Excellent article on declining Beyer's of 3yo's

[Mike]

http://www.drf.com/news/jerardi-kent...eyers-are-wane

[Riot]

Interesting thoughts. Thanks for the link.

[The Bid]

I don't see how somebody's subjective figure is relevant to the breed as a whole. This article is as crazy as Jon Whites

[tiggerv]

"By the way, did anybody notice that, as the horses went into the gate, Union Rags was 9-2 and Bodemeister 5-1? When they crossed the wire, Bodemeister was 4-1 and Union Rags 5-1. It was a $1 million swing in the win pool from a horse that broke terribly to a horse that cleared the field."

That's the most interesting part of the article to me. I am tired of seeing this even if there are innocent explanations for it. There is no reason for these fishy odds changes with all of the technology available today to move data.

[The Bid]

If we can send a man to the moon we can certainly figure out to have the odds set once the gate is popped. Its ridiculous

[Danzig]

close the windows sooner. that's the only way to make sure the final odds are correct so that they don't change during the running of the race.

[Cannon Shell]

This article is a great look into the industry and why it continually struggles with seemingly everything. You have guys who make numbers for a living (educated opinions really) asking for reasons why the numbers that they create (hardly exact) have inched down in one single race run 365 days apart by an entire new set of horses each year, all making their intitial start at the distance and many over the surface (in other words a lot of projecting here). Not that there is anything wrong with this on the face of it but the unfortunate side effect is that far too many people will misinterpret the "trend" and use this "evidence" to "prove" that some thing "needs to be done".

I am not even suggesting that the numbers made arent "correct" but of course of those who earned them the last few years in question Super Saver never raced again and Animal Kingdom and Mine That Bird never won a significant race again. However you can expect this articles "revelations" to be used in a twisted context in a hearing of some sort soon enough. Of course the real news that there were odds changes going on during the race despite a huge pool wont be talked about at all.

Sorry for the rant but FAR too many decisions are being made in the business (and have been for a long time) based on peoples opinions (or peoples opinions of peoples opinions) as opposed to pertinent data analyzed in an objective fashion.

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

This article is a great look into the industry and why it continually struggles with seemingly everything. You have guys who make numbers for a living (educated opinions really) asking for reasons why the numbers that they create (hardly exact) have inched down in one single race run 365 days apart by an entire new set of horses each year, all making their intitial start at the distance and many over the surface (in other words a lot of projecting here). Not that there is anything wrong with this on the face of it but the unfortunate side effect is that far too many people will misinterpret the "trend" and use this "evidence" to "prove" that some thing "needs to be done".

I am not even suggesting that the numbers made arent "correct" but of course of those who earned them the last few years in question Super Saver never raced again and Animal Kingdom and Mine That Bird never won a significant race again. However you can expect this articles "revelations" to be used in a twisted context in a hearing of some sort soon enough. Of course the real news that there were odds changes going on during the race despite a huge pool wont be talked about at all.

Sorry for the rant but FAR too many decisions are being made in the business (and have been for a long time) based on peoples opinions (or peoples opinions of peoples opinions) as opposed to pertinent data analyzed in an objective fashion.

You hit the nail on the head. The time for the derby this year was faster than 27 of the last 40 runnings. I'd love to see anyone convince a jury of laymen that horses are getting slower because their "numbers" say so. The defense would simply point out countless occasions where the numbers were changed weeks after they were assigned and days when the final times of races were identical yet the numbers were not. Insanity.

