Is it possible that there are no real speed figs?

[illinoisbred]

Originally Posted by steveb

to do that then you would need a pace factor which then means its not really a speed figure, because in most instances what any individual horse will do depends on the race pace, that is, what the leading horse/s are doing.

speed figures rightfully should have huge variations in my opinion that reflects the different ways races are run, the different makeup of the race, and so on.
i don't and never have believed in projections.

then you could you make additional figures that might give adjustments to the individual runners depending on how they went or were suited, not to the race as a whole

Correct...and I do incorporate the pace factor after the fact,when the pace is known. I didn't go into any deeper detail in my earlier posts than necessary. But yes, final figures fluctuate depending on the pace that is set.

[cj]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Yes...but those four past races don't exist in a vacuum; their figures are determined, at least theoretically, by the four races that preceded THEM. And those four races were influenced by the four races that were run even EARLIER...and so on down the line. In order to compare the horse "against itself"...we have to form some sort of definition of the horse's "self", as it was BEFORE we could have four races at our disposal to base our assessment on.

How do we form a numerical opinion about a horse when it only has one or two prior starts...and we can't review its last four races in order to make up our mind?

Like I said...I won't give away everything I do. I tried all races, last 10, last 5, etc and 4 was the number I liked best. That said, not all the races are weighted equally and some are tossed as unreliable. All the factors you mention are things considered in my weighting of how likely a figure is to be reliable in determining the speed of today's track.

Even then all races don't always fit into a neat puzzle which is why we have ? next to some races.

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by illinoisbred

Correct...and I do incorporate the pace factor after the fact,when the pace is known. I didn't go into any deeper detail in my earlier posts than necessary. But yes, final figures fluctuate depending on the pace that is set.

Looking at the raw Pace of a race is pretty much a “Catch-22” when it comes to adjusting speed figures. That’s because not only is it impacted by the running styles of the entries in a race, their running styles will ALWAYS be influenced by the track conditions (which includes Wind velocity). I used to deal with this by establishing PAR values not only for the Final time, but every call in the race. When making the final adjustment the inner calls would definitely be considered.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Are BEYER figures adjusted to track variance before published in DRF?

For that matter, what exactly does Andy include in his figure?

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by cj

Like I said...I won't give away everything I do. I tried all races, last 10, last 5, etc and 4 was the number I liked best. That said, not all the races are weighted equally and some are tossed as unreliable. All the factors you mention are things considered in my weighting of how likely a figure is to be reliable in determining the speed of today's track.

Even then all races don't always fit into a neat puzzle which is why we have ? next to some races.

How reliable is it to use Beyer figures for races that are not run at today's distance/ surface/ venue? Should I only use Beyer listed for ones that match today's conditions?

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Don't be so shocked. Most bettors out there are "specialists", whether they realize it or not. To some of us, myself included, looking at "eeeeevvvveeeerrryyyyytttthhhhhiiiinnnnggggg" is not only unnecessary...it could even be called UNDESIRABLE...because a horse that is validated by "eeeeevvvveeeerrryyyyytttthhhhhiiiinnnnggggg" often gets the short end of the price on the board.

How many hours before betting a race does your handicapping begin?

I know guys that have horses to watch lists going, their own virtual stable, then just wait for these horses to show up...trip handicappers you know....

How do their methods differ from the guy who just opens the form up and starts 'capping?

I used to think that each race was/ is a puzzle that could be figured out...but I'm starting to use other approaches like being up on horses coming out of Keeneland auctions, understanding form cycles, expecting the unexpected...using my intuition regarding trainers intentions, etc...

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by Flysofree

Is there a simple explanation, that even a slow learner like me can understand WHY times include "run up distances" and are not simply timed from the gate?

If it's a complicated math formula than that lets me out..

What I understand is that the run-up distance is at least partially a track maintenance issue....and I could be very wrong about all of this and I am only speculating here....for the grass anyway, the crew doesn't want to keep putting the gate in exactly the same place all they time cause it makes ruts or compacts differently if they did...But then again I heard some track have published run-up distances so I don't know about that....Also, when the dogs are up and the rail is outwardly placed this must affect the run up distance....Gulfstream I heard has a lot of variance in this regard and heard that their speed figures are very unreliable for turf races by massive amounts...

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Elliott Sidewater

No, the daily variant does not nullify the speed. There's a big difference between adjustment and nullification. The variant is used to adjust the speed. You really should read Beyer's 1st book Picking Winners, it explains the process in detail and the basics have not changed since the 70's.

I not sure what you mean by nullify speed, but speed is retarded, reduced, or stopped (nullified) by any interruption in its path and this is verified by Newton's 1st Law of Motion which states in part "a body in motion continues to move at a constant velocity (speed) unless acted upon by an external force."

