• Hi Guest, The forum will be moving hosts on 26 July and as such will be closed from Midday until the move has completed.
    As we will be with new hosts it may take a while before DNS get updated so it could take while before you can get back on the forum.
    I think it will take at least 4 hours but could easily be 48!
    Ark Royal
  • There seems to be a problem with some alerts not being emailed to members. I have told the hosts and they are investigating.
  • Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a 20% discount on Inform Racing.
    Simply enter the coupon code ukbettingform when subscribing here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Inform Racing so help is always available if needed.
    Best Wishes
    AR
  • Sorry for the ongoing issues that you may have been experiencing whilst using the forum lately

    It really is frustrating when the forum slows down or Server Error 500 pops up.

    Apparently the hosts acknowledge there is a problem.
    Thank you for using our services and sorry for the experienced delay!
    Unfortunately, these errors are due to a higher server load. Our senior department knows about the issue and they are working towards a permanent resolution of the issue, however, I'd advise you to consider using our new cPanel cloud solutions: https://www.tsohost.com/web-hosting


    I will have to investigate what the differences are with what We have know compared to the alternative service they want us to migrate to.
    Keep safe.
    AR
  • Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a free 7 day trial of Horseracebase here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Horseracebase so help is always available if needed, as well as dedicated section of the fourm here.
    Best Wishes
    AR

Compiling Speed figures.

Rail movement. I am right ?
Longchamp today rail movement impact on the distance :
12 in the courses - 26 in the straight =
(12*3,14)/2 + (26*3,14) / 2 =
18,84 + 40,82 = 59,66 m
Or
(12+26)/2*3,14 = 59,66 m
 

tomowenevans

Yearling
As you know just adding 17lbs to my speed figures gives me the handicap it ran to, this is achievable due to the constants I use.

Mike.

TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother Hi Mike, hope you are well and thanks for this great thread.

Do you add 17lbs in all races to get yourself a handicap rating? I was wondering how you got a handicap rating alongside the speed rating.

Sorry if you’ve already mentioned this in the thread. I’ve tried my best to read through it all.

Thanks,

Tom
 
Hi folks, I'm new to this thread and have a question. In the original post by TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother, he mentions 3.37lbs per length at a 5f trip at Curragh. How was this figure reached?
I just came across your post, sorry about the delay I can't recall being notified.

The pounds per length I use are calculated from the standard times from any course or distance, every time the standard time changes so do the lbs per length.

The 5f standard time for the Curragh is now 58.10s, divide the seconds into a constant of 200 (200/58.10s =3.44 lbs per length)

Curragh.PNG

Mike.
 
Last edited:
Do you add 17lbs in all races to get yourself a handicap rating?
The formula I use on the flat for obtaining handicap ratings for all race distances works out at 16.66 (17.0lbs ) just add 17.0lbs to my speed figures to obtain a handicap rating, for the jumps add 28lbs.

On Saturday at Lingfield, Valentinka produced her best speed figure of 63 running off an official mark of 64 which produced a handicap rating of 80 (+16), any horse that runs 10lb above OR is of interest in the future, all these figures are calculated taking into account rail movements and going allowances etc.

Lingfield.png


The above links are updated daily.

Mike.
 
Last edited:

tomowenevans

Yearling
The formula I use on the flat for obtaining handicap ratings for all race distances works out at 16.66 (17.0lbs ) just add 17.0lbs to my speed figures to obtain a handicap rating, for the jumps add 28lbs.

On Saturday at Lingfield, Valentinka produced her best speed figure of 63 running off an official mark of 64 which produced a handicap rating of 80 (+16), any horse that runs 10lb above OR is of interest in the future, all these figures are calculated taking into account rail movements and going allowances etc.

View attachment 108192


The above links are updated daily.

Mike.
Thank you very much, really appreciate it!

Can I ask you why you use 17lbs and 28lbs and how you get to those figures?

Thanks again,
Tom
TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother
 
Can I ask you why you use 17lbs and 28lbs and how you get to those figures?

My method of compiling speed figures is unique to me, the only other person on this forum who has any idea of the work that goes into them and what I do is forum member davejb davejb who has his own "Early Days" blog.

There are so many factors involved, such as standard times, going allowances, rail movements, and the different scales I work to when calculating the flat and jumps speed figures, for example, I use a base rate of 9-0 (100) and 11-0 (130) for the jumps.

