1000 guineas ratings

[Trotter]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

I dont think you're getting the point all the Racing Posts standard times dont tell you anything apart from the total average of every single horse who has run over that course and distance.

No it's not...........The RP standard times are not just 'average times' They are adjusted to take into account the course layout, class of horse and weight carried The RP Standard Time is the time that a mature horse rated 100 carrying 9 stone should be capable of achieving over each trip at each track I believe that after making these adjustments they then use the average of the 10 best times recorded So 1 second above standard at Ascot is equal to 1 second above standard at Brighton because those standards are set by the same horse (by adjustments)

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings this arguments been going on since the beginning of time ......i can see what zenyatta is getting at but i cant see how you can improve as to change the course standard system would be pure and utter guesswork and just flailling around in the dark :sad

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

You are totally on the right path but you're getting hung up on standard times produced by the Racing Post, they are totally wrong. If you want to treat speed figures in a scientific terms use true facts...the "winning time" of a race and work from that, standard times will just mess everything up. You will end up bending facts you uncover to "fit" racing post standards that are wrong. If RP standard times worked, all you have to do is compare every horses last performance and back the horse with the best "standard" time comparrison last time out.

if you just back the timed best horse then youd be miles out in some races as youd always be backing the horse that ran on an easy course lto as opposed to a potential classy horse that was running on a harder(slower ) course ........if you can crack that i agree youd have the holy grail of speed ratings

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings The Racing Post Standard Time is not an average of all races. That is correct Trotter, you beat me to it. Although I would disagree slightly about your last line. Because there are fewer horses of good quality running at Brighton, the average of those (weight adjusted) 10 best times is unlikely to be as good as Ascot. ie It is easier for a quality horse to break the standard barrier at Brighton than it is at Ascot. Then again to further complicate the issue, because your quote is of Ascot and not another established Grade 1 course: With recent(ish) changes made to courses like Ascot, Doncaster and Haydock there are not as many races to compare standard times. So a horse may not need to put up such a good run to produce a "good" time now (compared to before alterations made to the course). It is the same standard time whatever the ground. On heavy the time might be 25 seconds slower than standard. It is up to us to judge each race by that standard time. Softer ground, poor quality race, slow early pace, can all effect a time. Rail positions also affect times, the actual distance run over can be 30 or more yards different to the advertised distance. However, on the whole Racing Post Standard Times are quite accurate used as a guide and not as a rule book on definite ability. I would expect a good horse to beat the standard time on good-firm given a sound pace. If it is a slowly run race the time will be slow (even if the ground is on the firm side). On good going I'd expect a good horse to put up a time near the standard time. It is difficult to give a definite time because (as I said) it all depends on pace and quality. Although (as you might expect) I prefer Timeform Timefigures which take in to account things like wind speed and direction.

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings Richard, It may be beneficial to you to seek out what Simon Rowlands said about time. There's an article somewhere on the net. Will try to find it. :ok

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings windspeed and direction .......omg (faints...........):unsure

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings If you want accurate information Richard, that's what you need.:lol A strong head wind can slow them down dramatically. A strong tail wind can blast them to record times!

[Trotter]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

The Racing Post Standard Time is not an average of all races. That is correct Trotter, you beat me to it. Although I would disagree slightly about your last line. Because there are fewer horses of good quality running at Brighton, the average of those (weight adjusted) 10 best times is unlikely to be as good as Ascot. ie It is easier for a quality horse to break the standard barrier at Brighton than it is at Ascot.

I see what you're saying Ginge.........but don't the RP take the class differential into account by adjusting the times to a standard horse......ie a horse rated 100 So if the standard time for 5F at brighton is 60 seconds based on the actual horses that run at brighton, say average 80 rated types...........then the RP standard time wouldn't be 60 seconds, it might be 59 seconds because that's what a 100 rated horse should do ie they're dealing with a 'standard horse - 4yo, rated 100, carrying 9 stone'............and forming the standard times on what that horse would do, not the average horse that runs at each track, who might be rated only 80 at brighton

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings You are right Trotter, the RP is weight adjusted, but the fact more good horses run at Ascot than Brighton still effects the average time (imo).

