On the Ragozin site, Michael mentioned seeing Mark Hopkins talk on the OTB channel about the track changing speed 8 Beyer points because of track work, and asked Friedman "Do you make variant adjustments during the day due to maintenance work"?

Len's reply:

"If your question is whether track work immediately before or during the card ever produces changes in the variant level from race to race the answer is yes, although in the vast, vast majority of cases the track work is weather related and/or predictable as general maintenance at a particular track. I'm just guessing, but I think that Hopkins may have been referring to the 2yof stakes opening day at the Spa which went dramatically on the slow side. Even making the kind of adjustment he apparently did would not give those horses anything near what would have been expected (and I'm still not giving back any of what I cashed on that race) and there's no reason not to just give them the numbers that their final time earned. Changing the variant level because the horses in a particular race didn't run as you expected is a subjectivity that places the ego of the variant maker over the reality of what the horses actually did".

Amazing how much there is to work with in a single paragraph. Where to begin:

1-- Those times that the track work produces "changes in the variant level"-- how do you know it? Do you have a machine that measures "physical resiliencey", as you once put it?

Because if not, you are making the decision the way Hopkins, Beyer, myself and all other figure makers with some relationship to reality do it-- by looking at how fast the horses run relative to their figure histories. And if you are adjusting the "variant" based on that judgement, aren't you placing your ego over the reality of what the horses "actually did"?


2-- "In the vast majority of cases the track work is weather related and/or predictable as general maintenance practice at a particular track".

a) Really? For you to know that is true, you would have to be getting complete information about track maintenance at all tracks. Do you? If there are tracks where you are not getting information, do you assume it is being done, or not being done? Do your trackmen report to you-- as ours do wherever possible-- when the track is watered? I ask because there are some tracks where they water the track before every race on some days, and not at all on other days. All permutations of watering take place-- before some races but not others, etc., and I'm not even getting into the issues that I went into in "Changing Track Speeds" (Archives this site) about varying quantities of water, different climatic conditions, etc.

b) Even if you were getting that info, you would still have to correlate the track work with the track speeds. How would you do this without applying your own judgement, as above?

c) "Predictable". Boy, is that an interesting word in this context. Please explain what that means, and how the fact that work on the track is "predictable" in a certain instance can be applied to making a figure for a race or day. Do you make an assumption, for example, that because specific work was done, the track will be getting faster, and add points as the day goes along, without regard to the results and times of the races?


3-- On the Saratoga filly stake-- that's a GREAT example, I think I might have discussed it here already. Races 2 through 5 were dirt races, and after them the main track was sealed. It was reopened after the two grass races, but was noticeably slower (like 6 points) for the final TWO dirt races. This was an example of knowing something had been done to the track-- but even if I had not, I would have had no problem dealing with it because there were 2 races, which made it clear.

Tell you what-- why don't you post sheets for the last two dirt races on the day. I'm going to make a prediction, like I did after the 2001 Breeders Cup (and those who were around then remember how that turned out)-- if you did those races with the rest of the day, at least 75% of the horses in those two races (excluding the winner of the eighth, who ran out of his mind and figures to bounce) will go forward at least 3 points next time out, on YOUR figures.


4-- "...the numbers that their final time earned", and "...the reality of what the horses ACTUALLY DID" (emphasis added).

Really, what they ACTUALLY did, and earned. How do you know what they actually did? I mean, basing it on the horses would be an excercise in ego, so you must have another way.

Here's what you really mean, Len. You mean, make an assumption-- based on absolutely nothing, and one that goes against the science-- that the track stays the same speed. You mean that the right answer is to use a broad average of how fast the track is during the day, and apply it to individual races where it may or may not have been that "speed".



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2005 08:21PM by TGJB.