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 Handicapping Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.
Old 01-06-2015, 04:03 PM   #1
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 45,942
Turf vs Dirt question

I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-06-2015, 04:36 PM   #2
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.

While I am sure that your 1.6 and 2.0 values will give you a fairly accurate number, I have found that turf courses can be unique. Things such as length of grass, moisture, etc. can change the characteristics enough to make a difference.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-06-2015, 04:43 PM   #3
Stillriledup
Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 25,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.
This is 100% accurate. Turf races "bunch up" at the wire for 2 reasons mostly, less or no kickback and the slower nature of the internal pace. If i see a turf horse lose by 3 or 4 lengths i really try and remind myself that the horse was far from competitive and really got "drilled". Good post and good reminder to not give too much credit to those turfers who lose by 3, 4 and 5 lengths, a dirt runner who does the same thing is much more impressive from what i've seen.
Stillriledup is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-06-2015, 05:03 PM   #4
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 18,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.
I did some similar research, but not for figure making purposes. It was for a class oriented application. At the time I also broke it out by synthetic (which was still relevant) and off tracks (because margins on off tracks tend to be larger). I'm sure I still have the spreadsheet somewhere.

I also found evidence that winning margins don't expand as much as theory suggests they should as distances stretch out.

It's an interesting issue. I mentally filed it away as another reason to be skeptical about some figures, but found no real way to use it for my own purposes because margins also vary with pace and I couldn't control for that unless I used pace figures (which defeated the purpose of my class research). I shifted my attention to finishing positions, but ran into complications there also.

I'm going to revisit this soon for myself related to class. It's on my "to do" list. Now that I have a database to work with maybe I can make some progress.

Good luck with the figures.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-06-2015, 06:19 PM   #5
Some_One
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 1,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.
Isn't there a connection to the energy distribution in a turf race vs dirt race? In 8.5/9f races, isn't there a much different spread and average time in the final fraction times between a dirt vs turf race

Last edited by Some_One; 01-06-2015 at 06:20 PM.
Some_One is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-06-2015, 06:24 PM   #6
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 22,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.
That is Very cool.
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-06-2015, 09:18 PM   #7
Cratos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 4,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some_One
Isn't there a connection to the energy distribution in a turf race vs dirt race? In 8.5/9f races, isn't there a much different spread and average time in the final fraction times between a dirt vs turf race
Yes, there is a difference in the two surfaces which is defined by the surface resistance to speed between the two surfaces. There is a very good "white paper" on racing surfaces and can be found on the Internet. It is somewhat quantitative with math and statistics, but it is an excellent read.
__________________
Independent thinking, emotional stability, and a keen understanding of both human and institutional behavior are vital to long-term investment success My hero, Warren Edward Buffett

"Science is correct; even if you don't believe it" - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Cratos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-06-2015, 10:33 PM   #8
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 45,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some_One
Isn't there a connection to the energy distribution in a turf race vs dirt race? In 8.5/9f races, isn't there a much different spread and average time in the final fraction times between a dirt vs turf race
Of course, the races are run differently in general, though obviously there are numerous exceptions on all surfaces.

Here is why it matters in regards to speed figures which is what I was discussing. Imagine a speed figure scale where a beaten length counts as 2 points on dirt and turf. Horse A and Horse B both exit 9f races on turf.

Horse A exits a race won with a 100, was beaten 2 lengths. He gets a speed figure of 96

Horse B exits a race won with a 94, and he won the race. His speed figure is a 94.

In this scenario, horse A appears a length faster. But is he? What I am finding is that Horse A actually should have gotten a 92 if you double the value of a beaten length. He is now rated a length slower.

I'm not advocating that this is a better way to do things in every situation, but I think in the majority of the scenarios, it is. More to come in the next few days...
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-07-2015, 07:12 AM   #9
NY BRED
GARY
 
NY BRED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,339
TURF vs DIRT

Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
Of course, the races are run differently in general, though obviously there are numerous exceptions on all surfaces.

Here is why it matters in regards to speed figures which is what I was 'm not advocating that this is a better way to do things in every situation, but I think in the majority of the scenarios, it is. More to come in the next few days...

Any possibility of evaluating Kittens Joy offspring on Turf vs the rest of
the compositing Sires on grass.

