Jimbo and Miff,

Personally, I think JB would be making a huge mistake to even try to incorporate pace figures into the horses' ratings if that's what you are suggesting. Making the pace figures is one thing. Trying to combine them with speed figures is another.

I'm not sure if you've ever made pace figures yourselves or if you've just used someone elses's, but IMO it is close to impossible to make pace figures that are even nearly as accurate as the speed figures made by competent final figure makers. Even excellent speeed figures are prone to occasional inaccuracies due to interpretation. Heck, when I look at 4 or 5 sets of speed figures they often disagree by a wide margin even when adjusted for methodology.

The complications are endless for pace.

1. Horses rate so it's difficult to project the pace. You are more dependent on pars.

2. The wind is much more of a factor depending on the distance and the run against/with the wind.

3. Track speed is not always uniform.
ex. The backstretch could be a lot slower than the turn. That would effect the fractions differently than the final time.

4. The starting gate is not always in the same exact position.

That's just some of the major problems with making the pace figures.

Then, IMO, trying to create a precise formula for estimating the impact of pace on final time is doubly impossible. There are some rough guesstimates out there that work OK, but they are not perfect. I really believe the impact varies from horse to horse.

Between slightly suspect speed figures, more suspect pace figures, and a suspect formula for combining them you are often going to wind up with a very inaccurate appraisal.

IMO, the best way to do it is to look at the pace figures and look at the race development and determine if the pace was fast or slow, how fast or slow and when. Then look at the individual trips and see who may have benefitted and who may have been hurt by the pace. Then when you look at the speed figures, view them in light of the pace aspect of their trip and appraise the horse.

For example, you could make some kind of pace figure for the Woodward, but I don't think you will get a better rating than by just using some common sense. You might get something worse in many cases though.

You don't have to be rocket scientist to see that the second and third quarters of that race were really quick.

So if for example you are using Beyer figures combined with trips you know that Ghost isn't nearly as good as the 128 earned at Monmouth suggests. He beat a weaker field on the mud with a relatively easy trip that day.

You also know he's better than the 114 he earned this weekend because he was used extremely hard in the middle of the race battling St Liam.

I don't think you need to be much more precise than that.