[Ogygian]

I have had the "Declining Beyer" conversation with Doud a few times...I told him last year the days of the 120 Beyers are gone, and I believe only Quality Road hit that last year, with very few even making it over 115. Now I'm no expert, but could it be possible that the "lower level" horses are getting better or faster??? The same 10K claimer today might be a better quality horse then 15 years ago...
Here is my logic...I had asked Doug why QR didn't have a huge beyer the day of his 6.5 1:14 and change race at Saratoga...his response...because the claimers 3 races earlier went 1:09 (Those arent exacts but close enough)...I believe Beyer needs to update his formula...
I find it odd the the Beyer number keeps getting lower and lower each year...at this pace, I wouldn't be shocked if in a few years 110 is the highest and horses going into the Derby are lucky to hit 95's

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

You hit the nail on the head. The time for the derby this year was faster than 27 of the last 40 runnings. I'd love to see anyone convince a jury of laymen that horses are getting slower because their "numbers" say so. The defense would simply point out countless occasions where the numbers were changed weeks after they were assigned and days when the final times of races were identical yet the numbers were not. Insanity.

Raw final time has nothing to do with how fast a horse runs.

If it did -- $10,000 dirt claimers at Turf Paradise would be better horses than top Grade 1 males at Saratoga.

Raw final time is a laughably worthless indicator of anything because any race track can be made extremely fast or extremely slow, by any track super, on any given day.

A variant will find how fast or slow the track was VS par.

The brilliant Tizway won the 2011 Whitney over Flat Out in 1:52.43. Quality Road won the Woodward at Saratoga in 1:50.00 -- Curlin won it in 1:49.34 and Premium Tap won it 1:50.65 before running a close 3rd to Invasor and Bernardini in the BC Classic.

Tri Jet went 1:47 flat in the '74 Whitney going 9fs at Saratoga -- and he stumbled at the start and won with a last gasp lunge in a close finish.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Ogygian

I have had the "Declining Beyer" conversation with Doud a few times...I told him last year the days of the 120 Beyers are gone, and I believe only Quality Road hit that last year, with very few even making it over 115. Now I'm no expert, but could it be possible that the "lower level" horses are getting better or faster??? The same 10K claimer today might be a better quality horse then 15 years ago...
Here is my logic...I had asked Doug why QR didn't have a huge beyer the day of his 6.5 1:14 and change race at Saratoga...his response...because the claimers 3 races earlier went 1:09 (Those arent exacts but close enough)...I believe Beyer needs to update his formula...
I find it odd the the Beyer number keeps getting lower and lower each year...at this pace, I wouldn't be shocked if in a few years 110 is the highest and horses going into the Derby are lucky to hit 95's

I'm at a loss for time right now so I probably won't do as good a job as I'd like in explaining this but I think it's not that the lower level horses are getting better or faster but that the lower level races are being populated more with horses that are borderline stakes horses. Every year, the best horse are retired prematurely and what that's meant is that each year, the quality gets worse and worse. Look at 2007 for example. We had Curlin, Street Sense, Hard Spun, Rags to Riches, Any Given Saturday, and Nobiz Like Shobiz from the 3yo crop. The next year, Curlin was the only one still in training. In the absence of the other top horses, somebody had to step in and fill in the spots as the top horses in the big races. Grade two and three horses became grade one horses. High level allowance horses became grade two and three horses, even the occasional grade one winner. Everyone moves up a couple of levels. There is no longer a huge difference between graded stakes caliber horses and the lower levels therefore, it makes it harder to stand out in performance.

Another thing that I think plays a part in the lower figures is the trend to have these "Super" cards where you have five or six stakes races on the same day. On a day when the big race is the only stake on the card, it's much easier for the winners to stand out from the rest of the card but when there are so many stakes, there is not the same separation.

[Calzone Lord]

Here are the Beyer pars for class levels at Belmont Park in 2006.

http://www1.drf.com/misc/drf_simo/tour/beyer_pars2.pdf


In less than six years time -- the pars have become slower at every single class level by 3-to-5 points on dirt and 1-to-3 points on turf.

Go back ten years -- and it's 4-to-6 points on dirt for virtually every class level.

Basically - a 100 Beyer today is worth a 104 six years ago - and a 105 ten years ago.

Thoro-Graph had a reverse of the same problem....instead of a shrinking scale -- they had a runaway scale.

