Performance Figures (PFs) vs Beyer Speed Figures (BSFs)

[alphanumeric1]

I am interested in the pace factor in 'cappin the Derby. Steve Roman (chef-de-race.com) has his pace parameters for leading Derby contenders in 2007 prep races at a mile or more on dirt.

The explanation from his web site is: PFs are based on an integration of final time and fractional time. In other words, PFs incorporate a significant pace factor while Beyer SFs do not.

CIRCULAR QUAY
STREET SENSE
ANY GIVEN SATURDAY
NOBIZ LIKE SHOBIZ
DOMINICAN
ZANJERO

Since 1998, the Derby winner has been among the top 5, seven times, among PF contenders.

Does anyone think this holds any water?

By the way, this is my first post at DT. I have been lurking but I think it's a great place to hang out.

[estreetposse]

Originally Posted by alphanumeric1

I am interested in the pace factor in 'cappin the Derby. Steve Roman (chef-de-race.com) has his pace parameters for leading Derby contenders in 2007 prep races at a mile or more on dirt.

The explanation from his web site is: PFs are based on an integration of final time and fractional time. In other words, PFs incorporate a significant pace factor while Beyer SFs do not.

CIRCULAR QUAY
STREET SENSE
ANY GIVEN SATURDAY
NOBIZ LIKE SHOBIZ
DOMINICAN
ZANJERO

Since 1998, the Derby winner has been among the top 5, seven times, among PF contenders.

Does anyone think this holds any water?

By the way, this is my first post at DT. I have been lurking but I think it's a great place to hang out.

I don't know, I hold beer, but welcome.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by alphanumeric1

I am interested in the pace factor in 'cappin the Derby. Steve Roman (chef-de-race.com) has his pace parameters for leading Derby contenders in 2007 prep races at a mile or more on dirt.

The explanation from his web site is: PFs are based on an integration of final time and fractional time. In other words, PFs incorporate a significant pace factor while Beyer SFs do not.

CIRCULAR QUAY
STREET SENSE
ANY GIVEN SATURDAY
NOBIZ LIKE SHOBIZ
DOMINICAN
ZANJERO

Since 1998, the Derby winner has been among the top 5, seven times, among PF contenders.

Does anyone think this holds any water?

By the way, this is my first post at DT. I have been lurking but I think it's a great place to hang out.

I started another thread last night with basically the same info, noting that 8-9 winners had a PF of -54 or better. I like Dr Roman's figures and consider them better than Beyers (personal choice)...obviously the sample size is too small yet to draw firm conclusions but if his figures are a more accurate representation of a horse's race than Beyers then it is something to consider. One thing about this year's PF's, they expose Curlin as his Ark Derby PF was much less than Beyer awarded...we'll see how that pans out as well.

[Scurlogue Champ]

I like them because they have CQ up top and make me feel better.

Other than that it is like reading chinese to me.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I started another thread last night with basically the same info, noting that 8-9 winners had a PF of -54 or better. I like Dr Roman's figures and consider them better than Beyers (personal choice)...obviously the sample size is too small yet to draw firm conclusions but if his figures are a more accurate representation of a horse's race than Beyers then it is something to consider. One thing about this year's PF's, they expose Curlin as his Ark Derby PF was much less than Beyer awarded...we'll see how that pans out as well.

I saw your thread last night and appreciate the info.

[alphanumeric1]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I started another thread last night with basically the same info, noting that 8-9 winners had a PF of -54 or better. I like Dr Roman's figures and consider them better than Beyers (personal choice)...obviously the sample size is too small yet to draw firm conclusions but if his figures are a more accurate representation of a horse's race than Beyers then it is something to consider. One thing about this year's PF's, they expose Curlin as his Ark Derby PF was much less than Beyer awarded...we'll see how that pans out as well.

Didn't mean to duplicate your thread last night. I didn't notice it. Sorry. Nonetheless...thanks for your thoughts. I don't like the raw Beyer numbers. Hope others have some more opinions.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by alphanumeric1

Didn't mean to duplicate your thread last night. I didn't notice it. Sorry. Nonetheless...thanks for your thoughts. I don't like the raw Beyer numbers. Hope others have some more opinions.

What are your reasons for not liking the raw beyer numbers? And they better be HARD FACTS.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

I started another thread last night with basically the same info, noting that 8-9 winners had a PF of -54 or better. I like Dr Roman's figures and consider them better than Beyers (personal choice)...obviously the sample size is too small yet to draw firm conclusions but if his figures are a more accurate representation of a horse's race than Beyers then it is something to consider. One thing about this year's PF's, they expose Curlin as his Ark Derby PF was much less than Beyer awarded...we'll see how that pans out as well.

Could you kindly back up your personal choice with some REAL data??????

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by moodwalker

What are your reasons for not liking the raw beyer numbers? And they better be HARD FACTS.

Now, be nice! Just cause you caught hell on another thread...lol! To me, I simply think Roman's numbers are better...Dr Roman is a research scientist by trade, Beyer is not. Racing is far from a science I understand that but I just have more faith in Dr Roman's methodology because it is rooted in research methodology...Beyer numbers are an improvement over the old DRF numbers and less work than establishing your own par numbers (impossible for a race like the Derby anyway) but I think at times they are misleading...for me at least. I've had better luck with PF's so far...

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Now, be nice! Just cause you caught hell on another thread...lol! To me, I simply think Roman's numbers are better...Dr Roman is a research scientist by trade, Beyer is not. Racing is far from a science I understand that but I just have more faith in Dr Roman's methodology because it is rooted in research methodology...Beyer numbers are an improvement over the old DRF numbers and less work than establishing your own par numbers (impossible for a race like the Derby anyway) but I think at times they are misleading...for me at least. I've had better luck with PF's so far...

I'm just messing with you...

[alphanumeric1]

I'm basically a trip adjusted handicapping kind a guy. I was raised on Beyers. I believe in numbers. Trips and pace are probably more relevant for this Derby. So... I 'm always trying to dig into the raw number and make it more relevant.