The Beyers folks are pulling numbers out of their butt's again.
A horse I have a connection with, (Flighty Girl) received a 65 beyer for a NW1X alw. race at GGF last March 7th.
Flighty is in again this Saturday. I notice that 65 beyer has been changed to a 70.
This may open a can of worms, but I think Andy Beyer is a big windbag.
Regards,
Shergar
Beyer Numbers. What a crock
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
Barn 31 T-breds
- 2yo Maiden
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:35 pm
- Location: NJ
You won't get too much of an argument from me.
I recall seeing Andy Beyer making predictions on TV three times. The first two he tried picking the winner of each race and failed to pick a single winner on the card. What an embarrassment for someone who is supposed to be "the ultimate expert" on handicapping.
The third time, he changed his tactics and boxed exactas - probably due to his previous disasters - and was halfway through the card with nothing to show for it before he hit a nice exacta box.
All in all, not very impressive for someone who has been the subject of such great press.
All that having been said, I will give Beyer credit for one thing: His numbers are very good if viewed for what they are - speed ratings.
The problem is, many fans use Beyer numbers as if they are performance figures. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Here's an example I use to explain it:
Say that there is an inside speed bias on a particular day. Lets say that the #1 horse gets out quickly, takes advantage of the rail and opens up a couple of lengths with no pressure. He loafs along without having to race hard and turns for home with an easy lead.
Now, the #12 horse stumbles out of the gate, spots the field 10 lengths, then has to run very wide the whole race. He has to make up ground trying to rally wide into a fast pace and is now five lengths back turning for home. He digs in, battles to the wire and somehow noses out the #1 who had everything his own way.
The two horses will be assigned the same Beyer number.
Beyers are good for one thing only: as a speed rating. As a performance rating, they are worthless. There is no way that the two horses in the above example should get the same rating if trip, bias, etc. are taken into account.
Personally, I think that Andy Beyer is overrated as a handicapper and has been the beneficiary of long term good publicity.
Has anyone ever noticed that although Beyer figures have been around for many years, Racing Form handicappers never mentioned them until they started publishing them in the Form?
Now, of course, they are "indispensable". They even have trainers and owners quoting them to explain how their horses raced or ought to race.
What a joke.
I recall seeing Andy Beyer making predictions on TV three times. The first two he tried picking the winner of each race and failed to pick a single winner on the card. What an embarrassment for someone who is supposed to be "the ultimate expert" on handicapping.
The third time, he changed his tactics and boxed exactas - probably due to his previous disasters - and was halfway through the card with nothing to show for it before he hit a nice exacta box.
All in all, not very impressive for someone who has been the subject of such great press.
All that having been said, I will give Beyer credit for one thing: His numbers are very good if viewed for what they are - speed ratings.
The problem is, many fans use Beyer numbers as if they are performance figures. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Here's an example I use to explain it:
Say that there is an inside speed bias on a particular day. Lets say that the #1 horse gets out quickly, takes advantage of the rail and opens up a couple of lengths with no pressure. He loafs along without having to race hard and turns for home with an easy lead.
Now, the #12 horse stumbles out of the gate, spots the field 10 lengths, then has to run very wide the whole race. He has to make up ground trying to rally wide into a fast pace and is now five lengths back turning for home. He digs in, battles to the wire and somehow noses out the #1 who had everything his own way.
The two horses will be assigned the same Beyer number.
Beyers are good for one thing only: as a speed rating. As a performance rating, they are worthless. There is no way that the two horses in the above example should get the same rating if trip, bias, etc. are taken into account.
Personally, I think that Andy Beyer is overrated as a handicapper and has been the beneficiary of long term good publicity.
Has anyone ever noticed that although Beyer figures have been around for many years, Racing Form handicappers never mentioned them until they started publishing them in the Form?
Now, of course, they are "indispensable". They even have trainers and owners quoting them to explain how their horses raced or ought to race.
What a joke.
-
Barn 31 T-breds
- 2yo Maiden
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:35 pm
- Location: NJ
You won't get too much of an argument from me.
I recall seeing Andy Beyer making predictions on TV three times. The first two he tried picking the winner of each race and failed to pick a single winner on the card. What an embarrassment for someone who is supposed to be "the ultimate expert" on handicapping.