It took me 10+ years to arrive at the method I now use, putting together different tools which I use especially when I hit problems with the fictitious Irish racing distances which pop up on a regular basis.

It took me several years just to get my head around going allowances for example which is the most important factor when compiling speed figures, you can have the best standard times available, without the ability to understand how the racing surface is speeding up or slowing down the runners you will be pounds out on your calculations.

The 17lb and 28lb adjustments I use are just part of the methods I work to, most of the professional speed figure compilers wouldn't be able to replicate what I do let alone understand them.

My macro for yesterday's meeting, time compiling the speed figures and updating some standard times, took 3 hours.

141121.png

Here is an example of my Class totals and linear pars sheet which I would use for Irish racing when and if required, both tools were calculated using the statistics program SPSS.

Mike.
 

Attachments

  • ClassTotals.xlsx
    13.8 KB · Views: 12
  • LinearPars.xls
    43.5 KB · Views: 11
My method of compiling speed figures is unique to me, the only other person on this forum who has any idea of the work that goes into them and what I do is forum member davejb davejb who has his own "Early Days" blog.

There are so many factors involved, such as standard times, going allowances, rail movements, and the different scales I work to when calculating the flat and jumps speed figures, for example, I use a base rate of 9-0 (100) and 11-0 (130) for the jumps.

It took me 10+ years to arrive at the method I now use, putting together different tools which I use especially when I hit problems with the fictitious Irish racing distances which pop up on a regular basis.

It took me several years just to get my head around going allowances for example which is the most important factor when compiling speed figures, you can have the best standard times available, without the ability to understand how the racing surface is speeding up or slowing down the runners you will be pounds out on your calculations.

The 17lb and 28lb adjustments I use are just part of the methods I work to, most of the professional speed figure compilers wouldn't be able to replicate what I do let alone understand them.

My macro for yesterday's meeting, time compiling the speed figures and updating some standard times, took 3 hours.

View attachment 108203

Here is an example of my Class totals and linear pars sheet which I would use for Irish racing when and if required, both tools were calculated using the statistics program SPSS.

Mike.
I agree many factors to be IN the game :
Standard times
Going Allowance
Real distances
If you get that you have the power
 

davejb

Stallion
Just to jump in with an observation on the 17/28 figures that might help explain it a little, Mike TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother has obviously spent an inordinate amount of time working out each part of what he does now. It's easy, when starting out, to assume that the job can't be beyond human wit to handle, after all we are looking to calculate how fast a horse has run, we thing it's simply a case of speed = distance/time, it's only when we try to run with the idea and produce something that we hit problems - for example:

Okay, I calculate the speed of the winner, but how do I calculate speeds for all the other runners... how fast was the guy who finished 16l behind in 7th?

How do I compensate for, or calculate the effect that the varying weights carried might have had?

I have standard times, but we all know they run faster on firmer ground and slower on softer, how much do I have add or subtract to compensate for this?

Is there a reason most handicappers rate the runners in pounds?

As each of these, and many other issues. is dealt with there's often a long period of trial and error - because horses do not run like clockwork every time, so when A beats B by 2l and you decide that equates to A being 5lb better (for arguments sake) than B, the next time they meet B beats A despite being 3lb worse off.... how does that affect your calculations? (Short answer - like a grenade going off). Gradually a calculation is produced that seems to produce the best results over time - you know that your 'x lbs per length beaten' figure isn't perfect, but it's shown itself to be the best value to use compared to any other.

Then when you've tied enough ideas, estimates, and occasionally inspired guesses together you get a method that works as well as you seem able to manage, and if it picks winners often enough you realise that is as good as it is likely to ever get, because the fastest horse often doesn't win the race, you are actually picking the one that has the best chance of taking advantage of a good position and good ride - provided it didn't fall three fences back.

In other words, he tried lots of figures in the attempt to get his ratings to line up well enough with the official handicap ratings so that he could use his ratings to spot when the BHA handicapper had been too lenient or harsh and provided an opportunity to profit, and 17 and 28 are the figures that did the best job overall.



Dave
 

tomowenevans

Yearling
My method of compiling speed figures is unique to me, the only other person on this forum who has any idea of the work that goes into them and what I do is forum member davejb davejb who has his own "Early Days" blog.

