MPH Pro as an Adjunct

[Rivegauche610]

A fellow handicapper recently asked me about how I use MPH Pro, and given the length of my reply, I thought since I have been asked by one or two other fellow horseplayers, I thought it might be useful to share it.

Kevin

---------

I use MPH Pro from Trackmaster as an adjunct to RDSS and my own interpretations/informed intuitions.

When you first select a race at the MPH interface, a certain amount of calculation has already been performed for you. For example, I believe every horse's last race has been included. Sometimes a second race is selected by the software to reinforce a pattern or a similar effort. Sometimes its just another darn good race.

I go through each horse's "Input" (the program's term) using my initial analysis of BRIS Ultimate PPs in order to select a suitable and representative paceline. I always choose, if available, primary and secondary pacelines. I choose the second to augment the characteristics shown in the primary paceline. I usually trust MPH's first paceline, but sometimes I disagree and choose others.

After checking all the horses in the race, I click on Output and see the rankings in the first table. The middle table is for Brohamer/Sartin energy rankings, and the third table with projected beaten lengths I tend not to use as much as the first and second.

This helps me form a baseline of expectation for each horse before I ask RDSS to do the paceline selecting (based on Best Perceptor). I then compare its conclusions with my own and MPH Pro's and see what I've got. I guess you might say the next step comes down to using the algorithms of age and experience (I'm 56 and have been playing the horses off and on for about 20 years) to adjust RDSS to suit my views, conditioned by the software's.

It has proven pretty good, and I am in the midst of a test sequence of an entire summer's races at several tracks. It is a lot of work but it is interesting, and keeps me out of trouble. (I am semi-retired; my wife, who is quite a bit younger than I am, is a soldier going through medical discharge and then we will be moving to Vermont where she will attend college. We are looking forward to that move VERY much; life in the Confederacy has much less to offer than very rural Vermont does.)

I would like to use this reply in the general forums, since it may be of interest to others, too, as a couple have asked me also about MPH Pro, but I won't include your initial contact since it is a PM.

Best regards,

Kevin Smith

P.S. I have no connection to BRIS, but their Ultimate PPs are so data-intensive and thorough that I can't and won't break away from them. I feel they and RDSS can play nicely together, and in my case, they do. Especially helpful is the Race Summary page. I admit to a proclivity to the printed page, so I print my PPs (two sided, of course) and study the information thereon before using MPH Pro and RDSS. It is a long process, perhaps, but I enjoy the analysis. It keeps me out of more trouble and my wonderful wife actually encourages this hobby of mine because even winning a modest exacta makes me happy as hell! It isn't the money as much as it is having been right!

[Lt1]

Good post Kevin. I also use the Bris Ultimate pps with comments after seeing what paceline RDSS selects.. I just feel the Trackmaster pps do not provide enough info to make an informed decisions. Things like how a trainer does with claims or layoff horses etc. Also I trust Bris more when I look to see if the paeline chosen by RDSS is a lifetime best SR or not. I prefer not use lifetime best lines for horses 5 and up. Thanks again for the post. Like you I lean on my experience and pattern recognition to help in the decision making process.
Tim

[Rivegauche610]

Yes, Tim - the Trackmaster PPs are way, way too busy and congested for my eyes. BRIS, despite an obscenely anachronistic 1990s-vintage website (which seems to ask for my damn login credentials EVERY TIME I want to use it), their data is best.

About a lifetime best #: agree 100%. Somewhere in the literature a writer called such a speed fig a "giraffe" (probably Beyer!). Unless I see a pattern in the adjusted speed figs (whether conceptually or visually - they lay out so very much like The Sheets or Thororgraph patterns) that suggests a return to that or a similar fig, I just have to discount it. Was it on slop? Did the horse have little competition? Or maybe the choice of juice that day was "the" magic elixir?

I need to find out who the MPH Pro expert is at Equibase and ask some questions. I'm especially interested in finding out if selecting two pacelines is better than one: what does the algorithm to with two that could enhance what it does with one?

Peace,

Kevin

[MikeB]

P.S. I have no connection to BRIS, but their Ultimate PPs are so data-intensive and thorough that I can't and won't break away from them. I feel they and RDSS can play nicely together, and in my case, they do. Especially helpful is the Race Summary page. I admit to a proclivity to the printed page, so I print my PPs (two sided, of course) and study the information thereon before using MPH Pro and RDSS. It is a long process, perhaps, but I enjoy the analysis. It keeps me out of more trouble and my wonderful wife actually encourages this hobby of mine because even winning a modest exacta makes me happy as hell! It isn't the money as much as it is having been right!