The third time, he changed his tactics and boxed exactas - probably due to his previous disasters - and was halfway through the card with nothing to show for it before he hit a nice exacta box.
All in all, not very impressive for someone who has been the subject of such great press.
All that having been said, I will give Beyer credit for one thing: His numbers are very good if viewed for what they are - speed ratings.
The problem is, many fans use Beyer numbers as if they are performance figures. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Here's an example I use to explain it:
Say that there is an inside speed bias on a particular day. Lets say that the #1 horse gets out quickly, takes advantage of the rail and opens up a couple of lengths with no pressure. He loafs along without having to race hard and turns for home with an easy lead.
Now, the #12 horse stumbles out of the gate, spots the field 10 lengths, then has to run very wide the whole race. He has to make up ground trying to rally wide into a fast pace and is now five lengths back turning for home. He digs in, battles to the wire and somehow noses out the #1 who had everything his own way.
The two horses will be assigned the same Beyer number.
Beyers are good for one thing only: as a speed rating. As a performance rating, they are worthless. There is no way that the two horses in the above example should get the same rating if trip, bias, etc. are taken into account.
Personally, I think that Andy Beyer is overrated as a handicapper and has been the beneficiary of long term good publicity.
Has anyone ever noticed that although Beyer figures have been around for many years, Racing Form handicappers never mentioned them until they started publishing them in the Form?
Now, of course, they are "indispensable". They even have trainers and owners quoting them to explain how their horses raced or ought to race.
What a joke.
I recall seeing Andy Beyer making predictions on TV three times. The first two he tried picking the winner of each race and failed to pick a single winner on the card. What an embarrassment for someone who is supposed to be "the ultimate expert" on handicapping.
The third time, he changed his tactics and boxed exactas - probably due to his previous disasters - and was halfway through the card with nothing to show for it before he hit a nice exacta box.
All in all, not very impressive for someone who has been the subject of such great press.
All that having been said, I will give Beyer credit for one thing: His numbers are very good if viewed for what they are - speed ratings.
The problem is, many fans use Beyer numbers as if they are performance figures. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Here's an example I use to explain it:
Say that there is an inside speed bias on a particular day. Lets say that the #1 horse gets out quickly, takes advantage of the rail and opens up a couple of lengths with no pressure. He loafs along without having to race hard and turns for home with an easy lead.
Now, the #12 horse stumbles out of the gate, spots the field 10 lengths, then has to run very wide the whole race. He has to make up ground trying to rally wide into a fast pace and is now five lengths back turning for home. He digs in, battles to the wire and somehow noses out the #1 who had everything his own way.
The two horses will be assigned the same Beyer number.
Beyers are good for one thing only: as a speed rating. As a performance rating, they are worthless. There is no way that the two horses in the above example should get the same rating if trip, bias, etc. are taken into account.
Personally, I think that Andy Beyer is overrated as a handicapper and has been the beneficiary of long term good publicity.
Has anyone ever noticed that although Beyer figures have been around for many years, Racing Form handicappers never mentioned them until they started publishing them in the Form?
Now, of course, they are "indispensable". They even have trainers and owners quoting them to explain how their horses raced or ought to race.
What a joke.
-
Turn-To Fan
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:28 am
- Location: San Diego, CA
I've always thought that the regular DRF speed figures just to the left of the top three finishers in the PPs were more useful than Beyers. 100=track record, and the figure is a ratio to that mark. The second figure is the track variant to account for bad conditions or extraordinarily good conditions. The thing that Beyers supposedly did was equalize the class, but it doesn't seem to me that it does that at all. There is a horse running today that had a Beyer of 106 on a turf course. Oh, c'mon! It used to be that a horse like Curlin had a 106. I think his figures have begun to inflate. And as much as I like Moss on ESPN, his figures don't seem to have any consistency of success when I've checked them.
"When I am on my deathbed, I imagine I will say, 'Thank God I did that'" - Arthur Hancock, on buying back Gato del Sol from Europe after Exceller was killed in a slaughterhouse in Sweden.
