Fig players have finally lost it

[RarifiedAir]

So I'm watching TVG this morning and the US timeform fig guy comes on. They are comparing the one the only the great Pharoah to some horse who ran in the Whitney... AND LOST. The fig guy is giving this losing horse the same fig as pharoah from his last race and so the TVG "experts" start analyzing as they are known to do. I don't lose it at this point... yet... even though the comparison is a bit inane. But here is where I lose it. The losing horse from the Whitney is given 5 MORE POINTS than the WINNING HORSE! And they actually talk about this with straight faces. They say the losing horse did more in the race than the winning horse. You know its over for fig people when "the fig" is the be all end all... damn any logic that might interfere with it.

Anyway... for any of you people who use timeform figs... beware of this losing horse and its insane number.

[Kash$]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

So I'm watching TVG this morning and the US timeform fig guy comes on. They are comparing the one the only the great Pharoah to some horse who ran in the Whitney... AND LOST. The fig guy is giving this losing horse the same fig as pharoah from his last race and so the TVG "experts" start analyzing as they are known to do. I don't lose it at this point... yet... even though the comparison is a bit inane. But here is where I lose it. The losing horse from the Whitney is given 5 MORE POINTS than the WINNING HORSE! And they actually talk about this with straight faces. They say the losing horse did more in the race than the winning horse. You know its over for fig people when "the fig" is the be all end all... damn any logic that might interfere with it.

Anyway... for any of you people who use timeform figs... beware of this losing horse and its insane number.

Been using Timeform since day 1..the same exact angle your talking has made me some$$
I always look thru the TimeformUS charts trying to find horses in races in which they LOST but have better fig number then the winner.

[Trips]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

So I'm watching TVG this morning and the US timeform fig guy comes on. They are comparing the one the only the great Pharoah to some horse who ran in the Whitney... AND LOST. The fig guy is giving this losing horse the same fig as pharoah from his last race and so the TVG "experts" start analyzing as they are known to do. I don't lose it at this point... yet... even though the comparison is a bit inane. But here is where I lose it. The losing horse from the Whitney is given 5 MORE POINTS than the WINNING HORSE! And they actually talk about this with straight faces. They say the losing horse did more in the race than the winning horse. You know its over for fig people when "the fig" is the be all end all... damn any logic that might interfere with it.

Anyway... for any of you people who use timeform figs... beware of this losing horse and its insane number.

No doubt you're knowledge concerning horse racing is overwhelming.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

So I'm watching TVG this morning and the US timeform fig guy comes on. They are comparing the one the only the great Pharoah to some horse who ran in the Whitney... AND LOST. The fig guy is giving this losing horse the same fig as pharoah from his last race and so the TVG "experts" start analyzing as they are known to do. I don't lose it at this point... yet... even though the comparison is a bit inane. But here is where I lose it. The losing horse from the Whitney is given 5 MORE POINTS than the WINNING HORSE! And they actually talk about this with straight faces. They say the losing horse did more in the race than the winning horse. You know its over for fig people when "the fig" is the be all end all... damn any logic that might interfere with it.

Anyway... for any of you people who use timeform figs... beware of this losing horse and its insane number.

Next time you post, count to 10 before hitting send.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

So I'm watching TVG this morning and the US timeform fig guy comes on. They are comparing the one the only the great Pharoah to some horse who ran in the Whitney... AND LOST. The fig guy is giving this losing horse the same fig as pharoah from his last race and so the TVG "experts" start analyzing as they are known to do. I don't lose it at this point... yet... even though the comparison is a bit inane. But here is where I lose it. The losing horse from the Whitney is given 5 MORE POINTS than the WINNING HORSE! And they actually talk about this with straight faces. They say the losing horse did more in the race than the winning horse. You know its over for fig people when "the fig" is the be all end all... damn any logic that might interfere with it.

Anyway... for any of you people who use timeform figs... beware of this losing horse and its insane number.

It is not uncommon at all for horses that finish behind the winner to run faster. Happens every day at every racetrack.

I'm a thoro-graph guy and see it all the time. It's very simple mathematics really.

If two horses finish in a dead heat. One ran the entire mile on the rail while the other never left the 4 path, obviously the latter ran a much higher, or in the case of thoro-graph and ragozin lower figure.

Another easy example is weight carried. In this case let's say both horses stay on the rail all the way around both turns. One eases outside just in the last few strides and gets up for another dead heat. One horse carried 107 lbs while the other toted 132lbs. Again simple math. The horse that carried 132 obviously ran a much better figure.

