Speed Figure calculation and usage

Far from it, EC1. For what it's worth I think this is probably one of the most interesting threads I have seen since joining this forum.

Broadening the discussion somewhat, I would be interested to see if any correlation between position in a race and high speed figures exists. I have a (probably incorrect) presumption that impressive speed figures are generally posted in races dominated by hold-up performers for the simple reason that, in order to generate the pace needed to record a good speed figure, there has to be a generous early gallop that puts those racing prominently at something of a disadvantage. Perhaps there is an angle in following those that raced prominently in strong-run affairs which recorded a good speed figure?


I wish Stav were around - he would have a fair a bit to say on this.

I think sometimes a race is finely balanced pace wise..they go even pace +/- a small amount...and every horse has a chance..the leaders just have enough left..the resultant speed figure is large and the finishers are a mixture of pace types. Creating speed fiigures obviously highlights the type of races we have on this thread.

If you have a race where the pace collapses its less useful because the one pacers plod through and win and the overall time suffers because the pace has only been evenly run to suit the slow horses. The old agage holds true..fast horses win very slow run races and slow horses win very fast run races.

So i think that any race that shows a high figure overall ..if its genuine..will contain a mixture of run styles..sometimes its clear that those at the front had an advantage..spotting the finisher in those circumstances is useful..as is the opposite.

so i think personally its just a matter of scales tipping one way or the other..within a race there is an element of either you go just a bit too quick..or you go just a bit too slow early..both can result in a good time..its when that margin of just a bit too quick or bit too slow gets bigger where the final time suffers...mainly when they too slow early
 
Last edited:
I'll go through my Beyer type figures..Stan should have some views on this. They do differ from Beyer in that he only uses 10lb per second per mile..which is quite a narrow scale ..only about 40lbs from crap to super horse

Using a Beyer type calculation..I assign a speed figure to the race..I personally don't assign individual horse speed figures..I just want to know which races are faster than they should be..other figure makers want actual speed figures..this is the first decision you have to make really..what do you want from them? I personally want to know races that are under the radar as far as other punters are concerned time wise.

Weight doesn't enter into calculations using this method..as its a race spotting method..not an individual horse method.

I started by compiling standard times for all G1 courses and mainly concentrate on those.

My base figure for the standards is the time it takes an average Class C (3) handicap race to cover the distance in a true run race on official Good ground.

Why class C handicaps?..because there are plenty of them..and any adjustments from other classes to equate to C are kept to a minimum..handicaps are your best friend when compiling speed figures..they are in the main more reliable as bases to work from. Where there aren't class C's use other handicaps and adjust them to 90

I used RSB to help me do this ..by getting the names of all class C winners on good ground...then trawling through the RP database and noting the best horse in the race and the racetime...some of those are faster than actual good..some are slower..over a series of 25 to 30 races you get a good median figure of what that class of race will achieve on good ground. Its time consuming because you have to throw out obvious dawdle races.


By noting the best horse ..OHR rated.. in those class C races you then correct the time to equate to a 90 OHR for each race.. So..you end up with a standard time for each distance based on true run races where the standard of race is at a level of a 90 horse..on good ground

All times are calculated per mile..again this simplifies your spreadsheet for calcs.

I use 1 second = 14.3 lbs at a mile..so 1 lb = 0.07 seconds...many people use a similar poundage.

so you have your standard times..at a level you know they are based on..if you use others you never really know what class they equate to..i've tried to calculate a way of comparing mine with RP ones so I can use theirs for courses i couldn't be arsed to do..its trial and error...you do need to know what level they are based on so you can make sense of the alllowance and where it sits on the going scale.

