Beyer Speed Figures - can they be utilized as a tool

[DDT]

Rokeby Forever

How about post position, far outside the 12 hole, do you get off the horse??

DDT

[Rokeby Forever]

Post 12? Unless the horse can clear the field, I sure do!

Worrying about Post 12 is an East Coast thing, though. I don't think California has a number 12 printed to put on a starting gate. LOL!

[ageecee]

Great insight guys-this is a good thread to read..

[Shergar]

One angle that hasn't been mentioned is horses going from State bred alowance to open company. I think that can be a big class jump. A horse that has been running in open comany going back to a state bred race is taking a class drop. Even if the claiming tag, or Alw. condition is the same.

Previous posters have mentioned staying away from low percentage jocks/trainers. I agree these are horses to avoid. I may take a small stab on a horse with low % connections only at a good price.

I hate betting on a horse going into a new condition; Especially if it took that horse several tries to make it to a new condtion. Will give a horse a horse a look moving into a new condition under the following situation. Took only a few tries to move through a condition, and it was fairly competitve in its previous conditions before moving on.

As for Beyers, I don't put a lot of faith in them. There is a poster on here Petersd? That had a pretty nice filly in Press Camp. There was quite a lively discussion on this board about how some of her Beyer numbers got changed more than once!! I think she had a nice Beyer in her maiden breaker. Threw in a clunker and her maiden breaker Beyer got lowered. Atter she won again, This Beyer got moved up again. This is the way I remember it. If Petersd reads this, he may be able to fill in the complete details.

Just of few of my random musings. As with all handicapping rules I have, there always seems to be an exception to it. Maybe that is why I haven't made my fortune yet.

All the best, Shergar

[Rokeby Forever]

I think a great trainer stat to follow is how well a trainer does after a horse wins. If a trainer wins a race with a horse and then comes right back with a win at a good/high percentage, that tells me that the trainer has a pretty good idea of where to spot his horses and that he doesn't overestimate a win.

Some guys are great at it and some guys are just terrible. In the case of a trainer that has a low percentage off a win, that tells me that after a horse wins, the trainer either can't spot a horse correctly afterward or he can't hold the horse's form.

Some guys used to be terrific. Guys like Elliot Burch, Lou Rondinello, and PG Johnson would often "play" with a horse, but once it won, that horse would often rattle off three or four straight. Some other guys get a win out of a horse and then it falls to pieces.

I think using this stat, the Beyer of the horse's win may not be as important as the trainer knowing where to place his horse for a repeat win.

[Shergar]

To add a caveat to my previous post, I wanted to state I don't think Beyers are completely without value.

Since my beloved Winter/Spring SA meet is a shambles, I have had to turn my beady eye to other venues.

Right now I am concentrating on OP. Right now you are looking at horses from Ky, Ill, La,Tx, Ok, and other nether reachs of the racing world.

At first glance I look closer at the Ky. shippers as obviously they have been running in much better company.

I'm not up on the par times for say a 6f race at Retama, and a 6f time at say Ded. So if both horses have comparable times, I SORTA look at the Beyers. I would NEVER make a final decision on a horse solely from a Beyer figure, but do take it in account a little.

Now going off an another tangent, I sometimes watch the races at Mnr. Don't make to many bets there, as for the most part, a lot of the races just baffle me. I notice they run a lot of conditioned claiming races of Non-winners of 1,2 or 3 in a year. Seems to me a lot of horses that win in a non winners of 1, then go onto a nw2 race rarely ever win their first out in a new condition. Have also noticed horse running in nw2 or nw3 and not being competetive, are finally able to drop into a nw1 race and they are very dangerous.

Speaking of another class drop, seems like all the wise ones tout the MSW to Mdn Claiming drop as the biggest drop of all. I wish I had a nickle for every MSW dropper I have bet on and then ran up the track.

