Are These Beyer Figures Correct?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Check to see if the slower race was at a higher class. I have seen this scenario myself more than a few times, and have said on this board that the Beyer Associates appear to be making some sort of class adjustment to their figures...but I doubt that anyone believes me.

I think you're indirectly right.

Most times, it might be a higher class that gets the benefit of the doubt in the figure, but its not necessarily because of the class level, its to make the other Beyer figures "fit" nicely into a pattern that seems believable.


The problem i have with the way Beyer does it is that when they change a raw time figure, there's really no way to know exactly why they changed it, so you're essentially "trusting" them that they made a correct decision in why they didnt just leave the figure alone.

I've also seen them change figures after the fact, after horses who got the figures ran, and that change has nothing to do with pace, it has to do with the horse and his subsequent performance.

If it was just about pace like some people think, they wouldnt ever go back and change figures because the pace is the pace, it doesnt change...but what does change is the performance of the runners going forward....which means to me, that differing figures on similar final times/distances is more due to "making it fit" than trying to give credit to the higher class of runner.

As far as pace being factored into the number, according to Beyer himself in this video, pace is NOT a factor at all, he does not incorporate pace into the number.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvLwY-jSYcw

[rastajenk]

Seems like some of the New Yawkers are a little touchy this spring.

[infrontby1]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

I think you're indirectly right.

Most times, it might be a higher class that gets the benefit of the doubt in the figure, but its not necessarily because of the class level, its to make the other Beyer figures "fit" nicely into a pattern that seems believable.


The problem i have with the way Beyer does it is that when they change a raw time figure, there's really no way to know exactly why they changed it, so you're essentially "trusting" them that they made a correct decision in why they didnt just leave the figure alone.

I've also seen them change figures after the fact, after horses who got the figures ran, and that change has nothing to do with pace, it has to do with the horse and his subsequent performance.

If it was just about pace like some people think, they wouldnt ever go back and change figures because the pace is the pace, it doesnt change...but what does change is the performance of the runners going forward....which means to me, that differing figures on similar final times/distances is more due to "making it fit" than trying to give credit to the higher class of runner.

As far as pace being factored into the number, according to Beyer himself in this video, pace is NOT a factor at all, he does not incorporate pace into the number.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvLwY-jSYcw

Excellent video to reference this posting. And thanks for sharing.

A previous comment made by thelittleguy says otherwise though. But here we have it, straight from the horse's mouth: the man that invented these figures.

[Tom]

CD, Derby weekend. Friday-Saturday.
Top Beyer fig won 15 races. No other handicapping.
I guess Andy has a few more races left in him.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Tom

CD, Derby weekend. Friday-Saturday.
Top Beyer fig won 15 races. No other handicapping.
I guess Andy has a few more races left in him.

without a doubt, speed is a weapon these days, you either get with the program and use these numbers or get cleaned out.

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by infrontby1

https://s3.amazonaws.com/drf-live-pr...1ppBEL2599.pdf

If you look at the 4th race, examine the 1 horse, Elroi, and the 8 horse, Trainingforsucess. Not their last races that they ran, but check out theie next to last race; both of them ran within an hour apart at Aqueduct on April 19th.

Both horses won, Traininforsucess's final time was 11 ticks faster than Elroi's (that's 2 seconds and 1/5) yet his Beyer is ONLY 4 points higher? (80 vs. 76)

What kind of spread is this?

And keep in mind, on the Beyer scale, at that distance 1 length is approximately 1.7 points.

Doesn't take a math wizard to conclude something is amiss here.
And I looked at the replays of both races and the weather conditions were identical.

I even checked other sources (i.e. brisnet, predicteform) and they have a much larger spread for their final time figures, as expected.

This is not the first time I have seen this type of disparity among Beyer Figures.

I am not commenting on their accuracy, I'm making a statement on their reliability.

And before some of you intend on coming back with negative comments, saying "so-what", please do keep in mind that real money is wagered on thoroughbred races by a vast majority of handicappers that rely on these figures for the backbone of handicapping.


Would love to have CJ comment on this one.

I personally analyze all Beyer figures assigned at nyra tracks. Andy and his team arbitrarily assign numbers in many cases similar to this and here is a perfect example as to why: sometimes in grass races the better of the 2 races (higher quality horses in race 1 vs. Lower quality horses running race 2 or equal divisions of 2 separate races) the pace is soooooo slow in 1 race vs the other that it distorts the final time of 1 of the races. If the raw figure is given, it would be an inaccurate assessment of that field's performance.

