw Beyer of the 9th race than he did the 8th.

It looks like Beyer may have tweaked the 3rd race by a few points for the slow pace also.

The Ben Ali was an unusual race for a route on a synthetic track (especially on polytrack). You normally don't see a lively enough pace for a top horse to draw off, win by a substantial margin, and also put up a dirt caliber speed figure. I think it happens a little more often in sprints on the non poly tracks. The track was playing kind of fast though.

[cj]

It looks like Beyer may have tweaked the 3rd race by a few points for the slow pace also.

The Ben Ali was an unusual race for a route on a synthetic track (especially on polytrack). You normally don't see a lively enough pace for a top horse to draw off, win by a substantial margin, and also put up a dirt caliber speed figure. I think it happens a little more often in sprints on the non poly tracks. The track was playing kind of fast though.

I didn't look too deeply, but it seems he is lost on synthetics if he is using three different variants for three route races on the same card, especially if the sprints didn't change around them.

[classhandicapper]

I didn't look too deeply, but it seems he is lost on synthetics if he is using three different variants for three route races on the same card, especially if the sprints didn't change around them.

I didn't look at the whole card and I'm not that familiar with Keeneland figures. I could be mistaken, but I suspect he still takes some liberties adjusting figures for pace.

[Robert Fischer]

Kept going.

Not a good G-3 field by any means aside from the winner.

looks tough @ 9 and maybe 10 furlongs on any surface.

[Leparoux]

Kept going.

Not a good G-3 field by any means aside from the winner.

looks tough @ 9 and maybe 10 furlongs on any surface.
I'm not sure what the issue with the field is. Every horse in the race has graded earnings and three of the seven had won a graded stakes race before.

[cj]

I'm not sure what the issue with the field is. Every horse in the race has graded earnings and three of the seven had won a graded stakes race before.

It was a decent G3, but that is still just a G3. He wasn't beating any future champions or anything.

[Leparoux]

It was a decent G3, but that is still just a G3. He wasn't beating any future champions or anything.
No doubt. He has established himself as a major player in the handicap division though.

[cj]

No doubt. He has established himself as a major player in the handicap division though.
He has, but he did that well before this race IMO.

[Robert Fischer]

I'm not sure what the issue with the field is. Every horse in the race has graded earnings and three of the seven had won a graded stakes race before.

Entering the race Sunday the field was barely G3 level (on current ability, not each horses career history).

Cease and Big Blue Kitten were the most interesting alternatives to Wise Dan.

Cease looks great but just hasn't turned out to that talented. He didn't run at all on Sunday.

Big Blue Kitten is a legit turf stakes horse but not very brilliant. BBK at least ran about to his projection.

The others were lucky to be in G3 race in their current form.

This isn't meant to diminish Wise Dan who ran great. The speed figure may be a little high if projections of the others were taken seriously. I'm not an expert with figs.

[sammy the sage]

well at least THIS particular race confirmed what I thought about speed figure maker's...many give TOO MUCH credence about the level of race run...ie...therefore the horse COULDN'T have POSSIBLY run that fast...

glad there's MANY who believe TOTALLY in speed figures :rolleyes:

[cj]

well at least THIS particular race confirmed what I thought about speed figure maker's...many give TOO MUCH credence about the level of race run...ie...therefore the horse COULDN'T have POSSIBLY run that fast...

glad there's MANY who believe TOTALLY in speed figures :rolleyes:

I'm not sure where you got that ridiculous idea. I explained exactly why I think the figure is too high, and it has absolutely ZERO to do with class. Feel free to make stuff up though, provides great entertainment.

[sammy the sage]

I didn't MAKE up anything...if you skin is THAT thin...or your figures weren't good...you wouldn't be in business...chill out... :kiss:

[sammy the sage]

You DO realize Beyer WAS discussed...yes... :faint:

[cj]

If you were talking Beyer, then your post makes even less sense. He gave the race a 117, so obviously he didn't downgrade it because of class either. Who exactly were you talking about then?

[Leparoux]

There are certainly questions surrounding the Beyer figures in general. It was a jaw dropping performance but 117 is off the charts. Either way, makes for good debate.

