Beyer figs

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

denouncement speech. That's how you sound lately! So I'm telling you about it!

I gave Beyer some hell in one post otherwise merely expressed some skepticism of the Santa Anita variant. It may be much a do about nothing but I tend to analyze stuff versus taking everything for granted like half of America sharing fake BS on Facebook. There was a stretch where anyone casting doubts on Justify was torn a new one like they were ruining some pump and dump Wall Street endeavor. I'm certainly not sold on him but respected enough to wager over and under a few of my choices in Pool 4. I've shared positive and negative thoughts on many contenders. Any Derby trail and summer classics handicapper knows a 3 year old can pop a big figure improvement at any time (Arrogate, anyone?) or take a dump going 10 panels which is why I look at much more than just the speed figures. My early wagering order is even posted in one of the threads for all to see.

[reckless]

Originally Posted by cj

The three year best is not a good measuring stick. It is a little better than the track record maybe. How many 9f races do people think are run on dirt at these tracks in a three year span?

Since I was the one that posted both 3-year best and track records for the major Derby plays, I'd like to ask a few questions and make a comment or two.

What 9 furlong time (call it par, if you wish) did you --and the Beyer people-- use to compare Justy's Santa Derby performance against? There must be some sort of par, no? I assume it isn't 3 year best of track record, so what is it? Bill Quirin figs from an older generation compared horses to a $10,000 par +/- the day's variant. There should be a constant, no? I think there should be and 3 year best or track record are constants that I feel are, in fact, a good measuring stick.

I said earlier that slow horses make for slow times which equals to a slow (high) variant day, and that slower (higher) variant is added to make a slow effort faster. Got that?

So, it seems to me that Justify's time (speed figure) was upgraded because of the allegedly slow track. Am I mistaken here?

Why do you think the track was slow? On that day, there were three 2-turn races, at one mile, 8.5 furlongs and 9 furlongs.

The one mile race was run by $50,000 claimers who never won two races in their life. A very low grade class, imo... even with a $50,000 tag. That slow mile effort started the group thinking that the track was slow. Slow horse made for a slow mile race.

Then there was Justify's win ... 149.4 or so, after a pedestrian 112.3 pace time, no less. Also a slow race, imo, but the unbeaten winner had things his own way and while that advantage meant he didn't need to extend himself, 149.4 is a slow race, imo.

Two races later we had the S.A. Oaks for 3YO fillies which went down in 144.4 for 8.5 miles. Another slow race, imo.

What is most interesting in the Oaks race is that the winner, Midnight Bisou, ran much faster early than what Justify ran early. She went down in 23.2, 47.3, and 112.0 early before slowing; Justify's fractions were 24.0, 47.4, 112.3.

Gee, I could understand Midnight Bisou slowing down since she ran fast early, but Justify going slow?? He walked early and won in slow final time.

Yet, all I am hearing is that the Santa Anita Derby was the fastest race of all the preps and that Justify is lengths better than the other horses.

Now, I know Beyer figs are final time figs, but even TFUS' pace figs gave Justify way higher pace figs than Midnight Bisou received. Why was that?

Look, it doesn't mind me one bit that there's this Justify bandwagon rolling onward and upward, but why is it that Justify's slow effort is upgraded because of a perceived 'slow' track while the race winners of the other major prep races I posted does not receive any consideration of any kind?? Thanks, cj, and everyone.

[cj]

Originally Posted by reckless

Since I was the one that posted both 3-year best and track records for the major Derby plays, I'd like to ask a few questions and make a comment or two.

What 9 furlong time (call it par, if you wish) did you --and the Beyer people-- use to compare Justy's Santa Derby performance against? There must be some sort of par, no? I assume it isn't 3 year best of track record, so what is it? Bill Quirin figs from an older generation compared horses to a $10,000 par +/- the day's variant. There should be a constant, no? I think there should be and 3 year best or track record are constants that I feel are, in fact, a good measuring stick.

I said earlier that slow horses make for slow times which equals to a slow (high) variant day, and that slower (higher) variant is added to make a slow effort faster. Got that?

So, it seems to me that Justify's time (speed figure) was upgraded because of the allegedly slow track. Am I mistaken here?

Why do you think the track was slow? On that day, there were three 2-turn races, at one mile, 8.5 furlongs and 9 furlongs.

The one mile race was run by $50,000 claimers who never won two races in their life. A very low grade class, imo... even with a $50,000 tag. That slow mile effort started the group thinking that the track was slow. Slow horse made for a slow mile race.

Then there was Justify's win ... 149.4 or so, after a pedestrian 112.3 pace time, no less. Also a slow race, imo, but the unbeaten winner had things his own way and while that advantage meant he didn't need to extend himself, 149.4 is a slow race, imo.

Two races later we had the S.A. Oaks for 3YO fillies which went down in 144.4 for 8.5 miles. Another slow race, imo.

