3 Year Best Times 2017-2020

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

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.

Try clearing your history and doing it again. Last hope.

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Try clearing your history and doing it again. Last hope.

The track list is a pop up page of some type. so I'd guess Tom has something blocking it from appearing. Try trusting the page if you are using a pop up blocker, or ghostery, or something like that.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

The track list is a pop up page of some type. so I'd guess Tom has something blocking it from appearing. Try trusting the page if you are using a pop up blocker, or ghostery, or something like that.

I was thinking that also, but he said he was getting an old or different page. It could be though.

[CheckMark]

I have a quick question if anyone can answer it?

Is this formula correct to make speed figures for own use:

1) Subtract Final time-3 Year Best Time= number
2) Then multiply number you got in #1 by 5= number
3) Then subtract that number you got in #2 and subtract from 100=Figure

my question is where does this 100 come from? And do I use the 100 or does this number adjusted? I really want to know since it does not make sense to use 100 for each subtraction and also since I see stakes (graded) like 112 or 116 and not 89 or 80?

Please someone help me with this as I would love to work with this for monmouth for last year and do par figs

Thank you!

[Tom]

If you are using the 3 year best times, the 100 is the time for each distance on that chart.

ALL the fastest times for each distance = 100. That is what the DRF SR is based on - deduct 1 point for each 1/5th slower than the fastest time.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Tom

If you are using the 3 year best times, the 100 is the time for each distance on that chart.

ALL the fastest times for each distance = 100. That is what the DRF SR is based on - deduct 1 point for each 1/5th slower than the fastest time.

Exactly right, and for non-winners deduct a point for each length behind.

[CheckMark]

Originally Posted by Tom

If you are using the 3 year best times, the 100 is the time for each distance on that chart.

ALL the fastest times for each distance = 100. That is what the DRF SR is based on - deduct 1 point for each 1/5th slower than the fastest time.

Is 1/5th .2 .4 .6 .8 .0?

So a example:
1:11.22 of 6 Furlongs 3 Year best time
Time of 1.12.00 of 6 Furlongs would be this: 100-5= 95?
Is that right or am I missing something?

[cj]

1/5 = .20. I think they convert everything to fifths, so a 1:11.00 all the way through 1:11.19 would be considered 1:11 and 0 fifths.

In your example 1:11.22 would be 1:11 and 1 fifth, so the time is 4 fifths slower, thus a 96.

I'm only answering what you ask. I wouldn't go this route personally, but if that is what you want there you go.

[CheckMark]

Originally Posted by cj

1/5 = .20. I think they convert everything to fifths, so a 1:11.00 all the way through 1:11.19 would be considered 1:11 and 0 fifths.

In your example 1:11.22 would be 1:11 and 1 fifth, so the time is 4 fifths slower, thus a 96.

I'm only answering what you ask. I wouldn't go this route personally, but if that is what you want there you go.

What would you do then? I just want to make things work for me. Sorry Cj.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by CheckMark

DRF has pars but need the time rather than just the straight up par
Am I wasting my time? Or is this something that I should work with?

Attachment 27103

This PDF you attached here - can you send me the address that you clicked on to get it?

That is what I need and cant' get to on my computers.

[cj]

Originally Posted by CheckMark

What would you do then? I just want to make things work for me. Sorry Cj.

No need to apologize. If that is what you want. go for it.

That model of speed figures is pretty poor though. You mentioned using Beyer stuff which is fine, but then you are relying on the fastest time from the last three years. That is a horrible baseline to use for figure making.

[cj]

Originally Posted by cj

No need to apologize. If that is what you want. go for it.

That model of speed figures is pretty poor though. You mentioned using Beyer stuff which is fine, but then you are relying on the fastest time from the last three years. That is a horrible baseline to use for figure making.

Quick example of why, then I'll let it go.

Best main track 6f race at both Keeneland and Arapahoe is 1:09 flat. The horse that ran a 1:09 at Keeneland is much better than the horse that ran 1:09 at Arapahoe. Yet, both would receive a rating of 100 for that race as if they are equal performances.

[CheckMark]

Originally Posted by Tom

This PDF you attached here - can you send me the address that you clicked on to get it?

That is what I need and cant' get to on my computers.

Hope this works for you:

file:///Users/user/Downloads/40228531-0-MTH-2019BeyerParsAA-%20(3).pdf

[CheckMark]

Originally Posted by cj

1/5 = .20. I think they convert everything to fifths, so a 1:11.00 all the way through 1:11.19 would be considered 1:11 and 0 fifths.

In your example 1:11.22 would be 1:11 and 1 fifth, so the time is 4 fifths slower, thus a 96.

I'm only answering what you ask. I wouldn't go this route personally, but if that is what you want there you go.

But what about getting the figure above 100?

Or will I just have to follow the formula you suggested above?

Sorry too many questions, just would like to try something for my own study and also for learning purposes. Sorry.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Tom

This PDF you attached here - can you send me the address that you clicked on to get it?

That is what I need and cant' get to on my computers.

I go here:

https://promos.drf.com/beyer

Then scroll down to Beyer Pars. Clicking that opens a sort of pop up window that shows all the tracks. You click on any track and for me it downloads as a PDF.

If that doesn't work for you, I can email them to you. Just say the word.