[Valuist]

There are certainly questions surrounding the Beyer figures in general. It was a jaw dropping performance but 117 is off the charts. Either way, makes for good debate.

I don't know if I would classify a 117 as "off the charts". Maybe to those who've been handicapping for less than 10 years but once upon a time it was not shocking when a top level horse would run in the 115 neighborhood.

[cj]

I don't know if I would classify a 117 as "off the charts". Maybe to those who've been handicapping for less than 10 years but once upon a time it was not shocking when a top level horse would run in the 115 neighborhood.

True, but not on synthetics.

[Leparoux]

I don't know if I would classify a 117 as "off the charts". Maybe to those who've been handicapping for less than 10 years but once upon a time it was not shocking when a top level horse would run in the 115 neighborhood.
That would indicate that the charts have changed in the past ten years then maybe? Which would put this performance off the charts in the racing world today. (just playing hardball)

[cj]

That would indicate that the charts have changed in the past ten years then maybe? Which would put this performance off the charts in the racing world today. (just playing hardball)

There was a slight change to the synthetic charts a few years ago, but nothing major.

[the little guy]

I have no dog in the figure fight, and obviously have great respect for CJ and his numbers, as well as his reasoning, but I did speak to Beyer about the number and he was very comfortable with it. He said he used the same variant for the entire day, except for the 3rd race which he projected due to the slow pace and quick final fractions, and being that he had not been splitting route and sprint variants during the meet, he found no reason to do it on this day.

Once again, I'm not taking sides, and respect both figure makers greatly, but I did want to share Beyer's thoughts.

[Leparoux]

There was a slight change to the synthetic charts a few years ago, but nothing major.
I didn't mean the actual charts have changed, just that if horses really do not run those numbers anymore, then it is off the chart in today's racing world.

[classhandicapper]

I have no dog in the figure fight, and obviously have great respect for CJ and his numbers, as well as his reasoning, but I did speak to Beyer about the number and he was very comfortable with it. He said he used the same variant for the entire day, except for the 3rd race which he projected due to the slow pace and quick final fractions, and being that he had not been splitting route and sprint variants during the meet, he found no reason to do it on this day.

Once again, I'm not taking sides, and respect both figure makers greatly, but I did want to share Beyer's thoughts.

Could you tell him that while I agree that the 3rd race figure would not have been representative of the quality of those horses without an adjustment because of the slow pace, that making pace adjustments for pace via the variant causes multiple problems.

1. It assumes that the slow pace impacted each of the horses equally. That's rarely true because they all run different fractions early.

2. Trip/pace handicappers that also use speed figures might be tempted to upgrade the figures for some of the horses in that race because of the slow pace without realizing that Beyer already did so. So they would double count the impact of the slow pace and badly misjudge the performance of the horses.

I once had this discussion with him. At the time he felt that he had to make figures more useful for the average user and that more sophisticated players were better off making their own numbers. I understand the point, but IMO there should at least be a notation like an * when these decisions are made because a wide variety of people use his figures.

[cj]

I have no dog in the figure fight, and obviously have great respect for CJ and his numbers, as well as his reasoning, but I did speak to Beyer about the number and he was very comfortable with it. He said he used the same variant for the entire day, except for the 3rd race which he projected due to the slow pace and quick final fractions, and being that he had not been splitting route and sprint variants during the meet, he found no reason to do it on this day.

Once again, I'm not taking sides, and respect both figure makers greatly, but I did want to share Beyer's thoughts.

He was very comfortable with the Quality Road 121 too. I'm also not really sure how he could say he used the same variant for the 8th and 9th races, but it could be possible. I don't know the exact "new chart" for synthetics, but it doesn't match up with other 9f races at Keeneland. It clearly looks like a split variant to me.

[PhantomOnTour]

He was very comfortable with the Quality Road 121 too. I'm also not really sure how he could say he used the same variant for the 8th and 9th races, but it could be possible. I don't know the exact "new chart" for synthetics, but it doesn't match up with other 9f races at Keeneland. It clearly looks like a split variant to me.
Split variants are fairly common, but how often do you break out a race and treat it as a unique circumstance?
I rarely do this unless the situation obviously calls for it. I have always taken the data at face value unless something is clearly amiss.