you would get something like this whilst calculating them

8f

Time/best horse OHR
98.00/85
97.60/92
98.30/83

convert those to 90 OHR race times

the first one..5lbs shy..so needs speeding up by 5lbs x 0.07 = 97.65
second one..2 lbs shy..so needs slowing down by 2lb x 0.07 = 97.74
3rd one..7 lbs shy..needs speeding up by 7lbs x 0.07 = 97.81

you can easily do all these calcs on a spreadsheet..its not long winded calcing..collecting it..yes:)

obviously when you calculate shorter or longer distances you need to adjust the 0.07 to suit..at 6f its ..0.07 x (6/8) = 0.052...at 10f its...0.07 x (10/8) = 0.087

the reason why when calcing the actual speed figures that working to the per mile way is easier...is to avoid having to do the above calculations..you have to do them to calculate your standards but its not necessary later in the actual making of the figures..though then again..some people prefer that way. I think easier is better especially as it makes no difference to teh actual figures.

i'll go through a card later or tomorrow
 
Last edited:
:D

i can't think of all those lead in lines NM uses..he takes up the first two paragraphs with some right nonsense about a bloke carrying some fishes or summat:)

must take some thinking about though those lead in paragraphs mind you
 
these were the times I used to get a standard for Newmarket July 8f

Time/ best horse/ adjusted time to 90

97.98....80....97.32
98.40....89....98.33
98.85....86....98.59
99.73....75....98.74
98.74....91....98.81
99.50....80....98.84
99.44....82....98.91
100.13..74....99.07
99.99....79....99.26
100.05..80....99.39
100.73...70....99.41
99.62....94....99.88
100.88...77....100.02
100.39...85....100.06
100.37...88....100.24
99.90...104...100.82
101.11...86....100.85
101.69...79....100.96
101.55...85....101.22

the median is 99.40 for a 90 race

if you compare them to the RP standard there is quite a difference..even allowing for them using a 100 horse carrying 9-0...their standard is 96.50 which means on Good ground a 120 ish horse would need to run it in about 95 seconds..and yet the course record is only 95.53. Other courses at a mile differ from mine by about 2 seconds usually compared with RP ones..but this and Newmarket Rowley are really out imo. It would need to be really hard at Newmarket before Topspeed called it Good to firm with a standard like that
 
Does anyone use speed ratings over the jumps? Mine work well on the flat, but are useless when I try and apply them over the jumps.
 
I've tried them Mr Frisk but only very very briefly with races in France - not worked too well up to now though I'm still fiddling around with them.
 
I use one-on-one comparisons (races run on same day over same trip) and closing sectionals to establish the run of the race.

I did use overall times over jumps for a while but they are fraught with danger and not the kind of thing an individual can easily keep on top of.
 
That'd be because jumps horses are so slow, it's impossible to work out which ones have travelled less slowly than the others. :D

Just stick to the AW over the Winter if you enjoy speed figures, plenty of money to be made there. I'm going to try my hand at the Deauville AW track this Winter too.
 
I swear I saw all weather races last winter where the horses were running on the spot or even looked to be going backwards :p

I feel depressed if ever I sit through Southwell or Wolverhampton ...
 
I swear I saw all weather races last winter where the horses were running on the spot or even looked to be going backwards :p

I feel depressed if ever I sit through Southwell or Wolverhampton ...

Southwell is an absolute goldmine because it's surface is unique. Plenty of horses overpriced there as people think Kempton, Wolverhampton and Lingfield form is transferable to Fibresand.
 
I swear I saw all weather races last winter where the horses were running on the spot or even looked to be going backwards :p

I feel depressed if ever I sit through Southwell or Wolverhampton ...

those Southwell/wolves horses will soon be top notchers over the sticks..should be more suitable viewing for you there :D

Southwell is the only track left where the normal laws of physics still apply - makes it worth rating up..put in the work..the results will pay you back..Stav used to put up loads of stuff re speed ratings from there on Final Furlong board I think
 
Last edited:
in the 8.20 tonight Rain On The Wind runs again..this one was a noted horse behind One Good Emperor yonks ago on the thread

he hasn't won since and it looks obvious to me that this horse wants a drop to 7f..and yet they are persevering again tonight over 8f at Kempton..which is a stiffish test with that long straight

its only a claimer but i can see him leading again and weakening late on..hopefully before the end of the flat season 7f will be tried..he looks a real obvious candiate for that trip.
 