Here's a visual hypothetical. Wise Dan runs in a 1M race on grass: 25 51 116 1382.

10,000 claimers run: 234 48 113 1382.

Do you really believe the 10,000 claimers deserve an equal fig?

Of course not. Of course wise dan's field was compromised (in terms of final time) by their ridiculously slow pace, so Andy's team arbitrarily assigns figs in those cases.

Keep in mind, Beyer figs are based on final time, HOWEVER, in some cases it would be extremely misleading to the general public if the raw figure is posted.

Hope this helps.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I have seen sprint races where the winners were given identical Beyer figures even though their clockings were a second apart...and this on a dry track...and with the races separated by about an hour. And in every single case...the "classier" race is the one that has gotten the benefit of the doubt, Beyer-wise. Any idea why that is?

Or do you suppose I am making this whole thing up?

I've stated this here repeatedly in the past.

He's not including class. Without specifics, I can only speculate, but there is a logical answer.

We know that occasionally a race is broken out from the rest of a day on the assumption that the track changed speeds.

So if for some reason Beyer concludes that a particular classier race needs to be broken out because it looks too slow, it would tend to be adjusted faster. I'm sure if you dig hard enough you will find classy races that looked way too fast that were adjusted down.

[Tom]

Mark Hopkins wrote once that when he was confronted by a number that did not make sense, he would check the race timing, and he had found mistakes.

I miss reading his columns every week.

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by infrontby1

https://s3.amazonaws.com/drf-live-pr...1ppBEL2599.pdf

If you look at the 4th race, examine the 1 horse, Elroi, and the 8 horse, Trainingforsucess. Not their last races that they ran, but check out theie next to last race; both of them ran within an hour apart at Aqueduct on April 19th.

Both horses won, Traininforsucess's final time was 11 ticks faster than Elroi's (that's 2 seconds and 1/5) yet his Beyer is ONLY 4 points higher? (80 vs. 76)

What kind of spread is this?

And keep in mind, on the Beyer scale, at that distance 1 length is approximately 1.7 points.

Doesn't take a math wizard to conclude something is amiss here.
And I looked at the replays of both races and the weather conditions were identical.

I even checked other sources (i.e. brisnet, predicteform) and they have a much larger spread for their final time figures, as expected.

This is not the first time I have seen this type of disparity among Beyer Figures.

I am not commenting on their accuracy, I'm making a statement on their reliability.

And before some of you intend on coming back with negative comments, saying "so-what", please do keep in mind that real money is wagered on thoroughbred races by a vast majority of handicappers that rely on these figures for the backbone of handicapping.


Would love to have CJ comment on this one.

Using your example:

Race 6:3UP S MDSPWT 242 512 1173 1414 1474 76B
Race 4:3UP N2L 25000 231 483 1143 1392 1453 80B

Race 6 was 6/5's slower to the 1/4, 14/5 slow to the 1/2, 15/5 slower to the 3/4 12/5 slower to the 1M and 11/5 slower to the 1 1/16

Race 6 came home in 30 and 1/5 vs a 31 come home in race 4.

We all know that come home times are paramount to how classy or how good a turf horse is. So, if the raw number was assigned in this case, it would have been an injustice to all players (I ACTUALLY PREFER IF THE RAW NUMBER WAS PROVIDED BECAUSE I WOULD MAKE A TRUCK LOAD OF MORE $$$$ FLEECING UNSUSPECTING PLAYERS).

In my eyes, Elroi was a lock next time. His performance in this race in question was that of a new horse who is ready for bigger and bettor.

In his next start, he was the only victim at the start. Ran last with zero flow in another super slow pace and finished like an airplane along with the runner up (who was awesome while leazcano destroyed him on May 4th).

This post was not truly about Elroi but just for the record, he is a massive play today for me.

Hope this helps....

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by the little guy

For years.

The problem with adjusting for pace is not that he does it (although that also has some issues I've discussed elsewhere that made me no friends). It's that as a handicapper you don't know WHEN he's done it and by how much. So if you upgrade a race because of pace on your own, you are at risk of double counting the impact. If you sit there checking every figure so you know what he did, you are halfway to making to your own figures. There are better uses of time given there's not much value in figures anymore even if they remain essential.

[Sapio]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

He's not including class. Without specifics, I can only speculate, but there is a logical answer.

We know that occasionally a race is broken out from the rest of a day on the assumption that the track changed speeds.

