3 Year Best Times 2017-2020

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by steveb

mistake on my part
when i say it does not work like that, i only mean in the sense of beaten runners, not of winning time differences.

Beaten lengths are time, you can't have one point value for the time it takes to cover one length beaten and a different one for the same amount of final time difference between winners (IF what you're after here is indeed final time).

So I agree with classhandicapper, once you get into doing that you're getting into performance ratings and not final time speed figures anymore. It's a step in the right direction but then when you have admitted / conceded that the performance no longer scales properly into this neat little final time box why not walk away from time altogether?

I frankly have zero problem with the performance measurement bit, that's what anyone subscribing to my numbers sees and that's why they all scale properly going from turf to dirt and at all distances because I disengaged from being tied to the clock. If you're tied directly to the clock you will never scale properly on final time speed figures. It may kind of look like proper scaling with all of these different point value gyrations but it's contrived.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying accurate final time speed figures aren't extremely useful and that people can't make money with them, they aren't so far off that they're ineffective.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Beaten lengths are time, you can't have one point value for the time it takes to cover one length beaten and a different one for the same amount of final time difference between winners (IF what you're after here is indeed final time).

So I agree with classhandicapper, once you get into doing that you're getting into performance ratings and not final time speed figures anymore. It's a step in the right direction but then when you have admitted / conceded that the performance no longer scales properly into this neat little final time box why not walk away from time altogether?

I frankly have zero problem with the performance measurement bit, that's what anyone subscribing to my numbers sees and that's why they all scale properly going from turf to dirt and at all distances because I disengaged from being tied to the clock. If you're tied directly to the clock you will never scale properly on final time speed figures. It may kind of look like proper scaling with all of these different point value gyrations but it's contrived.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying accurate final time speed figures aren't extremely useful and that people can't make money with them, they aren't so far off that they're ineffective.

you are misunderstanding what i wrote.....or maybe i did not express it properly.


i don't deal in lengths, only time, at least not in what i may have written on this thread.

if 1 second at 1000m = 16 speed points(or metres because they ARE the same thing) then it is wrong to say that at 2000m 1 second will equate to 8 speed point(or metres)

It will be less at the 2000m but only slightly less.


it's nothing to do with class or lengths, only math.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Beaten lengths are time, you can't have one point value for the time it takes to cover one length beaten and a different one for the same amount of final time difference between winners (IF what you're after here is indeed final time).

So I agree with classhandicapper, once you get into doing that you're getting into performance ratings and not final time speed figures anymore. It's a step in the right direction but then when you have admitted / conceded that the performance no longer scales properly into this neat little final time box why not walk away from time altogether?

I frankly have zero problem with the performance measurement bit, that's what anyone subscribing to my numbers sees and that's why they all scale properly going from turf to dirt and at all distances because I disengaged from being tied to the clock. If you're tied directly to the clock you will never scale properly on final time speed figures. It may kind of look like proper scaling with all of these different point value gyrations but it's contrived.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying accurate final time speed figures aren't extremely useful and that people can't make money with them, they aren't so far off that they're ineffective.

We are very much on the same page on a lot of things. No wonder I think you are so smart.

Seriously though, any kind of class rating gets really tough for maiden races with a lot of first times starters and lightly raced horses, limited winner alw races with lightly raced horses, and for turf races with 1st time starters or a lot of 1st time turf horses. I'd love to know how you handle some of that until after they start coming out of the race, but by then it's often too late to cash a value oriented bet.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

The Beyer team does keep speed figure class PARs for all tracks. They are published by DRF.

Hey Class,

The NEW Beyer Pars - the ones in the Beyer section with the Q&A
and other Beyer stuff is not working - tried 2 browsers, neither one can open the link for the Beyer Pars.

The OLD Beyer Pars, in the section with Winners Books and that stuff is working. NEW nne much better - more classes, etc.

Problem with the site?

[cj]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Beaten lengths are time, you can't have one point value for the time it takes to cover one length beaten and a different one for the same amount of final time difference between winners (IF what you're after here is indeed final time).

So I agree with classhandicapper, once you get into doing that you're getting into performance ratings and not final time speed figures anymore. It's a step in the right direction but then when you have admitted / conceded that the performance no longer scales properly into this neat little final time box why not walk away from time altogether?

I frankly have zero problem with the performance measurement bit, that's what anyone subscribing to my numbers sees and that's why they all scale properly going from turf to dirt and at all distances because I disengaged from being tied to the clock. If you're tied directly to the clock you will never scale properly on final time speed figures. It may kind of look like proper scaling with all of these different point value gyrations but it's contrived.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying accurate final time speed figures aren't extremely useful and that people can't make money with them, they aren't so far off that they're ineffective.

There are actually some pretty good reasons to treat the time of the winners and the time behind the winners separately. Of course they aren't true speed figures in the traditional sense, but tradition stinks anyway.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

Hey Class,

The NEW Beyer Pars - the ones in the Beyer section with the Q&A
and other Beyer stuff is not working - tried 2 browsers, neither one can open the link for the Beyer Pars.

