Keeneland 4.5f figures…

[DanG]

I know the 4.5f races are bizarre coming out of Kentucky as a rule and this year is no exception.

Sunday, 6/29, Belmont race-4 for example.

#1 Mr Mistoffelees was a rocket ship in his 1st start at Keeneland (broke poor in the Tremont and certainly is a need the lead type) His Cramer speed figure was another worldly 123 (PER = 116) and my question is to Ron, Jim and Ken on their thoughts on addressing these unusual dist / ratings.

Another prominent figure service was completely mystified :confused: and left it blank for what its worth.

[km]

I know Dan, take them with a grain of salt, just like the 2.0f at SA. When a baby with no other past figures blasts one, near world record, at a distance run just a few times per year, it's very difficult to align that to the regular daily variant and normal 6.0f races run that day.

At a track like CT or LA, where they run 4.5f every night, it is much easier to get a handle on it.

In the end, the PER is the most conservative and reliable number for performance and comparison. It tends to iron out that goofy ones, but obviously a few wild ratings are going to seep out at oddball or infrequent distances.

[Ron Tiller]

This figure was definitely suspect. We have a series of traps specifically designed to catch questionable numbers like this and operator error (by me) failed to catch it. I apologize for that.

Here are the problems with Kee 4 1/2 F races:

1. They are 2 yo races.
2. They are races for 1st time starters, so no projections are possible.
3. The course configuration is goofy, with a long chute, used only for 4 1/2 F races, entering the main track at the far turn, part of which, due the the banking, is downhill.
4. They only run 9 or 10 4 1/2 F races per year, in the spring meet.
5. Typically horses who enter these races are very good horses, who are capable of running very fast times (although typically not 123). Separating fast horses from merely fast tracks is especially troublesome for these 4 1/2 F races.

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = :eek::confused::mad:

The other races on the card, for the race in question, were quite slow, and since none of the horses in the 4 1/2 F race had ever run, the only possible variant to use was the variant for the other races on the card, even though only a portion of the 4 1/2 F race is run on the same track surface as the other races.

Because of these considerations, Jim is working on a methodology to handle the 4 1/2 F races completely independently. They have been a thorn in our side for a long time.

Thanks, as always, for keeping an eye on the ball - it helps us and everybody else out.

Ron Tiller
HDW

[DanG]

Because of these considerations, Jim is working on a methodology to handle the 4 1/2 F races completely independently. They have been a thorn in our side for a long time.

Thanks very much Ken, Ron for your responses.

Breaking the races out independently is very interesting and something I tinkered with making figures.

I never thought the (otherwise sound) time honored [(8 / Dist) *2] point method worked as well under 6 furlongs. The same reasoning of why making Cramer / Beyer style numbers as pace figures always seemed so awkward to me. As Ron said; these babies can go full blast under 6f and they bare little resemblance to a typical thoroughbred sprint. Not to mention the challenges Keeneland brings to the table.
Dist Point Value
4 4.0
4.5 3.6
5 3.2
5.5 2.9
6 2.7
6.5 2.5
7 2.3
8 2.0
9 1.8
10 1.6
11 1.5
12 1.3
Charles Carroll stated that a good thoroughbred reaches their first energy plateau at 6.5f. If we use 6.5 as the base and see the relationships in the Cramer style # as distances increase / decrease; they certainly spike under 5.5f and when a baby like this wins by almost 10 lengths the number can reach the moon.

BTW: I remember some significant differences with Cramer's baby sprints from Monmouth in my 1st year with HTR and not trusting them. I was very wrong and it cost me dearly at the windows. :(