Let me preface this by saying I have read and enjoyed most of Andrew Beyer's books and columns and, in fact, learned from them. However, I question some of his fundamental assumptions in making figures and am amazed on an annual basis with his strange decisions regarding Derby selections. This year was no exception and his Monday column see link below points out some confusing, hilarious and bewildering points on several levels. I will tackle a few of the most obvious and interesting but I recommend that you read the entire article entitled, "It’s all a matter of position."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13669-2003May4.html

Here is one snippet worth repeating here:

********
"After breaking from post position 11, Empire Maker was forced to race wide around both turns. It is a rough rule of thumb that a horse loses one length for every path that he is removed from the rail around a turn. Thus, if Funny Cide was on the rail around the first turn, and Empire Maker was in the three-path, the favorite was traveling an extra two lengths. Empire Maker's ground loss equaled more than the 13/4 lengths by which Funny Cide beat him.

If the horses had switched post positions, if Empire Maker had Funny Cide's trip and vice versa, Funny Cide probably would have finished fourth and Empire Maker would have a chance to sweep the Triple Crown."
********

Does anyone else see the contradiction and irony in this statement? Beyer quantifies the relationship between racing path, ground loss and impact on finishing position (which can then be translated into finishing time and performance). He uses this relationship to both analyze a result (Empire Maker lost to Funny Cide because of a wide trip) and to handicap a race (if Empire Maker had a more inside post and Funny Cide a more outside post, then he would be able to run a faster "effective" race and win). This is from the guy who does NOT incorporate ground loss into his figures! How can he make the above statement which seems totally at odds with his own figure-making methodology? To add to they irony, when the Beyer figures come out for the Derby, Funny Cide will be 3 points faster than Empire even though Beyer himself admits that Empire Maker ran the fastest race (i.e., his average speed or distance/time was faster).

The irony, inconsistency and amusement do not stop there. Here is another snippet:

*******
"The best Beyer Speed Figure coming into the Derby belonged to Empire Maker (111), Funny Cide (110) and Ten Most Wanted (110). I picked Ten Most Wanted, so he was doomed. With only Empire Maker to beat, all Funny Cide needed was a little racing luck. And he got it."
*******

Beyer has just described how post affects the trip and he also has quantified the relationship between path, ground loss and final finish positions. He also goes on to show that his Beyer figures indicated that the three were all about the same with regards to ability. All this and yet his pick was not the horse with speed and an inside post that was most likely to save ground. It was not the stalker from the 12 hole that might be able to possibly work out a decent trip. Instead, it was the stalker from the 16 hole that was almost guaranteed a brutally wide trip! Go figure. Add to that, the fact that since Beyer’s speed figures do not incorporate ground loss (or weight – but that is another topic although a have to note that TMW was carrying 9 fewer pounds than the other two in his final prep), his Beyer figures for the three horses were actually flawed. Ten Most Wanted had a perfect rail trip to earn his 110 while both Funny Cide and Empire Maker lost some ground in their final preps. If he had used the knowledge he displayed in his post-race analysis to make the figures for those final preps and to handicap the race, he would have seen that Ten Most Wanted was slower than Funny Cide and Empire Maker without any adjustments for expected ground loss, that he was very likely to lose more ground than both of them (i.e., he would be "effectively" even slower) and he would have concluded that Ten Most Wanted was very unlikely to win and an extreme underlay as the second choice in the wagering. Instead, he embarrasses himself with yet another terrible Derby selection.

I have a feeling that I would really enjoy spending a day at the track with Beyer. I also imagine that he is a good handicapper. However, when it comes to making figures and handicapping the Derby, he still has a lot to learn. One of the best things about Beyer though is that he is willing to learn and adapt. I sure hope that he did not have some sort of epiphany after the Derby. I would hate to see him start incorporating ground loss and weight into his popular Beyer speed figures.

Cheers.

Chris