What is most interesting in the Oaks race is that the winner, Midnight Bisou, ran much faster early than what Justify ran early. She went down in 23.2, 47.3, and 112.0 early before slowing; Justify's fractions were 24.0, 47.4, 112.3.

Gee, I could understand Midnight Bisou slowing down since she ran fast early, but Justify going slow?? He walked early and won in slow final time.

Yet, all I am hearing is that the Santa Anita Derby was the fastest race of all the preps and that Justify is lengths better than the other horses.

Now, I know Beyer figs are final time figs, but even TFUS' pace figs gave Justify way higher pace figs than Midnight Bisou received. Why was that?

Look, it doesn't mind me one bit that there's this Justify bandwagon rolling onward and upward, but why is it that Justify's slow effort is upgraded because of a perceived 'slow' track while the race winners of the other major prep races I posted does not receive any consideration of any kind?? Thanks, cj, and everyone.

Before I get too deep into this, you realize that Midnight Bisou came from well off the pace and certainly did not run faster early than Justify, right?

If you mean the leader's figures, the Santa Anita Derby got 140 pace figures early versus 135 for the Oaks. That isn't way higher. But I've always said you shouldn't compare pace figures across races at different distances and different surfaces. They tell a picture about the race shape. Horses are expected to run faster at a shorter distance. At Santa Anita, for example, the same horses would be expected to run the opening half mile 0.44 seconds faster at 8.5f than they would at 9f.


We do something called adjusted fractions which are more of a raw speed measure. Using those, the Oaks is the faster race early.

[cj]

As to the speed chart issue, we use speed charts which are based on much more science than the three year best or track records. Beyer has written books detailing his methods so I'm not going to rehash them here. I do something similar though I used a huge database to support everything I created.

I'll give one example...lets say at Mythical Downs the following are the three years bests for a track. Lets also assume that the races are all around one turn and that the run up is the same for all three distances.

6f: 1:10
6.5f: 1:16 2/5
7f: 1:21

This kind of stuff can and does happen all the time at all distances for a variety of reasons. Some tracks don't run distances very often, just as they don't the 9f races as I mentioned. Some tracks might card much higher class races at one distance than they do at others. A track might be crazy fast one day, as happened at Parx this year for a day. They ran some distances and others weren't run. That will totally skew and baseline created using ONE DATA POINT.

Would anybody think these are reliable and a good baseline? It would assume that horses that can run 1:10 would run the next half furlong in 6 2/5, but then the next half furlong in 4 and 3/5.

There is mounds and mounds of data out there from which better numbers can be found. That is why I would never use three year bests or track records.

[cj]

Last part...the slow horses make big variants. It simply isn't true. Those horses coming in had a history. I don't even know what slow means. I've attached R3, which shows the figure the horses got for that race, and the ones they received for two prior races. It isn't like these horses were suddenly rated faster. In fact, every horse (save the winner, one point gain) ran slower using my track variant.

There were also sprints run on the day, and though they aren't always a good barometer, it isn't like you have to totally discard them. In this case they were a tight fit with the routes variant wise as they often are at Santa Anita.

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by reckless

There should be a constant, no? I think there should be and 3 year best or track record are constants that I feel are, in fact, a good measuring stick.

Can you tell me what the three yr best time for Santa Anita is? Was it run on a sloppy sealed track? Who ran it? Was the horse a lone speed horse who got everything his own way? At least Beyers uses a "par" time for individual classes.

By using a three year best time or the track record you are comparing all races to one race that might have just been ideal conditions for the horse that ran it. Might as well just pull a random date out and use the times for that day as a yard stick.

[Gerard02]

I got the Beyer speed averages of 9 horses who scored some points. Here they are, if anyone can find use for them. Now, I know some horses may have two races under their belt, but an average isn’t still an average and not a guaranteed win or loss.

Justify: 104
Bolt D’Oro: 101.5
Audible: 99
Magnum Moon: 93.75
Good Magic: 92
Vino Rosso: 91
Combatant: 90.33
Noble Indy: 90
Hofburg: 88.5

[BlueChip@DRF]

Originally Posted by Gerard02

I got the Beyer speed averages of 9 horses who scored some points. Here they are, if anyone can find use for them. Now, I know some horses may have two races under their belt, but an average isn’t still an average and not a guaranteed win or loss.

Justify: 104
Bolt D’Oro: 101.5
Audible: 99
Magnum Moon: 93.75
Good Magic: 92
Vino Rosso: 91
Combatant: 90.33
Noble Indy: 90
Hofburg: 88.5

What did last year's top-5 finishers average look like?

[Gerard02]

I don’t have those figs on me, right now. I’ll access them later. I still keep notes in a folder. Lol.

[Gerard02]

I saw DRF Derby Watch gave Mendy a 106. With SbCaris leaning towards him, I’m going to have to put him into my wagering. Although, until a UAE runner proves himself, I won’t be on board. However, better safe than sorry.

[Gerard02]

This is the spreadsheet, Power put out. It has the averages you are looking for. Interesting numbers,here as well.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...Qyzs/htmlview#