Class as Speed

[pondman]

Class has nothing to do with speed.

Class should be an evaluation of a horse's peers.

But...a player also needs to consider the deepness of the connections pockets. How much are they willing to spend to get the win?

Overtime a King will rule the serf.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

This thread is more about what we use as input to determine Class, speed or purse mainly. I don't see why this should upset anyone.

That's fine, I just think that "speed" and "purse" are far too limiting and will not lead to anything of value in the thread. What kind of speed do you mean (Just speed figures? Early speed versus late speed?) and what parameters for purses are you using (APV, total purse amt, win amt only, ITM amt, only recent purse amts, etc.), for example. Do you include running styles? Do you include distances and surfaces? Do you include tracks, ages, time of year, track condition, etc., etc.?

[Ocala Mike]

"The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet." - Damon Runyon (but I don't think he's able to vote in the poll).

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by cj

I think a class rating should not include speed as an element of the rating, if you are interested in having one. But you need to measure performance somehow. I would use a combination of finish position and beaten lengths. It doesn't mean a thing if a horse runs in a "classy" race and is 30 lengths behind at every point of call. I personally would use the same measurements at the sectional calls too.

Purse would be a good starting point, but you better understand all the different intricacies that go along with purse. For example, how does a 30k race at Pen stack up against a 30k race at Aqu and against a 30k race at Beulah? How do you adjust for statebred races? Surely that differs from state to state. How do you account for restrictions?

Any rating you make is only as good as the data that is put into it. There are no shortcuts in this game.

Agree. I like to keep Speed and Class separate also. Just in case, I wasn't hinting that purse evaluation was the only alternative to speed. I like what you suggested with the points of call. More of this in my program rewrite coming soon. I have to play catch up here to the Pace programs around here.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by raybo

That's fine, I just think that "speed" and "purse" are far too limiting and will not lead to anything of value in the thread. What kind of speed do you mean (Just speed figures? Early speed versus late speed?) and what parameters for purses are you using (APV, total purse amt, win amt only, ITM amt, only recent purse amts, etc.), for example. Do you include running styles? Do you include distances and surfaces? Do you include tracks, ages, time of year, track condition, etc., etc.?

The discussion is about Beyer's statement, "Class as Speed." And, if not, what else would you use. I like work with purse, earnings per start, APV, and BRIS RR ratings. I like what CJ said about points of call. That's all there is to it. No one is expecting a secret formula or a consensus on a base, just a discussion on the elements.

[thaskalos]

I address the class factor by remaining unimpressed by the lofty figures that a horse might earn in races of lower value than the race the horse is being asked to run in today.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

The discussion is about Beyer's statement, "Class as Speed." And, if not, what else would you use. I like work with purse, earnings per start, APV, and BRIS RR ratings. I like what CJ said about points of call. That's all there is to it. No one is expecting a secret formula or a consensus on a base, just a discussion on the elements.

I don't think that "class is speed"...and I believe that those nice and neat par charts that we have all seen in handicapping books -- where every subsequent class level boasts a higher speed figure than the class level before it -- were fabricated in order to make a point.

[cj]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I don't think that "class is speed"...and I believe that those nice and neat par charts that we have all seen in handicapping books -- where every subsequent class level boasts a higher speed figure than the class level before it -- were fabricated in order to make a point.

There is no doubt there was some fabricating going on. It is kind of a chicken or the egg type thing. We are creating par charts to make variants, but we try to make the create the charts from races without variants. Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? I think we can do better in 2013.

After this weekend, it is a pretty slow time in racing until the Malibu. I'll try to see how well we can make a chart for just one track while at the same time accounting for track speed. It could be interesting, or maybe not, but only one way to find out. I"m not proposing using figures at all, just raw times and some type of track speed measure. I'm open to any suggestions.

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I don't think that "class is speed"...and I believe that those nice and neat par charts that we have all seen in handicapping books -- where every subsequent class level boasts a higher speed figure than the class level before it -- were fabricated in order to make a point.

Well, I've made some, and the only stuff I ever fabricated were interpolations, so I was cool with it.

Originally Posted by cj

There is no doubt there was some fabricating going on. It is kind of a chicken or the egg type thing. We are creating par charts to make variants, but we try to make the create the charts from races without variants. Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? I think we can do better in 2013.

It's averaging, the more samples the better, of course. That's why bottom-level claimers make more reliable pars and variants. I believe it (it being the averaging that produces pars & variants) is close enough to make sound, but subjective, handicapping decisions without being blind to other factors...but then I have never appreciated the value of timing in hundredths or even Trakus, to be honest.

[cj]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

It's averaging, the more samples the better, of course. That's why bottom-level claimers make more reliable pars and variants.

With all the various class levels today, the samples will never be big enough to get a meaningful average in my opinion. I don't even think pars are necessary at this point, but if I were starting from scratch, I would never do them the way many of the old books recommend.

[rastajenk]

Along these lines, but not completely relevant, I was wondering, cj, if you make River/Beulah numbers, and if so, what kinds of adjustments were necessary for the River at Beulah meet this summer.

[cj]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

Along these lines, but not completely relevant, I was wondering, cj, if you make River/Beulah numbers, and if so, what kinds of adjustments were necessary for the River at Beulah meet this summer.

I do make numbers for the RD, BEU, and TDN. My stuff is now based almost entirely on projections, so other than using the time chart I have for Beulah instead of River nothing really changed.

[eurocapper]

In my opinion class is whatever the average trainer thinks it is. It can be also Beyer, Ragozin etc. For obvious reasons in at least claiming races about every trainer has some notion of class whether they are betting or not. It can influence whether it will be a go or a no-go (or scratch) today. If the prevailing notion is that class is speed (maybe because dirt sprints dominate) then breeding will also favor speed.

[dkithore]

Originally Posted by pondman

Class has nothing to do with speed.

Class should be an evaluation of a horse's peers.

But...a player also needs to consider the deepness of the connections pockets. How much are they willing to spend to get the win?

Overtime a King will rule the serf.

Pondman, are you indirectly referring to the pedigree and the price they paid for the horse?

[pondman]

Originally Posted by dkithore

Pondman, are you indirectly referring to the pedigree and the price they paid for the horse?

No. I was thinking more on the lines of War Emblem's career. His connections didn't think he had a chance in the triple. They wouldn't have entered him. A billionaire came along with money and gave him a shot to make history. I think this scenario is much more prominent in racing than the poor boys take Big Al's Express to the triple. A current day example would be Goldencents. The tip off is that he's in the barn of a multi-millionaire.

That why it's important to understand who owns the horse.