All the best, Shergar

[Keith]

Beyer figures can be handy

when you see steadily improving numbers

I like horses with drastic improvement when it comes to betting but sometimes a horse runs the race of his life and it take alot out of the horse and runs up the track. I think betting horses when they peak is the time to bet. I also like betting against what I call false favorites, horses that take drastic drops in claiming price after just being claimed and go off heavy favorites. I like playing a horse that starts to finally show some speed. Another thing to take into acount is trainers that improve the horses for one reason or another especially improving off of bad trainers. Alot of small tracks have trainers who improve off of bad trainers. Horses who get bet at the last minute also can sometimes be a sign. Patience is one key to gambling and not to get greedy getting caught up in betting exactas,trifectas, and so on. Alot of times there is not much difference in a win and a dollar exacta. If your just a small time gambler it is best just to go to the races once in a while and if you lose a set amount you quit and to quit when you win especially on a big win. Horses can nickle and dime you whether you bet on them or if you own them especially with grain, hay, bedding, and fuel steadily going up.

Keith

[DDT]

Rokeby Forever

Sorry about the delay in getting back to you, but I was sort of baiting you because as you have answered, even though the trainer is your number one factor to consider when handicapping a race, the jockey and post position also carry some weight, as do all other factors. I see the thread has developed into a kind of situational or spot play discussion so I will relate one that I read many years ago (20-25) that still produces nice winners. I do not remember who is responsible for this play and I do not take credit for it. It was/is called the Gold Clad Play, and it involves finding a horse entered that shows and easy win, 4 or more lengths, in his/her past performances over similar or higher class horses than facing today.

Rule 1: The horse cannot be named in the consensus top three by public handicappers.

Rule 2: The horse must have raced within the past 30 days.

Rule 3: The horse must not have won the most recent race but must have finished in the money or beaten not more than 8 lengths in his/her most recent race.

The rules were formulated to provide good odds, and the average payoff is around 4 to 5-1.

DDT

[Rokeby Forever]

Hi DDT,

I'm sure there are all kinds of rules and systems that work. And, like I've written - if a handicapper finds something that works, no matter how logical or wacky it is, he/she should stick with it.

Just before Bobby Ussery retired, he went into a terrible slump. His slump was compounded by the fact that a large percentage of horses he lost with came right back to win when other riders picked up those mounts. I've been told by some old timers that the "Ussery off" system worked very well at the time - and it eventually led to Ussery's retirement. Go know that betting a horse with a future HOF rider taking off of it would be profitable. LOL!

You asked me what my most important factor in handicapping is, and I responded that it's the trainer. That doesn't mean that I exclude all other handicapping factors. But here's why I think my "angle" or "spot" play can often be a stronger tool than any other:

There are two trainers in NY (Scott Schwartz and Jimmy Ferraro) that are low profile, everyday trainers with a 10-12% win average. Here's an interesting stat concerning both, that only my super degenerate friends in NY think to compile:

Over the last three years (2005 - 2007), Scott Schwartz has a 30% win average on tracks labeled good, muddy, or sloppy....and he has an average win price of $17 on these tracks.

Over the last three years (2005 - 2007), Jimmy Ferraro has a 27% win average on tracks labeled good, muddy, or sloppy....and he has an average win price of $19 on these tracks.

Who knows why these two everyday guys do so well on an off track, but I'm not going to question it - they have a knack, and that's all there is to it. Now, if the track is sloppy one day and I know that Jimmy Ferraro has a 30% win average and an average mutual of $17 on an off track, doesn't that make for a strong tool on that day if Ferraro is running something? The horse might not win (30% winners = 70% losers), but I think it adds a little more value to my bet if I wager on his horse on that day.

[DDT]

Rokeby Forever

You may have misunderstood me, I meant overall handicapping factor, not spot plays, or trainers who show a 30% win percentage under certain circumstances, or even higher. What I mean is what one factor do you consider the most important when handicapping a race, any race. Such as, speed, recent activity, performance in most recent race, class, track bias, jockey, trainer, track condition.....