Want real observers proof? Easy. Just switch saddles and watch a dead heat become a 4 length win.

All that aside the thing that makes Thror-graph and Ragozin the single most important handicapping tool in the history of horse race handicapping is their ability to make the numbers using a real, true and accurate track variant. Without the variant being 100% dead balls on perfect the figs are crap.

I know most of you understand what the variant is so please excuse this example for the few that might not.

Here's the best way to describe the importance of the track variant. Every racing surface is different. Even at the same track it changes day to day, even in many cases race by race.

Let's say you and a buddy are at the beach. You decide to race 100 yards. One races just inside the boardwalk wall on hot, loose, deep, cuppy sand. The other right next to the water on sand that's packed down, smooth and firm. And you're off.....another dead heat. Finish position equal. But we all know who ran better. Of course the guy next to the wall. Final time will be the same. But wall guys figure will be monstrous compared water guy.

Another reason why Thoro-graph and Ragozin's numbers are sooooo much better is their formula for setting the variant. For decades variants were based on final running times or worse yet PAR TIMES which are ridiculous. TG & R don't use winners times to set their track numbers. They correctly believe that most winners are running faster that day than they have been recently. Might throw the variant off.

What they do is find several horses than tend to run close to the same figure every time. Doesn't matter if they finish 2nd, 5th or last. Just that their sheet is consistent. They'll make raw figs for those dozen or so horses. If they all run 2 points faster or 3 points slower Wah La there's your variant and all raw figures run that day can be adjusted accordingly.

The final piece of the puzzle is an accurate timing of the race. Every thoroughbred race has what's called a run up. Strides the horses take before breaking the beam that starts the timer. Problem is these run up distances can vary dramatically. From a few strides to dam near 100 yards. Obviously if horses are running a different speed when the clock starts it's going to impact the official time. TG & R have their onsite "ground" people measure the run up distance. I've seen it change by 40 or 50 feet in two races at the same distance at the same track. TG & R factor in the run up but use their raw timing from the bell, a standing start. Like they do in quarter horse racing. Another factor as to why their figs are the holy grail.

So my suggestion to you is rather than LOSING IT. Find it. It being an open mind that their discussion was entirely proper.

[RarifiedAir]

The idea that there are people trying to justify this thinking is scary... and not surprising at all... considering what I read in my previous posting topic.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

It is not uncommon at all for horses that finish behind the winner to run faster. Happens every day at every racetrack.

I'm a thoro-graph guy and see it all the time. It's very simple mathematics really.

If two horses finish in a dead heat. One ran the entire mile on the rail while the other never left the 4 path, obviously the latter ran a much higher, or in the case of thoro-graph and ragozin lower figure.

Another easy example is weight carried. In this case let's say both horses stay on the rail all the way around both turns. One eases outside just in the last few strides and gets up for another dead heat. One horse carried 107 lbs while the other toted 132lbs. Again simple math. The horse that carried 132 obviously ran a much better figure.

Want real observers proof? Easy. Just switch saddles and watch a dead heat become a 4 length win.

All that aside the thing that makes Thror-graph and Ragozin the single most important handicapping tool in the history of horse race handicapping is their ability to make the numbers using a real, true and accurate track variant. Without the variant being 100% dead balls on perfect the figs are crap.

I know most of you understand what the variant is so please excuse this example for the few that might not.

Here's the best way to describe the importance of the track variant. Every racing surface is different. Even at the same track it changes day to day, even in many cases race by race.

Let's say you and a buddy are at the beach. You decide to race 100 yards. One races just inside the boardwalk wall on hot, loose, deep, cuppy sand. The other right next to the water on sand that's packed down, smooth and firm. And you're off.....another dead heat. Finish position equal. But we all know who ran better. Of course the guy next to the wall. Final time will be the same. But wall guys figure will be monstrous compared water guy.

Another reason why Thoro-graph and Ragozin's numbers are sooooo much better is their formula for setting the variant. For decades variants were based on final running times or worse yet PAR TIMES which are ridiculous. TG & R don't use winners times to set their track numbers. They correctly believe that most winners are running faster that day than they have been recently. Might throw the variant off.

What they do is find several horses than tend to run close to the same figure every time. Doesn't matter if they finish 2nd, 5th or last. Just that their sheet is consistent. They'll make raw figs for those dozen or so horses. If they all run 2 points faster or 3 points slower Wah La there's your variant and all raw figures run that day can be adjusted accordingly.

