Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 06-17-2019, 12:24 PM   #46
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
Beyer makes no such assumption. He is not making performance numbers, just speed figures. Factors used that may enhance or detract from the numbers is up to each individual handicapper.
That's slippery.

Obviously Beyer says he is only measuring the performance, not how the figure was earned.

But he also says that his figures are the single most important handicapping factor, the way, the truth, and the light, etc. And he specifically argues that you can compare horses' figures where they finish way back to other horses' winning figures. And he dismisses the "not perservered with" reasoning and ignores the "sucked in" issue.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-17-2019, 01:01 PM   #47
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
That's slippery.

Obviously Beyer says he is only measuring the performance, not how the figure was earned.

But he also says that his figures are the single most important handicapping factor, the way, the truth, and the light, etc. And he specifically argues that you can compare horses' figures where they finish way back to other horses' winning figures. And he dismisses the "not perservered with" reasoning and ignores the "sucked in" issue.
From his comments I think he consideres all aspects of trip when evaluating past performances, but I don't believe he includes all aspects of trip when making his variant projections.

For example, TG and RAG consider ground loss and weight changes when making their projection variants. TFUSA considers the pace and how it may have impcated the horses. Beyer is mostly just looking at prior figures and not consiering the ground loss and pace (unless perhaps it's very extreme like on turf). To me, in theory you should be including everything, but that makes a subjective process even more subjective. So there's an argument against it too.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-17-2019, 01:04 PM   #48
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
That's slippery.

Obviously Beyer says he is only measuring the performance, not how the figure was earned.

But he also says that his figures are the single most important handicapping factor, the way, the truth, and the light, etc. And he specifically argues that you can compare horses' figures where they finish way back to other horses' winning figures. And he dismisses the "not perservered with" reasoning and ignores the "sucked in" issue.
Have you done a study on the "not persevered with" and "sucked in" horses to back up your claims? What percentage of these horses actually run back to the numbers and how many don't? And how do those percentages compare with horses not in the those 2 categories?
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-17-2019, 05:13 PM   #49
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
That's slippery.

Obviously Beyer says he is only measuring the performance, not how the figure was earned.

But he also says that his figures are the single most important handicapping factor, the way, the truth, and the light, etc. And he specifically argues that you can compare horses' figures where they finish way back to other horses' winning figures. And he dismisses the "not perservered with" reasoning and ignores the "sucked in" issue.
Come on, he said that a LONG time ago and clearly doesn't handicap as if that is true any longer. He has written several books since that should make this crystal clear.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-17-2019, 05:36 PM   #50
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
Have you done a study on the "not persevered with" and "sucked in" horses to back up your claims? What percentage of these horses actually run back to the numbers and how many don't? And how do those percentages compare with horses not in the those 2 categories?
I have seen many instances of ridiculous figures in far back performances. I throw them out. Why would I need a study for information I don't use?
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-17-2019, 11:49 PM   #51
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
I have seen many instances of ridiculous figures in far back performances. I throw them out. Why would I need a study for information I don't use?
You are the one that claimed it was an issue. You would need a study to see if your observation is, in fact, true. Races where horses don't run back to figures happen everyday.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-18-2019, 09:38 AM   #52
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,528
There are problems with studies like that.

Most of the horses that drop back and get eased late are the ones that try to compete but get used up battling or get outrun by superior horses. Then as they tire, the jockey eases them late after they are already out of the purse money. The same thing will happen to that horse in race after race unless he drops in class (or there is form change).

So the only way to test it would be to look at horses that showed some contending speed or at least made a big move, dropped back, got eased, and then dropped in class.

That's when their figures should (and usually do) improve.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-18-2019, 02:54 PM   #53
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper View Post
There are problems with studies like that.

Most of the horses that drop back and get eased late are the ones that try to compete but get used up battling or get outrun by superior horses. Then as they tire, the jockey eases them late after they are already out of the purse money. The same thing will happen to that horse in race after race unless he drops in class (or there is form change).

So the only way to test it would be to look at horses that showed some contending speed or at least made a big move, dropped back, got eased, and then dropped in class.

That's when their figures should (and usually do) improve.
My comment pertained mostly to the figures of horses getting "sucked in". That would be easy to study.

I have found that most losing bettors have a habit of making bets based on opinions of handicapping factors with zero data for support.
__________________
Best writing advice ever received: Never use a long word when a diminutive one will suffice.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-18-2019, 04:58 PM   #54
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
My comment pertained mostly to the figures of horses getting "sucked in". That would be easy to study.

I have found that most losing bettors have a habit of making bets based on opinions of handicapping factors with zero data for support.
It's not an affirmative claim. The affirmative claim is the figure is unreliable. Sucking the horse in is one of several reasons it could be unreliable.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-18-2019, 05:13 PM   #55
Saratoga_Mike
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
It's not an affirmative claim. The affirmative claim is the figure is unreliable. Sucking the horse in is one of several reasons it could be unreliable.
This concept ("sucking the horse along") applies to harness racing, but I don't think it applies to t'bred racing. Hopefully, someone with a database can show some stats.
Saratoga_Mike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-18-2019, 08:37 PM   #56
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
I have found that most losing bettors have a habit of making bets based on opinions of handicapping factors with zero data for support.

I agree with that 100%.

It's usually either the result of some short term experience that made a big impression or they read it in a book written by someone that learned the same way.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-18-2019, 08:47 PM   #57
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike View Post
This concept ("sucking the horse along") applies to harness racing, but I don't think it applies to t'bred racing. Hopefully, someone with a database can show some stats.
I'm not sure how to test that, but I have demonstrated some of this to my satisfaction.

If a horse moves way up in class and tries to compete, it will often fail to duplicate its figures earned at the lower class. Then when it drops back down in class its figure will jump back up (there are exceptions like high quality lightly raced horses that will move up in class and show even more).

However, if the same type of horse just sits in the back of the pack and makes a very non threatening very late move at the higher class, it will often run the same figure at the higher class.

It kind of like what we see with deep closers in general.

If they move very late, they'll often make a good run and earn a good figure, but without being in position to win. Next time, if they move sooner and actually try to get into position to win, they'll hang and disappoint. So to me, the sucking up late phenomenon is more about the timing of the move and whether the horse worked in the middle of the race to get into position to win or not.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"

Last edited by classhandicapper; 06-18-2019 at 08:52 PM.
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-19-2019, 11:57 AM   #58
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike View Post
This concept ("sucking the horse along") applies to harness racing, but I don't think it applies to t'bred racing. Hopefully, someone with a database can show some stats.
Well it applies to human racing too.

So why WOULDN'T it apply to thoroughbreds?
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-19-2019, 01:39 PM   #59
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
This shouldn't be too hard to test. You just have to define the suck up horse. Try a query, for example, with horses that weren't in the top 3 at any point, have a last race speed figure in the top three next out, and see how they do from a win percentage and ROI standpoint. Then compare to all horses with a top 3 speed figure last out that were in the top three at some point during the last race.

You can do the same for horses that battle for the lead then fade to the back. The only limits are your ability to accurately define what you are researching. The answers are there if you get the question right.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-19-2019, 01:53 PM   #60
Saratoga_Mike
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 9,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
Well it applies to human racing too.

So why WOULDN'T it apply to thoroughbreds?
Like you, I'm speculating (just taking the other side). CJ has given a broad outline of how to test your theory. I look forward seeing the results from a large-scale database query. I'm always open to changing my mind, especially based on the results from a large data query.
Saratoga_Mike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.