Is this Beyer wrong?

[Scav]

April PP.jpg

Attached is BGR's filly Fifth of April, entered on Friday. While looking at the PP's, I can't help but notice how close the times, figures and variants are, yet the Beyers don't correspond.

21.3 / 45.3 / 58.3 / 112.4 74 - 16
21.3 / 46.1 / 58.4 / 112.2 78 - 18

Is the last Beyer wrong, or am I not understanding how numbers are made.

[outofthebox]

Originally Posted by Scav

Attachment 2085

Attached is BGR's filly Fifth of April, entered on Friday. While looking at the PP's, I can't help but notice how close the times, figures and variants are, yet the Beyers don't correspond.

21.3 / 45.3 / 58.3 / 112.4 74 - 16
21.3 / 46.1 / 58.4 / 112.2 78 - 18

Is the last Beyer wrong, or am I not understanding how numbers are made.

Just going off the DRF variant her number should be @ 50 for her recent race.But i'm not a figure maker, so what do i know..

[Calzone Lord]

On CJ's figures: (different scale than Beyer and different type of figure)

71 Debut
65 second time out
81 third time out
60 last time out

[joeydb]

I'm definitely curious to see the answer to this. Good post by Scav.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Scav

Attachment 2085

Attached is BGR's filly Fifth of April, entered on Friday. While looking at the PP's, I can't help but notice how close the times, figures and variants are, yet the Beyers don't correspond.

21.3 / 45.3 / 58.3 / 112.4 74 - 16
21.3 / 46.1 / 58.4 / 112.2 78 - 18

Is the last Beyer wrong, or am I not understanding how numbers are made.

Without putting a whole lot of effort into this, doesn't the fact she was beaten rather handily as a fairly heavy favorite kind of tell you she didn't run near her best?

Aside from that, the simple answer is the track was much faster for the most recent race. Just curious, did you bother looking at the charts for the full card of both days?

[MISTERGEE]

variant looks like -22 on most recent, and -6 two back

[Scav]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Without putting a whole lot of effort into this, doesn't the fact she was beaten rather handily as a fairly heavy favorite kind of tell you she didn't run near her best?

Aside from that, the simple answer is the track was much faster for the most recent race. Just curious, did you bother looking at the charts for the full card of both days?

I am not disputing that she ran bad last time.

This might be a stupid question, but wouldn't the variant be a lower number if the track was that much faster, or does the variant being 2 points lower really translate to that big of a number difference?

I'm just trying to understand how they came up with the 38, because the final time, the speed figures, and the variant from the last two races are pretty close, which is why I am questioning the 26 pt difference in Beyer.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Scav

I am not disputing that she ran bad last time.

This might be a stupid question, but wouldn't the variant be a lower number if the track was that much faster, or does the variant being 2 points lower really translate to that big of a number difference?

I'm just trying to understand how they came up with the 38, because the final time, the speed figures, and the variant from the last two races are pretty close, which is why I am questioning the 26 pt difference in Beyer.

Tom if this makes you feel any better I had her only 9 points lower on my Joey S power scale.

[The Bart]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Tom if this makes you feel any better I had her only 9 points lower on my Joey S power scale.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Scav

I am not disputing that she ran bad last time.

This might be a stupid question, but wouldn't the variant be a lower number if the track was that much faster, or does the variant being 2 points lower really translate to that big of a number difference?

I'm just trying to understand how they came up with the 38, because the final time, the speed figures, and the variant from the last two races are pretty close, which is why I am questioning the 26 pt difference in Beyer.

What variant? The Drf variant? That thing is ridiculously bad. I don't even know why they still publish that thing. Surely anybody that took it seriously is dead by now.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Scav

I am not disputing that she ran bad last time.

This might be a stupid question, but wouldn't the variant be a lower number if the track was that much faster, or does the variant being 2 points lower really translate to that big of a number difference?

I'm just trying to understand how they came up with the 38, because the final time, the speed figures, and the variant from the last two races are pretty close, which is why I am
the 26 pt difference in Beyer.

You should know better than to bother the mighty Craig with a peasants speed figure question....he is much above this.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by GBBob

You should know better than to bother the mighty Craig with a peasants speed figure question....he is much above this.

If it was a bother I wouldn't answer. I don't post for the sole purpose of being an ass like you did.

[cmorioles]

When I originally posted I had no idea that scav was involved with the horse. I answered honestly, and I am always objective when it comes to making numbers. I don't know what inspired the vitriol.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Scav

I am not disputing that she ran bad last time.

This might be a stupid question, but wouldn't the variant be a lower number if the track was that much faster, or does the variant being 2 points lower really translate to that big of a number difference?

I'm just trying to understand how they came up with the 38, because the final time, the speed figures, and the variant from the last two races are pretty close, which is why I am questioning the 26 pt difference in Beyer.