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings Richard, Google "Simon Rowlands time analysis" and look up parts 1, 2 and 3. You'll find it very interesting.:ok

[Trotter]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

You are right Trotter' date=' the RP is weight adjusted, but the fact more good horses run at Ascot than Brighton still effects the average time (imo).[/quote'] not just weight adjusted but class adjusted as well the standard time at ascot is what a 100 rated horse should achieve, let's call him Speedy the standard time at brighton is the equivalent time Speedy should run at brighton It's not really got anything to do with the average class of runners at each track because the standards are what Speedy should run at each track

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings Trotter, Given a FAIR PACE (ie not sound, strong or even good, just fair): When Frankel runs at Newmarket on good-firm his chances of breaking standard are good. If he ran at Brighton on similar ground, the chances of him breaking standard are excellant.

[Zenyatta]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

I see what you're saying Ginge.........but don't the RP take the class differential into account by adjusting the times to a standard horse......ie a horse rated 100 So if the standard time for 5F at brighton is 60 seconds based on the actual horses that run at brighton, say average 80 rated types...........then the RP standard time wouldn't be 60 seconds, it might be 59 seconds because that's what a 100 rated horse should do ie they're dealing with a 'standard horse - 4yo, rated 100, carrying 9 stone'............and forming the standard times on what that horse would do, not the average horse that runs at each track, who might be rated only 80 at brighton

The racing post standard times used to evalute a horses performance in relation to the average (Standard) of every horse ever to run over a given C/D, are NEVER adjusted, you're talking about speed figures. The standards that a horse rated 100 "should do" is why their standard times are wrong. I agree trying to calculate how fast a horse rated 100 can run on all the tracks in Britain is a good idea

[Haystacks]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings Just to add my 2c: 1. I think doing your own speed ratings can definitely throw up some good-priced winners, as Richard has proved on numerous occasions this year. Obviously a lot of races aren't won by the fastest horse. The pace of the race, jockey tactics, luck in running etc., all play a part. However, speed ratings do provide a reasonable barometer of the horse's raw level of ability relative to its opposition that day. 2. They are much more reliable for the a/w than turf. 3. I agree with those who have suggested that the RP standard times are very flawed and especially unreliable for the small tracks. 4. The only way around this would be to create your own standard times for every single racecourse, but that is obviously a huge amount of work. (On his web site Nick Mordin used to publish his own standard times as an alternative to the RP, but they aren't there any more.) Anyway Richard, you've obviously put a lot of work into your ratings and certainly deserve your successes. Over time you may be able to make modifications that make the ratings even more accurate, but if they work well for you as they are right now, then go for it and good luck!

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings ive taken on board whats been said and im going to attempt to compile my own standard time list for all courses up to mile ,ive noticed that the ratio between the course record and standard time should be around 1:0.990 but on some courses this is currently as low as 0.975 which could suggest that the standard time is too high and if i find the figure which brings these to around the 0.990 mark (or an average of all courses that i find) then that theoretically would give me a better standard time .....i'll give it a whirl and see what happens when ive finished ...... for arguments sake if this works then doncaster 1mile time is in fact miles out (approx 1-1.5 secs ) so would need some serious adjustment but thats just speculation at the moment and i'll post up the full list when its complete heres what i mean : record /standard time newm 0.9862 5f 6f 0.9937 7f 0.9908 8f 0.9850 newbury 5f 0.995 6f 0.975 7f 0.981 8f 0.978 this is the course record divided by the standard time which is consistent throughtout nemmarket at all distances up to a mile but at newbury 2 of the times are the same whereas 2 are quite far out suggesting they could be wrong ......does anyone think this has merit as a method for compiling a standard ?

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings back on the 1000 guineas ........does this mean we're all agreed that hooray could be the one to be on then if blue bunting is flawed ?

