TheBluesBrother my data only goes back to 2017 but I have yesterdays meeting at 0.31 s/f slow (Standard To Slow)This is the slowest going allowance I have recorded for Dundalk on my scale, previous slowest 0.28 slow 6/4/18
Compiling Speed figures.
- Thread starter TheBluesBrother
- Start date
TheBluesBrother my data only goes back to 2017 but I have yesterdays meeting at 0.31 s/f slow (Standard To Slow)This is the slowest going allowance I have recorded for Dundalk on my scale, previous slowest 0.28 slow 6/4/18
I read an interesting article in the Betfair community round 2012 I think and they were discussing speed figures and sugggesting that the AW tracks over 5 and 6 are probably the best for results as these mirror the American tracks. I came across this article recently and it inspired me a little. As I use the Beyer methodology I though I would give it a go and yesterday in a class 6 handicap that I would normally bypass, ROUNDABOUT MAGIC was top on the figures. It flew in the final furlong and should win again. Good price too as I managed to get 7/2 returned at 10/3. It is interesting to see the points per length (5 lengths per second) at the AW tracks as for 5f they are 3.4 except Lingfield which is 3.5 and 6f are 2.8 and Lingfield 2.9. Of course these are calculated from the RP standards so who knows !!! But as there is little deviation in the tracks I can understand that there should be a little more consistency as opposed to comparing Ayr and Newmarket and although the standard time standardise the final times, the actual course Configuration has to be subjective in judging whether your selection can act on it. Horses for courses. Never a truer word.
TheBluesBrother
Dam
B
Bertie123
With our different AW course configurations and racing surfaces, trying to compare our racecourses against the North American racecourses is not really an option, the majority of their racecourses our flat and uniformed and they race totally on a dirt surface, Lingfield AW and Newcastle AW for a start are totally different to each other.
When I first started to compile speed figures the first problem I needed to solve was the lbs per length for each racecourse and distance due to the different course configurations.
To bring every racecourse configuration into line with each other, take the standard time you use for each distance in (seconds) and divide it into the constant 200, so you have...
Lingfield AW polytrack 5f (57.10s) = 3.50 lbs per length
Newcastle AW tapeta 5f (57.45s) = 3.48 lbs per length
On the turf you have extreme examples...
Epsom 5f (55.0s) = 3.64 lbs per length
Pontefract 5f3y (61.50s) = 3.25 lbs per length
Note the difference between Epsom 5f and Pontefract 5f3yds is approx 1.95 lengths.
The RP will use the same lbs per length figures for the same distances at every racecourse, do you not think that this a major faux pas?
Standard Times: StandardTimes.xls
Mike.
With our different AW course configurations and racing surfaces, trying to compare our racecourses against the North American racecourses is not really an option, the majority of their racecourses our flat and uniformed and they race totally on a dirt surface, Lingfield AW and Newcastle AW for a start are totally different to each other.
When I first started to compile speed figures the first problem I needed to solve was the lbs per length for each racecourse and distance due to the different course configurations.
To bring every racecourse configuration into line with each other, take the standard time you use for each distance in (seconds) and divide it into the constant 200, so you have...
Lingfield AW polytrack 5f (57.10s) = 3.50 lbs per length
Newcastle AW tapeta 5f (57.45s) = 3.48 lbs per length
On the turf you have extreme examples...
Epsom 5f (55.0s) = 3.64 lbs per length
Pontefract 5f3y (61.50s) = 3.25 lbs per length
Note the difference between Epsom 5f and Pontefract 5f3yds is approx 1.95 lengths.
The RP will use the same lbs per length figures for the same distances at every racecourse, do you not think that this a major faux pas?
Standard Times: StandardTimes.xls
Mike.
Last edited:
Yes it is Mike. Thank you for your explanation and examples
davejb
Dam
The question is more of 'does speed rating methodology developed for the US tracks operate as well (?) when applied to UK tracks?' An AW track is an AW track, yes they have different types of surface over here, which can be a complication, and they aren't identical in layout, so v the US article we are faced with a more complicated picture.... a horse that only seems to do his best at track A and is usually well below par if at track B might have a genuine preference based on surface type or track configuration - would there be any apparent difference to interpret should the same horse run at two different US tracks?
I've read and attempted, for a while, to use Brohammer to rate in the UK, and to be honest I simply spend too much time doing other stuff to spend the necessary time on an extra path.... this is meant to be a hobby for me in retirement after all! I think Brohammer is rather easier to apply in the US than it is here, but I think it could work, although I'm not at all sure I'd end up picking different horses compared to the ones my ratings currently produce.
Dave
I've read and attempted, for a while, to use Brohammer to rate in the UK, and to be honest I simply spend too much time doing other stuff to spend the necessary time on an extra path.... this is meant to be a hobby for me in retirement after all! I think Brohammer is rather easier to apply in the US than it is here, but I think it could work, although I'm not at all sure I'd end up picking different horses compared to the ones my ratings currently produce.
