Quirin included a section on "The Speed Points as Predictors" in Winning at the Races, based on the same (relatively small) sample that he used to develop his speed-point concept (400 sprints; 300 routes). Out of those 700 races, the chances of a horse with a given speed-point total running first, second, or third at the first call were as follows:

0 9.2%
1 19.8%
2 22.6%
3 31.6%
4 42.4%
5 56.7%
6 66.4%
7 70.4%
8 86.1%

He also figured in the early-speed tendencies of other horses in a given race by adding the percentages associated with each individual horse's speed-point total, dividing each horse's individual percentage by the total of the percentages for the whole field, and then multiplying the result by three (since speed points were automatically awarded to the top three runners at the first call). Out of a separate 1,549-race sample, there were 806 horses for which the results of this calculation were .75 or higher (indicating at least a 75% chance of being in the top three at the first call). 167 of those horses won, producing an impact value of 1.81, and an overall loss of 1.5% on $2.00 wagers.

In Quirin's original 700-race sample, the number of horses with each speed-point total that actually did run in the top three at the first call was as follows:

0 114 (with 24 winning)
1 129 (with 29 winning)
2 161 (with 38 winning)
3 256 (with 52 winning)
4 278 (with 56 winning)
5 416 (with 77 winning)
6 300 (with 54 winning)
7 174 (with 35 winning)
8 272 (with 57 winning)

The horses actually running first, second, or third at the first call all showed a flat-bet profit (except for those with 7 speed points, which had a 1% loss). However, the bulk of those profits resulted from horses that showed surprise early speed (those that had had 2 speed points or less).

Clarification of my previous post: After developing his speed-point model, Quirin tested it on a 2,031-race sample. The role of the 700-race sample that I cited above was in his calculation of a horse's percentage chance of actually being in the top three at the first call, based on its individual speed-point total (from 0 to 8), and on how the rest of the field stacked up as far as early-speed potential. He also used this 700-race sample to measure the performance of horses that actually did show early speed in their races, compared with their speed-point totals calculated before the race was run.

Why I abandoned speed points
 

Horses IN FORM generally show the SAME relative early speed race to race, and to base THEIR speed abilities on some POSTION versus OTHER horses is, well, FLAWED. They are NOT meeting any of those same horses over and over again, but their inherent general ABILITIES to run are being determined upon their relationship to OTHERS, not them.

Imagine a Honda Civic going up against a Toyota Corolla, then that same Civic, later, going up against a rail dragster. Would the Civic go any faster or slower full out vs. either ? NO, but it would appear quite different POSITIONALLY. That of course is an extreme example, but accurate. The inhernet ability to run a certain speed is the horse's OWN, not relative to the competition.

That is the false sense that POSTION can often give. I try to relate this to early horses all the time: AN EARLY HORSE, projecting into today's contest, DOES NOT HAVE TO LEAD to win or even be competitive. I have seen entire fields run as early... ENTIRE FIELDS even those horses back in 5th and would project that when they next ran, meeting a subsequent field (with KNOWN pressers and sustained/pressers vs. it next out) and having the same velocity, they would be up in the front SAME realtive velocity: BIG difference in POSITION

Of course I believe in measuring velocity at the pace call, that is why I make pace figures. But, position is another important part of the equation. Many horses run the same velocity, but if they find themselves in an uncomfortable position while doing it they won't run well to the finish.

With regard to speed points as a predictor of position (apart from the speed or pace at which the race is being run), Quirin devised and tested several computer-generated spot-play methods based on a variety of key handicapping factors in Chapter 24 of Winning at the Races. He noted that (at least at the time the book was written), regardless of any other factors that might have been involved in a particular method, three conditions acted, in combination, as universal catalysts in improving any factor or combination of factors to which they were supplemented. Those conditions were: at least one win in the horse's last ten starts; at least one Quirin speed point; and last race within ten days. As Quirin put it, "The consistency requirement guarantees that the horse knows how to win, the early speed condition that it is still capable of getting in position to win, and the strong recent action restriction that the trainer has good intentions." Perhaps the recent action requirement might stand a slight amount of relaxation under today's conditions, but I think that the other two are still useful.

I have found days since last race -- if low, like 7 - 10 days -- to be extremely powerful if the horse showed any signs of life in the last race. There is a huge dropoff in win percentage when you go farther out. So I think that layoffs don't mean as much as they used to, but quick turnaround is still a very good sign as long as it is coupled with some positive move in the last race...

GT, I wonder what you would find if you broke your "findings" down into sprints/routes.
Reason is, Quirin found that horses coming back fast, from a route to a route, didn't fair as well, as when they had a few more days to "recover" from the previous race. He thought that routes took more out of a horse.

