Beyer:Change coming for turf Beyers.

[Kash$]

http://www.drf.com/news/beyer-change...-beyer-figures

[rastajenk]

The comments are pretty harsh. I have a hard time conjuring up the motivation to say, "What difference does it make, you suck anyway." If Beyers aren't your thing, ignore them. I guess some people need to proclaim their own genius.

I'll always be suspicious of turf numbers because of the tactics, but I will appreciate their effort to tighten them up.

[no breathalyzer]

some real special comments in that drf article..

[thaskalos]

Just because it's "logical" to assume that the best turf horses should run comparable speed figures to those of the best dirt horses...this doesn't necessarily make this assumption TRUE. It could easily be that the dirt horses are still superior to the turf horses in this country.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Just because it's "logical" to assume that the best turf horses should run comparable speed figures to those of the best dirt horses...this doesn't necessarily make this assumption TRUE. It could easily be that the dirt horses are still superior to the turf horses in this country.

I think he's more or less saying that the top turfers from Europe are on par with our top dirt horses and the gap between top US dirt and turf horses has narrowed as turf racing has become more popular.

That's been my assessment in non figure terms by observing the horses and results when horses cross over.

[Robert Goren]

I actually think that today's top turf horses are better than today's top dirt horses at least in route races. There are so few dirt horses that are bred to go route anymore. The law of extremes of a larger population of turf routers means more turf horses 2-21/2 standard deviations out from the average. Even if the average dirt horse is a couple lengths better than the average turf horse, the larger population of turf horses will more than make up the difference. Turf sprinters are different story however although that gap is narrowing rather quickly. With turf horses being less brittle than their dirt counterparts, we will see more and more turf races and turf horses even though most bettors still prefer dirt races.

[cj]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Just because it's "logical" to assume that the best turf horses should run comparable speed figures to those of the best dirt horses...this doesn't necessarily make this assumption TRUE. It could easily be that the dirt horses are still superior to the turf horses in this country.

True, but we get a pretty big crossover especially on Breeders' Cup Day. We saw the winner of the biggest turf race in the world race in the United States. I can only speak from my perspective because we have an affiliation with Timeform. One thing we try to do is make the best horses in the world on each surface comparable. I think we've done it, but it is an ongoing process that requires constant monitoring.

Edit: I see now Class basically said the same thing.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I actually think that today's top turf horses are better than today's top dirt horses at least in route races. There are so few dirt horses that are bred to go route anymore. The law of extremes of a larger population of turf routers means more turf horses 2-21/2 standard deviations out from the average. Even if the average dirt horse is a couple lengths better than the average turf horse, the larger population of turf horses will more than make up the difference. Turf sprinters are different story however although that gap is narrowing rather quickly. With turf horses being less brittle than their dirt counterparts, we will see more and more turf races and turf horses even though most bettors still prefer dirt races.

Not sure I can buy this for turf sprints. There are hardly any graded stakes races of note for turf sprinters, and only one Grade 1. Nobody is rushing out to breed to turf sprinters. I think it is safe (as of now) to assume the best turf sprinters aren't truly top class horses.

[classhandicapper]

My technique for trying to assess the quality of some of these groups is to look at how easy it is to rise through the ranks of ALW races into the graded stakes races and how some of the more versatile runners do when they cross back and forth.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by cj

True, but we get a pretty big crossover especially on Breeders' Cup Day. We saw the winner of the biggest turf race in the world race in the United States. I can only speak from my perspective because we have an affiliation with Timeform. One thing we try to do is make the best horses in the world on each surface comparable. I think we've done it, but it is an ongoing process that requires constant monitoring.

Edit: I see now Class basically said the same thing.

That's pretty much what Beyer himself says is the motivation for the change, as he writes, "As every racing fan knows, turf has become a much more important part of the U.S. sport in recent years. Races on grass regularly draw fields that are larger and more competitive than those on dirt. The higher-class events are filled with runners trained by top grass-oriented horsemen and bred by proven sires of grass runners.

Most classes of grass races now appear comparable in quality to their counterparts on dirt, and we believe our figures ought to reflect this fact."

While I'm sure he's going to take some heat from those who say, "Well why didn't you fix this earlier" or "I always knew those numbers weren't accurate", I think it takes guts to admit your mistake and make changes, especially to a well-established product.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

The comments are pretty harsh. I have a hard time conjuring up the motivation to say, "What difference does it make, you suck anyway." If Beyers aren't your thing, ignore them. I guess some people need to proclaim their own genius.

I'll always be suspicious of turf numbers because of the tactics, but I will appreciate their effort to tighten them up.

Read the comments to one of his Washington Post stories. Beyer has a lot of haters. It's really weird. I'm not saying you have to worship the guy, but to actively hate a person who has written intelligently about racing and promoted the sport for 45 years is silly.

On the merits of this thing, I have never used Beyers in turf races (I calculate sustained pace numbers, which work better I have found) and still won't.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by castaway01

That's pretty much what Beyer himself says is the motivation for the change, as he writes, "As every racing fan knows, turf has become a much more important part of the U.S. sport in recent years. Races on grass regularly draw fields that are larger and more competitive than those on dirt. The higher-class events are filled with runners trained by top grass-oriented horsemen and bred by proven sires of grass runners.

Most classes of grass races now appear comparable in quality to their counterparts on dirt, and we believe our figures ought to reflect this fact."

While I'm sure he's going to take some heat from those who say, "Well why didn't you fix this earlier" or "I always knew those numbers weren't accurate", I think it takes guts to admit your mistake and make changes, especially to a well-established product.

One thing that may be going on is he has forgotten what his figures are for. They are a handicapping tool, not a way of determining who the best horse in the world, or the best horse of all time, is (those determinations are impossible to make using mathematics anyway). It really doesn't matter if his turf numbers correlate with his dirt numbers anyway, as long as his turf numbers are useful in handicapping grass races. He should focus on THAT.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

One thing that may be going on is he has forgotten what his figures are for. They are a handicapping tool, not a way of determining who the best horse in the world, or the best horse of all time, is (those determinations are impossible to make using mathematics anyway). It really doesn't matter if his turf numbers correlate with his dirt numbers anyway, as long as his turf numbers are useful in handicapping grass races. He should focus on THAT.

Totally concur. Unless a someone believes that dirt and turf numbers are completely interchangeable there is really no benefit to a handicapper. Also concur that using a sustained pace calculation is superior to any Beyer turf number.

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

One thing that may be going on is he has forgotten what his figures are for. They are a handicapping tool, not a way of determining who the best horse in the world, or the best horse of all time, is (those determinations are impossible to make using mathematics anyway). It really doesn't matter if his turf numbers correlate with his dirt numbers anyway, as long as his turf numbers are useful in handicapping grass races. He should focus on THAT.

I personally don't think dirt figures are useless on turf and vise versa. I have a huge database that backs this up. I think getting them on the same scale ability wise is a good thing and this is a good move for Beyer.

[JimG]

I don't think this would be happening if the timeform figures were not very, very good. Many have migrated from Beyers to other vendors. Timeform is becoming more mainstream. Beyer should be applauded for his original work in this area though, not harshly criticized as some of the comments on the original article were in poor taste.

Jim