The final piece of the puzzle is an accurate timing of the race. Every thoroughbred race has what's called a run up. Strides the horses take before breaking the beam that starts the timer. Problem is these run up distances can vary dramatically. From a few strides to dam near 100 yards. Obviously if horses are running a different speed when the clock starts it's going to impact the official time. TG & R have their onsite "ground" people measure the run up distance. I've seen it change by 40 or 50 feet in two races at the same distance at the same track. TG & R factor in the run up but use their raw timing from the bell, a standing start. Like they do in quarter horse racing. Another factor as to why their figs are the holy grail.

So my suggestion to you is rather than LOSING IT. Find it. It being an open mind that their discussion was entirely proper.

Interesting synopsis...which has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. The question asked here is why the second-place finisher of the Whitney received a better figure than the winner. The answer has nothing to do with the "run-up", the "weight" carried, the "variant", or the "ground loss" in the race. It had to do with the PACE of the race, which, strangely enough, is a handicapping aspect which isn't given its due in the "sheets".

[RarifiedAir]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

It is not uncommon at all for horses that finish behind the winner to run faster. Happens every day at every racetrack.

I'm a thoro-graph guy and see it all the time. It's very simple mathematics really.

If two horses finish in a dead heat. One ran the entire mile on the rail while the other never left the 4 path, obviously the latter ran a much higher, or in the case of thoro-graph and ragozin lower figure.

Another easy example is weight carried. In this case let's say both horses stay on the rail all the way around both turns. One eases outside just in the last few strides and gets up for another dead heat. One horse carried 107 lbs while the other toted 132lbs. Again simple math. The horse that carried 132 obviously ran a much better figure.

Want real observers proof? Easy. Just switch saddles and watch a dead heat become a 4 length win.

All that aside the thing that makes Thror-graph and Ragozin the single most important handicapping tool in the history of horse race handicapping is their ability to make the numbers using a real, true and accurate track variant. Without the variant being 100% dead balls on perfect the figs are crap.

I know most of you understand what the variant is so please excuse this example for the few that might not.

Here's the best way to describe the importance of the track variant. Every racing surface is different. Even at the same track it changes day to day, even in many cases race by race.

Let's say you and a buddy are at the beach. You decide to race 100 yards. One races just inside the boardwalk wall on hot, loose, deep, cuppy sand. The other right next to the water on sand that's packed down, smooth and firm. And you're off.....another dead heat. Finish position equal. But we all know who ran better. Of course the guy next to the wall. Final time will be the same. But wall guys figure will be monstrous compared water guy.

Another reason why Thoro-graph and Ragozin's numbers are sooooo much better is their formula for setting the variant. For decades variants were based on final running times or worse yet PAR TIMES which are ridiculous. TG & R don't use winners times to set their track numbers. They correctly believe that most winners are running faster that day than they have been recently. Might throw the variant off.

What they do is find several horses than tend to run close to the same figure every time. Doesn't matter if they finish 2nd, 5th or last. Just that their sheet is consistent. They'll make raw figs for those dozen or so horses. If they all run 2 points faster or 3 points slower Wah La there's your variant and all raw figures run that day can be adjusted accordingly.

The final piece of the puzzle is an accurate timing of the race. Every thoroughbred race has what's called a run up. Strides the horses take before breaking the beam that starts the timer. Problem is these run up distances can vary dramatically. From a few strides to dam near 100 yards. Obviously if horses are running a different speed when the clock starts it's going to impact the official time. TG & R have their onsite "ground" people measure the run up distance. I've seen it change by 40 or 50 feet in two races at the same distance at the same track. TG & R factor in the run up but use their raw timing from the bell, a standing start. Like they do in quarter horse racing. Another factor as to why their figs are the holy grail.

So my suggestion to you is rather than LOSING IT. Find it. It being an open mind that their discussion was entirely proper.

I saw the Whitney and there's nothing to suggest the losing horse ran better. In fact it was the winner that ran outside of the loser. Its logic simply applied.

[RarifiedAir]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Interesting synopsis...which has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. The question asked here is why the second-place finisher of the Whitney received a better figure than the winner. The answer has nothing to do with the "run-up", the "weight" carried, the "variant", or the "ground loss" in the race. It had to do with the PACE of the race, which, strangely enough, is a handicapping aspect which isn't given its due in the "sheets".

You're correct about the topic. The losing horse set the pace without pressure and was clear. The winner plain ran faster.