[Trotter]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

this is the course record divided by the standard time which is consistent throughtout nemmarket at all distances up to a mile but at newbury 2 of the times are the same whereas 2 are quite far out suggesting they could be wrong ......does anyone think this has merit as a method for compiling a standard ?

I think that's an excellent idea richard......... As i said earlier in the thread I don't think it matters how you do speed ratings as long as you do them consistantly the same all the same, ie they're consistant with themselves Doing them differently to other people is the way ahead because other people will all get much the same result and you'll have something unique to yourself I think in this great game of ours it's finding a differant angle to the 'herd' that wins you points and prizes in the long run I would advise though, like others, to avoid getting carried away with speed figs............they might show a numerical assessment of what a horse did in one race on one day, but there's loads of factors which determine that result which might not be the same the next time the horse runs in a different race against different opposition if you can identify some anomolies in RP standard times via your method, that should give you an angle that other people aren't using !

[Zenyatta]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

Just to add my 2c: 1. I think doing your own speed ratings can definitely throw up some good-priced winners, as Richard has proved on numerous occasions this year. Obviously a lot of races aren't won by the fastest horse. The pace of the race, jockey tactics, luck in running etc., all play a part. However, speed ratings do provide a reasonable barometer of the horse's raw level of ability relative to its opposition that day. 2. They are much more reliable for the a/w than turf. 3. I agree with those who have suggested that the RP standard times are very flawed and especially unreliable for the small tracks. 4. The only way around this would be to create your own standard times for every single racecourse, but that is obviously a huge amount of work. (On his web site Nick Mordin used to publish his own standard times as an alternative to the RP, but they aren't there any more.) Anyway Richard, you've obviously put a lot of work into your ratings and certainly deserve your successes. Over time you may be able to make modifications that make the ratings even more accurate, but if they work well for you as they are right now, then go for it and good luck!

Top post.

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

The racing post standard times used to evalute a horses performance in relation to the average (Standard) of every horse ever to run over a given C/D, are NEVER adjusted, you're talking about speed figures.

If the Racing Post did do the above Zenyatta, then you'd be right to criticise, but as they don't; you are the one whos figures are wrong, not the Racing Post.:eyes So very sorry and all that...., but your criticism of the Racing Post is invalid.;)

[Zenyatta]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

If the Racing Post did do the above Zenyatta, then you'd be right to criticise, but as they don't; you are the one whos figures are wrong, not the Racing Post.:eyes So very sorry and all that...., but your criticism of the Racing Post is invalid.;)

The racing post standard times are a mean/average. Topspeed then adjusts them for going weight, etc etc to get a speed figure. My figures are not wrong, I dont use RP standard times :tongue2

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

back on the 1000 guineas ........does this mean we're all agreed that hooray could be the one to be on then if blue bunting is flawed ?

If just going by times, then Hooray is the only one you should be interested in Richard. However she is unlikely to stay. By sprinter Invincible Spirit who was in turn by another best known for sprinting in Green Desert (also second to Dancing Brave in the Guineas). Dam Hypnotise is by miler Machiavellian whos stock are generally milers. Hypnotise herself was effective at up to 1m. Her sons and daughters have not got further than a mile, no matter who the sire. Including Hypnotic and Notorize who were by stamina influences Lomitas and Hernando. Grand dam Belle Et Deluree (by Derby winner The Minstrel herself) did win over further, but produced Dazzle (by miler Gone West), winner of the Cherry Hinton (6f) at 2 yet finished 3rd in the 1000 Guineas before being dropped in trip. Winning the Oak Tree (listed 7f) at Goodwood. There is also Hooray's character to consider, she's an enthusiastic filly who likes to get on with it. Attraction was another front-running filly who managed to stay 1m, although she was by Efisio, best at 7f to 1m, from a miling family on the dams side. Her ability is A1 at 6f, better than any other horse in the race. If it were a 6 furlongs she'd be favourite. There are fillys in the race like Havant and Misty For Me, who will want a strong pace to make use of their stamina. So it is unlikely Hooray will be allowed to dictate a slow pace and make it a test of speed at the trip. I'd say she probably won't stay, but it is possible her price makes it a worthwhile risk.

