09/09/2009 6:57PM

Thanks for writing

Email


Saratoga_Mike said: 

   Randy, Could you please post and comment on Rachel's Moss Pace figs from the Woodward?

    No problem.  Rachel Alexandra's pacefigs for the Woodward were not that far out of line with those of her recent races.  She deserves style points for putting away consecutive direct challenges from older males, but in terms of the clock, her figs were solidly above-average for 1 1/8 miles at Saratoga while not impossibly fast.

    Pacefigs for Rachel's last four starts 

       Woodward:  83-87-93-95  final 96

       Haskell:      75-85-93-99  final 99

       Mothr Gse:  83-90-94-96 final 97

       Preakness:  75-80-87      final 96

Patrick said:  

    As someone who computes Beyer Speed Figures, how difficult would it be for someone to make figures for the great horses that ran in the 1960s? I have access to a complete set of DRF chart books from the decade and have always thought about taking a swing at making Beyer pars/figures for the NYRA tracks as a special project. Any suggestions or advice? Thanks.

    That's something I've always wanted to try. Unfortunately, I could never find the time. You could get deeper than this, but for starters, I'd suggest compiling a five-year sample of average raw Beyer Speed Figures for every distance and class level. Using those raw-time pars, you could then take a stab at making track variants on the days those great horses ran.

     It's far from an exact science, but suppose Dr. Fager ran a race 30 points faster than nw1x allowance horses and 40 points faster than open maidens.  Wouldn't that be interesting? That could translate into a mid-120s figure by today's standards.

     Of course, this doesn't take into account the possibility that today's horses are inherently faster than those of yesteryear, but it would be a fun exercise.  Good luck, and if you choose to accept this mission, please let me know what you come up with.

GregB said:

   "...deserve nothing but platitudes." Platitudes? LOL You might want to look up that one in a dictionary.

    LOL indeed.  Thanks for the English lesson.  According to Merriam Webster, the first definition of platitude is "a quality or state of being dull or insipid."  Obviously, that's not what I intended to convey, so perhaps that would describe me.  I'm not sure whether to apologize first to the readers or Jess Jackson. How about both?  

Michael Costello said:  

   Past the Point, eh? Well I guess I can confidently dismiss these pace figures from any future handicapping ventures.

    Past the Point was merely an option I threw out based on, a) the chance he might make a clear early lead, b) the possibility he would be in comparable form to his '08 Woodward, given the recent success of Maktoum-owned horses in stakes races, c) his 15-1 program odds (he went to post at 13-1), and d) the reality that many horseplayers would want an option other than 1-5 Rachel Alexandra.

    What's the problem?  He only lost by 17 3/4 lengths.  

 Here's another from Saratoga_Mike:

     Is it possible for you to publish a Moss Pace fig to Beyer Pace fig conversion chart on here for half-time splits? I want to be able to convert your four-furlong pars into Beyer half-time equivalents. I typically bet on a track with very few shippers, so I simply use the Beyer four-furlong table contained in "Beyer on Speed" and adjust for the Beyer variant. I understand why you truncated your pars, but I think there are a lot of people accustomed to my simplistic single track approach. I'd gladly buy your Pace Moss figs everyday if you'd provide a conversion table--it will help me with the occasional shipper and speed up the process by taking the variant calculation out of the process. Thanks.

     Okay, you asked for it. 

     A Beyer Speed Figure of 120 corresponds to a 100 on the Moss Pace Figure scale, and on the other end of the spectrum, a Beyer Speed Figure of 0 corresponds to a 56 on the Moss Pace Figure scale.

      From there, it's not too difficult for those mathematically or algebraically inclined to come up with a conversion spreadsheet.  If x=Moss Pace Figure, use this formula to get the corresponding Beyer figure: ((x-100)/0.366)+120. 

      For example, if a Moss Pace Figure is 75, the Beyer Speed Figure will be:

      ((75-100)/0.366)+120, or (-25/0.366)+120, or (-68)+120 or.......52.

       Now that deserves platitudes!

tom hughes More than 1 year ago
never been more disappointed in learning you are voting for rachel over zen rac beat nominal 3 yr old boys and a so so group of olders her exciting winnings were mostly because in this country we are facinated by girls beating boys tho it happens plenty of times zens bc race was the most spectacular race of the yr and i bet against her even tho i loved her the last 2 yrs i too dont think girls will beat boys and thought she had met her match but she was the match to be met. i got chills.by far and away the hoy. thanks for yuor great tv work love it keep it up
Medlocke More than 1 year ago
Mr.Moss, I'd just like to say as a huge thoroughbred racing fan for many years, I relish the races that ESPN carry where I get to hear your sensible commentary and also get to hear you set Jerry Bailey straight.lol. I think you and Bailey together give betters a very professional perspective on which horse has the best chance to win the race you guys may be calling. Most of the time, we're stuck with the TVG and HRTV nuts who constantly complain about how much money they've lost, and go on to show us how they played their ticket, expecting us to take the same losses I guess. Anyway, I really respect your opinion on the racing game.
slewofdamascus More than 1 year ago
I think PTP was a legitimate pick in the sense that there was positive information that might coorelate to a big figure, namely that he was a horse for a course. In spite of what he lost by, he was sitting in a great spot, I wouldn't have any regrets, especially since Macho Again was similarly attractive, and obviously he ran very well, a winning effort under a lot of circumstances. That was the race to try and beat RA, imo. She just proved to be the genuine article. A look at where the other horses who were up on the pace finished, like the PTP, is indicative of another high quality performance (I gave her a 110).
Michelle More than 1 year ago
Randy, I think you meant accolades, for future reference, in case you're wondering what the heck that word was you wanted.
C More than 1 year ago
Larry, "HOY honors go to horses who duck no one... ...Lady's Secret and Ruffian were better Fillies" By your own standards, did Ruffian ever face male of the year Forego? older female of the year Susan's Girl? How many times did she race outside of the East Coast? How many older males did she face? Older females? Aside from the fateful match race, which should've favored her, how many males did she face? Answers: no, no, zero, zero, zero, zero. So what exactly makes her "better"?
Ralph d More than 1 year ago
Can't fathom your figures for R. A.'s Woodward. If her final figure is 96(or 97 as I calculted) her opening quarter of 22.85 should be slightly over 100 pacewise.Her second quarter is 97.7, followed by a third quarter of 95.8, and last 3/8 running at a 95.4 clip. A methodology that has pace figures below final time rating (excluding synthetics) doesn't seem realistic to me..... and I do realize that your pace figures do not represent separate pace intervals as mine do. But you have done great work work in this difficult aspect of pace relationship.
Al Placido More than 1 year ago
Please explain how to compute a track variant on synthetic tracks. The conundum is: Synthetic tracks are always rated fast.
Nick Briglia More than 1 year ago
You could go crazy trying to convert this and that figure or you can do something sensible like get Bris pp's instead of DRF pp's. Problem solved.
Pete More than 1 year ago
Randy, You describe the Woodward pace as above average for 9f at Saratoga. How can the early pace be fast when the first two numbers in your race shape [83-87] are slower than the next two [93-95]? Shouldn't they be slowing down, in the later stages, if the early pace was fast? What points of call do those numbers represent? Running your numbers through the Beyer conversion you posted I get the following: Woodward: 73-84-100-106 Final 109 Is that correct? Thanks in advance.
fabian sepaul More than 1 year ago
there are two figures represented on your forms.please explain the purpose or use of both.I am interested in performance speed figs. plus "track variances" figs.
Saratoga_Mike More than 1 year ago
Thanks for the conversion table! And I don't find it one bit dull.