However, in both instances, the pars have always stayed consistent on each version of speed figure.

Using todays pars, Secretariat would have been a low to mid 120's Beyer horse at absolute peak...and he still would be just about the fastest 3yo in history.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

asking for reasons why the numbers that they create (hardly exact) have inched down in one single race run 365 days apart by an entire new set of horses each year.

You would be pretty surprised how exact they are in the vast majority of situations.

It's only fair to label them "hardly exact" in situations like this years Wood Memorial day and Fountain of Youth day when only a single two-turn dirt route is carded all day. The route figures are tough to make and trust when that happens.

Or obviously on days when the weather isn't consistent throughout the card, or the track super decides to play around with the track a lot in between races, or when a timing problem occurs. The Beyers and Sheet style figures also can produce some hardly exact numbers on tougher variant days when an extreme pace further messes with the variant.

However, the figures will be brutally exact if the conditions for making figures aren't difficult and tricky.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

You would be pretty surprised how exact they are in the vast majority of situations.

It's only fair to label them "hardly exact" in situations like this years Wood Memorial day and Fountain of Youth day when only a single two-turn dirt route is carded all day. The route figures are tough to make and trust when that happens.

Or obviously on days when the weather isn't consistent throughout the card, or the track super decides to play around with the track a lot in between races, or when a timing problem occurs. The Beyers and Sheet style figures also can produce some hardly exact numbers on tougher variant days when an extreme pace further messes with the variant.

However, the figures will be brutally exact if the conditions for making figures aren't difficult and tricky.

They arent exact

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

They arent exact

Assuming fair conditions for figure making -- How far do you assume they're generally off by... a neck, a half length, a full length?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Assuming fair conditions for figure making -- How far do you assume they're generally off by... a neck, a half length, a full length?

Figures arent exact. Hell the actual times of the races aren't exact all the time.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Figures arent exact. Hell the actual times of the races aren't exact all the time.

I will take that answer as an "I don't know and neither do you" ... which is fine...and not untrue.

I'm telling you though ... if you have consistent weather conditions, accurate clockings, a race track that isn't being fooled around with a lot throughout the day, and a reasonable sampling of both sprint and route races to work with ... you will have a figure that is very, very exact. IMO, always within a length or less of reality.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

I will take that answer as an "I don't know and neither do you" ... which is fine...and not untrue.

I'm telling you though ... if you have consistent weather conditions, accurate clockings, a race track that isn't being fooled around with a lot throughout the day, and a reasonable sampling of both sprint and route races to work with ... you will have a figure that is very, very exact. IMO, always within a length or less of reality.

So you are telling me that a beyer figure is generally exact within a length despite having no regard for pace, trip, in most cases weather changes like wind, harrowing of the track, etc? My question is how do you know if the figure is correct? Based on what evidence? It is all just an educated guessing game and when the numbers are 108 versus 105 I'm pretty sure that they fall within an acceptable margin of error.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So you are telling me that a beyer figure is generally exact within a length despite having no regard for pace, trip, in most cases weather changes like wind, harrowing of the track, etc? My question is how do you know if the figure is correct? Based on what evidence? It is all just an educated guessing game and when the numbers are 108 versus 105 I'm pretty sure that they fall within an acceptable margin of error.

No. You're bringing wind, pace, and trip into this and those are things that you know they don't account for.

If you took 5 competent figure makers -- and had them make a Beyer on a typical day when you have consistent weather conditions, accurate clockings, a race track that isn't being fooled around with a lot throughout the day, and a reasonable sampling of both sprint and route races to work with.

I would bet that virtually every single time -- all 5 figure makers would have every single horse to run that day on the card -- within no more than 2-to-3 points of each other.

[cmorioles]

Speed figures, or any performance figure that might measure all the variables CS mentions, will never be exact. However, they will beat any other performance related factor when it comes to picking winners. They have for years, and they will continue to do so for years to come.