The DRF Speed Rating and Variant is a joke.

Basically, If a horse equals a 3-year best for final time for a distance, he receives a rating of 100. Otherwise, a point is subtracted from 100 for each fifth of a second by which a horse misses the 3-year best time.

So, in other words, the 3-year best time for 7 furlongs at Santa Anita is 1:19.70 ... if a horse runs 7fs in 1:20 flat at Santa Anita, he gets a speed rating of 98.

If a horse runs 7 furlongs in 1:25 2/5ths at Michigan's Pinnacle Racecourse -- he gets a speed rating of 99 because the 3-year best time for the distance is 98.

The DRF's ''track variant'' is supposed to say how fast or slow the track was each day. But, again, the comparison of running times and 3-year bests can be misleading. If a given day's races involve cheap horses running long distances, their final times will be far off the track records. If it is a day of top-class racing at sprint distances, the times will be much closer to track records. The Form's variants will suggest a major difference in the speed of the track on those two days, when in fact there was none.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Scav

Attachment 2085

Attached is BGR's filly Fifth of April, entered on Friday. While looking at the PP's, I can't help but notice how close the times, figures and variants are, yet the Beyers don't correspond.

21.3 / 45.3 / 58.3 / 112.4 74 - 16
21.3 / 46.1 / 58.4 / 112.2 78 - 18

Is the last Beyer wrong, or am I not understanding how numbers are made.

You're way off in how the figures are made.

The DRF speed rating and variant have nothing at all to do with it. They are just put in the form for 80-year-old people who used them as a rule of thumb growing up. They give speed handicapping a horrible name.

As far as Fifth of April's last race ... the winner ran 6 furlongs in 1:12 4/5ths.

Earlier in the card, a $5,000 N3L claiming race went six furlongs in 1:11 flat and later on in the card a different $5,000 N3L claiming race went six furlongs in 1:11 and change.

Regarding the horse who went 1:11 flat ... he came back and finished 7th in a 10K claimer race at Hawthorne ... these are his PP's...



A speed figure can be "wrong" for a few different reasons ... sometimes the race isn't timed correctly or the final time gets typo'd.

Sometimes the track changes speeds because of track maintenance or weather ... stuff like that.

However, the speed rating/variant has nothing at all to do with the Beyer figure and it is without question the most worthless piece of information you will find in the past performances.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

You're way off in how the figures are made.

The DRF speed rating and variant have nothing at all to do with it. They are just put in the form for 80-year-old people who used them as a rule of thumb growing up. They give speed handicapping a horrible name.

As far as Fifth of April's last race ... the winner ran 6 furlongs in 1:12 4/5ths.

Earlier in the card, a $5,000 N3L claiming race went six furlongs in 1:11 flat and later on in the card a different $5,000 N3L claiming race went six furlongs in 1:11 and change.

Regarding the horse who went 1:11 flat ... he came back and finished 7th in a 10K claimer race at Hawthorne ... these are his PP's...



A speed figure can be "wrong" for a few different reasons ... sometimes the race isn't timed correctly or the final time gets typo'd.

Sometimes the track changes speeds because of track maintenance or weather ... stuff like that.

However, the speed rating/variant has nothing at all to do with the Beyer figure and it is without question the most worthless piece of information you will find in the past performances.

This is what I was looking for. Thanks, appreciate it.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Scav

This is what I was looking for. Thanks, appreciate it.

Whatever she does Friday ... I think her best game will be sprinting and on synthetic.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Whatever she does Friday ... I think her best game will be sprinting and on synthetic.

I don't disagree at all. We are really trying the spot cause we are essentially in jail right now because of the EHV-1. She was suppose to be on a farm Nov 15th in NOLA relaxing until mid Jan but because we can't leave, we talked it out after her last disaster and figured what the hell, might as well try it and see what happens.

Her being the ML favorite is laughable IMO cause I thought she would be around 8/1.

[Calzone Lord]

That last race had to be heartbreaking.

All she needed was to show up and she'd win a 100K stake race.

She's obviously a bad ML favorite on Friday. Still, worth running in there I suppose because only one other horse is proven on dirt.

For Christ sakes man, give GB Bob a Xanax or a Valium or something to chill him out.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

That last race had to be heartbreaking.

All she needed was to show up and she'd win a 100K stake race.

She's obviously a bad ML favorite on Friday. Still, worth running in there I suppose because only one other horse is proven on dirt.

For Christ sakes man, give GB Bob a Xanax or a Valium or something to chill him out.

Every race you don't win is heartbreaking. Fact is that never did we think we would be in that spot with this horse so her races this year have been a welcome surprise.

Lets just hope we get a chance to run on Friday, cause the weather is about to get crazy here, and while I don't think the track will be an issue, the wind will.