I`ll post up the article Epi its all i have to go on as i dont have the form books either it may make better sense then.

Thanks Walter, that would be helpful.

Boozer

Roushayd ran twice as a two-year-old, coming out at Kempton on September 6th over 7 furlongs (class 32) and finishing 2nd. Note what is said later about the better horses coming out later and being lightly raced as two-year-olds. Also note the distance raced over, (not the minimum five furlongs) and also note the track. His second outing was at Newbury on September 19th (class 56) over one mile where he finished 4th and showing a lot of improvement in this higher class and at a greater distance.

As a three-year-old Roushayd ran ,eight times, winning three times, Class ratings were progressively, 12 over extended 1 mile 3 furlongs, 39 over 1 1/2 miles and
641 over 1 1/2 miles. Raced also in class 9 over 1 mile 2 furlongs and class 604 over 1 mile 6 furlongs and note that he was out of the first three both times.

highest win 641
A/rating = 231

Athough these figures are given in Systematic Betting it is interesting to note no mention is made on how to form the a/rating. Class is based on the last run ONLY in the book.

Be Lucky

Leaving out both race details, his (vdw`s)comments were as follows.

First Division and Greenhills Joy are the only others with a run and both showed previous class to be 31.Both ran over today`s distance, Greenhills Joy at Haydock and First Division at Kempton. Greenhills Joy won her race and First Division was second in his.Both were first outings but, although Greenhills Joy won, her form upon inspection is below that of First Division.A slow race and the closing stages shows hers was less of a test.In the previous season Greenhills Joy had had a hard campaign , running 14 times and winning three races of class 21, 28, and 52. First Division ran 4 times, winning once in class 78. There is little doubt that First Division is the most probable winner although the evidence would not have me reaching for my wallet.

When dealing with Shimshek an important point was reiterated.

(vdw)On recent running, Shimshek has the highest previous race class, finishing second in a five horse race over 2 miles, but when you examine the form it does not make the pulse quicken.The race was slow and the horse did nothing from the distance.When looking at the race before it shows a considerable downturn so is not "on" here. Shimshek, however, was only beaten a head and this should indicate to you the importance of class.

Mtoto

Thanks for that

So Roushayd was dropped in class from a race roughly equal to his ability rating
Was expecting the previous race to be much higher in value in relation to his ability rating.

Walter

While I can see what you are getting at
Sf’s apart,in relation to the comments VDW made about other horses could you have honestly backed Roushayd with confidence

Bearing in mind that Roushayd if I remember rightly was beaten 9 lengths and ran on one paced in the King George.
What did he do from the distance
What did he set alight?
Did his form make the pulse quicken?
There was only the improved Sf which is almost bound to be an improvement when upped in class if they run anywhere near, due to the class factor that is calculated into the Sf

Boozer,

Looking back at how the old s/f were formulated was a class factor built into it. The figures seem to be based on the standard time for the course. They didn't appear to have an allowance for class. If there is an allowance for class (higher class horse are expected to run faster) wouldn't this make it harder for a horse from a class race to score a good figure, not easier?

Be Lucky

All very interesting and thank god we've finally got rid of that silly "ability" rating.

That's as may be. To have any success you still have to have some means of rating a horses ability. VDW later suggested the one that is most commonly used now. What would you suggest as a better alternative? It's easy to say it's silly, how about some constructive ideas.

I dont believe in an idea of general abstract ability, only ability in respect to the race in consideration, how that ability is best judged depends on the nature of the race, for example shorter distances are won by speed so I aim to find the fastest horse, longer distances are won by strength so I try to find the strongest horse and generally speaking I look for races in which only one of the runners has clearly demonstrated the ability to win a race that is more taxing in terms of these demands than the race under consideration.

While I have never been a fan of Speed Figures
and have only a basic Knowlege on the subject I think an allowance for class of meeting was built in via going allowance
I will do some swotting
In the meantime if somebody can verify the fact ...........

That's the problem isn't it. Generally speaking if two horses finished a similar race at a similar number of lengths from the winner but one was in higher class than the other or one was carrying more weight than the other compared with their present race I would consider these performances distinguishable according to the conditions of speed or strength respectively, how about you?

I deleted that
as I reread your post and the answer was in it

You really need to find a race where there is only one that stands out
Then over a period of time study is required, some of the standouts will win some will lose
Get rid of most of the losers in realtime by experiance gained by the studying of past results
and Bobs your uncle

Piece of cake really

"Like shelling peas" one might even venture to suggest.

