Beyer figs

[steveb]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I am going on memory, but here are the steps I followed when I made speed figures as a teenager:

1. Start with a commonly run distance and class level and collect a large sample of data. For instance, at Santa Anita these days, you might use allowance optional claimer nonwinners of 2 at 6 furlongs. (Back in the 1980's I used $12,500 open claimers at 6 furlongs, but now there aren't so many of those.)

2. Take the mean of all times at that distance and class level and assign it an arbitrary number such as 70 or 80 or 90.

3. Now collect another large sample of data for the same class level at other distances. 5 1/2 furlongs, 6 1/2 furlongs, 7 furlongs, 1 mile, 1 1/16 miles. Each par time will get the same number that you arbitrarily assigned.

4. Now, at 6 furlongs, assign a point value for each 1/5 of a second (or nowadays, 0.20 seconds) interval. Such as 2 points.

5. That same point interval should be a different amount of time at the other distances, because the horses are traveling faster at the end of shorter races and slower at the end of longer races. So divide the .20 seconds by the par time of the 6 furlong race, expressed in seconds. Then multiply it by the par time for each other distance, and you will get the equivalent number of seconds for each distance. Based on that, you can construct a beaten time chart for each distance. Each 2 points will be .20 seconds at 6 furlongs, it will be a little less than .20 seconds at 5 1/2 furlongs, and it will be significantly more than .20 seconds at 1 1/16 miles, for instance.

6. Using the beaten time chart, you can construct a speed figure chart for each distance that assigns each time a number, by, for instance, going up and down 2 points for each .20 at 6 furlongs, and using the other numbers you just calculated with the other numbers. Those are your base speed figures.

7. Go back and take average base speed figures over large samples at various common class levels at the track. These are your par times. After you have a large number of par times, use those times to project the speed figures for races going forward. Compare the actual numbers run by winners to the par times, and average the differences out to create an estimate of whether the track is faster or slower than normal. This is your track variant. Add or subtract the track variant to your base numbers. These will be your preliminary speed figures.

8. Once you have a few weeks of speed figures calculated this way, instead of continuing to use the par times, start using the actual numbers run by horses in previous races to project what they will run in each race. Once again, compare the projected numbers to what they actually run. Use a par time when you don't have enough data. Once again, average these out each day to create an estimate of track speed, which is your track variant. Add or subtract the track variant to your base numbers. Now you are calculating real speed figures.

that's a great post that i enjoyed reading.
i think though that you need somebody to take you under his wing and give you some guidance.
your 4 5 and 6 though are very very wrong.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by steveb

that's a great post that i enjoyed reading.
i think though that you need somebody to take you under his wing and give you some guidance.
your 4 5 and 6 though are very very wrong.

I am trying to remember something I did 30 years ago. I didn't go back and look at all my charts and calculations (a lot of which I actually kept!). I am sure I misremembered a bunch of stuff.

At any rate, if you want to make corrections to the methodology I posted, feel free to append them.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I am trying to remember something I did 30 years ago. I didn't go back and look at all my charts and calculations (a lot of which I actually kept!). I am sure I misremembered a bunch of stuff.

At any rate, if you want to make corrections to the methodology I posted, feel free to append them.

you could probably put it all together off my post posts if you wanted to, or were intersted enough.
but i am confident that i have beyer and anybody else, covered where time is concerned.
basically speeds figures are nothing but percentage figures.
thus you should not use any fixed values.

if one winner runs 6f in 70 seconds and in the next race they run the trip in 71.
assuming the 70 second winner was worth a 100 then the 71 second winner was worth 86

but what if they run 74 and 75???
you way would have the same diff but it should not be.
if the 74 was 100 then the 75 is 87 rather than 86

what about if the race were run in 120 and 121 seconds over a much longer trip?
if 120 = 100 then 121 = 92


simple little sums to keep it all in proportion(70/71-.9)*1000= 86
(120/121-.9)*100 =92
that is ALL that beyers were when they were actually speed figures.....percentages


BUT if those times of 70 was for the winner and the next horse in the race run 71 then the above is WRONG, but that's basically what you are saying in your post even if you don't realise it.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aketcA_hkoM

Doug knows his stuff.

[jay68802]

I did this for Delta Downs for a long time. For par I would used all the races at a distance that were for older horse's in races from $7500 and up. Toss all outlier's, then used Beyer's chart and methods after that. I also weighted the average so that the most recent races carried more weight. Worked well, but I thought I still had problems with the variant. Figuring the variant is the hardest part of the process.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by jay68802

I did this for Delta Downs for a long time. For par I would used all the races at a distance that were for older horse's in races from $7500 and up. Toss all outlier's, then used Beyer's chart and methods after that. I also weighted the average so that the most recent races carried more weight. Worked well, but I thought I still had problems with the variant. Figuring the variant is the hardest part of the process.

Yeah. You have a day where one race is an outlier, or where the track seemed to speed up or slow down, or whatever. It was hella difficult.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Boy another thread that has gone down the tubes by the red tape of the figs! Stan started out asking about the figs for the preps. Slow horses rarely win this race and maybe the top fig doesn't win much but competitive with top fig does. Cramer was right when he wrote Value Capping that high fig fundamentalism was rampant. Then. I think handicapping factors in general are cyclical but speed isn't one of them. Fast enough wins more than any other factor. It is relevant. And to to be able to talk to a figure maker in CJ, that he is accessible. Means a hell of a lot. Thanks CJ.