There are so many factors involved, such as standard times, going allowances, rail movements, and the different scales I work to when calculating the flat and jumps speed figures, for example, I use a base rate of 9-0 (100) and 11-0 (130) for the jumps.

It took me 10+ years to arrive at the method I now use, putting together different tools which I use especially when I hit problems with the fictitious Irish racing distances which pop up on a regular basis.

It took me several years just to get my head around going allowances for example which is the most important factor when compiling speed figures, you can have the best standard times available, without the ability to understand how the racing surface is speeding up or slowing down the runners you will be pounds out on your calculations.

The 17lb and 28lb adjustments I use are just part of the methods I work to, most of the professional speed figure compilers wouldn't be able to replicate what I do let alone understand them.

My macro for yesterday's meeting, time compiling the speed figures and updating some standard times, took 3 hours.

View attachment 108203

Here is an example of my Class totals and linear pars sheet which I would use for Irish racing when and if required, both tools were calculated using the statistics program SPSS.

Mike.

Hi again mate TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother and again, thanks for your reply.

I understand all the aspects of compiling the speed figures but at the moment just using the RP standard times and going corrections which as I've seen on here, nobody seems to rate. (They have Cheltenham yesterday at -0.25 where you have it at 0.30). Have you got a set of updated standard times and how do you work out your going correction?

The only question I had prior to that was how you get to a handicap rating from the speed rating which you answered so thanks for that.
 

tomowenevans

Yearling
Just to jump in with an observation on the 17/28 figures that might help explain it a little, Mike TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother has obviously spent an inordinate amount of time working out each part of what he does now. It's easy, when starting out, to assume that the job can't be beyond human wit to handle, after all we are looking to calculate how fast a horse has run, we thing it's simply a case of speed = distance/time, it's only when we try to run with the idea and produce something that we hit problems - for example:

Okay, I calculate the speed of the winner, but how do I calculate speeds for all the other runners... how fast was the guy who finished 16l behind in 7th?

How do I compensate for, or calculate the effect that the varying weights carried might have had?

I have standard times, but we all know they run faster on firmer ground and slower on softer, how much do I have add or subtract to compensate for this?

Is there a reason most handicappers rate the runners in pounds?

As each of these, and many other issues. is dealt with there's often a long period of trial and error - because horses do not run like clockwork every time, so when A beats B by 2l and you decide that equates to A being 5lb better (for arguments sake) than B, the next time they meet B beats A despite being 3lb worse off.... how does that affect your calculations? (Short answer - like a grenade going off). Gradually a calculation is produced that seems to produce the best results over time - you know that your 'x lbs per length beaten' figure isn't perfect, but it's shown itself to be the best value to use compared to any other.

Then when you've tied enough ideas, estimates, and occasionally inspired guesses together you get a method that works as well as you seem able to manage, and if it picks winners often enough you realise that is as good as it is likely to ever get, because the fastest horse often doesn't win the race, you are actually picking the one that has the best chance of taking advantage of a good position and good ride - provided it didn't fall three fences back.

In other words, he tried lots of figures in the attempt to get his ratings to line up well enough with the official handicap ratings so that he could use his ratings to spot when the BHA handicapper had been too lenient or harsh and provided an opportunity to profit, and 17 and 28 are the figures that did the best job overall.



Dave
Hi davejb davejb ,

Thanks also for the reply and trying to make me understand it all better, its really appreciated.

At the moment I've just been using the RP ratings section after calculating the lbs per length and the winning speed rating to calculate all the runners in behind.

The one thing I seem to be off with at the moment is the standard times and going corrections which I've been using RP for but it doesn't sound as if they are that great.

Thanks again mate,

Tom
 
Have you got a set of updated standard times and how do you work out your going correction?
You have to understand going allowances, it took me years to get my head about it, regarding Top Speed's going correction of -0.25s/f which would make the going on the slow side of good says it all, anybody who understands form knows that the going at Cheltenham was on the fast side of good, hence I had +0.30s/f.

If the RPR has a big figure for any horse, Top Speed speed figures are expected to follow suit, the only way to achieve this is by a going correction adjustment, hence the -0.25s/f.

Dave Edwards didn't take any notice of me when I started to implement rail movement adjustments back in 2015 when they first started publishing them on the BHA website and he still doesn't do it now, for example, at Fakenham due to rail movements the distance has increased by +253yds I would make a time adjustment of 17.07s, this has a major effect on your going allowance calculations.