It looks like Beyer eliminated this race from his variant calculation and then applied the variant back to this race.
I have the other races like this (note...my figs are NOT Beyer figs!):
F8-F3-F2-F1-S5-S1...and the Ben Ali was F17.
Averaging the others would give you about a F1 for the day, and that makes the Ben Ali look huge.

Again, i don't use Beyers, but the deviations from par should be similarly clustered and a comparison is feasible, as with CJ's figs.

[classhandicapper]

I have an idea for a fun and educational PPV.

Put all the top figures makers in separate rooms and have them make their numbers for all the major stakes races on a big weekend race day. When they are finished, let them out and begin a discussion about all the differences.

It would be wildly educational for handicappers and extremely entertaining if we could get Jerry Brown and Len Friedman there. :lol:

[cj]

I have an idea for a fun and educational PPV.

Put all the top figures makers in separate rooms and have them make their numbers for all the major stakes races on a big weekend race day. When they are finished, let them out and begin a discussion about all the differences.

It would be wildly educational for handicappers and extremely entertaining if we could get Jerry Brown and Len Friedman there. :lol:

They would only want to talk, not listen.

[Steve R]

I didn't look at the whole card and I'm not that familiar with Keeneland figures. I could be mistaken, but I suspect he still takes some liberties adjusting figures for pace.
My figures incorporate pace and the units are different from Beyer's, but I found nothing unusual in the routes and no reason to split variants. The older horse 50K MdCl was 7 units slow, the older horse OCl (NW2/40K) was 5 units fast and the Ben Ali was 21 units fast. The average was 6 units fast which, when my figures are converted to approximate Beyer equivalents gives the MdCl a 71, the OCl a 96 and the Ben Ali a 114. The 114 aligns well with Big Blue Kitten's equivalent 97 (compared to his equivalent 101 in January's GP Turf H and his equivalent 92 in last year's Natl. Museum of Racing Hall of Fame S as a 3yo) and Guys Reward's equivalent 93 (compared to his equivalent 99 in last year's Louisville H). Last year I had Wise Dan with equivalent Beyer's of 109 and 107 in the Fayette S and Clark H. I think the 114 is a reasonable and acceptable improvement over those races, being only about 2 to 3 lengths better at 9f.

[cj]

My figures incorporate pace and the units are different from Beyer's, but I found nothing unusual in the routes and no reason to split variants. The older horse 50K MdCl was 7 units slow, the older horse OCl (NW2/40K) was 5 units fast and the Ben Ali was 21 units fast. The average was 6 units fast which, when my figures are converted to approximate Beyer equivalents gives the MdCl a 71, the OCl a 96 and the Ben Ali a 114. The 114 aligns well with Big Blue Kitten's equivalent 97 (compared to his equivalent 101 in January's GP Turf H and his equivalent 92 in last year's Natl. Museum of Racing Hall of Fame S as a 3yo) and Guys Reward's equivalent 93 (compared to his equivalent 99 in last year's Louisville H). Last year I had Wise Dan with equivalent Beyer's of 109 and 107 in the Fayette S and Clark H. I think the 114 is a reasonable and acceptable improvement over those races, being only about 2 to 3 lengths better at 9f.

You just average in the 3rd race when the pace is that slow? Maybe I'm missing something.

[Steve R]

He was very comfortable with the Quality Road 121 too. I'm also not really sure how he could say he used the same variant for the 8th and 9th races, but it could be possible. I don't know the exact "new chart" for synthetics, but it doesn't match up with other 9f races at Keeneland. It clearly looks like a split variant to me.
I believe that Beyer may sometimes exaggerate what he considers high-end performances. Just as I think Wise Dan's Ben Ali was closer to 114 than 117 I also had Quality Road's Donn H closer to 117 than 121. However, when Beyer assigned Stephen Got Even a 120 in his Donn H I had him at an equivalent 119.

