• Hi Guest, The software has been updated but I have not had a chance to tweak anything yet.
    It took longer than I had hoped, so I just turned it on and hope everything is OK
    If you spot anything that does not look rigfhyt then please let me know.
    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, If you are seeing that Lurker has appeared under your name then please take a look here to see why. AR

Outlanders speed ratings

I spent a lot of time creating my own standards for flat racecourses , the aim was to create better speed rating than were possible using the Racing Post standards, it hasn't really been successful , could be many reasons for that
1. My standards are not as good as the RP standards
2. My automated going allowances are not good enough
3. My speed rating calculations are not accurate enough

On my sheet i calculate going allowances and ratings for RP standards and my standards in exactly the same way , so i can hopefully determine if my standards are better or inferior to RP standards
I need to find out if i've wasted my time completely.
I am going to try time allowing to post as often as i can( time permitting) during August as an experiment.
I will display best rating for both sets of standards achieved in the last 6 runs max 2 years.
I will not be messing about with the ratings as this is purely to compare the 2 sets of standards.
Some days i might struggle to post in time before racing starts but i will still post if i can in the interests of the experiment.
RP Standard Ratings and rankings in Red
Outlander Standard Ratings and rankings in Blue
Filter for Each Race
 

Attachments

SteveT

Gelding
Give it time mate and im sure things will fall into place for you some days are better than others and i usually find that if 1 persons ratings have had a poor day then so have the others usually.
 

Paceman

Yearling
I spent a lot of time creating my own standards for flat racecourses , the aim was to create better speed rating than were possible using the Racing Post standards, it hasn't really been successful , could be many reasons for that
1. My standards are not as good as the RP standards

My own opinion is that Racing Post standards are far too simplistic and calculated without recourse to weight and ability.

By all means, calculate a standard using a median of whatever percentile you deem best. But at least make sure those times are then adjusted for weight carried and ability, otherwise the resulting standard will be nonsense.

For example, imagine that 100 races were run over 5f and all produced a winning time of 60 secs. You might suppose in the light of no other information that your standard time should be 60 secs. But what if all those races were won by horses rated between 60 and 70 carrying between 8-7 and 9-0 and then the next 100 races were all won in 58 secs by horses rated between 120 and 125 carrying 10-0. What is your standard time now? It certainly isn’t 59 secs that is for sure.
 
I spent a lot of time creating my own standards for flat racecourses , the aim was to create better speed rating than were possible using the Racing Post standards, it hasn't really been successful , could be many reasons for that
1. My standards are not as good as the RP standards

My own opinion is that Racing Post standards are far too simplistic and calculated without recourse to weight and ability.

By all means, calculate a standard using a median of whatever percentile you deem best. But at least make sure those times are then adjusted for weight carried and ability, otherwise the resulting standard will be nonsense.

For example, imagine that 100 races were run over 5f and all produced a winning time of 60 secs. You might suppose in the light of no other information that your standard time should be 60 secs. But what if all those races were won by horses rated between 60 and 70 carrying between 8-7 and 9-0 and then the next 100 races were all won in 58 secs by horses rated between 120 and 125 carrying 10-0. What is your standard time now? It certainly isn’t 59 secs that is for sure.
yeah I built a spreadsheet for every course that adjusted every time for class rating, weight for age, weight and rail movements, then ran the times over and over again to pinpoint a going allowance then added this adjustment to the times, so every time was painstakingly adjusted for every factor influencing the time, then I used the adjusted times to calculate a standard time for every course and distance, the calculations are all as precise as I can get them, the result is I think the resultant ratings are no better than if I’d used the obviously flawed RP standards, it’s frustrating but I think it has been a waste of time tbh, I keep toying with the idea of repeating the whole procedure for National Hunt because RP standards are particularly woeful over the jumps, but every time I think of starting the project , I think what is the point.
 

Paceman

Yearling
yeah I built a spreadsheet for every course that adjusted every time for class rating, weight for age, weight and rail movements, then ran the times over and over again to pinpoint a going allowance then added this adjustment to the times, so every time was painstakingly adjusted for every factor influencing the time, then I used the adjusted times to calculate a standard time for every course and distance, the calculations are all as precise as I can get them, the result is I think the resultant ratings are no better than if I’d used the obviously flawed RP standards, it’s frustrating but I think it has been a waste of time tbh, I keep toying with the idea of repeating the whole procedure for National Hunt because RP standards are particularly woeful over the jumps, but every time I think of starting the project , I think what is the point.
I wouldn't give up....you will have a big edge eventually. What you need to remember is that the final time is made up of smaller increments of time and that might be where you are better focusing your efforts...particularly over jumps as you say.
 
I estimate a standard that could be anything like The racing post or something as simple as a formula like distance x 11, accuracy is not important , it then calculates a going allowance(innacurate) and adjusts for all factors and produces a new standard(innacurate). At this point there is another column on my sheet that calculates an error in Lbs this could still be very inaccurate, so I copy and paste the new standard into the old estimated column and this produces a new slightly more accurate going allowance and new standard time , I repeat the process until the error in my error column has a spread of less than 0.2 lbs across all distances on the track, when this is completed I have a going allowance and standard time that is as accurate as you can get to fit all the past winning times adjusted for every factor. I have no doubts about my process now but the results are not as good as I was hoping for, there have been days where it has fired in winners all day long at all kinds of prices, but there are more days when the ratings have virtually zero correlation to the results and I wonder if using a random number generator would be any less effective.
 

tacker

Colt
Hi @Outlander although i'm personally unconvinced about the value of speed figures for nh racing I do still take an interest in what's being said, so reading Simon Rowlands piece (atr) this week regarding sectional timing. Because i believe ELEGANT ESCAPE is an out and out stayer it struck me as surprising that he was held up on saturday but still stayed on well on ground that was too quick for him, 16/1 for the welsh grand national looked generous to me and i'm going to guess he will be fav on the day.
 
Hi @Outlander although i'm personally unconvinced about the value of speed figures for nh racing I do still take an interest in what's being said, so reading Simon Rowlands piece (atr) this week regarding sectional timing. Because i believe ELEGANT ESCAPE is an out and out stayer it struck me as surprising that he was held up on saturday but still stayed on well on ground that was too quick for him, 16/1 for the welsh grand national looked generous to me and i'm going to guess he will be fav on the day.
I've not looked at the race or got figures for National Hunt, but 16/1 looks huge, I would think you would be right and he would go off favourite now after that, I just looked on Paddy Power and currently 8/1, think even that is fair , last years winner and popular horse no fears about the ground could go off 5/1 or less on the day, of course he has a harder task with increased handicap mark from last year , if trainer leaves in Native River then 11st5lb wouldn't be too sad. If you have him backed at 16/1 I hope he does the job for you.
 

tacker

Colt
I've not looked at the race or got figures for National Hunt, but 16/1 looks huge, I would think you would be right and he would go off favourite now after that, I just looked on Paddy Power and currently 8/1, think even that is fair , last years winner and popular horse no fears about the ground could go off 5/1 or less on the day, of course he has a harder task with increased handicap mark from last year , if trainer leaves in Native River then 11st5lb wouldn't be too sad. If you have him backed at 16/1 I hope he does the job for you.
My main point here was to point you in the direction of Simon Rowlands and his most recent article and well worth a look if you get the time.
 
Yesterday not great again 2/15 top rated winners @ 9/2 and 4/1
There were 5 2nd top rated winners @ 22/1, 20/1, 8/1, 9/2 and 4/1
so maybe the rating weren't too bad a guide overall.

Todays Ratings
 

Attachments

Top