Quote:
Originally Posted by steveb
i guess i am not 'most'
the speed model is just fine, your problem is thinking that guys like me think it's the be all of it.
i would use a zillion factors other than time, i just know that time is the best of them.
but much much much more than that, you can figure many things seemingly unrelated to time.
i would actually call YOU, 'figure blind' even though you may not use them, that's because you have your mind made up.
that's fine though i am not interested in trying to convert you
|
I've been making, using, and studying figures decades. I know exactly what the problems are and how handicappers try to address them. I have no problem with them as a tool.
Where I differ with conventional wisdom is that most figure handicappers believe that even though there are huge variations in pace, different levels of ability and natural speed among horses within the same race, ground loss considerations, weight changes, different competitive races developments, positional considerations, variations on how tiring the track is, the wind, run up changes, maintenance crews allowing the moisture level in the surface change from race to race, etc... they can produce figures that accurately reflect performance/ability or make adjustments to them to do that.
I think that's a delusional view.
At best, you can get somewhere in the ballpark, but you will be wrong more often than appreciated and very wrong some of the time.
That does not make the information useless.
It means if you are forming very strong opinions based on the clock (even if you are making subjective adjustments for other factors), you should probably not be so confident.
My only contribution and view beyond that is that if you understand the pecking order at your track (or in a specific race), look at a field in a qualitative way, look at who beat who with what trip (especially similar trips), you can sometimes bypass many of those complexities and get to a more accurate appraisal.
Just as a simple example.
The BC Classic got a 105 Beyer figure.
I have no problem with the accuracy of that figure. However, a 105 is about the PAR for a solid Grade 2 dirt race for older males in the US. If anyone thinks that was a Grade 2 quality race and you could just throw a 107 horse into the mix with those horses and he'd win, I think you are very wrong. There were several horses in that race that put up better numbers than that going in (some even got bet) and they predictably got buried in that field - as would just about any other legit Grade 2 older horse. That was a solid Grade 1 field even though it may not have been one of the better Classics we've ever seen.