It appears the KJ offspring ,if not winning, generally hit the board across
the major tracks in the U.S.
NY BRED is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-07-2015, 09:07 AM   #10
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 18,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
Of course, the races are run differently in general, though obviously there are numerous exceptions on all surfaces.

Here is why it matters in regards to speed figures which is what I was discussing. Imagine a speed figure scale where a beaten length counts as 2 points on dirt and turf. Horse A and Horse B both exit 9f races on turf.

Horse A exits a race won with a 100, was beaten 2 lengths. He gets a speed figure of 96

Horse B exits a race won with a 94, and he won the race. His speed figure is a 94.

In this scenario, horse A appears a length faster. But is he? What I am finding is that Horse A actually should have gotten a 92 if you double the value of a beaten length. He is now rated a length slower.
It's an interesting theoretical question.

Do we want to know who ran the faster final time or do we want to know who actually ran better?

Sometimes they are different answers.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
classhandicapper is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-07-2015, 09:34 AM   #11
OTM Al
intus habes, quem poscis
 
OTM Al's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brooklyn NY
Posts: 9,776
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.
This was basically the rationale Beyer used when using the 6f dirt beaten length scale for turf races. Since turf sprints were (evidently by comments I've read) much rarer and probably not well considered, this lines up well with the turf route observation you make.
OTM Al is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-07-2015, 09:57 AM   #12
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 45,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTM Al
This was basically the rationale Beyer used when using the 6f dirt beaten length scale for turf races. Since turf sprints were (evidently by comments I've read) much rarer and probably not well considered, this lines up well with the turf route observation you make.
Agreed, but I'm also saying his adjustment was based on observation and not actual numbers. Had he been using numbers it would have been much bigger. That is what surprised me so much.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-07-2015, 09:57 AM   #13
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 45,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY BRED
Any possibility of evaluating Kittens Joy offspring on Turf vs the rest of
the compositing Sires on grass.

It appears the KJ offspring ,if not winning, generally hit the board across
the major tracks in the U.S.

I'm sure somebody could do it, but that isn't something that interests me much.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-07-2015, 11:37 AM   #14
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 45,942
Adding to yesterday, another surprising bit of info. The slower the pace, the bigger the average margin of victory. The faster the pace, the smaller it gets. Conventional wisdom has been that slow paces bunch them at the wire, but the data doesn't show that. This was true regardless of surface and distance with one small exception, turf sprints are nearly even for average and slow paced races.

However, one thing did go as expected. When comparing turf to dirt, as the pace slows, the value of a length definitely changes with pace. The faster the pace, the closer the values become on the different surfaces. The slower the pace, the more they spread apart.

Attached Images
File Type: png AvgBL.png (13.9 KB, 263 views)

Last edited by cj; 01-07-2015 at 11:56 AM.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 01-07-2015, 11:41 AM   #15
GatetoWire
Registered User
 
GatetoWire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I did some research today that was pretty enlightening. I've always known turf finishes are tighter than dirt finishes in general, but I didn't know to what extent. The value of a beaten length in a turf race is much greater than a dirt race. It actually breaks out really clearly by distance, less than a mile and a mile and over:

< 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 1.6 times that of a similar dirt race

> 1m Value of a beaten length in turf races is 2.0 times that of a similar dirt race

I use different values for the two, but not to that extent. Beyer made and adjustment to use his 6.5 furlong chart for turf routes, but that is about the 1.3 to 1.4 range, not 2.0. I don't believe Rags or Thorograph or BRIS or Equibase differentiate between the surfaces.

This is definitely something I'll be digging into a lot deeper the next few weeks. It sure looks like also rans in turf races are being given more credit than they deserve by speed figure guys, myself included.

Good post CJ.
I think this illustrates how important linking Speed Figures, Pace Figures and Trip Handicapping is when it comes to evaluating races.
This is especially the case in turf races. The slightest bit for difficulty (wide trip, waiting for a hole, not ideal pace setup etc) can virtually eliminate a horse from hitting the board in a turf race.

Figures are fantastic tools but they only tell a piece of what happened and they need to be used with good trip notes and charts to get the full picture.
GatetoWire 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
» Current Polls
Do you use energy percentages?
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2022 -- 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.