Look: even Beyer is a raw times guy now

[keithw84]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

106 Beyer for Oxbow.

Where is a good place to find Beyer's speed figures? I used to have a link in my favorites that listed speed figures for recent stakes races, but I switched computers and lost it!

[Tom]

http://www1.drf.com/stakeresults/drfStakeResults.jsp

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

Still no white pope smoke from the Conclave? Or, to put it in another context, are State and the CIA still working on the edits to make the talking points fit the narrative?

Ummmm...huh?

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by pandy

Definitely a dead rail yesterday, track favored outside closers and the jockeys were way off the rail all day.

I think several paths inside were bad. IMO you wanted to be in the 3 path (maybe even the 4 path).

[RXB]

http://www.drf.com/news/dick-jerardi...ugh-one-figure

[JPinMaryland]

That article by Jerardi is both a little silly at times and pretty interesting too.

The silly bit is this constant promotion of BSFs. I guess that is how they make their money. But it's basically a guess, and at the end Byer says "it was a pretty interesting exercise in figure making."

It's not an exercise if you don't get scored on it. No one will ever know if these figures are correct or a little off or a lot off. There's no way to ever prove that. So he says it's an exercise. Yeah it's like taking a test without a grade. It's a guess.

But the really interesting bit is that part about the headwind. Which might explain why the pace is slow and final time is so slow.It didn't seem like anyone was able to push the pace even though they weren't traveling that fast. So actually the article is really interesting once you look past the BSF advertisement.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by RXB

The race was run in a terribly slow 1:57.54 for 1 3/16 miles, one of the weakest runnings of the race ever.

http://www.drf.com/news/andrew-beyer...winners-circle

Hmmm... purely from an adjusted final time standpoint it shouldn't be too far from the Preakness par of 109. Should be around 105.

Good article. Thanks

[cj]

Originally Posted by JPinMaryland

Right, I figured as much CJ. Can you explain to me how they rate that track as "fast," which I see on the chart. Was the track actually rolled before the race? Do they do some other sort of smoothing, but less than rolling it? I have a hard time seeing these jocks with mud all over their face, and obvious problems in the inner path and the track is rated; "Fast."

Can you shed any light on this?

Track ratings have to do with moisture almost every time, not the actual "speed" of the track.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by pandy

Definitely a dead rail yesterday, track favored outside closers and the jockeys were way off the rail all day. That helped Oxbow because the jockeys figured they could wait and rally wide and Stevens kept Oxbow off the rail and stole it.

Agree the inner paths were very deep but not necessarily that it was a speed killing track. The rider just had to have the sense like Stevens to stay well off the inside.

FWIW, I noticed Rosario had a few rides where his mount was probably too close to the inside on Friday and Saturday (dirt races). Have we found a possible chink in the armour?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by JPinMaryland

That article by Jerardi is both a little silly at times and pretty interesting too.

The silly bit is this constant promotion of BSFs. I guess that is how they make their money. But it's basically a guess, and at the end Byer says "it was a pretty interesting exercise in figure making."

It's not an exercise if you don't get scored on it. No one will ever know if these figures are correct or a little off or a lot off. There's no way to ever prove that. So he says it's an exercise. Yeah it's like taking a test without a grade. It's a guess.

But the really interesting bit is that part about the headwind. Which might explain why the pace is slow and final time is so slow.It didn't seem like anyone was able to push the pace even though they weren't traveling that fast. So actually the article is really interesting once you look past the BSF advertisement.

I play a fair amount of poker. Speed figures, like reads in poker, are based on incomplete information. You don't know everything you would need to know to do a proper figure. There's always some guesswork, some projections, involved. Sometimes more information is produced when horses run back, and you can piece together the figure better.

That doesn't make speed figures useless, or wrong, or invalid, anymore than it makes calling down a guy who bluffs a lot wrong just because he isn't always bluffing.

Some figure-makers, by the way, incorporate wind speed into their calcuations. Beyer doesn't-- he wants as clean a figure as possible-- but he acknowledges its effects.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I play a fair amount of poker. Speed figures, like reads in poker, are based on incomplete information. You don't know everything you would need to know to do a proper figure. There's always some guesswork, some projections, involved. Sometimes more information is produced when horses run back, and you can piece together the figure better.

That doesn't make speed figures useless, or wrong, or invalid, anymore than it makes calling down a guy who bluffs a lot wrong just because he isn't always bluffing.

Some figure-makers, by the way, incorporate wind speed into their calcuations. Beyer doesn't-- he wants as clean a figure as possible-- but he acknowledges its effects.

Speed figures are not the only things in the game that are based on "incomplete information". EVERYTHING in the game is based on incomplete information.

The running lines in the past-performances are inaccurate, because they are created by men who view the races, as they unfold, with binoculars; the class designations are also man-made and imprecise, holding horses with varying degrees of ability within the same class level; and the very timing of these races has come under scrutiny, with alarming regularity.

And the horse itself, by its inability to speak, is perhaps the entity most seriously affected by this "incomplete information" factor that we speak of.

It is BECAUSE of this "incomplete information", which undermines everything in this game, that it becomes essential that we get a certain return whenever we decide to put our money at risk...to make up for the "unknown factor" that we so often encounter.

That's why we shy away from horses that go off at very short prices. The "margin of error" is not there...

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

EVERYTHING in the game is based on incomplete information

I would say that the game itself is based on it

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Some figure-makers, by the way, incorporate wind speed into their calcuations. Beyer doesn't-- he wants as clean a figure as possible-- but he acknowledges its effects.

Like anyone that makes figures, wind is incorporated even if not directly or intentional.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Speed figures are not the only things in the game that are based on "incomplete information". EVERYTHING in the game is based on incomplete information.

The running lines in the past-performances are inaccurate, because they are created by men who view the races, as they unfold, with binoculars; the class designations are also man-made and imprecise, holding horses with varying degrees of ability within the same class level; and the very timing of these races has come under scrutiny, with alarming regularity.

And the horse itself, by its inability to speak, is perhaps the entity most seriously affected by this "incomplete information" factor that we speak of.

It is BECAUSE of this "incomplete information", which undermines everything in this game, that it becomes essential that we get a certain return whenever we decide to put our money at risk...to make up for the "unknown factor" that we so often encounter.

That's why we shy away from horses that go off at very short prices. The "margin of error" is not there...

That analysis obscures more than it discloses. In some situations, you have enough information to predict that a horse is more likely to win than even short odds.

And people should also always be cautious of analysis that confirms preexisting biases. The desire to play price horses, especially in big races when there is a bragging / ego factor in addition to the gambling action factor involved in every race, is probably embedded in almost every horseplayer.

If you think a short priced favorite can never be a good bet, you are probably wrong. If you bet against every short priced favorite in every big race, you are certainly making some long term -EV plays.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Sometimes more information is produced when horses run back, and you can piece together the figure better.

By that time it's too late...

You need to collect evidence and decide whether a horse is going to run a good effort prior to a race. And you must hope other players don't see what you see.

That doesn't make speed figures useless, or wrong, or invalid, anymore than it makes calling down a guy who bluffs a lot wrong just because he isn't always bluffing..

Andrew Beyer knows the game and the limitations of his own numbers. You must also learn, know, and practice a method which avoids these limitations. And you need to know when a speed rating is suitable. If you don't there are other practices, which will take your money. Don't assume everyone, including whales, are fixating on speed ratings. In many races speed rating are a waste of time.