Quality Road's 121 Beyer is a sham

[Tom]

One example, figures fail to recognize ability about 70% the time everywhere.

Speed figures represent the speed of one race. Nothing more. They can't fail to recognize ability when that is not what they are meant to do.

[nobeyerspls]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

I followed you. I just know how the Beyer-haters think - "see even Serling says Beyers don't work." Of course you never said that, but they don't let facts get in the way of their Beyer contempt.

Holding an opinion that the bsfs are not predictive does not make anyone a "Beyer hater". Andy Beyer has done a lot for this sport and his articles are always on topic and insightful. I hold that he attempted the impossible when he tried to digitize an analog event. Remember that he dropped out of a University that few of us could get in to. (After my high school career and SAT's, they'd let me in to wash the windows or cut the grass).
If you read his stuff you'll learn that the last race beyer is only a starting point and that it is more important as to how the figure was achieved. Look at his record as a public handicapper of the high profile races. In the BC sprint last year he backed a horse (I did too) that didn't run and the one with the best last race figure won.
Why do double-fig horses lose at odds on? Why does a filly with consecutive figures in the low thirties win next out and post consecutive races in the seventies. The answer is that something physical occured. In the latter example, a filly with the bad habit of stall walking was calmed down when the trainer put a baby goat in with her. She adopted it as her foal and saved her energy for the afternoon. A horse in the barn next to us continually trapped his soft palate when head to head with other horses in the stretch. Double-sided tape was applied to the bit, the problem was solved, and the horse won at big odds. Those perusing the bsf column in those two examples would not understand the improvement. Do the exercise yourself. Look at favorites that lost at even money or less. You'll note that the figure for their loss is substantially lower than those that precede it. Do the same with horses winning at 15-1 or more. Same thing only inverted - big number for the win, lousy numbers before.
The irony for me is that I'm a numbers guy. I'm an investment manager and developed something called the Nolan Quotient, a simple formula for adjusting P/E's for net cash in the numerator and earnings growth in the denominator. Despite the subjectivity of that last element, it has served me well.
This thread started out about the accuracy of the figures and then morphed into their value. The debate is old in the tooth but I'm not ashamed to have continued it. It was heart warming for me to see guys like Cratos and TLG post. TLG is a formidable apologist for the bsfs although he, like Andy himself, might tell you that race replays are more important.
This is a civil forum where differences of opinion can be expressed with mutual respect. I'll always put my two cents in even if some of you think that I'm over priced.

[jonnielu]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

Eskenderreya 106
Discreetly mine 98



Measurement of two horses past performances according to my methodology and just like Beyers they do exactly what it says on the tin in my humble opinion.


If you think Beyers or my figures are meant to do something different to the above your way off base in my humble opinion.

So it's a measurement, does it show then one of these horses to be faster then the other, or does it just show that one has been faster then the other, or is it just two horses with arbitrary numbers attached in the guise of measurement?

jdl

[rastajenk]

The middle choice...on the same day, at two different tracks. How they are interpreted later is an individual's choice, not part of some rigid formula.

[cj]

Originally Posted by jonnielu

So it's a measurement, does it show then one of these horses to be faster then the other, or does it just show that one has been faster then the other, or is it just two horses with arbitrary numbers attached in the guise of measurement?

jdl

It is the second one. Now how about that bet? You got caught talking out your ass.

[Charlie D]

Originally Posted by jonnielu

So it's a measurement, does it show then one of these horses to be faster then the other, or does it just show that one has been faster then the other, or is it just two horses with arbitrary numbers attached in the guise of measurement?

jdl

Correct, they are what i stated, a measurement.


How you or anyone else interprets or uses the information these numbers provide is entirely up to you or them.

[jonnielu]

Originally Posted by cj

It is the second one. Now how about that bet? You got caught talking out your ass.

How do you intend to get Steve to tell you what he knows?

jdl

[cj]

Did it ever occur to you I already know the answer?

[gm10]

Originally Posted by cj

That is definitely not related to prior performance.

You should have made that clear before you made the statement.

Anyway, that much is true.

[cj]

Originally Posted by cj

They are the single best performance related predictor of future performance, both ROI wise and win percentage wise, on a stand alone basis.

Clearer than this?

[gm10]

Originally Posted by cj

Would that be unusual for 3yo in the spring?

My numbers are calibrated for age. So yes, it is very unusual.
As an illustration, I have for Mine That Bird (100 = max)

2yo 37 79 82 85 84 55
3yo 74 77 (SUN) 86 83 88 89 83 46

As you can see, the numbers are pretty stable.

With the absolutely brutal pace in the Sunland Derby, it is only natural the whole field ran slower than they are capable of under normal circumstances.

The final times weren't that bad. In my case, I can explain why my number is slightly too low (has indeed to do with a slow fraction), but there is no reason why pure 'final time ratings' like BSF would be low for this performance.

[Charlie D]

Jonnie

Now you know what these numbers are will you be giving up your Beyer Speedfigures are BS quest??

[gm10]

Originally Posted by cj

Clearer than this?

Well it wasn't clear to me that when you said 'performance' you meant 'performance of the horse'. A jockey and trainer have their own performances coming into a race.

[cj]

Originally Posted by gm10

The final times weren't that bad. In my case, I can explain why my number is slightly too low (has indeed to do with a slow fraction), but there is no reason why pure 'final time ratings' like BSF would be low for this performance.

I also use the fractions as a big part of my numbers and I adjust for age as well, so it is hard to talk about Beyers and remember what they are. When the pace is very fast, much too fast for the horses in the Borderland Derby, the final time is always going to suffer. If you are making just speed figures based on final time alone, it should have been low for that race. It doesn't mean it was wrong.

[Charlie D]

Originally Posted by cj

. If you are making just speed figures based on final time alone, it should have been low for that race. It doesn't mean it was wrong.

A very sensible comment in my humble opinion