- This topic has 109 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
If you look at the standards time list I have put up, I solved the track variant problem by adding a lbs. per length figure to every race distance on every course.
When compiling my speed figures I use the standard times + the lbs. per length variant for that distance, and then round each rating to 9st i.e a horse rated 95 carrying 9-2 would end up with a rating of 97…
Of course in reality the horse beaten a length at Pontefract would have been closer to the winner when the winner past the post, than would be the case for the Epsom horse
Is this really the case?
Yes it should be, at least based on conventional thinking.
Suppose Horse A is beaten by 1 second at Epsom and Horse B is beaten by 1 second at Pontefract. Both horses will be given the distance beaten as 6 lengths because 1 second = 6 lengths.
David,
I think it’s the other way around: the lengths beaten are obtained from the film at the winning post & the time beaten is calculated from lengths beaten.
Could stand correction, though!
I have just started working on the speed figures for the French racing, notably at Longchamp and Saint-cloud etc, and I came across the 4 1/2f 2yo old race at Saint-cloud and worked out that the lbs. per length for this distance should be
4.06
.
I looked at the rating machine on the Racing post website and it does not offer any any lbs. per length for this distance, which is not surprising.
I have just started to add France to the standard times list.
Ratings: http://tinyurl.com/3h5zupw (excel.xls)
Standard Times: http://tinyurl.com/69fol76 (.rar file)
David,
I think it’s the other way around: the lengths beaten are obtained from the film at the winning post & the time beaten is calculated from lengths beaten.
Could stand correction, though!
Just read this on the BHA site:
"the Photo-finish software which calculates distances based on the elapsed time between each horse multiplied by the Lengths per Second Scale in use, dependant on the ground conditions"Corrected!
I came across this thread while searching for "racecourse standard times".
I play the big handicaps each day and along with draw bias, pace analysis plays a big part in my selection process.
Part of what I do is look at a horses previous runs to see how well it did pace-wise. To do this I need to know the race finishing time relative to the standard time for the race. I have been using the RP times but they look wrong, and everyone says they are wrong. Every race is ‘Slow by 3.02s’.
What I need is the standard time for each course, distance, and importantly, each class from 1-6.
You guys seems to know more than a bit about it and if someone could point me in the right direction it would be much appreciated.
I came across this thread while searching for "racecourse standard times".
I play the big handicaps each day and along with draw bias, pace analysis plays a big part in my selection process.
Part of what I do is look at a horses previous runs to see how well it did pace-wise. To do this I need to know the race finishing time relative to the standard time for the race. I have been using the RP times but they look wrong, and everyone says they are wrong. Every race is ‘Slow by 3.02s’.
What I need is the standard time for each course, distance, and importantly, each class from 1-6.
You guys seems to know more than a bit about it and if someone could point me in the right direction it would be much appreciated.
You will not find a set of standard times arranged in class for the UK and the only set of times I have seen arranged like that were in Hong Kong.
I use my own lbs. per length calculations when checking The Racing Posts standard times and they are correct, believe me.
My list: http://tinyurl.com/69fol76I see a flaw in your calculations if you are just using the time outside standard as printed in the Racing Post i.e. (slow by 6.02s) because you then have to add or subtract the going allowance to this figure.
I spent months working on the standard times list above, checking evey race distance and adding my own lbs. per length calculations, and with the 38,500+ ratings which I have for this season alone, I would have noticed any major errors by now.
TheBluesBrother,
Thanks for your link to the times, and also to your ratings.
I see that from your LBS/LENGTH figure you can give a horse a LBS rating akin to the OR by the BHA.
I won’t be so accurate with what I’m doing though. I want to know whether a given race was run in a slow (-2 lengths), average (-2 to +2 lengths), or fast final time (>+2 lengths). Obviously a fast class 6 finishing time may not equal an average class 3 finishing time.
I used to compile my own AW speed figures and to do this I had a list of standard times seperated by class. The difference was clear to see with better class races having faster times. The problem was I did it all by trawling through the form book, and it literally took months.
Any resources you know of that would let me do this faster?
Here is a list of times I have put together 20,000+ races which are updated twice a week http://tinyurl.com/68tgh7p just sort using the filters.
The trouble is that The Racing Post do not publish the class of race which would have been handy for you
You are right about the lbs. per length being akin to BHA, I use this to assess which horses are well handicapped i.e.
Silver Grey
who won at Sandown on the 4th August had a BHA offical rating
78
I have her now on
95
.
I have seen trainers handicap horses but this is one of the best, In Sept 2010 she had a offical mark of108
.
Silver Grey 50/1 for the Salisbury 4.05 tomorrow.
The horse has gone from a class 4 handicap to running off 78 in a listed race today
.Even at 33-1, the trainer must think she is in with a chance, because she can kiss goodbye to her new handicap mark of 84 if she makes the frame, and look forward to something in the 90+.
Awesome post mate,I’ve also been searching for the RP Standard Times as well so many thanks.
Blues Brother
Have you read Andrew Beyer’s book Beyer on Speed?
Because this is how he works his speed ratings out.