DDT

[Rokeby Forever]

Hi DDT,

If, let's say, I visited a track for the first time and knew nothing about the track, trainers, riders, or the horses, I think I'd concentrate on pace scenarios, looking at how the speed shapes up (if there is any) and deciding which closers would benefit/not benefit from how the race shapes up to me. From there, I'd look at what's available to me - who's doing well at the meet and who isn't, does the inside or outside have an edge at that track, and so on and so forth. Needless to say, I don't like handicapping tracks I know nothing about - it's hard enough handicapping the tracks I do follow. LOL!

[Keith]

Being on the track does have an advantage as I ponied horses at Charles Town for a couple of years especially knowing jockeys that were scared of a horse being a cripple. Knowing scared jockeys and bad trainers as well as knowing the small trainers that get the best run out of a horse does help when it comes to handicapping. A trainer can look good on paper but does performance enhancers really make a good trainer? There is alot more to handicapping than whats on paper such as watching a horse warm up and to know how well the horse is taken care of rather than just looking at speed figures on paper. Another thing to take into consideration is that horses run better for some jockeys for one reason or another. Some horses run bad on certain surfaces or run bad if hooked in a speed duel. Some horses do not put two good races in a row and some run better off of layoffs. The are alot of things that affect a horse race that are not on the racing form.

Keith

[bcassidy]

Rokeby---to answer the question you posed to me a few posts back---I believe the 2nd off the layoff or the 3rd off the layoff angle is usually different in each circumstance. I certainly wouldn't blindly bet either angle unless the other information about that horse today led me to believe that this race would be a better race for that horse and good enough to win this race provided the post position,class, pace scenario, jockey, weight, distance, surface and various other factors all lead me to believe this horse has an excellent chance to win and also offers enough value in their odds at race time.
I very rarely would bet a horse off just one angle and to answer your question more directly--- I haven't noticed a huge difference between the 2nd off vs 3rd off angle in the last few years. I find it very subjective depending upon the many other factors listed above. Additionally, the key factor I would use in determining whether 2nd off or 3rd off might be this horses best effort is by analyzing this horses' past form cycle and comparing those past efforts to the most recent efforts and then projecting what level of effort I should expect today compared to the efforts other horses are likely to put forth today---if I believe that effort will be good enough to be competitive in today's race and the horse represents good value----then by all means----he may be worth a bet.

[bcassidy]

ddt---I will try to make my answer to your original post more direct. Yes the speed numbers matter---- but I wouldn't use Beyers, I would use a more sophisticated system---try the rags or thorographs for a while and you will see what I mean.
Also, I would never use the speed numbers exclusively. There are certainly races where they are more important than others but even then there are many other factors to consider.
I am sure you know this----- but in case you haven't already witnessed this, speed horses tend to be more inconsistent than distance horses, fillies more inconsistent than colts/geldings, dirt horses more inconsistent than turf horses, young horses more inconsistent than older horses. So a young, filly, racing short on the dirt is therefore the most inconsistent animal you can wager on while an older, colt/gelding going long on the turf is the most consistent animal you can wager on. You can factor these guidelines in when handicapping a particular race as I believe most people would agree with these guidelines. I am a big believer in bounces off of big efforts, especially when you use the guidelines I mentioned above---it is all about the level of effort you can expect today from a given animal vs the level of efforts you can expect from other horses he will be competing against in todays race. I wouldn't bet seriously without using speed numbers---I just wouldn't use Beyers.
If I could only have one tool to use for my handicapping it would be a high quality speed product---not beyers, but by no means are they the only tool I would want to use on an every day basis. There is too much data available that is just as important. They are only one piece of the tool kit I like to have when I gamble.

[bcassidy]

Keith, believe it or not everything you just mentioned can be ascertained by using high quality speed figures. They are not one dimensional at all. I venture to say I can determine more of this kind of data than most can determine using the drf or most other common handicapping tools.