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Stan started out asking about the figs for the preps. Slow horses rarely win this race and maybe the top fig doesn't win much but competitive with top fig does.

How do you define "competitive with top fig"? I'll Have Another was 14 Beyer points behind Bodemeister. Barbaro was 13 Beyer points behind Sinister Minister who finished 16th. Giacomo was 25 points behind Bellamy Road and 13 points behind Afleet Alex. One oddball tidbit I did garner from Stanley's manual is no horse worse worse than 8th best overall Beyer on last dirt prep has won the roses. This includes bombers Giacomo and MTB.

If that trend holds up then your winner will be one of the following:
Justify (107), Mendelssohn (106), Bolt (102), Audible (99), Magnum Moon (98), Vino Rosso (98), Good Magic/ Noble Indy/Lone Sailor (95).

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by f2tornado

How do you define "competitive with top fig"? I'll Have Another was 14 Beyer points behind Bodemeister. Barbaro was 13 Beyer points behind Sinister Minister who finished 16th. Giacomo was 25 points behind Bellamy Road and 13 points behind Afleet Alex. One oddball tidbit I did garner from Stanley's manual is no horse worse worse than 8th best overall Beyer on last dirt prep has won the roses. This includes bombers Giacomo and MTB.

If that trend holds up then your winner will be one of the following:
Justify (107), Mendelssohn (106), Bolt (102), Audible (99), Magnum Moon (98), Vino Rosso (98), Good Magic/ Noble Indy/Lone Sailor (95).

This post to me shows that you either don't play this game much or the way you look at figures is kindergarten level. I think I speak for many players on here that we are not instilled with awe of big figures. Maybe an eyebrow raise. I look at a race and think about what will win it. This race I say about a 105. If a horse is above the 95 Beyer he is definitely in the mix. Only because as spring 3yo's they can improve like that. Either way figures over time prove out. I already expanded on my 6% theory. That gets 80% and usually better % of winners. Competitive is good enough. While I think the pedigree work is good, it's nothing compared to figures. Fast enough will always win. If you make your life score off outliers you are hanging with the right guy in this guy. When I'm on track and getting my ass kicked I root for my boys around me and ride their wave of winning. Not going to listen to the Derby fig bashing with less effective stats being thrown around as truth and being preached to. This happens every year. I'm a 10 year PA vet. I'm skeet shooting what I think is BS on the TC threads. Because everyone else does it so often I feel obligated!

[CincyHorseplayer]

Speaking of pedigree and the derby. This Raise A Native run has been good but pedigrees change. Often abruptly. In the 1950's the Bay Ronald line dominated. Then was gone completely by the mid 60's.

Give me any 10 or 20 year period of time and I will give you the statistics by root sire lines. I did the male and female lines of every winner back to Aristides in 1875.

[cj]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Boy another thread that has gone down the tubes by the red tape of the figs! Stan started out asking about the figs for the preps. Slow horses rarely win this race and maybe the top fig doesn't win much but competitive with top fig does. Cramer was right when he wrote Value Capping that high fig fundamentalism was rampant. Then. I think handicapping factors in general are cyclical but speed isn't one of them. Fast enough wins more than any other factor. It is relevant. And to to be able to talk to a figure maker in CJ, that he is accessible. Means a hell of a lot. Thanks CJ.

Thanks, I really appreciate that.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by cj

Thanks, I really appreciate that.

Needed to be said. Easy to do. Being able to rap with you and for everybody is a luxury. We are a small world. Love this place because the average player can talk to people they read their books and/or use their products. You are a fun guy anyway! I would like to hang with you in person so you don't have to omit curse words and in general humor oriented perversions! If the figure world is flat I'm going over the big waterfall with you brother!

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

This post to me shows that you either don't play this game much or the way you look at figures is kindergarten level.

I've been playing since 1987 with a positive ROI. I'm certainly not making a ton of money but have fun winning here and there or wouldn't be a participant. I use speed figures, stats, angles, track bias, horse for course, J/T, gut feelings, breeding, and whatever else at my disposal. I asked a fair question and you did give me an answer in between a bunch of meaningless drivel. I know how most of the figures work and can tell you playing the best last out figure in any race will net a slightly better ROI, albeit still plenty negative, than playing the favorite. So, yes, the figures do a slightly better job than the public.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by f2tornado

I've been playing since 1987 with a positive ROI. I'm certainly not making a ton of money but have fun winning here and there or wouldn't be a participant. I use speed figures, stats, angles, track bias, horse for course, J/T, gut feelings, breeding, and whatever else at my disposal. I asked a fair question and you did give me an answer in between a bunch of meaningless drivel. I know how most of the figures work and can tell you playing the best last out figure in any race will net a slightly better ROI, albeit still plenty negative, than playing the favorite. So, yes, the figures do a slightly better job than the public.

I certainly am not trying to demean a lifelong player. But I think basic terms are being mixed up here. Being a speed figure player doesn't mean worshipping the figure hierarchy of a race. Being a pace player doesn't mean betting only frontrunners. You can scoff at this notion but it's real. Players take racing so less seriously that they develop almost Voodoo notions about the game. My figure percentile theory isn't theory. It works. If you play day in and day out. This is one race. I know the magnitude. Derby fever gets me but I never roll around on a denouncement speech. That's how you sound lately! So I'm telling you about it!

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

Thanks, I really appreciate that.

CJ's posts here on time and figures are amazing.