I think one of the big problems with all the systems is that they are supposed to be transferrable from track to track. I find that most horses shipping in to our local track will earn much lower numbers than they were running on other tracks except for a few which will earn much higher numbers. I see this effect on the tracks where I follow the simulcasts as well, and it is particularly problematic for a race like the KD where all the horses will be running on numbers earned at different tracks. On the other hand, when the entire field has been running on the same track the race is being run on, I generally find the numbers (whichever system) to be quite indicative of a horses talent. Beyer made his biggest mistake by taking his numbers national and having to bring in other people to do his numbers, some of which are subjective estimates.
-
wangkw
- Restricted Stakes Winner
- Posts: 969
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:48 am
- Location: Singapore -- Small, Solid Island In Dictatorship
Let me say this...albeit anti-climate.... depending whom you are..know how many parties are involved in a race ?..when your love one
is brought to its starting box..altogether 10 legs and 4 beyer numbers are to be taken into consideration.
is brought to its starting box..altogether 10 legs and 4 beyer numbers are to be taken into consideration.
Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Falling But In Rising Everytime We Fall
-
Playwithfire
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 226
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:55 pm
- Location: California
It's certainly popular to rip Beyer and his speed figures, but they guy's been writing a horse racing column in the Washington Post and has written several popular books on the subject, a few of which i've read and enjoyed. Beyer admits that using his figures alone are not enough to "beat the game", but certainly the fact that he developed them himself on graph paper charting countless races and crunching the numbers on a handheld calculator back in the day should at least earn a modicum of respect.
I agree that the figures are more useful on some tracks than others, and the fact that his "teams" are doing every track in America probably dilute the consistency these days. But they wouldn't be in the Daily Racing Form if people didn't use them. The figures aren't meant to be predictive, just indicative of the "speed" of the race based on the time and condition of the track. That being said, I find them much less important in turf races where I think Pace and Class have much more importance than final time. I use the Beyer figures and Brisnet ratings/pace figures in conjunction usually to handicap.
I agree that the figures are more useful on some tracks than others, and the fact that his "teams" are doing every track in America probably dilute the consistency these days. But they wouldn't be in the Daily Racing Form if people didn't use them. The figures aren't meant to be predictive, just indicative of the "speed" of the race based on the time and condition of the track. That being said, I find them much less important in turf races where I think Pace and Class have much more importance than final time. I use the Beyer figures and Brisnet ratings/pace figures in conjunction usually to handicap.
-
Elusive City
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 304
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:57 pm
-
wangkw
- Restricted Stakes Winner
- Posts: 969
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:48 am
- Location: Singapore -- Small, Solid Island In Dictatorship
It is a brush with fatality if you saddle your cash cylinder on beyers..otherewise there is no harm done if you merely engage it in say, a
reality check. But yet intuitively, that does not mean you are given an excuse to shun from reality...what else is more real than dollar
and sense.
Just like in share market...traders who fervently believed in Elliott Wave kind of stuff often turned belly up later...in fact, its italian
inventor, who was a retired accountant then, lost his own life savings in the 1929 stock market crash...his works on the so-called wave
principle was completed long after that calamitous fall..but managed to find the greatest fool of all time among his numberless self
proclaimed diciples..in the 1987 crash. That fellow is noneotherthan Robert Prechter.
Every party must come to an end....some day..some time...somewhere.
Any patterns, however intriguing or silky, were all human works to tailor the sequence of events recorded in past tense..and with the
passage of time...every of them fails...only those number patterns we often come across in IQ tests will last, and last forever.
reality check. But yet intuitively, that does not mean you are given an excuse to shun from reality...what else is more real than dollar
and sense.
Just like in share market...traders who fervently believed in Elliott Wave kind of stuff often turned belly up later...in fact, its italian
inventor, who was a retired accountant then, lost his own life savings in the 1929 stock market crash...his works on the so-called wave
principle was completed long after that calamitous fall..but managed to find the greatest fool of all time among his numberless self
proclaimed diciples..in the 1987 crash. That fellow is noneotherthan Robert Prechter.
Every party must come to an end....some day..some time...somewhere.
Any patterns, however intriguing or silky, were all human works to tailor the sequence of events recorded in past tense..and with the
passage of time...every of them fails...only those number patterns we often come across in IQ tests will last, and last forever.
Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Falling But In Rising Everytime We Fall