Casino Drive Beyer vs Unbridleds Heart Beyer

[CSC]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

There is no doubt he improved, and I am certainly not surprised a second time starter would do so. However, with a Beyer of 85, were are asked to believe the winner improved 18 points off of a good effort first out, the runner up went from a 35 to an 80, and the long time maiden that ran 3rd went from a 41 to a 73, and improved a few lengths over his lifetime best as well. The 2 to 1 favorite ran about the same 55 he did last time finishing second as he did getting drubbed on Saturday.

It just doesn't pass the smell test. Keep in mind these are NY breds maidens, and the race was originally carded for turf. Good luck betting those horses off of the figures that will be in the DRF.

With that being said do you think Casino Drive's beyer is an accurate one one race earlier?

[cmorioles]

I think it is pretty good, maybe a touch high.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by NoLuvForPletch

What I find most ammusing about beyer figures is that it seems like there isn't 1 figure that is ever assigned without someone challenging it...but they continue to be the most commonly used and accepted figures in handicapping?

Seeing how there are hundreds assigned every week, there are probably about 99% that don't get mentioned.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Seeing how there are hundreds assigned every week, there are probably about 99% that don't get mentioned.

Probably because they're not visible enough to know what type of adjustments/assumptions were made. Most of the people using them aren't sick enough to follow some crappy NYB maidens in their successive starts to determine the validity of another race's figure, like we are.

You know what my biggest beef with them lately is CJ? Too much subjectivity. It's impossible to know the figuremaker's thought process, and it seems multiple splits of the variant on a single day to make them "fit" better is NOT within the principle in which they were initially designed by Beyer. Horses rarely run the same race twice in a row, I think we all know that by now. Why try to finagle the numbers to make it sound like they did? If a horse ran 5 lengths better and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, why not leave it as such, with a designation that it's a questionable result, and let the handicapper determine the usefulness of the performance and whether or not it's repeatable.

[NoLuvForPletch]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Seeing how there are hundreds assigned every week, there are probably about 99% that don't get mentioned.

you are right...i don't often see people complaining about those donuts they assign the 5000 maiden claimers at pimlico...

my point was simply that it seems as though whenever someone brings up an a specific beyer figure for a horse, you can find someone who will question it, one way or the other

and the reasons for why the figure comes back that way can be spun just like any other statistic...

i have my reservations about using the figures...i seem to have trouble with the theory that the horse ran a 58 last race, how could he have run a 78 today? or, the horse he beat (horse a) ran a 58 last race, so that's the figure he runs, therefore the speed figure for horse b must be calculated off of horse a...

i do however appreciate you taking the time to explain how these figures are calculated most of the time

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by philcski

If a horse ran 5 lengths better and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, why not leave it as such, with a designation that it's a questionable result, and let the handicapper determine the usefulness of the performance and whether or not it's repeatable.

I'm a Beyer user but I sort of agree with you, Phil. That's why I don't use t-graphs or rags. Just tell me the speed - i'll do the rest of the handicapping. The BSFs are better than those figs in that respect, though, and since I don't have the time to make my own figs I rely on the Beyer guys to use their best judgment.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by philcski

Probably because they're not visible enough to know what type of adjustments/assumptions were made. Most of the people using them aren't sick enough to follow some crappy NYB maidens in their successive starts to determine the validity of another race's figure, like we are.

You know what my biggest beef with them lately is CJ? Too much subjectivity. It's impossible to know the figuremaker's thought process, and it seems multiple splits of the variant on a single day to make them "fit" better is NOT within the principle in which they were initially designed by Beyer. Horses rarely run the same race twice in a row, I think we all know that by now. Why try to finagle the numbers to make it sound like they did? If a horse ran 5 lengths better and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, why not leave it as such, with a designation that it's a questionable result, and let the handicapper determine the usefulness of the performance and whether or not it's repeatable.

I agree, but I'm glad, because it isn't all that tough to capitalize on it. Sometimes I'm wrong and the Beyer guy is right, but the public is betting the Beyer, so when I'm right I see it on the tote.

[MISTERGEE]

so true, ah for the good old days before the beyers were in the form

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

There is no doubt he improved, and I am certainly not surprised a second time starter would do so. However, with a Beyer of 85, were are asked to believe the winner improved 18 points off of a good effort first out, the runner up went from a 35 to an 80, and the long time maiden that ran 3rd went from a 41 to a 73, and improved a few lengths over his lifetime best as well. The 2 to 1 favorite ran about the same 55 he did last time finishing second as he did getting drubbed on Saturday.

It just doesn't pass the smell test. Keep in mind these are NY breds maidens, and the race was originally carded for turf. Good luck betting those horses off of the figures that will be in the DRF.

It was either the above OR Mint Lane getting 5 points (or whatever) higher than he'd run previously? Is that right?

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

The angst of the quantifier.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

It was either the above OR Mint Lane getting 5 points (or whatever) higher than he'd run previously? Is that right?

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

The angst of the quantifier.

Actually, I was only talking about the last race in that post.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

say Big Brown has to run 9 furlongs @ GP from the 12 post. The beyer doesn't reward the 5 lengths he lost before the race in the draw.
Or say some cheap speed horse gets a 5 length lead at the half and runs an uncontested 6 furlongs in 1:09 = he doesn't get anything deducted for being dealt a beautiful hand.
There is no big brown , there is no cheap horse, all I see is a final time, and a track variant.


well that is the utopian view.

in reality we see projections, we see pre-judging a race or a horse by their ability or class. we see variants made by the evaluation of a horse, as opposed to the track.
All this, and these guys do a great job with the figures and produce a great resource for horseplayers. It's hard to make good figures and these guys do it.

Why does he lose five lengths automatically simply because of his post? Does running style matter? Does Giacomo lose the same amount as Big Brown?

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Like Mint Lane on Saturday.

Anybody who saw his Tesio knew he ran a huge race there. I don't care what the figure came up on that race (86). [I didn't have a cent on him or the winner on Saturday, however.]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I agree, but I'm glad, because it isn't all that tough to capitalize on it. Sometimes I'm wrong and the Beyer guy is right, but the public is betting the Beyer, so when I'm right I see it on the tote.

Agree on this, and one of the things I've noticed is horses who ran a good race in allowance company stepping up to stakes ranks often don't fit on Beyers despite being legitimate threats to win, and I think part of it is the self-fulfilling prophecy the Beyers have become (i.e., assigning a figure based on what it "should" be classwise).