CJ's Weekly DRF/TimeformUS Speed Figure Review

[ultracapper]

Originally Posted by cj

https://www.tvg.com/blog/2015/12/02/...november-30th/

Will be on just after 12 ET / 9 PT today to discuss.

Just want to comment, outside of the normal theme of this thread, how the assessments of Mor Spirit and Om in the November races, transferred to popular wins next out. Really impressed with the assessment of Om. Seemed very predictive of his upcoming impressive win.

Very cool.

[cj]

https://www.tvg.com/blog/2016/01/06/...k-january-3rd/

I'll be on in about 10 minutes, sorry for short notice, didn't get much myself.

[cj]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

Just want to comment, outside of the normal theme of this thread, how the assessments of Mor Spirit and Om in the November races, transferred to popular wins next out. Really impressed with the assessment of Om. Seemed very predictive of his upcoming impressive win.

Very cool.

Thank you very much!

[cj]

https://www.tvg.com/blog/2016/01/12/...-january-10th/


I'll be on today at 12:10 ET, 9:10 PT...will discuss the Chrome race of course, the Sham, and a couple from Gulfstream. I'll be on with Britney and Dave.

[ultracapper]

Cool. TV time.

[ultracapper]

I'm a big fireplace guy.

Gas inserts- No, No, No.

[dasch]

Pretty surprised Craig is holding firm on his opinion of the California Chrome race.

1)Pace wasn't visually slow(field was spread out and nobody had any kind of strong hold on their horse)

2)The horses that were 1st & 3rd early with CC had nothing left in the stretch to even challenge for minor awards and finished off the board

3)If you use the same variant for the 7th & 8th races ALL horses in the CC race would have run slower than they usually do/were expected to.

In the past Craig and I have been on the same side of these controversial numbers and I am surprised with all of the common sense evidence pointing to the variants being different that his opinion hasn't wavered at all.

[ultracapper]

The finish wasn't visually impressive, even though I don't think Espinoza really asked Chrome to dig way deep in the stretch. The second place finisher looked to be finishing a little better, but Chrome looked to be finishing within himself. What does the final 1/4 look like? I can't think even that came up too fast, in and of itself.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by dasch

Pretty surprised Craig is holding firm on his opinion of the California Chrome race.

1)Pace wasn't visually slow(field was spread out and nobody had any kind of strong hold on their horse)

2)The horses that were 1st & 3rd early with CC had nothing left in the stretch to even challenge for minor awards and finished off the board

3)If you use the same variant for the 7th & 8th races ALL horses in the CC race would have run slower than they usually do/were expected to.

In the past Craig and I have been on the same side of these controversial numbers and I am surprised with all of the common sense evidence pointing to the variants being different that his opinion hasn't wavered at all.

Race 9 ran about like it should have so it's pretty obvious that the surface was not significantly different in that race versus race 7 or 9. CJ chose to not break out that race, and I agree with him. The horses/jockeys in race 8 just ran slow, on their own. You run slow on a normal surface, you get a slow speed figure. The "enhanced" speed figure would need to be adjusted for the slow pace but not the normal speed figure.

[dasch]

Originally Posted by raybo

Race 9 ran about like it should have so it's pretty obvious that the surface was not significantly different in that race versus race 7 or 9. CJ chose to not break out that race, and I agree with him. The horses/jockeys in race 8 just ran slow, on their own. You run slow on a normal surface, you get a slow speed figure. The "enhanced" speed figure would need to be adjusted for the slow pace but not the normal speed figure.

Race 9 was 6 furlongs so not even run on the part of the track that the slow opening quarter was recorded in race 8. To me that's apples and oranges. If there was a gust of headwind going in to the 1st turn of race 8 how under any circumstance is the 9th race going to prove the variant of a 2 turn race?

I realize most people think you can never be 100% certain on anything in horse racing and especially in these type of situations but I disagree(its taken me years and years to get to this point), and I am not being hyperbolic when I say that I am 100% sure that there is a big difference in the variants between the 2 races. I DO NOT know the reason but to me that is not really all that important.

I agree with the final number Beyer gave for both races. I used the EXACT same methodology for the 7th and 8th races, NO ARTIFICIAL ADJUSTMENT, and both races matched well within each race but the variants were a full second apart from each other. I should add that I do include pace AND ground loss in my methodology.

[cj]

I saw the pace was slow, but that is in relation to final time. The pace was not necessarily slow for the horses mentioned that were first and third early. They just aren't very good as evinced by their odds of 38 and 39 to 1. They actually ran figures close to their last race when pace is considered.

Here is how the figures look for the San Pasqual with the variants I used (same as races 6 and 7) and it also shows the previous two figures for each horse.

[cj]

Another perspective---the leader, Alfa Bird, ran a 92 1st 1/4 mile and a 112 for 6f. While that 112 is moderate in relation to the final time figure of 120, he had to work very hard to get from that 92 to a 112 while fighting with Chrome for the lead.

We don't give numerical ratings for individual race segments, only cumulative. But if we did , Alfa Bird's 1/4 to 3/4 rating would be 122. That is too much for him and no real surprise he packed it in.

[dasch]

I see that you shaded the pace in blue, which if I am correct this is only done in the most extreme of slow paced days/races.

And watching that race you can honestly say that it LOOKED like a "blue coded" pace to you? To the extent it would cause GRADED STAKES horses to run 3-9 points off of their previous race?

I just don't see that at all and to me by you giving the entire field lower final numbers but shading the pace blue you "broke out " the race in your own way.

[cj]

Originally Posted by dasch

I see that you shaded the pace in blue, which if I am correct this is only done in the most extreme of slow paced days/races.

And watching that race you can honestly say that it LOOKED like a "blue coded" pace to you? To the extent it would cause GRADED STAKES horses to run 3-9 points off of their previous race?

I just don't see that at all and to me by you giving the entire field lower final numbers but shading the pace blue you "broke out " the race in your own way.

That is my point though, the horses you mentioned are not graded stakes horses. Alfa Bird was badly beaten in a NW2 Allowance last out and Blingo badly beaten in a NW3 allowance. This was a grade 2. What is "slow" for California Chrome is not slow for them.

The blue shading is for extreme differences between the leader's pace figures and the winner's final time. That is it. It can be a little confusing when overmatched horses quit in these races. You may notice Alfa Bird was still given two extra points for "pace" in his overall rating. His final time figure of 107 was upped to 109. It wasn't a "slow" pace for him.

[dasch]

Originally Posted by cj

That is my point though, the horses you mentioned are not graded stakes horses. Alfa Bird was badly beaten in a NW2 Allowance last out and Blingo badly beaten in a NW3 allowance. This was a grade 2. What is "slow" for California Chrome is not slow for them.

The blue shading is for extreme differences between the leader's pace figures and the winner's final time. That is it. It can be a little confusing when overmatched horses quit in these races. You may notice Alfa Bird was still given two extra points for "pace" in his overall rating. His final time figure of 107 was upped to 109. It wasn't a "slow" pace for him.

Ok, so let me get this straight, the "slow pace" wasn't a slow pace for Alpha Bird but he ran 5 points lower on your numbers than his last race because of the "slow pace"?

Huh?