Mechanical Beyer System

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by ClassTrumpsSpeed

Is the purpose of HANDICAPPING to make money BETTING?

The handicapping of racehorses are predictions and predictions are an excellent means of testing our comprehension of horserace handicapping, and once we have that comprehension, wagering might occur; but the basic aim of handicapping remains the comprehension itself.

[Bruddah]

Originally Posted by ClassTrumpsSpeed

Is the purpose of HANDICAPPING to make money BETTING?

No matter what these mathmatical minds say, the purpose of Handicaping is two fold. 1) identify the winner and those which can possibly win. 2) Find an edge in betting or constructing your tickets. (investment)

To me, no one has shown how refining a horse's beaten length beyond .20 seconds increases either #1 or #2.

It comes down to matmatical minds having an intrinsic need for problem solving. In other words, matmatical minds need order and are willing to put in the extra work to satisfy this burning desire.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

Class,

Even you have to admit that if Zenyatta was doing this on turf nobody would complain. There is simply no way to really know if she is doing something that special or not. It is a new surface that nobody can really have a complete grasp on at this early stage. We are the only country running alleged top grade races on it. I think this is the main reason people want to see her run well on turf or dirt. Sure, she has won on dirt, but hardly in the fashion that would indicate she is an all time great, or even on the level of Lady's Secret, Azeri, Go For Wand, Bayakoa, etc. That is what is so sad about this less than ambitious campaign the connections are mapping out.

I understand the point you are making, but don't agree.

Turf form has translated reasonably well to the synthetic surfaces (especially the CA Pro Ride) for many high level US runners and top class European shippers. For many, their turf figures seem right in line with synthetic figures and their non numeric form also looks similar.

Some rare dirt horses have also translated their form well fairly to the CA and other synthetics. The only difference is the typical figure compression we see at the top of the scale that we also see in turf racing (most likely due to pace issues). It's that figure compression that I think is throwing a lot of people off.

To me, she's obviously an all time great filly in the same class as anything I have ever seen. The quality of a few of the fields she has beaten was outstanding, her peak figures were at the top end of what we typically see from Grade 1 older males on turf or synthetic (let alone fillies), she wins with reserves of stamina and speed, overcame ridiculously slow paces when other quality horses couldn't make up an inch of ground, and she always fires.

I agree that that's not the same as saying she's an all time great dirt filly. We don't know that yet. But I don't think being a great dirt filly is a requirement for greatness. I doubt Ruffian was a great turf filly. If she ran on it and got beat it wouldn't diminish her in my mind. If she won it would enhance her. Same with Zarkava if she tried dirt.

That's the way I feel about Zenyatta on dirt.

She isn't as proven on dirt, but she earned a 106 Beyer with something in reserve in only her 4th start well before she had even peaked on synthetic.Then she jogged around the track against a very weak field this year. That's already a lot more than most horses can do on a secondary surface. And for all we know, there's a lot more in the tank.

I just don't think they are going to go out of their way to run a filly against the best colts all year long to satisfy fans that in many cases are so biased against her they want her to take on the best fields in every race because they are actually rooting for her to lose.

Even the greatest fillies that have tried older colts on dirt have only done so on a very limited and selective basis. Those that tried more got buried.

I think they would be crazy to take on colts in the Classic, but they seem to be gearing up for that. That's an insanely aggressive goal. If they are serious, we can at least be patient with the current schedule because they are trying to get her to peak that day.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I just don't think they are going to go out of their way to run a filly against the best colts all year long to satisfy fans that in many cases are so biased against her they want her to take on the best fields in every race because they are actually rooting for her to lose.

Yeah, that's it. It's because we're rooting for her to lose...

The only time I would ever root for Zenyatta to lose would be if she were racing against Rachel Alexandra. Other than that, I hope she wins every single time.

[cj]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Yeah, that's it. It's because we're rooting for her to lose...

The only time I would ever root for Zenyatta to lose would be if she were racing against Rachel Alexandra. Other than that, I hope she wins every single time.

I feel the same way, I just prefer her to not lose against better horses, and even now and then on a surface with some proven history.

[Fastracehorse]

Originally Posted by shouldacoulda

To use any past performance data in a "mechanical" fashion is asking for trouble IMO. I don't want to bash Beyer. Heck I bought his book and enjoyed reading Beyer on Speed. He says it himself that the numbers aren't always accurate, even though they try to make them as accurate as possible. If I'm not mistaken I think it was James Quinn that said speed handicappers tend to 1 race behind a horses best effort. I can attest to that from experience. Horses are not machines and neither are the jockeys and trainers. That's why I don't think there could ever be a mechanical system that could work well enough to make it worth the time and effort, speed based or not. I think you could have just as good a result from reading body language on the post parade w/o any past performances. At least you can catch some prices that way. The problem is everyone looks at the Beyers and most that do can count too. So when the top speed number wins, it pays accordingly.

.......my point.

You want the horse that has the Beyer that needs to be adjusted the most - ie, the lowest Beyer in the form - that isn't a true indicator of the horse's ability; and that way U get the biggest overlay.

fffastt

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Fastracehorse@DRF

.......my point.

