Fig players have finally lost it

[cj]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

honest... I didn't know. The poster has it right I really was asking. Now... for listening to TVG announcers... you really are asking a lot. Especially if its Matty Carrouthers. But thats a totally different topic. I saw the pace I didn't need to hear what the "personalities" said. I really did ignore it. I was working out on the olyptical at the time.

But you listened to the spot today. It was.discussed in depth how Liam's Map was given a higher number. It is fine that you don't agree. But how could you watch and not know the why?

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

To show you how behind-the-times I am...I didn't even know that the Sheets Figs were the "Holy Grail".

That's why you'll never graduate to being a whale...

[cj]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

Answer... a profound no. You won't have an argument from me on that.

As for this race I just don't see it. And 5 to 6 points I think is insanity.

Do you even know what 5 to 6 points represents? Before I go criticizing something I learn all I can about it first.

Do you think we'd do figures this way if there wasn't a benefit? One of our employees questioned this, as he should, thinking we might be adjusting too much for pace. Guess what? We aren't. If anything, we are too conservative. The bigger the pace adjustment the better the ROI while won percentage remained stable for top fig horses.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by RarifiedAir

Todd Schrutte?

I have never met Todd, so I have no opinion.

[JohnGalt1]

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.

You are correct in that the winner ran a faster race than the second place horse did.

But if the two horses face each other in their next race, and if I make pace figures, MY figures may show the second place horse with a higher fig because I punish, or deduct points if the closer gained many lengths.

Let's say a race went 46.0 and 1:10.0.

Horse A went One length back the whole race.

Horse B was 10 lengths back at the call and won the race.

Hambleton pace figures for horse A would be 89 90 179.

I would make horse B's figures as 80 97 177.

So horse B was the fastest horse in that race, but I'd probably bet horse A in the rematch.

I rate gains up to 5-- 1 for 1, then award gains on a 1 for two after 6 length gains. So 15 lengths gained is 10, and that's the maximum. 10 lengths gained is 7 lengths the way I do it.

Closers in future races may encounter trouble, have to take wider or in and out paths or are more challenged by pace.

[cj]

What is a fig player anyway? Is that the mythical person that blindly bets every best figure horse?

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by AndyC

I think the Sheets and TG are great products. But to say that anybody has a real, true and accurate variant is only kidding themselves. There is so much subjectivity in making a variant that the words true and accurate should not be in the conversation. If the variants were always correct the Sheets and TG would always have the same numbers adjusted for their different scales. They don't.

Ground loss can make a winner a loser but what about when there is a dead rail? Do the Sheets or TG adjust for that? And just how do they know the exact detriment or benefit to a horse of weight carried? Does it differ by the horse's height, weight, stride, running style, or configuration of the track?

Neither the Sheets nor TG nor Beyers nor TF are perfect products.

Nothing is perfect. I believe the sheets are the best we have available. Of course a dead rail is an opinion. Usually forwarded by people who lost that day and need an excuse after the fact. As for how they know about the effect of weight carried. That answer would be fine tuning the raw figures of making numbers on millions of horses.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

And what about when two speedsters set torrid fraction and then tire each other out in the last stages of the race...allowing the closer to come around the outside and win by a slim margin? The sheets account for the closer's wide run...but do they account for the torrid speed duel which exhausted the front-runners?

The answer is no. That's why only one tool as we attack the windows is never enough. We as players must use multiple angles to get the clearest possible picture. The sheets do note when the pace was notably slow but not when it's torrid. It's up to us to factor that in and apply it as we see fit.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

Nothing is perfect. I believe the sheets are the best we have available. Of course a dead rail is an opinion. Usually forwarded by people who lost that day and need an excuse after the fact. As for how they know about the effect of weight carried. That answer would be fine tuning the raw figures of making numbers on millions of horses.

The entire process of figure making is an opinion save for the raw time of the race. You can make light of my dead rail example but there are numerous things that happen in a race that affect the performance of horses that are totally disregarded. The Sheets are a good starting point but they aren't the end-all be-all for handicapping.

[Grits]

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.

After so many pages, hopefully, you've learned something from the gentlemen, here, who've tried to help you. Though your poster name indicates you know a tremendous amount already..

One thing I don't believe anyone has told you. The figure guy you saw has been making pace and speed figures for 3 decades, also he's one of the moderators of this message board. The other moderator is the owner of it.

Pick your rants wisely.

[v j stauffer]

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".

I completely disagree with that. When a horse is assigned a figure. The 4 things you listed as meaningless are the very foundation of the numbers. Tactics and running style very often determine winning and losing. I don't think anyone will argue that. However, a number is a number is a number is a number.

Some us choose to use those figures in comparing and contrasting horse as PART of the handicapping process. Is it the beginning, middle and end? Of course not. But IMO it's an extremely valuable tool.

Tens of millions of dollars are bet everyday in this country for perhaps just as many reasons.

A small portion is wagered on what I personally believe is the starting foundation of every race I handicap and bet.

" FAST HORSES BEAT SLOW HORSES"

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

I believe the sheets are the best we have available.

What is interesting, is not what you believe about the sheets or any other analogous metric but if there exists a methodology to compare them and rank them based in how good they are.

A blanket statement, like the one you are making here, is completely useless for anyone else except yourself, unless you can back it with some convincing data.

Comparing figures, is not a simple process and the required skills to design a valid comparison algorithm, clearly are not there when it comes to the makers of either Ragozin or Thorograph..

To add my own belief, Rags, Thorograph and beyer are all antiquated approaches that failed to evolve to the modern era of computing and big data science...

Although I do not have a huge experience with them, I also believe, that the best commercial figures money can buy are CJ's TimeformUS...

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by Grits

After so many pages, hopefully, you've learned something from the gentlemen, here, who've tried to help you. Though your poster name indicates you know a tremendous amount already..

One thing I don't believe anyone has told you. The figure guy you saw has been making pace and speed figures for 3 decades, also he's one of the moderators of this message board. The other moderator is the owner of it.

Pick your rants wisely.

And one used to be a STEWARD before becoming washed up. But I believe he still has the power to levy sanctions and suspensions. Tread very lightly Air Ball

[Grits]

AIR BALL ......

That's a really good one, Vic. LOLOL

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

I completely disagree with that. When a horse is assigned a figure. The 4 things you listed as meaningless are the very foundation of the numbers. Tactics and running style very often determine winning and losing. I don't think anyone will argue that. However, a number is a number is a number is a number.

Some us choose to use those figures in comparing and contrasting horse as PART of the handicapping process. Is it the beginning, middle and end? Of course not. But IMO it's an extremely valuable tool.

Tens of millions of dollars are bet everyday in this country for perhaps just as many reasons.

A small portion is wagered on what I personally believe is the starting foundation of every race I handicap and bet.

" FAST HORSES BEAT SLOW HORSES"

Of course the four things that I listed as "meaningless" can be very meaningful in other cases...but they are indeed meaningless when trying to explain why Cj assigned a higher figure to the second-place finisher of the Whitney than he did to the winner. And we were talking about the Whitney here...