Where a lenght is worth say for (I have rounded)
Ascot 5f 3.5 Epsom 3.8 York 3.6
Ascot6f 2.8 Epsom 3.0 York 2.9
Ascot7f 2.4 Epsom 2.6 York 2.5
Ascot8f 2.1 York 2.1
Based on standard times for each different course.This will vary some what.
Now do you take into account weight when you do your ratings?
Or do you ignore what weight a horse has carried in each of its races?Hi venjee, yes I have all Andrew Beyer’s books in my collection.
You cannot use Beyer’s lbs per length method and apply them to European racecourses because they are not uniformed like the US racecourses i.e. round and flat.
My lbs per length calculations take into account the different variations for each racecourse, whereas Top Speed will use 3.54 lbs per length for every 5f distance on every racecourse and this will include odd distances like 5f11y at Bath…I don’t think so!
To test a theory here I will look at the Chepstow’s 1m14y distance
2.15 lbs
per length and Limerick’s 1 mile distance
1.96 lbs
per length.
Chepstow’s 1m14y distance is run downhill from the start, hence the high 2.15 lbs per length.
Limerick’s 1m distance has a low 1.96 lbs per length is run uphill from the start.When I am rating a race, I use 9.0st and any weight below i.e. 8.11 I will take 3lbs off the rating and add 3lbs if the horse carried 9.3 and I do not use the WFA scale as this corrupts the ratings.
I have a booklet by B.J.Healy "Profit From Weights Right" edited by Tony Peach 1989 and published by Moss Publications Manchester.
In the booklet Mr Healy states that he spent months sitting at his desk trying to work out the lbs per length holy grail calculation.Maybe I was lucky to have worked for two multi-national companies where I used Probabilities and Statistics in my job as a Quality Auditor, because after 20 odd years I can tell whether a process is right or wrong and it didn’t take me long to come up with the Formula.
Standard Times: http://tinyurl.com/69fol76
Food for thought
Thanks for the reply Blues
Personally I do not take weight into account with my ratings as most books I have read it appears that weight is not to much of a issue to affect the ratings in any way?
I use the american method for my ratings it is not perfect but my strike rate is acceptable so far this year. 26 bets 9 wins 34%
I have sourced the book you mentioned will have a read when it comes.Hi all
I have recently returned to this forum and I am keen on using speed ratings but I am struggling to understand the lbs/length process
Could someone please show me a working example so that it sticks in my head as this is the piece of my jigsaw I just cannot fathom
By the way, Blues Brother….fantastic work and I cannot explain how much work you have saved many of us
Hope to hear from you soon
Fil
When the weekly Handicap Book was on sale, one day they published a Pounds, Seconds and Length chart and I spotted a major error in the lbs. per lengths calculations.
Top Speed "Dave Edwards" uses for instance a figure of 3.54lbs per length for every 5f distance covering every course and this would include odd distances like the 5f11yds distance at Bath.
So you have 3.54 lbs.per length for the the 5f trip at Epsom ("run downhill") and the same calculation for the 5f trip at Pontefract ("last two furlongs run uphill").
My calculations for Epsom’s 5 furlongs would be 3.64 lbs.per length and at Pontefract 5 furlongs would be 3.24 lbs. per length making a difference of 2 lengths whereas Top Speed would be the same i.e. "o" lengths.
The simple formula for the lbs. per length which I came up with (my secret) takes into account the different track variances.
I emailed Dave Edwards a couple of times over the past year and I was going to share my findings with him, but he was so far refused to answer my emails.
The Racing post have been using their old lbs. per length chart since the days of the late great Ken Hussey and it’s a shame that it was never accurate.
So looking at my Lbs. per length calcualtions you have a different calculation for every distance on every course and not like The Racing Post where you have one figure covering a block of distances and using the same figure for every course.
Standard Times: http://tinyurl.com/69fol76
Here is an example how I rated the 2yo "Dawn Approach" over 5f at the Curragh on Sunday 25th March.
One thing to note is that I do not use Weight For Age in my calcuations, you can if you want.
1. The going time for the race was 6.93 secs above standard.
2. The going allowance was -0.9 secs per furlong (the yeiding going was slowing the horses down).
3. I use .2 secs per length.Now for the calculation:
multiply 5 furlongs by the going allowance i.e. -0.9
5 x -0.9 = -4.50 secs
As the race was run 6.93 secs outside standard subtract the updated going allowance corection i.e -4.50. (note that if the going allwance was + 4.50 secs you have to add the going correction)
6.93-4.50 = 2.43 secs.
Now divide the corrected going allowance of 2.43 by .2 secs per length.
2.43 /.2 = 12.15 lengths.
multipy the lengths by the lbs.per length calculation which is 3.37 lbs per length for 5f trip at the Curragh.
12.15 x 3.37 = 40.94
now subtract the figure 40.94 from 100.
100-40.94 = 59.06 or rounded down 59.
As Dawn Approach carried 9st 5lb we now have to adjust the speed figure of 59.
For weight carried over 9st adjust the figure for the rating i.e.59 + 5lb = 64 ( this is Dawn Approach speed figure).
So if Dawn Approach had carried 8-11 we would have had to subtract 3lb from his speed figure i.e.
59 – 3lbs = 56.
Once you have arrived at any horses speed figure you could add the Weight for age allowance but I don’t because it corrupts the ratings.
Speed ratings are very simple to work out
.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.