Weekend Stakes Beyers

[sdjcom]

Originally Posted by Kasept

You are largely alone in that opinion as most find the Brisnet figures useless. They are computer generated, thereby taking no mitigating race day factors or circumstances into account.

I,m glad I am alone on this , works for me and you are saying Beyers, factors on one day will be the same on the next day the horse in question runs? Also the Bris, computer figures are more than just speed rating however I said I us them as a tie -breaker, not a factor alone, They work for me. A figure weather hand calculated, or computer generated is still just a figure to help you in selections. Beyers are no better than speed ratings with variances.

[alysheba4]

wait a while 97...........yeah, these are meaningfull.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by alysheba4

wait a while 97...........yeah, these are meaningfull.

Sheba,

Not to single your post out in this discussion, but actually, that Wait a While figure would appear beyond even discussion in its' accuracy..

The evidence:

RIBBON: 24.53 -- 47.83 -- 1:12.31 -- 1:35.63 -- 1:59.16
HIRSCH: 23.52 -- 45.63 -- 1:08.86 -- 1:32.88 -- 1:57.16

1 - WAIT A WHILE: 97 (Previous 3 BSF's: 105-93-105)
2 - Vacare: 96 (Previous 3 BSF's: 97-96-94)
3 - Black Mamba: 94 (Previous 3 BSF's: 100-96-95)


1 - RED GIANT: 112 (Previous 3 BSF's: 105-93-103)
2 - Out of Control: 112 (Previous 3 BSF's: 46-105-103)
3 - Transduction Gold 10.30-1 BEYER: 101 (Previous 3 BSF's: 101-95-95)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.) The Hirsch was run exactly :02 full seconds faster than the Ribbon.. At 10f, the 15 point spread between Red Giant's 112 and Wait a While's 97 is dead on.

2.) The 97 fits Wait a While's alternating pattern.

3.) Vacare's fig is dead in line with her typical effort.

4.) Black Mamba returned to her typical figure after the slightly bigger the usual effort last.

5.) The Hirsch figures fit and if anything my be a tad high, which would bring the Ribbon and Wait a While's figs DOWN more. Frankly, the Ribbon figures actually STRENGTHEN the credence of the Hirsch figures.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Sheba,

Not to single your post out in this discussion, but actually, that Wait a While figure would appear beyond even discussion in its' accuracy..

The evidence:

RIBBON: 24.53 -- 47.83 -- 1:12.31 -- 1:35.63 -- 1:59.16
HIRSCH: 23.52 -- 45.63 -- 1:08.86 -- 1:32.88 -- 1:57.16

1 - WAIT A WHILE: 97 (Previous 3 BSF's: 105-93-105)
2 - Vacare: 96 (Previous 3 BSF's: 97-96-94)
3 - Black Mamba: 94 (Previous 3 BSF's: 100-96-95)


1 - RED GIANT: 112 (Previous 3 BSF's: 105-93-103)
2 - Out of Control: 112 (Previous 3 BSF's: 46-105-103)
3 - Transduction Gold 10.30-1 BEYER: 101 (Previous 3 BSF's: 101-95-95)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.) The Hirsch was run exactly :02 full seconds faster than the Ribbon.. At 10f, the 15 point spread between Red Giant's 112 and Wait a While's 97 is dead on.

2.) The 97 fits Wait a While's alternating pattern.

3.) Vacare's fig is dead in line with her typical effort.

4.) Black Mamba returned to her typical figure after the slightly bigger the usual effort last.

5.) The Hirsch figures fit and if anything my be a tad high, which would bring the Ribbon and Wait a While's figs DOWN more. Frankly, the Ribbon figures actually STRENGTHEN the credence of the Hirsch figures.

Am I correct in saying the Hirsch was a new world record at a mile and a quarter on turf? Was trying to confirm this on Saturday.

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by philcski

Am I correct in saying the Hirsch was a new world record at a mile and a quarter on turf? Was trying to confirm this on Saturday.

Yes... The turf course was rolling a 12 on the stempmeter.