If only

Regarding the 3 point advantage and go back as far as you like it will serve you well
Have you done any studies of same over the jumps?
It would be interesting to see the results
Albeit you would need to multiply the figures for use with todays values

The class factor in Speed Figures

The following is from Bellamys Article (Raceform)
Which has been put up before


The median time is precisely what it says. It is the median time of all winning times for a certain trip over a five-year period, eliminating races confined to young horses or fillies.
Standard times tend to be an average of the faster times run over a certain trip, after which adjustments may be made for CLASS and weight.
Consequently, the Raceform median times are slower than their standard counterparts. Unlike standard times, however, median times are not theoretical and have been achieved by at least one horse in the history of mankind.
That is not to say that the class of horse is ignored. Adjustments for class are made in the calculation of the Split Second speed figures, but they are carried out at a later stage.
Once median times have been calculated, it is then possible to calculate speed figures for any meeting.
Firstly, the winner's time for each race is compared to the me-
dian time for the trip and a raw unadjusted speed figure is allocated using this comparison in its calculation.
There is an obvious question here. Does this not mean that this figure will always be high for races run on fast ground and low for those run on soft?
Yes they will, but they are not the figure that is published and there is one more very important stage to go through before the speed figures are allocated to each horse.
We have to work out how conditions on the track have influenced the final times and, of these factors, the going is but just one.
Other factors that may affect the time taken to run a race include moving the rails inwards or outwards, especially around a bend, or the omission of fences or hurdles. Even forces of nature like wind or driving rain can have a big effect.
To compensate for all of this, a set of 'par' speed figures have been established for each class of race and have been arrived at after plenty of research.
These par figures are the speed figures you would expect to be earned by the better winners within each class and would, in theory, be earned if track conditions had no effect either way on their final times.
Incidentally, the research showed there to be an 18-length gap between a top-class Group 1 horse and a winning selling plater over a trip of one mile.
The raw speed figure allocated to each winner at a particular meeting is compared to the par for the class of race and an average difference for the meeting is calculated.
This average difference becomes the going allowance (or track variant) and is applied to the raw speed figures earned by each winner on the card.
Separate going allowances may be established for races run on the straight and round tracks at the same meeting if it's obvious the ground was different on each, as is also the case with races over fences and hurdles at a National Hunt racing.

Boozer - If you consider that VDW said he only backed less than 20% of horses he thought should win, it becomes apparent that the class/form horse does not win 80% of the time. It's nearer to the strike rate of favs.

VDW said
The class/form horse the one most likely to win.
From your findings do you say not?

Frequently I have spoken of "class" and "form" also the importance of getting the balance between the two correct. Also I have consistently said the "class/form" horse is the one most likely to win and that to bet against it pushes the odds away from you. Racing being what it is, prevents the absolute certainty, but to be successful you must always put the odds in your favour not vice versa. To isolate the "class/ form" horse can often prove a tricky problem, but some stick out like a sore thumb and it is these which should have support.

"Some stick out like a sore thumb"

Temperement ,Winner in a race?

Class form horse the one most likely to win
Probabilty?
as is

The 3 most consistent often trap all winners on the card
Probability?

First 6 in betting
80% winners trapped probabilty?

111 111 111 99% certain that winner comes from these 3
Probabilty?

Going against probabilty is flaunting the odds

Sorry cant see why probabilty is a problem for Fulham
Bearing in mind that there are no rigid rules

[This message was edited by boozer on October 02, 2003 at 07:31 PM.]

Had to have a couple of days "Off" - owing to having to attend to the dreaded - "W" word, but hope to make some sensible posts shortly !

On a Positive note, the thread alreadly appears to show signs of a revival, and I hope that I have had a small input towards this.

I know that some of the "High Priests" are steadfastly defending their ground - but I beleive that the answer - is not to hurl abuse at them when they decry a contribution, - but to support the contributor, if you feel that they have made a usefull suggestion !!

Todays suggestion from myself - is to ask yourself --

Who were VDWs "Target" audience -

was it the likes of Guest who appears to be looking for the "Hidden Truths" - or was it the average reader - who was looking for help in solving his betting problems. - and - who needed some simple stratagies to help him out.

more later when I have actualy had time to re-read some of the VDW letters !

tc