The OLD Beyer Pars, in the section with Winners Books and that stuff is working. NEW nne much better - more classes, etc.

Problem with the site?

Try this

https://promos.drf.com/beyer

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

We are very much on the same page on a lot of things. No wonder I think you are so smart.

Seriously though, any kind of class rating gets really tough for maiden races with a lot of first times starters and lightly raced horses, limited winner alw races with lightly raced horses, and for turf races with 1st time starters or a lot of 1st time turf horses. I'd love to know how you handle some of that until after they start coming out of the race, but by then it's often too late to cash a value oriented bet.

You ask the hard questions. The answer to how I handle some of that is, I haven't (yet) which bothers me and your post is enough to finally push me to address the issue sooner rather than later. Not to make excuses but job and family life over the past few years have had me running on fumes. I haven't dug into any of that code in very long time now, but, I've had a good plan of attack in mind for how to largely mitigate the lightly raced issue and will definitely try to get it done over the next few months.

[CheckMark]

Hey does anyone know if the new Pars are any good and if they are around 2020? Would like to use the pars for the next tracks to open!

*Just saw now that they are 2019 when you download when saying 2019BeyerPars2-7.indd(track)*

[Tom]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Try this

https://promos.drf.com/beyer

I get to that page alright, but when I click on the "Beyer Pars "
I go to here....seems like the word "block" shouldn't be in there.


https://promos.drf.com/beyer#page-block-9g0gfdb8ps

[Tom]

Originally Posted by CheckMark

Hey does anyone know if the new Pars are any good and if they are around 2020? Would like to use the pars for the next tracks to open!

*Just saw now that they are 2019 when you download when saying 2019BeyerPars2-7.indd(track)*

How did you get to the list of the tracks?
I am getting an address that is no good..see above.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

I get to that page alright, but when I click on the "Beyer Pars "
I go to here....seems like the word "block" shouldn't be in there.


https://promos.drf.com/beyer#page-block-9g0gfdb8ps

I'm not having any issue.

Go to the page I sent you to.

Then go to this section down lower on the page.

Beyer Pars

Pars for Beyer Speed Figures represent the approximate average winning figure for a given class at a given track.
These numbers reflect the relative strength of different racing circuits. At Belmont Park, maiden special weight races for older horses have a par of 87. The par for the same class at Thistledown is 59.

When I click on the Beyer Pars button to the right it brings up a track list. Then I CAN download the PARs for each track. The reports are massively improved from what they were.

If you are still having an issue, send a note to Lonnie. I'd do it myself, but I don't work there anymore.

[CheckMark]

Yes sorry that it does not work for you Tom. I emailed them about seeing if they can post 2020 pars or at least update them for the current tracks running. Wait and see.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by MJC922

You ask the hard questions. The answer to how I handle some of that is, I haven't (yet) which bothers me and your post is enough to finally push me to address the issue sooner rather than later. Not to make excuses but job and family life over the past few years have had me running on fumes. I haven't dug into any of that code in very long time now, but, I've had a good plan of attack in mind for how to largely mitigate the lightly raced issue and will definitely try to get it done over the next few months.

I've experimented with using the PAR combined with various adjustments for lengths between the horses, but some erroneous conclusions are inevitable if you try to automate it. Sometimes a couple of average horses dominate a terrible field and sometimes they were actually monsters.

It helps if a few of the horses in the race have race records so you have some idea of the quality of the field, but if they are lightly raced, form can change dramatically from race to race

It also probably makes sense to look at the connections. If some million dollar first time starter from Baffert wins by 8 and there was a gap of 5 from 2nd to 3rd, you can probably be pretty sure the horse ran huge. You might come to a different conclusion if it was a 30-1 shot from a barn that doesn't handle top horses.

I think in these situations you almost have to look at the times of the race even though you know the speed figures will be less reliable than usual also.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by CheckMark

Yes sorry that it does not work for you Tom. I emailed them about seeing if they can post 2020 pars or at least update them for the current tracks running. Wait and see.

The Beyer PARs don't change much from year to year and for some classes are probably not just based on 1 year of data to begin with because the sample sizes are too small. I'm sure the Beyer team is taking some artistic license to smooth some of this out. IMO, if you look at the data in these reports, you aren't going to find anything much better related to Beyer figures. It's coming from the horse's mouth.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I'm not having any issue.

Go to the page I sent you to.

Then go to this section down lower on the page.



When I click on the Beyer Pars button to the right it brings up a track list. Then I CAN download the PARs for each track. The reports are massively improved from what they were.

If you are still having an issue, send a note to Lonnie. I'd do it myself, but I don't work there anymore.

Thanks, Class, I will get a hold of Lonnie.
When I click on that button, I get another copy of the same page I am already on. Chrome and FF.