Beyer figure question...
 

I don't usually wager on the races at Turf Paradise...but I plan to do so today. As I was handicapping the first race...I noticed a peculiarity in the past performances of the :2: Lonely Lover. In both of her last two starts, this horse covered the 6 furlongs in about 1:11.2...so, given that this track is located in sunny Arizona...the assumption must be that the corresponding Beyer figures for these two races would closely resemble one another...track variant notwithstanding. The DRF variant suggests that a two/fifths of a second difference exists between the two track variants, so, a five-point Beyer difference between the two figures would exist...if the DRF variant was "accurate". Of course, we all know that the DRF variant ISN'T accurate...but how inaccurate COULD it be, at a commonly-run distance run on a lightening-fast track in ideal weather conditions?

The Beyer figures assigned to these two races are 54 and 28 respectively...suggesting that almost 11 lengths of difference exists between them. Is this possible? Is the DRF variant totally wrong in this case...or does the fault lie with the Beyer figure? Could the WIND have played a role in this case?

If these two races were run in cold weather...then I could condemn the much-maligned DRF variant. But NOW...I am not so sure.

I can't speak for Beyer, but this is what I have for those races. The figures below the calls are for the race, not the horse. That is the setting I use. So in this case, we have both races as a 72 on final time. The eight point difference in overall speed figures are a reflection of pace, not variant.

But the Beyer figures are supposed to EXCLUDE the effects of pace...except for some dramatic exceptions which occur in routes....or on peculiar surfaces. I've heard Beyer himself say that his speed figures are "pure-speed" measuring devices.

Is the discrepancy between these two Beyer figures an infrequent "mistake"...or is the "mistake" in the Beyer speed-figure methodology?

'I just mentioned the pace so you could see why the horse's overall numbers looked different. I have the variant for the days the same. That was the point of my post. It can be seen in the race final time figure.

I have no idea why Beyer has it the way he does. Nobody really knows except the person that does Beyer figures for TuP.

I know what you are saying, Cj...and I also know what you are trying NOT to say. So...I'll say it myself:

Either these Beyer figures are "performance ratings", even though Beyer denies it...or, the Beyer Associates aren't as careful in calculating these figures as they should be.

Interesting you mention this... was slaving away trying to come up with someone for yesterday's third which had a few that finished behind Lonely Lover in the N2y win and that race stuck out like a sort thumb as being screwy on the Beyer scale. I tend to just give them a passing look so didn't make any effort to understand it and just chalked it up to being flat wrong for one reason or another.

Looking at the filly I'll attach here, she's pretty damn consistent (on the Beyer scale) for a cheap conditioned TuP powerhouse and somehow came back with a number almost HALF her par while WINNING. :D

Thanks for the chart, John. :ThmbUp:

Lonely Lover is ALSO a consistent sort, who runs her good races in the 46+ figure range...so, it's pretty obvious that a mistake was made in the Beyer calculations of this January 19 race. But...are these INFREQUENT mistakes...or are the more subtle ones also more frequent?

Good eye, you guys
 

My buddy calls this "Beyer suppression".
He can say it with a straight face,too.
I know I can't.

These happen quite often and I personally love it.

In this case, IMHO, the beyer person was attempting to assign the race a 39 and hit 29 by accident.

On the numbers,I use the 1/19 number is 66 while the 2/8 is 53.

Winners number is 62 for 2/8 race,which makes sense.

The only problem with that is that I, using the Beyer scale...have that race figured as a 47.

I find quite a few of numbers like that.
I note the printed fig and my adjusted fig and look for those races.
If the horse goes off at 9-5, so be it, but if he is 9-1, or 12-1, then for sure I am on it if my adjustment makes him a contender.

Pulling up charts and without detailing pace (as it shouldn't matter to the beyer team :lol: :lol: :lol: ). Here is what I see:

Sprints only to save time typing:

Race 1 111.00 29 Beyer Assigned
Race 2 109.67 55 Beyer Assigned
Race 5 108.89 115.47 65 Beyer Assigned
Race 6 111.12 38 Beyer Assigned
Race 8 105.37 (with a slow end-project out to a 112.50) 64 Beyer Assigned


Race 8's number seems totally wrong to me and 8 horses ran back to much smaller Beyer Figs

Races 2&5 align well.

Race 6 was 1.45 slower than race 2. Or about 15-16 points slower. There was a 17 point difference, so, I can see the number assigned to race 6.

Race 1 was .12 faster than race 6. Assuming no split variant, Beyer's knucklehead mistyped 29 instead of 39 (1 point for the .12 difference).

That's what I see.

I respect your opinion Thaskalos, what do you see?

EDIT: It does seem like his team might have created a different variant (slower track for the latter part of the card).

Also, I stopped following TP 2 years ago, so I don't know these horses inside out, have much less of an opinion as to which race was right or wrong.

I brought this up before and I'll say it again. I wish every knucklehead degenerate (with money and of course present PA members-readers exluded ) bet horses via the Beyer Figs AS BEYER'S TEAM makes many huge mistakes.

They are not true speed figs and they do make adjustments for pace many many times. They also have typos and dumb mistakes.

I love capturing them and leveraging them.

This IS a good thing. ;) :)