Dave
I too have read the Beyer books and use his method of calculating the points per length @ 5 lengths per second, for weight free ratings. I use a par of 100 and the RP standards but only use the AW tracks apart from Southwell, and don’t adjust for any weight carried. I try and keep it as simple as possible
Over 5 and 6 furlongs I find the ratings are fairly consistent and although the surfaces might be said to be different, its not much as you can see in the points per length table below and won’t have a dramatic effect on the ratings.
Also horses in these sprints usually go at a fair pace unlike 7f and beyond where the Jockeys bide their time for a fast finish. The configuration of the courses are all circular and flat which makes once again for a little more consistency.
Having said all this their is still form study do but generally if a horse had run well or won on its last race fairly recently it should be fit enough to run to a reasonable or better figure in this current race. As far as class is concerned I think that as these figures are weight free the highest figures will be from the better class horses or a rapidly improving young horse, but whichever at sprint trips it’s unlikely you will find a poor figure from a good horse. Unlikely but not unknown, just to cover myself there!
Over 5 and 6 furlongs I find the ratings are fairly consistent and although the surfaces might be said to be different, its not much as you can see in the points per length table below and won’t have a dramatic effect on the ratings.
Also horses in these sprints usually go at a fair pace unlike 7f and beyond where the Jockeys bide their time for a fast finish. The configuration of the courses are all circular and flat which makes once again for a little more consistency.
Having said all this their is still form study do but generally if a horse had run well or won on its last race fairly recently it should be fit enough to run to a reasonable or better figure in this current race. As far as class is concerned I think that as these figures are weight free the highest figures will be from the better class horses or a rapidly improving young horse, but whichever at sprint trips it’s unlikely you will find a poor figure from a good horse. Unlikely but not unknown, just to cover myself there!
davejb
Dam
If you are VERY interested in speed ratings, and think that learning how somebody else (Tom Brohamer) does it by ploughing diligently through 224 pages of instructions, followed by quite a lot of calculations, then go ahead 
I bought the book off Amazon as a Kindle e-book, it was about £20.
There's no quick way to learn it all of course, you get through the chapters on how to calculate the figures and find this is just the basic legwork before you have to look at a bunch of other things - as is usual with any significant idea, you can pick up the basics relatively quickly (compared say to continental drift rates) but spend rather a lot of time playing with all the bits trying to make them turn a profit.
Dave
I bought the book off Amazon as a Kindle e-book, it was about £20.There's no quick way to learn it all of course, you get through the chapters on how to calculate the figures and find this is just the basic legwork before you have to look at a bunch of other things - as is usual with any significant idea, you can pick up the basics relatively quickly (compared say to continental drift rates) but spend rather a lot of time playing with all the bits trying to make them turn a profit.
Dave
With speed ratings is the purpose to establish a horses ability based on how fast he can run per furlong or the full 5f, 6f etc, I don't know the answer but i do know that sectionals throw up some surprising results. When you look at the king stands stakes ascot 16th june you see very little between BATTAASH & EQUILATERAL............
BATTAASH .......13.77 / 10.89 / 10/64 / 11.20 / 12.14
EQUILATERAL..14.25 / 10.88 / 10.58 / 11.20 / 12.16
The numbers suggest the race was won at the start but yet when i watched the race live i thought BAT was an easy winner and much the better.
BATTAASH .......13.77 / 10.89 / 10/64 / 11.20 / 12.14
EQUILATERAL..14.25 / 10.88 / 10.58 / 11.20 / 12.16
The numbers suggest the race was won at the start but yet when i watched the race live i thought BAT was an easy winner and much the better.
That’s the beauty (Inconvenience) of racing you can‘t run races on paper or spreadsheets, Equilateral lost 3+ lengths on Battash in the first furlong and held that right to the finish line, what could have been if he had a better start say 13.77 like Battash then in theory would have been a photo between the pair, but the truth is if Equilateral had got out on terms in 13.77 he almost certainly would have been beaten further than he was and i reckon wouldn’t have placed in the race, he wouldn’t have been able to match Battash sectionals if he hadn’t conserved that energy in the first furlong. Battash is different class because he can maintain those sectionals after that exertion at the start(most of the time anyway)
davejb
Dam
Agreed completely. For me speed ratings show the capabilities of the horse - the best rating is a bit like seeing the 'max speed' figure for a car you are thinking about buying. Of course with horses the max speed will increase/decrease depending on all sorts of factors on the day, but if I know horse A does X mph and horse B does X+1 mph on their best days then - unless I have some info regarding the conditions suiting one more than the other - I work on the idea that horse B ought to beat A....
Dave
Dave
Not to get too caught up with this one particular race but EQUILATERAL was deliberately switched left and and held up so it wasn't a case that BATTAASH was so much quicker over the first furlong more a case of tactics, throw into the mix that EQUI pulled quite hard and therefore using up energy leads me to believe that they didn't get the best out of him . It is also likely that they didn't get the best out of BATTAASH on the day, we can never know for sure but if by understanding what the numbers are telling us alongside what we are seeing during the race can be said to be of real value then we must try and include them as a major part of assessing a race.
