Speed rating poll. Did your horse fail to win because of speed rating

[jasperson]

I know that speed rating can be inaccurate,but I still think they are usable.
Here is my question? What percentage of the time was the speed rating the primary cause of your horse not Winning?

[thaskalos]

According to my calculations...the speed rating causes me to lose my bet 58.7% of the time.

[Fingal]

I said zero because I don't look at a speed rating as the final deciding factor.

As Shakespeare said-

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- Hamlet 1.5.167-8

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

According to my calculations...the speed rating causes me to lose my bet 58.7% of the time.

100 % of my losses are due to the fact another horse (or horses) earned a higher speed rating in the race.

[therussmeister]

I said 0% because it is my job to know the strengths and weaknesses of the figures I use.

[PhantomOnTour]

I applaud everyone who has voted in this poll so far, because I can't figure out what the OP is asking in the first place.

[Some_One]

Yea it sounds like another 'I bet the horse with the best figure, it lost, the figures must be wrong' thread.

[Overlay]

I take speed figures into account as one of a weighted variety of handicapping factors that I use to assess the winning chances of each horse in a field -- not just automatically selecting the horse that rates highest on any one factor, or using the factors as elimination criteria to narrow the field to a single horse.

Although speed figures are very influential in my determination of a horse's overall chances, my approach serves to remind me that no horse (in my opinion) ever has a 100% guaranteed assurance of winning any given race (no matter how superior it may appear to be with regard to speed, class, condition, or any other variable), and that the final separation criterion always comes down to whether the horse's odds make it worth a bet in light of my calculation of its likelihood of winning. (And, in my experience, it would be more difficult for horses that appear markedly superior on speed to offer betting value.)

Since I don't use factors as "go/no-go" standards, it rarely surprises me or leaves me unable to account for a race outcome when a horse that appeared to have had the best speed in the field fails to perform as expected.

[Red Knave]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

According to my calculations...the speed rating causes me to lose my bet 58.7% of the time.

Of course everyone knows that 87.246% of statistics are made up on the spot.



(good one )

[Valuist]

As if trips and riders weren't enough. Now bettors can blame a horses loss on a numerical rating.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

100 % of my losses are due to the fact another horse (or horses) earned a higher speed rating in the race.

Unless your horse was DQ'd from first.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Valuist

Unless your horse was DQ'd from first.

Dang. You've got a good point there. I should have said 99.9%.

[ultracapper]

Are you sure of that 99.9% number? That's 1 out of 1000. What is the true DQ rate of winning horses? Just another of those 87.4% statistics that are made up.

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

Are you sure of that 99.9% number? That's 1 out of 1000. What is the true DQ rate of winning horses?

I thought he was quoting from his records.

[ultracapper]

No kidding. there's a record kept out there for everything by somebody.