Speed Figure calculation and usage

Desert Orchid said:
I don't think either race was even and true.

I think they went too slow for the first half at Newmarket and too fast for the first half in Ireland. I have Makfi's time rating 6lbs ahead of CC's Irish win. Overall, once you factor in wfa, I'd say Makfi's time was 5lbs slow of what you'd want of an up-to-scratch Guineas time, which really isn't very far away at all when you consider some of the rubbish times posted by horses that ultimately went to prove they were very smart.
Click to expand...

the splits for Ireland..would suggest they went a decent pace..but not a burnout..particularly as leader ignored a bit..the 3yo handicap was a burn out for the leader though at a similar pace..its open to question...but the split time are off the leader..maybe they did burn a bit...need more data for splits at that distance.

but..I still don't see how CC has run 6 lb slower than an already slow English guineas though..because that would make Bangladores race ..a key race here...very slow..which it wasn't...again referring to splits..ran maybe an even split race..if we think the 3yo ones were too much ..basically they didn't go slow enough early in Bangladores race to damage the final time too much..I made Bangladores race 9 lb slow..I still think thats fair..what did you get for Bangladores race DO?

up to press we have..me giving CC a 126..Pru said 123 I think..what figure would you put on CC DO..about a 114?

I'm surprised with just 4 X 8f races to look at that we can be too different in ratings:)
 
Last edited:
In terms of time ratings alone, I have CC on 116 (wfa adjusted) but I have him on 123+ on my form rating.

I think where we differ is in relation to the 3yo handicap that day. I don't use splits/sectionals. I only go on bare times backed up by a reading of form comments plus, obviously, what I think I've seen with my own eyes. I've rated the 3yo handicap as being the marker. It's an assumption that it's been the true-run race. Then I've worked out the others using a going allowance derived from the 3yo race. It would render Bangladore's race slow.

I'm keeping an open mind about it being too fast early, though, as this would push up the other two races if accurate. I still don't think it would make Bangladore's race anything hot. The 3yo race had a decent size field and when they're too fast early the held up horses end up running fast times. However, I've long held the opinion that the resultant fast time only serves to give a more accurate going allowance as opposed to identifying a particularly hot race. I'll get that wrong occasionally - which might be the case here - but I reckon I get it right many times more often. It's an aspect of my method I have to live with.
 
Desert Orchid said:
In terms of time ratings alone, I have CC on 116 (wfa adjusted) but I have him on 123+ on my form rating.

I think where we differ is in relation to the 3yo handicap that day. I don't use splits/sectionals. I only go on bare times backed up by a reading of form comments plus, obviously, what I think I've seen with my own eyes. I've rated the 3yo handicap as being the marker. It's an assumption that it's been the true-run race. Then I've worked out the others using a going allowance derived from the 3yo race. It would render Bangladore's race slow.

I'm keeping an open mind about it being too fast early, though, as this would push up the other two races if accurate. I still don't think it would make Bangladore's race anything hot. The 3yo race had a decent size field and when they're too fast early the held up horses end up running fast times. However, I've long held the opinion that the resultant fast time only serves to give a more accurate going allowance as opposed to identifying a particularly hot race. I'll get that wrong occasionally - which might be the case here - but I reckon I get it right many times more often. It's an aspect of my method I have to live with.
Click to expand...

i've just run the those 4 races through my ..weight allowed..more traditional flavour spreadsheet..I keep two so I can see where other raters are coming from. That comes up with a more par time for Bangalore's race..and actually makes that a marker race..it makes the 3rd horse in the 3yo handicap about par..which makes the winner in that race about 13lbs above its OHR..it then gives a 124 to CC...if i made the 3yo handicap par as you have it makes CC a very slow race..it just can't have been that slow with the solid splits imo...I can't see CC being less than 120 which makes that 3yo handicap interesting for the future..imo..could be wrong.

I can see where you are now using the 3yo handicap as a par race..I still think that one is faster than par..its the interesting race imo..in all this..because the first two will either be correctlly handicapped ..if you have it right..and above their marks if they come out and show improved form..if I have it right. Its an interesting card isn't it?
 
EC1 said:
it makes the 3rd horse in the 3yo handicap about par..which makes the winner in that race about 13lbs above its OHR..it then gives a 124 to CC
Click to expand...
Spooky...