Disagree on this one given a peach of a ride , no other way could this horse have finished second, I think close to a peak performance
We will never know O Outlander but my main point is that the sectionals sometimes seem to be at odds with the visual, i'm certain battaash is a much better racehorse but the numbers are somewhat surprising to me at least.
Again just looking at the film BATTAASH appears to run in a straight line while EQUI switches left but if the're the facts then it must be the case.
Good graphics by the way
Chesham
TheBluesBrother
Dam
Some people might be aware that Southwell NH racecourse has new race distances, throw in yesterday's rail movements and you end up with a complete nightmare, if you take yesterday's rail movements as read the chase course times go completely out of sync to the hurdles races.
When it gets this bad I end up making my own adjustments as I see fit...
Mike.
When it gets this bad I end up making my own adjustments as I see fit...
Mike.
Cashelman
Filly
Here are my top 2 year old figures for the season to date wanted to see how they compared with others
| Campanelle (IRE) | 82 |
| Sacred | 79 |
| Mother Earth (IRE) | 78 |
| The Lir Jet (IRE) | 76 |
| Golden Pal (USA) | 76 |
| Tactical | 75 |
| Muker (IRE) | 74 |
| Master Of The Seas (IRE) | 74 |
| Fev Rover (IRE) | 73 |
| Dandalla (IRE) | 73 |
| Frenetic (IRE) | 72 |
| race_date | track | horse_name | horse_age | RCode | Furlongs | placing_numerical | GA | GOING | SPEED | CLASS |
20/06/2020 | Ascot | Campanelle (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 1 | 8 | GOOD | 112.84 | 116.42 |
20/06/2020 | Ascot | Sacred | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 2 | 8 | GOOD | 111.60 | 115.18 |
17/06/2020 | Ascot | Tactical | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 1 | 0 | GOOD | 110.61 | 115.64 |
19/06/2020 | Ascot | The Lir Jet (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 1 | 27 | GOOD TO SOFT | 109.54 | 113.42 |
19/06/2020 | Ascot | Golden Pal (USA) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 2 | 27 | GOOD TO SOFT | 109.29 | 113.18 |
11/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Master Of The Seas (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 7.00 | 1 | -9 | GOOD | 108.97 | 115.83 |
10/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Dandalla (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 6.00 | 1 | 8 | GOOD | 108.67 | 112.82 |
10/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Fev Rover (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 6.00 | 2 | 8 | GOOD | 108.56 | 112.70 |
17/06/2020 | Ascot | Yazaman (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 2 | 0 | GOOD | 108.53 | 113.56 |
04/06/2020 | Newmarket (Rowley) | Eye Of Heaven | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 1 | -19 | GOOD TO FIRM | 108.53 | 110.29 |
17/06/2020 | Ascot | Muker (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 3 | 0 | GOOD | 108.45 | 113.48 |
09/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Tactical | 2 | Flat | 6.00 | 1 | 15 | GOOD TO SOFT | 108.35 | 114.14 |
10/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Santosha (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 6.00 | 3 | 8 | GOOD | 107.83 | 111.98 |
10/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Time Scale | 2 | Flat | 6.00 | 4 | 8 | GOOD | 107.62 | 111.77 |
20/06/2020 | Ascot | Caroline Dale | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 3 | 8 | GOOD | 107.44 | 111.02 |
08/06/2020 | Naas | More Beautiful (USA) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 1 | -9 | GOOD | 107.35 | 113.99 |
04/06/2020 | Newmarket (Rowley) | Get It | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 2 | -19 | GOOD TO FIRM | 107.24 | 108.99 |
09/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Yazaman (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 6.00 | 2 | 15 | GOOD TO SOFT | 106.63 | 112.42 |
23/03/2020 | Naas | Poetic Flare (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 1 | 112 | HEAVY | 106.51 | 110.39 |
04/07/2020 | Naas | Mother Earth (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 6.00 | 1 | 41 | GOOD TO SOFT | 106.33 | 113.33 |
23/03/2020 | Naas | Lipizzaner (USA) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 2 | 112 | HEAVY | 105.74 | 109.61 |
11/07/2020 | Newmarket (July) | Devious Company (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 7.00 | 2 | -9 | GOOD | 105.39 | 112.25 |
20/06/2020 | Ascot | Sardinia Sunset (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 4 | 8 | GOOD | 105.36 | 108.95 |
20/06/2020 | Ascot | Happy Romance (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 5 | 8 | GOOD | 105.20 | 108.78 |
20/06/2020 | Ascot | Scarlet Bear (IRE) | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 6 | 8 | GOOD | 105.15 | 108.73 |
17/06/2020 | Ascot | Get It | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 4 | 0 | GOOD | 105.12 | 110.14 |
04/06/2020 | Newmarket (Rowley) | Tactical | 2 | Flat | 5.00 | 3 | -19 | GOOD TO FIRM | 105.08 | 106.84 |