The only way to learn about going allowances is learning the subject of compiling speed figures it's a long and rocky road, you would have to work with me for a month to learn what I do, there are no shortcuts.

I have a Rar file that has every meeting I work on since 2019 which I update every day.

Here is the link to standard times I am currently using which is updated most days, I note of warning I will not answer any questions on them as life is too short.


Mike.
 

tomowenevans

Yearling
You have to understand going allowances, it took me years to get my head about it, regarding Top Speed's going correction of -0.25s/f which would make the going on the slow side of good says it all, anybody who understands form knows that the going at Cheltenham was on the fast side of good, hence I had +0.30s/f.

If the RPR has a big figure for any horse, Top Speed speed figures are expected to follow suit, the only way to achieve this is by a going correction adjustment, hence the -0.25s/f.

Dave Edwards didn't take any notice of me when I started to implement rail movement adjustments back in 2015 when they first started publishing them on the BHA website and he still doesn't do it now, for example, at Fakenham due to rail movements the distance has increased by +253yds I would make a time adjustment of 17.07s, this has a major effect on your going allowance calculations.

The only way to learn about going allowances is learning the subject of compiling speed figures it's a long and rocky road, you would have to work with me for a month to learn what I do, there are no shortcuts.

I have a Rar file that has every meeting I work on since 2019 which I update every day.

Here is the link to standard times I am currently using which is updated most days, I note of warning I will not answer any questions on them as life is too short.


Mike.
I understand now, so RP use the going correction as something to almost bridge the gap in order for the RPR and TS figures to correlate.

I'd be more than happy to try and get my head around going allowances properly if you'd be willing to do so. Ofcourse, I understand if that's something that you'd rather not be doing.

Is there another way that I can message you so that I'm not clogging up this thread?

Thanks again,

Tom
 
You have to understand going allowances, it took me years to get my head about it, regarding Top Speed's going correction of -0.25s/f which would make the going on the slow side of good says it all, anybody who understands form knows that the going at Cheltenham was on the fast side of good, hence I had +0.30s/f.

If the RPR has a big figure for any horse, Top Speed speed figures are expected to follow suit, the only way to achieve this is by a going correction adjustment, hence the -0.25s/f.

Dave Edwards didn't take any notice of me when I started to implement rail movement adjustments back in 2015 when they first started publishing them on the BHA website and he still doesn't do it now, for example, at Fakenham due to rail movements the distance has increased by +253yds I would make a time adjustment of 17.07s, this has a major effect on your going allowance calculations.

The only way to learn about going allowances is learning the subject of compiling speed figures it's a long and rocky road, you would have to work with me for a month to learn what I do, there are no shortcuts.

I have a Rar file that has every meeting I work on since 2019 which I update every day.

Here is the link to standard times I am currently using which is updated most days, I note of warning I will not answer any questions on them as life is too short.


Mike.
Thank you Mike for the Standard Times, Very much appreciated.
 

tomowenevans

Yearling
I understand now, so RP use the going correction as something to almost bridge the gap in order for the RPR and TS figures to correlate.

I'd be more than happy to try and get my head around going allowances properly if you'd be willing to do so. Ofcourse, I understand if that's something that you'd rather not be doing.

Is there another way that I can message you so that I'm not clogging up this thread?

Thanks again,

Tom
Sorry Mike TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother , forgot to tag you in. My bad!
 
Is there another way that I can message you so that I'm not clogging up this thread?
You wouldn't clog up this thread, this forum is about open discussions, I just recently spent time helping out a couple of posters, who suddenly stopped posting on here, so I rather not get involved.

By the way, you can correct any post you make using the edit button.

Mike.
 

tomowenevans

Yearling
You wouldn't clog up this thread, this forum is about open discussions, I just recently spent time helping out a couple of posters, who suddenly stopped posting on here, so I rather not get involved.

By the way, you can correct any post you make using the edit button.

Mike.
TheBluesBrother TheBluesBrother Is that you saying then saying that because of that you don't want to help me out? No problem at all if that's the case as I can understand that's very frustrating for you, just trying to understand if that's what you meant by that message.

Sorry about that, new to this so still getting to grips with it!
 
Top