[NorCalGreg]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

All that aside the thing that makes Thror-graph and Ragozin the single most important handicapping tool in the history of horse race handicapping is their ability to make the numbers using a real, true and accurate track variant. Without the variant being 100% dead balls on perfect the figs are crap.

I actually started to type "If all that is true--then why aren't you rich?"

Your ""handle" sounded familiar and I realized you were the gentleman that was entered in the Poker World Series. I certainly don't have the $10,000 entry fee in disposable income, which probably totals at least $15,000 with hotels, food, hookers, etc. So Maybe you ARE rich, Vic. Thanks for posting. -NCG

[biggestal99]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

I saw the Whitney and there's nothing to suggest the losing horse ran better. In fact it was the winner that ran outside of the loser. Its logic simply applied.

I also saw the whitney, liams map ran a good race, honor code a slightly better one.

I bet timeform would have to hate a horse like forego, or more recently zenyatta.

Honest Pleasure ran better timeform fig than forego. Lol

Allan

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

I saw the Whitney and there's nothing to suggest the losing horse ran better. In fact it was the winner that ran outside of the loser. Its logic simply applied.

Go look up the trakus figs. The winner ran the shortest distance.

[RarifiedAir]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Next time you post, count to 10 before hitting send.

I didn't know you were the posting cop. Are you someone I should know?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

I didn't know you were the posting cop. Are you someone I should know?

I'm not the posting cop, just a little helpful hint. Try and not get too bent out of shape, I'm here to help.

[ultracapper]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

It is not uncommon at all for horses that finish behind the winner to run faster. Happens every day at every racetrack.

I'm a thoro-graph guy and see it all the time. It's very simple mathematics really.

If two horses finish in a dead heat. One ran the entire mile on the rail while the other never left the 4 path, obviously the latter ran a much higher, or in the case of thoro-graph and ragozin lower figure.

Another easy example is weight carried. In this case let's say both horses stay on the rail all the way around both turns. One eases outside just in the last few strides and gets up for another dead heat. One horse carried 107 lbs while the other toted 132lbs. Again simple math. The horse that carried 132 obviously ran a much better figure.


Want real observers proof? Easy. Just switch saddles and watch a dead heat become a 4 length win.

All that aside the thing that makes Thror-graph and Ragozin the single most important handicapping tool in the history of horse race handicapping is their ability to make the numbers using a real, true and accurate track variant. Without the variant being 100% dead balls on perfect the figs are crap.

I know most of you understand what the variant is so please excuse this example for the few that might not.

Here's the best way to describe the importance of the track variant. Every racing surface is different. Even at the same track it changes day to day, even in many cases race by race.

Let's say you and a buddy are at the beach. You decide to race 100 yards. One races just inside the boardwalk wall on hot, loose, deep, cuppy sand. The other right next to the water on sand that's packed down, smooth and firm. And you're off.....another dead heat. Finish position equal. But we all know who ran better. Of course the guy next to the wall. Final time will be the same. But wall guys figure will be monstrous compared water guy.

Another reason why Thoro-graph and Ragozin's numbers are sooooo much better is their formula for setting the variant. For decades variants were based on final running times or worse yet PAR TIMES which are ridiculous. TG & R don't use winners times to set their track numbers. They correctly believe that most winners are running faster that day than they have been recently. Might throw the variant off.

What they do is find several horses than tend to run close to the same figure every time. Doesn't matter if they finish 2nd, 5th or last. Just that their sheet is consistent. They'll make raw figs for those dozen or so horses. If they all run 2 points faster or 3 points slower Wah La there's your variant and all raw figures run that day can be adjusted accordingly.

The final piece of the puzzle is an accurate timing of the race. Every thoroughbred race has what's called a run up. Strides the horses take before breaking the beam that starts the timer. Problem is these run up distances can vary dramatically. From a few strides to dam near 100 yards. Obviously if horses are running a different speed when the clock starts it's going to impact the official time. TG & R have their onsite "ground" people measure the run up distance. I've seen it change by 40 or 50 feet in two races at the same distance at the same track. TG & R factor in the run up but use their raw timing from the bell, a standing start. Like they do in quarter horse racing. Another factor as to why their figs are the holy grail.

So my suggestion to you is rather than LOSING IT. Find it. It being an open mind that their discussion was entirely proper.

Somebody has to say good post, because it is. For those that missed it, he was throwing out reasons why a second place horse could be rewarded a higher number than a winner, and gave examples of how seemingly even runs may not really be even, or even why a superior run may not even be superior.

Oh well.