Last edited:
I'm just catching up on some figures

What do you figure makers make of Frankel's Doncaster win?

it seems a big figure..until you stick the last race time on..Willing Foe's race squashes all the other times down

the round course must have been riding faster i assume..this race doesn't fit with any others from the round or straight course.

if that last race time is omitted the others fit well together..the 6.5 f race must have been truly would have thought

here is what i get using my beyer type figures..ignoring the last race

104 ZEBEDEE
95 IRISH HEARTBEAT
109 FRANKEL

those are without wfa..with it it makes Frankel a 126 rating

those figures are derived from the going allowance being 20lb fast..just into Good/firm territory
 
Last edited:
These were beyer figures for Ascot

Ascot 80-22ASPECTOFLOVE
Ascot 99-5 REDFORD
Ascot 83 -29 RAINFALL
Ascot 102 -1FRANKEL
Ascot 87 -16WHITE MOONSTONE
Ascot 130 5 POETS VOICE

the ground timed at Good imo

RP says the round course was softer than the straight but the times suggest otherwise..PV's figure looks big...but to make it smaller would push the going into fast..which it wasn't

that race looks solid on time..but the placed horses... form wise look iffy..interesting time though

anyone want to offer their figures on these two meets?
 
Last edited:
using weight adjusted method

86 ASPECTOFLOVE
102 REDFORD
81 RAINFALL
97 FRANKEL
81 WHITE MOONSTONE
127 POETS VOICE

no wfa added back
 
Last edited:
I'd like to say that Ascot figures can be dubious in my experience and it can be dangerous to transfer them elsewhere due to the reasonably unique and unpredictable nature of the surface. Totally unadjusted Beyers:

Aspectoflove 80
Frankel 96
White Moonstone 85
Redford 99
Poets Voice 115
Rainfall 88
 
My figure for Frankel at Donny was 124 and includes w-f-a.

Others on the day were Zebedee 111, Precision Break 91, Samuel 108, White Moonstone 106, Irish Heartbeat 81 and Willing Foe 105.
 
My figure for Frankel at Donny was 124 and includes w-f-a.

Others on the day were Zebedee 111, Precision Break 91, Samuel 108, White Moonstone 106, Irish Heartbeat 81 and Willing Foe 105.
yes the Donny one works out at about that on my figures with wfa added

i'm just not sure about the round course being the same as the straight Gus..the figure for Willing Foe is very high isn't it?

tricky one
 
Last edited:
I'd like to say that Ascot figures can be dubious in my experience and it can be dangerous to transfer them elsewhere due to the reasonably unique and unpredictable nature of the surface. Totally unadjusted Beyers:

Aspectoflove 80
Frankel 96
White Moonstone 85
Redford 99
Poets Voice 115
Rainfall 88

with Poets Voice being 2 seconds faster than Frankel he would have to be 30lbs ish higher..depending on what you allow for a second

if you use pure Beyer workings..then 1 second only comes to 10lb per mile..which is how i am assuming you are working there..basically the full range between seller and G1 is only 40 Beyer points

a Beyer G1 time would be 110/115 I am assuming here Stan?
 
Last edited:
Can see where you're coming from, the Doncaster Cup was unnaturally fast on my figures, don't think the Willing Foe fig is too wrong though, the second and third have come out and won and the winner looks potentially group class.

Tricky one as the Doncaster Cup makes me think it was def quicker round the back but it's not a usual pattern at Doncaster.
 
a Beyer G1 time would be 110/115 I am assuming here Stan?

Correct, Beyer uses 108 as his benchmark for a typical Group One winner and works either side of that.

If you believe Mordin and other speed authors, 108 equates to a Timeform of 120.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=79q_peU8Kq4C&pg=PA180&dq=beyer+to+timeform&hl=en&ei=wtC0TIyMAouhOuy9rY4K&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=beyer%20to%20timeform&f=false

Page 311 here has a decent table, I had the hard copy of the book but a friend borrowed it ages ago and I've never got it back!
 
Back
Top