In horseracing the horse (body in motion) is acted upon by 4 primary external forces which are surface resistance force, wind resistance force, air resistance force, and side force in the turn.

You suggested that the poster should read Beyer's "Picking Winners" which I have read but I didn't see anything in it remotely near Newton's Law; theoretical or applied.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Flysofree

Everybody and their brother has a speed figure.What I can't figure out is why or how the "run up distances" are valuable and or needed.

The run-up have a functional value by the racetrack as being part of the race and it is because the racetrack apparently want "running race starts."

To do that there has to be a "standing start"; hence the run-up.

However we don't live in a perfect world and some races don't have run-ups; and run-ups have different distances because of lack of available track area and different race distances.

Also with some elementary calculus of physics you can apply Newton's 2nd Law and calculate the magnitude of the horse's acceleration in the run-up.

[Elliott Sidewater]

Originally Posted by Cratos

I not sure what you mean by nullify speed, but speed is retarded, reduced, or stopped (nullified) by any interruption in its path and this is verified by Newton's 1st Law of Motion which states in part "a body in motion continues to move at a constant velocity (speed) unless acted upon by an external force."

In horseracing the horse (body in motion) is acted upon by 4 primary external forces which are surface resistance force, wind resistance force, air resistance force, and side force in the turn.

You suggested that the poster should read Beyer's "Picking Winners" which I have read but I didn't see anything in it remotely near Newton's Law; theoretical or applied.

He used the word nullify. I was just responding to his OP. There was no intention to discuss or debate Newtonian physics. This was about speed figures, the numerical components being raw speed and variant. Period. How many books would Beyer have sold under the title "The effects of friction and air resistance on race horses; a treatise"?

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Elliott Sidewater

He used the word nullify. I was just responding to his OP. There was no intention to discuss or debate Newtonian physics. This was about speed figures, the numerical components being raw speed and variant. Period. How many books would Beyer have sold under the title "The effects of friction and air resistance on race horses; a treatise"?

I don't want to turn this into an argument, but an understanding of basic physics is essential in the understanding of "speed" in horseracing.

I couldn't care less about how many books could have been sold by Beyer, but I do believe that if a basic Newtonian explanation of speed had been given in his book as opposed to anecdotal rhetoric, sales of the book would have probably been better.

This is a fundamental problem in horseracing; explaining the "what" and not the "why."

[jasperson]

Originally Posted by cj

I was exaggerating with the 1950s comment of course. I'm not going to give away much, but I don't use pars at all. It is basically impossible at most places any longer. There are so many different conditions you would never have a big enough sample size to have anything remotely reliable.

How would you get a par, for example, for a NW3X allowance race? Are you going to go back a decade to get 15 of them? Are you going to lump circuits together? Regions?

You will also see things like this at one track for 5k claimers:

Open
NW2L
NW3L
NW4L
NW16m
NW1y

What do you do for a par for 2yo MSW? Does it matter if it is June or September? 6f or 8.5f? I could go on and on.

I think by far the best way to make variants is with projections. You look at each and every horse that ran on a card. Instead of having between 1 and 12 data points (based on surface, inner/outer, etc.), you have anywhere from 10 to 100 or more. You'll have to ignore some of them based on distance, surface, trainer changes, etc. But it is still way better than just using a class par for each race.

I agree with you C J and you have not thrown in state breds. This more than ever have convinced me that keeping speed figures and pace figures as separate factors is the way to go. Run up distance and wind has more effect on 1f time than the time for the finish. On 1 mile tracks the distance is a factor because part of 4f pace is on the turn in the shorter sprints. I hate Gulfstream because almost half the races are on turf and that dilutes the sample size for computing the dirt track variant. This is also true at Aq and Bel in the summer.

[cj]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

How reliable is it to use Beyer figures for races that are not run at today's distance/ surface/ venue? Should I only use Beyer listed for ones that match today's conditions?

I haven't used Beyer figures for a few decades so you are asking the wrong guy.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Cratos

Also with some elementary calculus of physics you can apply Newton's 2nd Law and calculate the magnitude of the horse's acceleration in the run-up.

Sure, if you know the actual run up. What is posted in the charts (and data files, same data) often does not match reality.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Elliott Sidewater

He used the word nullify. I was just responding to his OP. There was no intention to discuss or debate Newtonian physics. This was about speed figures, the numerical components being raw speed and variant. Period. How many books would Beyer have sold under the title "The effects of friction and air resistance on race horses; a treatise"?

Cratos can never resist getting into speed figure threads and doing the old "you're way is wrong" post. He never really tells you what he does, though.