So if for some reason Beyer concludes that a particular classier race needs to be broken out because it looks too slow, it would tend to be adjusted faster. I'm sure if you dig hard enough you will find classy races that looked way too fast that were adjusted down.

Hi Class

Is it safe to say that most, if not all, serious figure makers use a projection method? If it is so, do they make projections based on a single horse? Two horses? Three horses?, etc.

Is the projection made independent of the field? Is the strength (speed rating based) of the field taken it account? How do they separate race uncertainity from race variants?

And finally betting lots of money on a point estimate without knowing the distribution is absurd!

Thomas Sapio

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

The problem with adjusting for pace is not that he does it (although that also has some issues I've discussed elsewhere that made me no friends). It's that as a handicapper you don't know WHEN he's done it and by how much. So if you upgrade a race because of pace on your own, you are at risk of double counting the impact. If you sit there checking every figure so you know what he did, you are halfway to making to your own figures. There are better uses of time given there's not much value in figures anymore even if they remain essential.

I hear you classhandicapper, however I will say this. I do check all of his figures (at NYRA and Emerald for the record) and I find the time spent very fruitful. I uncover many nuggets and dare to say it, a few mistakes that are not adjusted till after horses come back and win or lose as heavy chalks. I have no problem with what his team does. I wish they'd make more mistakes lol but they don't.

[infrontby1]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

Using your example:

Race 6:3UP S MDSPWT 242 512 1173 1414 1474 76B
Race 4:3UP N2L 25000 231 483 1143 1392 1453 80B

Race 6 was 6/5's slower to the 1/4, 14/5 slow to the 1/2, 15/5 slower to the 3/4 12/5 slower to the 1M and 11/5 slower to the 1 1/16

Race 6 came home in 30 and 1/5 vs a 31 come home in race 4.

We all know that come home times are paramount to how classy or how good a turf horse is. So, if the raw number was assigned in this case, it would have been an injustice to all players (I ACTUALLY PREFER IF THE RAW NUMBER WAS PROVIDED BECAUSE I WOULD MAKE A TRUCK LOAD OF MORE $$$$ FLEECING UNSUSPECTING PLAYERS).

In my eyes, Elroi was a lock next time. His performance in this race in question was that of a new horse who is ready for bigger and bettor.

In his next start, he was the only victim at the start. Ran last with zero flow in another super slow pace and finished like an airplane along with the runner up (who was awesome while leazcano destroyed him on May 4th).

This post was not truly about Elroi but just for the record, he is a massive play today for me.

Hope this helps....

Nice breakdown of the segments, EMD4ME.

In fact, the 3rd place finisher of the Elroi maiden race, Point Roll, who was the big favorite in that race, came back earlier this week to dominate his competition in a similar field.

{Handicappers relying on the DRF PP's from the temporary site won't notice this because Point Roll's name is not italicized in the running line just yet}

So, then contrary to what most people are saying here, where the classier field would received an upgrade to their final adjusted figure, here you would suggest it was the horses than ran in the inferior race (i.e. the MSW race # 6 from 04/19) that received the upgrade?

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by EMD4ME

I hear you classhandicapper, however I will say this. I do check all of his figures (at NYRA and Emerald for the record) and I find the time spent very fruitful. I uncover many nuggets and dare to say it, a few mistakes that are not adjusted till after horses come back and win or lose as heavy chalks. I have no problem with what his team does. I wish they'd make more mistakes lol but they don't.

I hear you. I'm time constrained. I check them via the backdoor.

I look at the Formulator charts and set them to "Beyer figures". That quickly gives me the last 10 Beyer figures for each the horse at one time (including the figure for the race in question). If a figure doesn't seem to make sense, then I start clicking on the individual horses and looking at their PPs.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Sapio

Hi Class

Is it safe to say that most, if not all, serious figure makers use a projection method? If it is so, do they make projections based on a single horse? Two horses? Three horses?, etc.

Is the projection made independent of the field? Is the strength (speed rating based) of the field taken it account? How do they separate race uncertainity from race variants?

And finally betting lots of money on a point estimate without knowing the distribution is absurd!

Thomas Sapio

They all use the projection method, but the number of horses they use as input is probably a little different for each. That's one factor that contributes to the different results despite similar methods (there are other factors).

Generally the thinking will be weighted towards the top few finishers because those are the horses most likely to have run back to their good figures. They will look at the prior figures of those horses and the result of the race and try to construct a "most logical" figure for the race and then create the track variant for that race. Then they look at the variants for each race on the card and try to make sense of the day.