The Beyer number looks about right for Understatement\'s perfromance in the Stymie last Sunday, but I heard the other guys pegged him at neg 1.5, which seems wrong (way too fast).
I don\'t know how to do the comparison between Beyer and TG -- can anyone tell me what the estimated TG number would be for a 105 Beyer? Much appreciated.
Rick B. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Beyer number looks about right for
> Understatement\'s performance in the Stymie last
> Sunday, but I heard the other guys pegged him at
> neg 1.5, which seems wrong (way too fast).
>
> I don\'t know how to do the comparison between
> Beyer and TG -- can anyone tell me what the
> estimated TG number would be for a 105 Beyer? Much
> appreciated.
Without trying to upset Jerry, I once did a preliminary study comparing Beyers and their TG equivalents which would indicate that a 105 Beyer is roughly equivalent to a TG of neg 1.
I stress that this was a pilot study with a relatively small sample which may need updating,but I find that it does give me a ballpark figure.
This is based on averages and does not imply that a particular horse earning a 105 Beyer will have necessarily earned a neg 1 TG figure. The TG figure may vary due to incorporation of ground loss, weight carried and a different interpretation of the variant for that race.
Bob
\"The Beyer number looks about right for Understatement\'s performance in the Stymie last Sunday, but I heard the other guys pegged him at neg 1.5, which seems wrong (way too fast)\".
Rick,
....if the \"other guys\" had neg -1 and 1/2 then TG would have the fig at neg-5,if they agreed, which is highly doubtful. The fig looks like app neg -1 1/2 on TG(as Bob stated), and I\'d be a little surprised if the other guy came out at neg -1 1/2.
Mike