As you know, I don't do 'pars'. I have a sliding scale of average 'in advance of OR' levels depending on the class of race, which I then cross check against the market on the day and the form comments.

For the above 3yo race, I'd start off going down the 'average' route and rate the winer as 10lbs ahead of its OR. It wasn't a particularly valuable race but was run on a Classic day, which sometimes attracts better animals. The winner's OR of 74 is pretty low for a classy race. The first five home were either 'mid-division' or 'chased leaders'. This suggests an even pace. The first home of the hold-up horses was 6th having got to fourth at one point. This tells me the race might not have been a very fast one, that the leaders maybe got to set their own pace and get the run of the race. Five of the first six home were 10/1 or less, so they've pretty much run to form.
 
Desert Orchid said:
Spooky...

As you know, I don't do 'pars'. I have a sliding scale of average 'in advance of OR' levels depending on the class of race, which I then cross check against the market on the day and the form comments.

For the above 3yo race, I'd start off going down the 'average' route and rate the winer as 10lbs ahead of its OR. It wasn't a particularly valuable race but was run on a Classic day, which sometimes attracts better animals. The winner's OR of 74 is pretty low for a classy race. The first five home were either 'mid-division' or 'chased leaders'. This suggests an even pace. The first home of the hold-up horses was 6th having got to fourth at one point. This tells me the race might not have been a very fast one, that the leaders maybe got to set their own pace and get the run of the race. Five of the first six home were 10/1 or less, so they've pretty much run to form.
Click to expand...


watching the race though and seeing the splits..the leader is so tired he drops back and is legless..suggesting he alone did do too much.

it could be that they went too fast which has caused a slower overall time by the whole pace collapsing..or the leader just did too much..its open to interpretation a lttle.

I need to do some % par splits for that distance and see what the average % split is between each half of the race..if they did go too fast early in guineas and handicap it should show up easily with a bit more data

do you know if they always run over the same bit of the curragh every year for guineas?
 
DO

I have looked at about 15 races that weren't obviously slow over the mile there..slung out any that looked to slow after I calculated the % to make sure the median time is based on solid races.

I timed to the end of the running rail where the round course comes in about 3f from home..its a better marker

The average % of energy used for an even gallop is 60.60% for that first approx 5f

The race that we know was pedestrian was..Shamwari's..not surprisingly came out at 62.65%..

The interesting one is Bangalore's..that race was 60.38%..which is only slightly faster than an even gallop..there is no reason why that race cannot be used as a marker for the meeting..its an older handicap so more reliable in every way...this isn't a slow run race..or an over fast race either

The 3yo handicap was 59.47%... which shows they went too fast..or the leader did for sure..but compare the overall time of this race to Bangalore's and its faster when wfa is allowed for..so the early pace hasn't eaten into the winner or second..that is possible when the early pace is too much..if horses are far enough away they don't get burned as much.

The guineas was run in 60.55%..which means it was run at an even gallop and so was a perfect true run race...which means the time can't really be slow ....especially when you compare it to Bangalores race which also wasn't too fast or slow early.

I think you maybe underestimating the 3yo handicap looking at these figures tbh...Bangalore's race looks a perfectly valid marker.

can't wait for the first and second in the handicap to reappear..particlularly the 2nd :)
 
How come the faster the race the lower the percentage?

I must be missing something but I'd have thought if a greater percentage of energy was used it would make for a faster early time.

Also, 5f is 5/8 of a mile so why isn't the average 62.5%?
 
Last edited:
Desert Orchid said:
How come the faster the race the lower the percentage?

I must be missing something but I'd have thought if a greater percentage of energy was used it would make for a faster early time.

Also, 5f is 5/8 of a mile so why isn't the average 62.5%?
Click to expand...

its not 5/8..I timed it to an easy visbible point..end of rail far side...possibly 3.5f from home..can't tell exactly ...where round course comes in..doesn't need to be a furlong marker..main thing is each race timed to same point
 
I find it useful to express sectionals as finishing speed from the sectional, calculated as follows:

(T*d*100)/(t*D)

Where T is the overall time, d is the distance of the closing sectional, t is the time of the closing sectional and D is the overall distance.

So that an 8-furlong race run in 99.00 sec in which the last 3f is run in 37.0 sec is: (99*3*100)/(37*8) = 100.34% finishing speed.

It makes comparison easy, and you can usually come up with a sensible estimate for the length of the sectional if it is not known.