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

The racing post standard times are a mean/average. Topspeed then adjusts them for going weight, etc etc to get a speed figure. My figures are not wrong, I dont use RP standard times :tongue2

But it is NOT the mean/average of EVERY RACE.:wall Therefore it is YOUR ASSESSMENT of Racing Post standard times that is flawed Zenyatta, not the Racing Post Standard times themselves.:eyes You are evaluating something that does not exist.:lol

[Trotter]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings Just looking at the card for the 1000 gns on the RP.........there are 3 horses that have no odds quoted Barefoot Lady, Immortal Verse and Nova Hawk Does that mean they're likely non runners ? Barefoot Lady was only supplemented a few days ago !........:unsure I'm rather interested in Nova Hawk for an EW bet...........

[zapp]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

Just looking at the card for the 1000 gns on the RP.........there are 3 horses that have no odds quoted Barefoot Lady, Immortal Verse and Nova Hawk Does that mean they're likely non runners ? ...

Maybe a glitch? Nova Hawk's price is in line in most bookies including the exchanges (where I guess it would jump upwards if there was suspicion for withdrawal). Besides, a couple of major bookies are now "non-runner no bet" so bet should be safe there.

[Zenyatta]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

But it is NOT the mean/average of EVERY RACE.:wall Therefore it is YOUR ASSESSMENT of Racing Post standard times that is flawed Zenyatta, not the Racing Post Standard times themselves.:eyes You are evaluating something that does not exist.:lol

Computer says .................no :D

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings off to work for a few hours but i'll begin work on my course standards later ,i will also try to evaluate a course standard for maison lafitte if i can so i can evaluate moonlights run better as at the moment everyone seems in the dark as to the value of the form he achieved . i agree about hooray ,im sceptical that she will stay as a horse that is so good over 6f would need to be superhuman to be equally as good over 1 mile as they ae different disciplines and there are negative vibes from trainer (poor training ,no eating etc) so id be worried from that alone . so that leaves a big hole ........moonlight clouds run against wooton bassett would suggest a classy runner ,if the rain comes i will definately be on laughing lashes(needs good/sft to be best but could handle good possibly) ,havant hasnt done nothing to date ,memory looked like a sprinter last year ,misty for me now has to come into calculations on 135 (looked progressive and comes from powerful stable) izzi tops comeback run was decent 135 so you would expect a certain amount of improvement(hence 142) so 40/1 looks big at present from the dunlop stable but this race is so wide open if you weigh up all the ratings then surely MISTY FOR ME 8/1 is the percentage call (looks like he would beat laughing lashes on good/good/firm) ,stable are brilliant at bringing horses on for the big races ,horse has been quiet in write ups so is value at moment at around 8/1 ,with question marks over many of these .....this is one im favouring at present

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings trying to find a horse capable of 150 ,few on the ground at present so it looks like an improver will be the answer .....but which one ?

[Haystacks]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings

off to work for a few hours but i'll begin work on my course standards later

Richard, I have to say that your enthusiasm and dedication is inspiring and infectious. Best of luck mate!

[Gingertipster]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings Richard, Did you look at that stuff by Simon Rowlands? Am sure it will help. I'd hold fire if you are thinking of backing Misty For Me or Roderic O'Connor for the Guineas es, both freindless on betfair at the moment. I know Misty For Me is not a good worker, been second string more than once and still won at two. And she is a stayer at the trip (probably too much so), so may be they've under-estimated how she's going at home. However, they should know what she's like by now. I am thinking about taking her out of my R.Post ttf lists.

[richard-westwood]

Re: 1000 guineas ratings well at least i think shes won 2 group 1? if im right so that would be a good pointer as to her class .i cant find any times or anything for maison lafitte so i cant rate the french horse which leaves a gaping hole in the form ....which i dont like .....form is thin on the ground so it might pay to get hold of some gallop reports and see whos running the best at home ?wide open and an outsider might blast forward and cause a surprise