• 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

Going allowances

AustinDillon75

AustinDillon75

Colt
I've been experimenting with going allowances, with the theory that an allowance could change as the day's racing progresses and equally, that some races will be more instructive than others. So the experiment is at this point so far.

Firstly, I am looking at each race's winning speed and comparing to what it would have been expected to achieve. The first example is from Ascot, on 11 May 2018.

1656683896525.png

So, Sam Missile ran 7lb below what would have been expected, Shades of Blue 1lb above, but the rest of the runners were somewhat slower on my figures.

I've plotted a linear graph of these (races 1-6, numbers -7,1,-21,-12,-24,-23) and it produces an RSQ of 0.61, which offers an unproven argument that the ground did get worse as the meeting went on, but also wouldn't dismiss the possibility of tactical affairs either.

So when I've determined the slope and intercept for races 1-6, it gives this line reflecting worsening going (though officially, it was good to firm throughout)

1656683923396.png
So we can now see that there would be a 4lb disadvantage for Sam Missile and a 25lb disadvantage for Corrosive, who won the final race of the meeting.

What I have then done is taken the 0.61 RSQ and multiplied that by the right hand column, and then 1-RSQ (0.39) is used on the race itself, which gives the following:

1656683997721.png
So Sam Missile has a going allowance in his race of (-7 X 0.39) + (-4 X 0.61) = -5 when rounded. This means that we have factored in the way the race was run in addition to the ground conditions experienced. I am allowing a maximum RSQ of 0.85 and a minimum of 0.15 in all cases. The higher the RSQ, the more weight is given to the ground, the lower the RSQ, the more weight is given to the actual individual races themselves.

This amounts ultimately to theory but may be of interest for those wanting to continue their development of speed figures.
My standard times for Ascot, against which the above were determined.

1656683659823.png

and finally here are my ratings of the winning horses that day with the allowances alongside.

1656684101170.png
 

Attachments

  • 1656682725700.png
    1656682725700.png
    9.3 KB · Views: 1
  • 1656683081166.png
    1656683081166.png
    10.7 KB · Views: 2
  • 1656682948813.png
    1656682948813.png
    10.1 KB · Views: 5
As a little bonus for you lucky lot, my best 100 Ascot runs since 2018 as well. See Trueshan popping in a 126 on October, that would have suggested to me that the 120 rating he had for the Northumberland Plate was frankly a bit of a gift.

1656684560546.png
 
Hi AustinDillon75 AustinDillon75 i have Dramatised as my fastest 2yo at Ascot and is top of my 2yo speed figures so far this season. interestingly does not even make your list here, and Mediate does not even make it in my top 40. This demonstrates how subjective compiling speed figures is :)

Good piece of work mate (y)
 
4mandu 4mandu since I posted those figures I've done some further work which deals with the variance of going over distance as well as the meeting progression. If I posted an example, it will seriously be eye-watering but my review now gives Dramatised a figure of 106. I will repost the full 2yos as my changes may have affected one or two other horses.
 
AustinDillon75 said:
4mandu 4mandu since I posted those figures I've done some further work which deals with the variance of going over distance as well as the meeting progression. If I posted an example, it will seriously be eye-watering but my review now gives Dramatised a figure of 106. I will repost the full 2yos as my changes may have affected one or two other horses.
Click to expand...
be interesting to see once you have finished (y)
 
This is the whole problem with speed figures, use the same going allowance for every race and no doubt some of the races will be on different going or parts of the course will be softer than others, even in a straight race the going can obviously be quicker on one side than another so you end up with any horses inconvenienced by slower ground in any part of their contest underrated, so does each race or even each horse warrant its own personal going allowance….probably …but if you do this you end up with form ratings not speed ratings because you will just be adjusting everything to the expected form rating. I don’t know the answer just saying so many moving parts and variables that if you go down this route the line between producing speed and form ratings gets more clouded.
Recent meeting at Sha Tin I don’t think any horse on the entire card had an equal set of circumstances to enable any of them to be compared by their finishing times, rained all day different sections of course explored etc.
Really there comes a point sometimes on some days where a random number generator would be no less sensible a measure than the times.
 
O Outlander completely agree you can get form and speed conflated and my ratings are probably more the former. I can quite easily just stick with form figures and go for a more pure speed number alongside.

I could just take the view that the 15th percentile horse on the day compared to rating was the benchmark, and soon enough, there'll be winning horses with a speed rating of 4 that are clearly far superior to horses who achieve three figures due to tactics and standard of beaten rivals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top