On most courses the final 2f is a bit over 100% but the final 1f is a bit under 100%. I tend to use final 3f only at more than a mile.
 
J Alfred Prufrock said:
I find it useful to express sectionals as finishing speed from the sectional, calculated as follows:

(T*d*100)/(t*D)

Where T is the overall time, d is the distance of the closing sectional, t is the time of the closing sectional and D is the overall distance.

So that an 8-furlong race run in 99.00 sec in which the last 3f is run in 37.0 sec is: (99*3*100)/(37*8) = 100.34% finishing speed.

It makes comparison easy, and you can usually come up with a sensible estimate for the length of the sectional if it is not known.

On most courses the final 2f is a bit over 100% but the final 1f is a bit under 100%. I tend to use final 3f only at more than a mile.
Click to expand...

cheers Pru

do you think i have made a case for Bangalores race being truly run..or is it inconclusive?
 
It probably was truly run, judged on those figures, though a single sectional can sometimes hide what more than one sectional would reveal and a few assumptions have had to be made.

Estimating the sectional as 3.2f (it may have been slightly less) and using the times that can be derived from your figures results in the following finishing speeds:

Shamwari Lodge 107.1% (steadily run)
Bangalore Gold 101.0% (truly run)
Aghadoe 98.7% (strongly run)
Canford Cliffs 101.4% (truly run)

That is just the pace for the leaders at the sectional and the leader at the line (i.e. the winner). Individual horses will have run their races differently, and that is what really matters after all.
 
J Alfred Prufrock said:
It probably was truly run, judged on those figures, though a single sectional can sometimes hide what more than one sectional would reveal and a few assumptions have had to be made.

Estimating the sectional as 3.2f (it may have been slightly less) and using the times that can be derived from your figures results in the following finishing speeds:

Shamwari Lodge 107.1% (steadily run)
Bangalore Gold 101.0% (truly run)
Aghadoe 98.7% (strongly run)
Canford Cliffs 101.4% (truly run)

That is just the pace for the leaders at the sectional and the leader at the line (i.e. the winner). Individual horses will have run their races differently, and that is what really matters after all.
Click to expand...

its an interesting exercise though Pru as it just gives a little more insight to each race..with just the final times it was difficult to tell if Bangalore's race was truly run..once you know how that race was run you can frame the rest of them...it makes calculating that card so much easier.

having individual sectionals for each horse would be another great step forward...won't be happening though

its still useful to see what speed the field were being towed along at..yes the leader is a little in front ..but the horses behind are going the same speed as the leader or they would never keep up.
 
The Lingfield Derby and Oaks Trials are the most fascinating races I've seen this year, conveninently as they were run straight after each other, of how 2 races can be run in completely different fashion to produce similar overall times.
 
davidjohnson said:
The Oaks trial was some 3 seconds faster to the top of the hill and then they've crawled home in the last 3f.
Click to expand...

the only time when a race can't be run in same time with differening tactics is is if they crawl early..you can't get that time back..I assume the other race was more evenly run.

you say top of hill..and then last 3 furlongs..what happened in between..is there 3 or 4 furlongs missing in this?

if there is..its possible they slowed in middle in that race...probably better just splitting race in two sections..up to 3f out..the 3f from home to finish.
 
If Makfi does go straight to The St James Palace and win it will be the first time in decades the winner of the 2000G has gone straight to Ascot and won.
 
I've not watched all the racing today yet but have calculated the figures..there seems to be a very fast 3yo handicap here

I watched the Oaks..looked a slow pace?..was F&G a slow run race as well?..overall times for those are slow..I wonder if they need a different allowance ..this happens re 12f here sometimes. Will have to run Pru's equation on those two races.

Epsom 4 June 2010 : Going +21 [Good/Firm]

OHR/SF

109 93 --BUSHMAN
100 100-TARTAN GIGHA
128 114-FAME AND GLORY
105 96--FIERY LAD
000 96--SNOW FAIRY
107 100-SHAKESPEAREAN
85 103--CANSILI STAR

Last race is particularly fast..Bushman's race was definately slow..they pulled their heads off.

I'd be interested in what you guys got :)
 
Last edited:
Was wondering what you made of it EC. Given the fact it was a handicap, and they've not really finished that well strung out, and that the field were 5 from 24 in handicaps coming into the race, how much do you want to stick your neck on the block and suggest the first 6 are all well ahead of their marks.
 
Back
Top