Beyer Figs Bogus?

[Denny]

I'll have to look it up and get back to you.
I know it was a Pletcher/repole horse, maybe the name i gave was wrong.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by Denny

Beyer is doing the sport no favors.

Making turf horse appear inferior to dirt runners.

He's also doing the sport no favors by lowering his figures for ALL TRIPLE CROWN races.

He makes horses appear to be getting worse.

I think horses are every bit as fast as they've ever been and think the numbers should support that.

Beyer needs an adjustment to his figure making process to reflect what horse really do.

His method is outdated and keeps going backwards because it's based on comparisons and expected values - not reality.

Beyer does the sport no favors? You can't be serious; NOBODY, and I mean nobody, has done more to promote horse racing than Andy Beyer.

Based on the earlier posts you've made, you need to get a better understanding of the workings of speed figures before spouting off.

[Denny]

Tom,

Just looked it up - and I mixed up names of two Repole/Pletcher horses with similar names.

It was OUTWORK not OUTPLAY. What a huge mistake, huh Tom?

2016 - Track MUDDY/SEALED for both races - races 1 hour apart

Gazelle Stakes - 3yoF - Lewis Bay - 9F - 1:52.60

Wood Memorial - 3yo - Outwork - 9F -- 1:52.92

Now you can look up the BEYERS for both and see that I'm right about who got the better number - and by how much.

[Denny]

Originally Posted by Valuist

Beyer does the sport no favors? You can't be serious; NOBODY, and I mean nobody, has done more to promote horse racing than Andy Beyer.

Based on the earlier posts you've made, you need to get a better understanding of the workings of speed figures before spouting off.

I'm not referring to everything beyer ever did.

I'm referring to a couple of things that i think are bad for the sport.

1. Making turf numbers lower than dirt numbers for comparable performances.

2. Increasingly over the years making figures of horses lower than the were years ago. He was routinely giving much higher figures for comparable performances by comparable quality horses.

You can do the comparisons of both if you have old Racing Forms and want to challenge what i have to say.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

After doing a lot of data base work its very hard to make consistent profits when pace and speed figures is the key factor in making a selection. The public just ovrbets these horses, unfortunately they win a high %, makes it a tough go if you try to find value.

This is exactly the problem. Time based figures produce a lot of winners, but since everyone has figures now it's very difficult to find value if they are a significant part of your thinking. It's probably better to use an equally valid but different approach.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Denny

Tom,

Just looked it up - and I mixed up names of two Repole/Pletcher horses with similar names.

It was OUTWORK not OUTPLAY. What a huge mistake, huh Tom?

2016 - Track MUDDY/SEALED for both races - races 1 hour apart

Gazelle Stakes - 3yoF - Lewis Bay - 9F - 1:52.60

Wood Memorial - 3yo - Outwork - 9F -- 1:52.92

Now you can look up the BEYERS for both and see that I'm right about who got the better number - and by how much.

If you are using wet track, your argument has zero validity. He undoubtedly split the variant. Happens a lot on off tracks. You sure you understand what a speed figure is and how it is created?

It was OUTWORK not OUTPLAY. What a huge mistake, huh Tom?

Well, you called it your best example, so I thought you might at least remember it. It sure wasn't "OUTTHINK!"

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

This is exactly the problem. Time based figures produce a lot of winners, but since everyone has figures now it's very difficult to find value if they are a significant part of your thinking. It's probably better to use an equally valid but different approach.

I think this is correct in part, but I think it is foolish to ignore time based figures as part of the process. They are still races, after all.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by cj

I think this is correct in part, but I think it is foolish to ignore time based figures as part of the process. They are still races, after all.

Most definitely, I think the key is finding holes in these horses, which some of them do have.

[GMB@BP]

I dont think the Beyers are bogus in terms of any type of intentional sabotaging of the figures, in fact I think that is a foolish statement.

I do believe however that the scales on the figures, for whatever reason, are not correct. The best horses of today are lengths slower than in the past, and I do not believe with modern medicine, race spacing, careful placement of top horses in small fields, that they are slower.

One could argue though that as a handicapping tool this is irrelevant, as long as the numbers relate to all class levels and tracks they are still just as strong at comparing efforts of horses.

For example, I dont believe Justify would be drowned by mediocre horses from the 90's from the Grade 1 3yo races, but he would by figure comparisons....but Justify had better figures all year long than this 3yo crew so they certainly were correct that he was faster than they were.

[Tom]

...but Justify had better figures all year long than this 3yo crew so they certainly were correct that he was faster than they were.

This
And that is all you can bet on.
Nothing else matters in terms of betting.

[Denny]

Split the variant?

Just another way of making the figure look the way you want it to.
Or how you expect how it should come out!

Totally subjective interpretation is what that is.

I call it fudging - and bogus figure making Beyer style.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by Denny

Split the variant?

Just another way of making the figure look the way you want it to.
Or how you expect how it should come out!

Totally subjective interpretation is what that is.

I call it fudging - and bogus figure making Beyer style.

Lets suppose you are correct and you are spotting these "bogus figures", doesn't this give you a golden opportunity to make money? This should be your edge, not your complaint.

[Denny]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

Lets suppose you are correct and you are spotting these "bogus figures", doesn't this give you a golden opportunity to make money? This should be your edge, not your complaint.

Maybe you're right!

[Denny]

GMB,
Justify was a huge overlay at 4/5 in the Belmont.
Should have been 2/5.
The Beyer figs made it look like he was regressing!
97 for the Preakness was a joke.
Even Beyer bet against Justify with Tenfold in the Belmont.

(It's in the webinar at DRF youtube for those (Tom) who don't believe me)

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Denny

Split the variant?

Name a top 5 figure maker who doesn't split variants.