[PhantomOnTour]

Based on my "me to Beyer" conversion scale the BSF should have been about a 111.

[cj]

Personally, I think the track was still a little faster and that the 3rd and 9th race pace scenarios hide that fact, but that is just my style.

[Steve R]

You just average in the 3rd race when the pace is that slow? Maybe I'm missing something.
All I can tell you is that when I plug the pace and final time numbers into the program, the output is the number from which the race variant is calculated. That variant is not simply a final time variant but an entire pace line variant. In those three races only the Ben Ali was exceptional. The progression was 7 slow (on my scale), 21 fast, 5 fast. At middle distances 4 points = 1 length so in a Beyer sense the races were between 1 and 2 ticks slow, just over 5 ticks fast and just over 1 tick fast.

These figures are closely related to energy output over the entire race. In conventional terms the 50K MdCl was very slow early while the final time was actually about 4 ticks fast. The OCl was very slightly fast early and right on par for the final time. The Ben Ali was on par early and very fast for the final time. IOW, the methodology I use takes into account race shape. In a sense it looks at the incremental change in kinetic energy output so there are times when a slow early/fast late race and a fast early/slow late race can generate the same figure even if the final times are different. It simply says that an equal energy output by a horse will result in a different final time depending on the early pace (or how much energy the horse uses early and how much is left for the later stages of the race).

The correlation coefficient between BSFs and my figures exceeds 0.9 based on a comparison of hundreds of races. Not unexpectedly the biggest differences show up under conditions of extreme pace, either fast or slow.

[Valuist]

Based on my "me to Beyer" conversion scale the BSF should have been about a 111.

I was thinking right around 111-112 too. It still was a sub 1:47 mile and an eighth with a 10 1/2 length winning margin.

[cj]

One thing to note, his "new" synthetic scale artificially boosted that number about 5 points. By the conventional scale, the Beyer would have been about 112. The problem with that is the "new" scale was meant to address races with slow pace, which wasn't the case here.

I promise, no more Beyer threads for me, but I'll finish this one out!

[PaceAdvantage]

Once again, I'm not taking sides, and respect both figure makers greatly, but I did want to share Beyer's thoughts.Much appreciated!

[classhandicapper]

My figures incorporate pace and the units are different from Beyer's, but I found nothing unusual in the routes and no reason to split variants.

The 3rd race pace was very slow. IMO it caused the final time to be slower than those horse could run on that track with a more average pace.

I have no problem with that because IMO they DID run a slow final time on that speedy track and I know the pace was slow.

The issue here is whether it's appropriate for the figure maker to isolate the race and make the speed figure faster to reflect the actual abilities of the horses or just leave it alone.

In theory, Beyer is NOT making performance figures that adjust for pace. He's making speed figures, yet he occasionally adjusts figures for pace like in this instance.

[classhandicapper]

One thing to note, his "new" synthetic scale artificially boosted that number about 5 points. By the conventional scale, the Beyer would have been about 112. The problem with that is the "new" scale was meant to address races with slow pace, which wasn't the case here.

I promise, no more Beyer threads for me, but I'll finish this one out!

IMO that's clearly one of the issues.

It was a dirt like pace, on a synthetic track that was playing faster than usual (perhaps more dirt like) which enabled a very sharp horse to draw off by a large margin (rare on synthetics) and run a more dirt like figure.

[Steve R]

IMO that's clearly one of the issues.

It was a dirt like pace, on a synthetic track that was playing faster than usual (perhaps more dirt like) which enabled a very sharp horse to draw off by a large margin (rare on synthetics) and run a more dirt like figure.
If there is a concern with Beyer's handling of synthetic surfaces perhaps the discussion is better served by focusing on figures that don't show a surface bias.

[classhandicapper]

If there is a concern with Beyer's handling of synthetic surfaces perhaps the discussion is better served by focusing on figures that don't show a surface bias.

It's really an issue of pace, not surface. It's just that you get more extremely slow paces on turf and synthetic and more extremely fast paces on dirt. So you tend to wind up with different impacts and different choices about how to handle the situation if you are making speed figures for a diverse audience.