You want the horse that has the Beyer that needs to be adjusted the most - ie, the lowest Beyer in the form - that isn't a true indicator of the horse's ability; and that way U get the biggest overlay.

fffastt

That wouldn’t be a Beyer system; if adjustments are made, it would be a “Fastracehorse@DRF System” that is Beyer-based.

[nobeyerspls]

I'm not a "Beyer Basher", just a guy that says his speed figures have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races. He did put forth a gallant effort to digitize an analog event and was savvy enough to amend it with pars when early shortcomings were noticed. Seems now that he is more into replays than his own numbers.
So, I'm in. Races limited to maidens, turf, and fillies sprinting. May pass races, no pick can be less than 5-1, and must bet win/place (I run 2nd a lot but often at decent odds).
Let the games begin.

[Tom]

What early shortcomings?
You were there in 1975?
He had a big red Flare pen.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by nobeyerspls

I'm not a "Beyer Basher", just a guy that says his speed figures have no practical application in handicapping thoroughbred races. He did put forth a gallant effort to digitize an analog event and was savvy enough to amend it with pars when early shortcomings were noticed. Seems now that he is more into replays than his own numbers.
So, I'm in. Races limited to maidens, turf, and fillies sprinting. May pass races, no pick can be less than 5-1, and must bet win/place (I run 2nd a lot but often at decent odds).
Let the games begin.

I was wondering when you would jump into the "mix." Good hearing from you and I hope all is well.

[nobeyerspls]

[QUOTE=Tom]What early shortcomings?
You were there in 1975?
He had a big red Flare pen.[/QUOTE

By early I meant after they first appeared in the racing form. When horses shipped-in to a major track from a minor one, an equal bsf didn't matter. Weren't track pars developed because of this? I note the same issue on a gender basis, particularly at the claiming level. I suppose that those relying on the figures adjust for this.

[nobeyerspls]

Originally Posted by Cratos

I was wondering when you would jump into the "mix." Good hearing from you and I hope all is well.

Thanks. All is well. I don't visit here as much as I'm into writing. Published my first novel last year - Crystal Beach Sunset - which has some nice racing content. I'm working on the second one now.
Always fun to put my two cents in regarding the bsf's. Those that use them would tell you that my ideas are overpriced at that amount.

[cj]

Originally Posted by nobeyerspls

By early I meant after they first appeared in the racing form. When horses shipped-in to a major track from a minor one, an equal bsf didn't matter. Weren't track pars developed because of this? I note the same issue on a gender basis, particularly at the claiming level. I suppose that those relying on the figures adjust for this.

They already had the pars years before races ever went to print. What has happened is that now that the figures are in a database, it is easy to see when a track is being over or under rated and they can be adjusted accordingly.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Yeah, that's it. It's because we're rooting for her to lose...

The only time I would ever root for Zenyatta to lose would be if she were racing against Rachel Alexandra. Other than that, I hope she wins every single time.

Then I just have to ask whether you guys were as vocal about getting Bayakoa, Azeri, Go for Wand, Paseana, Personal Ensign, Dance Smartly etc.. to run against the best possible colts every time or whether Grade 1 races against fillies and an occasional foray against colts was OK?

Did you ever demand they test themselves on turf too?

Seriously you guys are ridiculously transparent.

You are entitled your opinion about her ability (one I disagree with) and your desire to see her on dirt more often just to what she can do on that surface (one I agree with), but I don't think you are entitled to ask her to do things that other great fillies have not done and hold it against her if she doesn't.

They ran in the freaking Classic last year (and WON) and are planning the same thing this year. They showed up at the AB this year and no one came.

How many great fillies have even tried the Classic?

How did they do?

Most picked very soft Grade 1 older colt spots to try or stuck to 3YOs.

I'd bet my life against a dollar if she got beat by Grade 1 colts many of you guys would be here gloating all day long and holding the loss against her even though she's already beaten a multitude of Grade 1 horses whose dirt/turf form translated well to synthetic, won 2 Breeder's Cups, and was the first filly to ever win the Classic.

But if one of those other great fillies tried synth or turf and got beat, it wouldn't mean a thing.

I get the point, but you guys are toooooo transparent.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by nobeyerspls

Thanks. All is well. I don't visit here as much as I'm into writing. Published my first novel last year - Crystal Beach Sunset - which has some nice racing content. I'm working on the second one now.
Always fun to put my two cents in regarding the bsf's. Those that use them would tell you that my ideas are overpriced at that amount.

You are absolutely right, the premise that BSFs were built upon then and now is equalization. Paraphasing Joe Cardello the author of “Speed to Spare: Beyer Speed Figures Uncovered (Elements of Handicapping)” in which he states that a BSF value at one racetrack is the same at any racetrack, but the corresponding final time values might be different.

Theoretically that might be proven to be true, but in actual practice, BSFs are effects; not causes and that difference makes Cardello’s assertion virtually impossible to be true.