[Kasept]

Listed so far as just a new course record.. Haven't seen reference to world record..

[CSC]

I'm confused but wasn't the turf course drenched with rain the day before causing a day's cancellation and these numbers were run on yielding and or soft turf?

HIRSCH: 23.52 -- 45.63 -- 1:08.86 -- 1:32.88 -- 1:57.16

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by CSC

I'm confused but wasn't the turf course drenched with rain the day before causing a day's cancellation and these numbers were run on yielding and or soft turf?

HIRSCH: 23.52 -- 45.63 -- 1:08.86 -- 1:32.88 -- 1:57.16

Wrong Hirsch, that is the Santa Anita one. And not to be confused with the G2 by the same name that Zenyatta won earlier this year. The Clement Hirsch should be renamed the John Henry Turf Championship. It is idiocy to have two graded stakes named the Clement Hirsch and two Hirsch races run on the same day.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by CSC

I'm confused but wasn't the turf course drenched with rain the day before causing a day's cancellation and these numbers were run on yielding and or soft turf?

HIRSCH: 23.52 -- 45.63 -- 1:08.86 -- 1:32.88 -- 1:57.16

The Clement Hirsch is run at Santa Anita.

The Joe Hirsch is run at Belmont.

Steve's talking about the Clement Hirsch.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by CSC

I'm confused but wasn't the turf course drenched with rain the day before causing a day's cancellation and these numbers were run on yielding and or soft turf?

HIRSCH: 23.52 -- 45.63 -- 1:08.86 -- 1:32.88 -- 1:57.16

so this race was on soft, or firm?

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by philcski

Am I correct in saying the Hirsch was a new world record at a mile and a quarter on turf? Was trying to confirm this on Saturday.

That's what they said on TVG.

[alysheba4]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Sheba,

Not to single your post out in this discussion, but actually, that Wait a While figure would appear beyond even discussion in its' accuracy..

The evidence:

RIBBON: 24.53 -- 47.83 -- 1:12.31 -- 1:35.63 -- 1:59.16
HIRSCH: 23.52 -- 45.63 -- 1:08.86 -- 1:32.88 -- 1:57.16

1 - WAIT A WHILE: 97 (Previous 3 BSF's: 105-93-105)
2 - Vacare: 96 (Previous 3 BSF's: 97-96-94)
3 - Black Mamba: 94 (Previous 3 BSF's: 100-96-95)


1 - RED GIANT: 112 (Previous 3 BSF's: 105-93-103)
2 - Out of Control: 112 (Previous 3 BSF's: 46-105-103)
3 - Transduction Gold 10.30-1 BEYER: 101 (Previous 3 BSF's: 101-95-95)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.) The Hirsch was run exactly :02 full seconds faster than the Ribbon.. At 10f, the 15 point spread between Red Giant's 112 and Wait a While's 97 is dead on.

2.) The 97 fits Wait a While's alternating pattern.

3.) Vacare's fig is dead in line with her typical effort.

4.) Black Mamba returned to her typical figure after the slightly bigger the usual effort last.

5.) The Hirsch figures fit and if anything my be a tad high, which would bring the Ribbon and Wait a While's figs DOWN more. Frankly, the Ribbon figures actually STRENGTHEN the credence of the Hirsch figures.

....you should single me out....sorry, i was thinking she ran the 57 and change.....

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by sdjcom

I,m glad I am alone on this , works for me and you are saying Beyers, factors on one day will be the same on the next day the horse in question runs? Also the Bris, computer figures are more than just speed rating however I said I us them as a tie -breaker, not a factor alone, They work for me. A figure weather hand calculated, or computer generated is still just a figure to help you in selections. Beyers are no better than speed ratings with variances.

That's fine.. I look at the various BRIS reports and find some useful, but can't take their speed figures seriously if they aren't allowing for the possibility of split variants over the course of an afternoon and the other important variables that go into serious figure making.

The accuracy of the figure is important because it helps give the best possible indication of the performance pattern of the horse in question. An inaccurate figure can skew judgement by giving the wrong impression of the horse's likeliest effort next out...