Tampa Bay Beyers

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

LOL, it was more than 20 I think. And I was exagerrating for sure. 6 lengths? C'mon. I highly doubt that...But I know how Thoros are made. I don't put much into Beyers which the Valid Video race and Shake You Down race at the Spa convinced me of.

20 points at 5f on Beyer is 6.5 lengths.

Seriously, if you didn't know that was in the ballpark, I'm not sure how you can then knock the figures like you understand them. You don't.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

20 points at 5f on Beyer is 6.5 lengths.

Seriously, if you didn't know that was in the ballpark, I'm not sure how you can then knock the figures like you understand them. You don't.

Look above your post please. That's what I remember.

[cmorioles]

It was lowered from 102 to 92. Are you intentionally giving out misinformation, or just posting whatever pops in your head?

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It was lowered from 102 to 92. Are you intentionally giving out misinformation, or just posting whatever pops in your head?

You are dead wrong on that. I remember it distinctly when. 10 points, you just said 20 a minute ago....Someone who has the race in October I believe from DRF would have it in front of them. I don't.

[cmorioles]

It is in fact lowered to 92. I have the Feb 28 PPs in front of me, when she ran at GP. I said around 20, as I was guessing, but I'm not now. I knew it was not 30.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

It is in fact lowered to 92. I have the Feb 28 PPs in front of me, when she ran at GP. I said around 20, as I was guessing, but I'm not now. I knew it was not 30.

Look, they upped it then after lowering it. I can honestly say I remember it being between 68 and and 75 when she was in the race in October I believe...If I'm mistaken I apologize. As I said before I don't use Beyers anymore so I'm going strictly on memory of it from the fall.

[randallscott35]

I'm wrong. Sorry I just found an article that it was lowered by 10 as you said. Sorry about that. 10 is not that much considering the variant for that day and the distance. Sorry.

[cmorioles]

It was never lower than 92, I have them all databased. Not a big deal really.

[blackthroatedwind]

For some clarification on this, the 5F race figures are an enormous problem at Belmont, and it may be because of different runups or simply because they run so few that it is hard to have an accurate par time. Todd Pletcher actually brought this up to me at Belmont last fall, as there were a number of difficult numbers over the past two years, one being discussed here along with Air Lord and Sam I Am the previous summer. Because of this, the initial raw numbers are often used, and then subsequently checked as these first time starter filled fields run more races to offer a better feel for their respective abilities. When Beyer Associates changes these figures in the future it is because they are trying to make their numbers as accurate as possible. Unfortunately, it is near impossible to judge some of the races accurately when first run, but of course they do the best job they can to do this.

Frankly, any player making definitive judgements about horses based on just the speed figure for one race, especially early starting 2YOs, is treading into very dangerous waters. Just like Beyer Associates, who always have these early races under review, a player should seriously evaluate these races for themselves. One way to do this is to keep a close watch at any horse from such races who make subsequent starts. Formulator-4 makes this easy and can often uncover numbers that seem " inaccurate ". Furthermore, sometimes it is apparent that these numbers are questionable, as was the case with the Sam I Am race where two NY Breds hit the wire together and yet the number still came up stakes quality high. Any sane handicapper would look at that number questioningly, especially considering the 5F difficulties, as the likelyhood of even one NY Bred 2YO, much less two, running that " fast " so early in its career seemed infinitessimal.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

For some clarification on this, the 5F race figures are an enormous problem at Belmont, and it may be because of different runups or simply because they run so few that it is hard to have an accurate par time. Todd Pletcher actually brought this up to me at Belmont last fall, as there were a number of difficult numbers over the past two years, one being discussed here along with Air Lord and Sam I Am the previous summer. Because of this, the initial raw numbers are often used, and then subsequently checked as these first time starter filled fields run more races to offer a better feel for their respective abilities. When Beyer Associates changes these figures in the future it is because they are trying to make their numbers as accurate as possible. Unfortunately, it is near impossible to judge some of the races accurately when first run, but of course they do the best job they can to do this.

Frankly, any player making definitive judgements about horses based on just the speed figure for one race, especially early starting 2YOs, is treading into very dangerous waters. Just like Beyer Associates, who always have these early races under review, a player should seriously evaluate these races for themselves. One way to do this is to keep a close watch at any horse from such races who make subsequent starts. Formulator-4 makes this easy and can often uncover numbers that seem " inaccurate ". Furthermore, sometimes it is apparent that these numbers are questionable, as was the case with the Sam I Am race where two NY Breds hit the wire together and yet the number still came up stakes quality high. Any sane handicapper would look at that number questioningly, especially considering the 5F difficulties, as the likelyhood of even one NY Bred 2YO, much less two, running that " fast " so early in its career seemed infinitessimal.

So the 5 furlong races at Monmouth are better? Cotton Blossom being an example from last year...If the run-up is a problem, couldn't it be fixed? I mean the run-up doesn't change year to year.

[Dunbar]

BTWind, I'm interested in your take on the Summer Doldrums re-figuring. I like Beyer and I use his figs, but this one is still bugging me. Summer Doldrum's race before the Gotham (Whirlaway?) wasn't 1st time starters, so there was at least some kind of historic baseline to work from. It's been pointed out that there was evidence that the variant changed on that day. But aren't you at least a little concerned about Beyer using next-race performance as a way to (re-)measure previous performance?

What I'd like to hear is that Beyer had re-figured Summer Doldrum's fig BEFORE the Gotham, but somehow the news didn't get out in time! I simply don't like the idea of back-fitting the data.

Maybe Beyer should consider adding an asterisk to figs they know from the get-go are particularly difficult.

--Dunbar