[Steve R]

It's really an issue of pace, not surface. It's just that you get more extremely slow paces on turf and synthetic and more extremely fast paces on dirt. So you tend to wind up with different impacts and different choices about how to handle the situation if you are making speed figures for a diverse audience.
OTOH, if you use entire pace line pars in the calculation rather than just final time pars you don't have that issue. The pace characteristics of the surface are already built in. For example, reviewing my figures for Santa Anita since 2000, my average Beyer equivalents on dirt, aws and turf for older horses in G1 races at route distances are 105.4, 106.8 and 107.4, respectively. It's a relatively small sample but still involves about 90 races. I chose older horse G1 routes at Santa Anita as the example because I can make the assumption that the quality is reasonably consistent and the results reflect only a difference in surface. The entire spread of 2 BSF units over the three surfaces represents just one length difference in the extreme, the point being again that not all figure methods necessarily display a bias.

As I noted earlier, under typical pace conditions on any surface, the correlation between my figures and Beyer's is very high. When pace conditions are extreme I simply ignore his numbers and trust my own.

[cj]

I would be somewhat concerned if I had turf horses better than dirt horses in this country. It just doesn't work that way. Our best horses are our dirt horses.

[Steve R]

I would be somewhat concerned if I had turf horses better than dirt horses in this country. It just doesn't work that way. Our best horses are our dirt horses.
That might be generally true, but when you look only at the individual older horse, Santa Anita G1 winners on dirt and turf at route distances since 2000, I'd say its debatable.

TURF
ARTISTE ROYAL
BIENAMADO
CONDUIT
DUBAWI HEIGHTS
EVER A FRIEND
FLUKE
FOREVER TOGETHER
FOURTY NINERS SON
GIO PONTI
GOLDEN APPLES
GOLDIKOVA
HIGH CHAPARRAL
ISLINGTON
JANET
JERANIMO
JOHAR
KIP DEVILLE
LEROIDESANIMAUX
LIGHT JIG
MAGICAL FANTASY
MASH ONE
MEGAHERTZ
MIDDAY
MILK IT MICK
NASHOBA'S KEY
PASSINETTI
PRESIOUS PASSION
PROVISO
RED GIANT
RINGASKIDDY
SIX PERFECTIONS
STAR OVER THE BAY
STORMING HOME
SUNSHINE STREET
TATES CREEK
THE TIN MAN
TRANQUILITY LAKE
WAIT A WHILE
WILLYCONKER

DIRT
ADORATION
AZERI
BALANCE
FAVORITE FUNTIME
GAME ON DUDE
GENERAL CHALLENGE
HEALTHY ADDICTION
INCLUDE ME OUT
LAVA MAN
LAZY SLUSAN
LOVELLON
MANISTIQUE
MILWAUKEE BREW
MISS LOREN
MISS MATCH
PLEASANTLY PERFECT
RIBOLETTA
ROCK HARD TEN
RON THE GREEK
SOUTHERN IMAGE
STAR PARADE
STARRER
SUGAR SHAKE
TARLOW
TIZNOW
ZAZU

[classhandicapper]

OTOH, if you use entire pace line pars in the calculation rather than just final time pars you don't have that issue. The pace characteristics of the surface are already built in. For example, reviewing my figures for Santa Anita since 2000, my average Beyer equivalents on dirt, aws and turf for older horses in G1 races at route distances are 105.4, 106.8 and 107.4, respectively. It's a relatively small sample but still involves about 90 races. I chose older horse G1 routes at Santa Anita as the example because I can make the assumption that the quality is reasonably consistent and the results reflect only a difference in surface. The entire spread of 2 BSF units over the three surfaces represents just one length difference in the extreme, the point being again that not all figure methods necessarily display a bias.

As I noted earlier, under typical pace conditions on any surface, the correlation between my figures and Beyer's is very high. When pace conditions are extreme I simply ignore his numbers and trust my own.

I am simply pointing out that other figure makers are theoretically only making final time figures, yet they sometimes tinker for pace issues even on the same surface.