Top 25 Most Overrated Performances of '06

[todko]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

" Split variants are a fraud ".

Thus, you believe 100% that all racetracks maintain the same variant throughout every racing day.

Good to know.

I should have re-stated and said "all track variants are a fraud"

It is iffy enough to judge a variant in the early races of a card by assessing times versus pars for that class. To conclude that "the track is slow" because 10k claimers ran +.5 at 6f in the first two races on the card is a huge mistake. Maybe the first two races just had weak fields or even full fields. Later a horse goes -.5 in a race with a short field (no traffic) and the horse gets a stunning speed fig.

It is even more iffy to split the track variant. The first 4 races get a certain variant and then the last 4 get a different variant? The track changes drastically between races 4 and 5 but not between races 1 and 2 or races 8 and 9? Gimme a break.

Dirt changes. Nobody is arguing that. It changes every time the water trucks run on it. And not only because of the water -- also because the weight of the trucks compress the track and produce fast lanes. How much do you think a full water truck weighs?

Throw in rain, wind, different field sizes, time spent stalled in the gate while horses refuse to load . . . you name it.

Like I said, any time an independent variable (track variant) is indeterminate then the dependent variable (speed figure) is also indeterminate.

I've often went up against speed figure handicappers at the local tracks. I worked off raw running times, trips, pedigrees . . . the speed figures were taped over so I couldn't see them. I always won. Try it. It will improve your handicapping. Put a piece of tape over the speed figure column on your pps. You'll find yourself taking a lot closer look -- at the fractions, trip, class, pedigree, and chart caller's comments than you will if you remain corrupted by the Beyer speed figs.

Don't get caught up in the hype. Don't be a Bernardinian.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by todko

I should have re-stated and said "all track variants are a fraud"

It is iffy enough to judge a variant in the early races of a card by assessing times versus pars for that class. To conclude that "the track is slow" because 10k claimers ran +.5 at 6f in the first two races on the card is a huge mistake. Maybe the first two races just had weak fields or even full fields. Later a horse goes -.5 in a race with a short field (no traffic) and the horse gets a stunning speed fig.

It is even more iffy to split the track variant. The first 4 races get a certain variant and then the last 4 get a different variant? The track changes drastically between races 4 and 5 but not between races 1 and 2 or races 8 and 9? Gimme a break.

Dirt changes. Nobody is arguing that. It changes every time the water trucks run on it. And not only because of the water -- also because the weight of the trucks compress the track and produce fast lanes. How much do you think a full water truck weighs?

Throw in rain, wind, different field sizes, time spent stalled in the gate while horses refuse to load . . . you name it.

Like I said, any time an independent variable (track variant) is indeterminate then the dependent variable (speed figure) is also indeterminate.

I've often went up against speed figure handicappers at the local tracks. I worked off raw running times, trips, pedigrees . . . the speed figures were taped over so I couldn't see them. I always won. Try it. It will improve your handicapping. Put a piece of tape over the speed figure column on your pps. You'll find yourself taking a lot closer look -- at the fractions, trip, class, pedigree, and chart caller's comments than you will if you remain corrupted by the Beyer speed figs.

Don't get caught up in the hype. Don't be a Bernardinian.

You definitely have the right idea. If someone has absolutely no idea how to make variants and speed figures, they shouldn't use them. Heady move on your part as you definitely fit into this category.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

There is some really crazy stuff on the last page.....

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

There is some really crazy stuff on the last page.....

Oh yay! My bestfriend is back!!!

[The Indomitable DrugS]

#1 fan I thought I was?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

There is some really crazy stuff on the last page.....

Yes, such as these classics:

• Hey, don't be picking on my girl Lemons -- she's a good horse. And that field was damn good. Wait a While. Bushfire. One of the fastest Oaks in history. Lemons ran a monster race that day and she'll do it again. Circled the field from last to get that final time.
  

  She stinks. She basically ran the same slow race every time out.

• The track suddenly slowed on BC day? No -- the later races were just won by slow horses.
  

  Invasor is a slow horse?

• The track on BC day got faster as it dried. Yet Beyer said it got slower.
  

  Every other figure maker, including Brown and Rags, probably concluded the same thing

• I think it's nearly impossible to make or use speed figures from a Breeders Cup day.
  

  It is actually quite a bit easier.

• It is iffy enough to judge a variant in the early races of a card by assessing times versus pars for that class.

  I don't know of any figure maker, other than BRIS computer generated figures, that makes serious use of pars when making figures.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Yes, such as these classics:

• Hey, don't be picking on my girl Lemons -- she's a good horse. And that field was damn good. Wait a While. Bushfire. One of the fastest Oaks in history. Lemons ran a monster race that day and she'll do it again. Circled the field from last to get that final time.
  

  She stinks. She basically ran the same slow race every time out.

• The track suddenly slowed on BC day? No -- the later races were just won by slow horses.
  

  Invasor is a slow horse?

• The track on BC day got faster as it dried. Yet Beyer said it got slower.
  

  Every other figure maker, including Brown and Rags, probably concluded the same thing

• I think it's nearly impossible to make or use speed figures from a Breeders Cup day.
  

  It is actually quite a bit easier.

• It is iffy enough to judge a variant in the early races of a card by assessing times versus pars for that class.

  I don't know of any figure maker, other than BRIS computer generated figures, that makes serious use of pars when making figures.

Good start, though you left out one of my favorites....


" Lemons needs a new jockey with better timing. "

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Good start, though you left out one of my favorites....


" Lemons needs a new jockey with better timing. "

Timing? He would need an hourglass.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Timing? He would need an hourglass.

Or an alarm clock.

Here's my favorite thought process....

I love this horse

He/she won

The speed figure came back relatively slow

The speed figure maker is an idiot

[philcski]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Yes, such as these classics:

• Hey, don't be picking on my girl Lemons -- she's a good horse. And that field was damn good. Wait a While. Bushfire. One of the fastest Oaks in history. Lemons ran a monster race that day and she'll do it again. Circled the field from last to get that final time.
  

  She stinks. She basically ran the same slow race every time out.

• The track suddenly slowed on BC day? No -- the later races were just won by slow horses.
  

  Invasor is a slow horse?

• The track on BC day got faster as it dried. Yet Beyer said it got slower.
  

  Every other figure maker, including Brown and Rags, probably concluded the same thing

• I think it's nearly impossible to make or use speed figures from a Breeders Cup day.
  

  It is actually quite a bit easier.

• It is iffy enough to judge a variant in the early races of a card by assessing times versus pars for that class.

  I don't know of any figure maker, other than BRIS computer generated figures, that makes serious use of pars when making figures.

We differ on our opinion of this one.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by philcski

We differ on our opinion of this one.

This isn't opinion, I don't know any serious figure maker that relies on pars. What one do you know that does?

About the only time I could think of using pars would be lightly raced horses or first time starters, things like that. Even then, you try to avoid those races if at all possible as part of making the variant.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

This isn't opinion, I don't know any serious figure maker that relies on pars. What one do you know that does?

About the only time I could think of using pars would be lightly raced horses or first time starters, things like that. Even then, you try to avoid those races if at all possible as part of making the variant.

Myself... for example, the par time for an older 20K claimer on the AQU inner track is 1:11.16 over the last 5 years (with a boatload of datapoints). Fact. What is incorrect about using this information to your advantage?? I'd rather calculate a variant, if possible, on what DID happen rather than what SHOULD have happened. I have firm reservations against the projection method. It allows human nature to "prove yourself correct" by matching the figures from previous races...