And this is why many need the lead horses romp at 10-1 when they look pathetic on the form - they are more comfortable in today's pace match up and do not quit. Many horses lose by many lengths in final times that they have run or bettered in the past becasue they lost the pace match ups early on. The comparison to cars is flawed becasue the horses are living things with minds that control thier actions. Jim the Hat Bradshaw used positional match up as a major part of his time match ups.
Horses have no idea where the finish line is, many are done racing at the break. A horse with 8 QSP is likely to run as fast as it has to to get the lead and pay the price later on.

I'm not sure that Quirin concluded that a quick turnaround from one route to another route took more out of a horse, as much as he found that a quick turnaround was a definite benefit to a horse going from one sprint (especially one where the horse had run well) to another sprint, while a longer layoff for a sprinter acted to dull the sprinter's form. For routers, by contrast, there was less difference in next race performance depending on the length of the layoff. (A "good race" the last time out for a router showed roughly the same benefit whether the horse came back in another route within 1-14 days or within 15-30 days.)(Quirin's comment, as I recall, was something like, "Sprinters seem to require that razor-sharp edge. Routers do not.") However, just because routers hold their form longer, and a quick turnaround is more beneficial (and apparently necessary) for sprinters, that wouldn't necessarily lead me to conclude that a quick turnaround was a negative sign for a router, even though it might not be as strong a positive sign as for a sprinter. (I believe that the computer-generated systems where Quirin found the addition of a ten-day action requirement to be beneficial included at least some that encompassed routes as well as sprints.)

Quirin..."Interestingly, 45 of the horses in the first catagory (1-30 days) were racing again within 5 days of their most recent race, which also was a route. None of them won. Clearly a horse needs a few days more rest after (before?) engaging in a route race."

Thanks for refreshing my memory on that. (I would imagine that the 45 routers coming back within five days of their last race were a relatively small percentage of the total sample.) Apparently, though, based on Quirin's findings concerning the wide-ranging benefit of a ten-day action requirement, I would gather that routers coming back within 6-10 days of their last route are not at a significant disadvantage (or, at least, were not at the the time of Quirin's research).

Rule of thumb I always have gone by - a router shortening up to a sprint must have been leading or within a length at the frist call fo the route. This was from a study of distance changes published in the old Woodside Reports. It worked well for a long time, but I have been bitten a lot in recent months - memorably so (:mad: ) by horses I would otherwiae have liked.


I need to a new study based on current data.

So many questions, so little time......:(

CompuTrak has a Friction rating which as per manual the description is:

"A measure of a horse’s closing capability. The lower the number, the better its “come-from-behind” capability. It indicates the horse may race longer distances. A negative*number* normally means the horse sped up during the race."*

Therefore, by utilizing the opposite side would give you the speed balls in any race. Are Klein and Friction numbers similar?

In todays 5th race at SA (01-11-06) the frictions are from a low of 165 to a high of 393. The next lower number behind 393 (#1 horse) is 264 (#10 horse). Both horses are listed at 15 to 1, it might just make the winning pick six today :lol: :lol: :lol:

FYI, I have done all the tracks, every card, for 2005. For racecards with at least 3 rateable races, I have this for the ratings:

They are average, median, bottom 5% cutoff, bottom 10% cutoff, top 10% cutoff, top 5% cutoff. I found 6 days with a 300, or every horse winning wire to wire, and 7 days with a 0, or no winners from the front half of the field at the first call.

CJ...is that the bias rating?

Yes, bias rating, I think the speed points thing stinks.

Speed Calculator
 

Check out the initial website for "Weighted Speed Calculator"

L8R

Sly

Maxspa:

Going back to your post that started this thread, I went to the Web site and didn't find anything on Steve Klein's program. Was it removed because of the DRF dispute?

It's called the Weighted Speed Calculator, now.

It's There!
 

Wickel,
The calculator has had a name change. The name is the "Weighted Speed Calculator" and Bob Pitlak came up with a more efficient scale that is similar. I received my order a few weeks ago but haven't had a chance to use it because I 'm in the process of moving and have had no time for handicapping. It's for sale on their website.
Maxspa

Thanks. I'll check it out.

Max,
Moving back to Saratoga?

Saratoga-Only In August!
 

Figman,
The real estate market here on the Florida west coast is as crazy as the Saratoga one. Many apartment complexes have turned into Condo's. Every scrap of available land is being bought by developers. Housing developments with $300,000 dollar homes and up are common place. I had the opportunity to buy the two bedroom apartment where I now reside for nearly $200,000. However, I said no thanks and am looking for another respectable one in a good part of town.
On a side note, Huey Mahl material is being aggressively sold on e-bay so his legend lives on. It was quite a few years ago that you made me aware of what a genius he was and I thank you for that overture!
Maxspa