I use RDSS and BRIS also. I don't know which way you print yours double sided, but I print the first half of the card single sided then flip that stack over and print the second half. That way I can spread out all the pages of a race side by side. Comparing all of the races of one horse against all of the races of another is too awkward in the RDSS software.

As a minor gripe, the Trackmaster PPs does a lousy job of assigning ESP running styles. BRIS does it right and saves me the time of having to go through the Trackmaster PPs and correct them.

[Mitch44]

Ditto on Bris PP for me also. I find the taskmaster PP lacking and some of the PP information that is there in trackmaster such as workouts are a pain in the a-- because you have to go to another page. Inconvenient as I like everything in one place and that's you get with BRIS and as LT1 said the trainer stats are good for todays situation.

I like to view them from the bottom up and can easily see w/o ,medication and equipment changes etc.

Been using them for so many years I can't remember when I started with them, over 15 through. Plus the price is correct compared to the Racing form and others. I get them for free mostly if I make 1 bet for the track I downloaded. Its like getting a free $2 bet every time I play. I also play multiple tracks so their real cheap. Also used their pace ratings for years, their very good and consistent.

I highly recommend BRIS PP in conjunction with RDSS.
Mitch 44

[Ted Craven]

Tim, MikeB and Mitch, just to clarify - when you say 'TrackMaster PPs', do you mean the PDF Past Performaces downloadable from TrackMaster, or do you mean the Original Screen displayed in RDSS (sourced from data provided by TrackMaster)?

Ted

[Mitch44]

I'm talking about the original screen in RDSS, not sure about the other guys.

The times, adjustments and all the RDSS readings derived from TrackMaster are the best out there but the PP on the original screen is terrible in my humble opinion, therefore I use both in conjunction and have been since getting RDSS. Horses beaten, comments etc. are all in one place.

Plus the BRIS has more data in their PP readouts, great additional information not in TrackMaster. Hope this answers your question.

Mitch44.

[MikeB]

Tim, MikeB and Mitch, just to clarify - when you say 'TrackMaster PPs', do you mean the PDF Past Performaces downloadable from TrackMaster, or do you mean the Original Screen displayed in RDSS (sourced from data provided by TrackMaster)?

Ted

I'm talking about the data as downloaded into RDSS. Even if I am just doing the Match Up, RDSS is the only way to go for pace line comparisons. Plus the computations and factors are great for drilling down into the details.

But I also like to mark up the hard copies of the BRIS PPs and lay out all the PPs of all the horses in the race on my desk for a totally different perspective. As others have said, a lot of the stats in BRIS are in a handier format or not available in RDSS.

[Rivegauche610]

I've been handicapping the Wednesday Woodbine card and have found two anomalies, one of which I'm sharing here. It is interesting, and I would welcome any input and opinions from more RDSS-experienced hands.

For the 6th at Woodbine, an n1x Allowance at 6f, Brisnet's Prime Power has them ranked 3-5-7-1; MPH Pro (see attachment 1) ranks them 5-7-3-1 based on my paceline selection (and I usually assign two when possible); and RDSS ranks them 5-1-2(-4) as you can see on the attached screen excerpt. "Secondary Contenders" statuses have been arbitrarily assigned by me based on both BL/BL analysis and the Segments screen.

My first question I have to ask myself (and the membership at large) is whether the #3 deserves it's assigned status by BRIS and MPH Pro. According to RDSS, and one can easily discern this corroboratively on the PPs, the 3 horse tends to have a more robust middle segment than closing segment, even though the evidence in its most recent race suggests an impending improvement due to the second best lifetime late pace figure. It came back later in the fall and wasn't the same animal. Its comeback in May was on turf and today we are on Tapeta. My instinct tells me he may be a vulnerable favorite despite Josie Carrol's 34% beaten favorite number.

That 34% is the key, though, because RDSS and MPH don't know and don't care about trainer proclivities. Neither, I gather, did Doc Sartin! I do. I've made some money on Josie Carrol horses over the recent years, so I don't discount her ability, nor can one ignore the jockey's tendencies, either.

I am inclined to "trust" the RDSS analysis via the VDC% which shows a dramatic difference between the top three figures and the BRIS fave's.

While I gather can't choose two and only two pacelines in RDSS, I can in MPH Pro and I have reached out to Trackmaster in order to speak with anyone who knows the software and can tell me how it deals with two pacelines vs. one.

At this point, my win choices are the 5 and the 1 both at $6, and an exacta box 125 plus a part wheel 125/3 and small reversal unless I become convinced the 3 isn't going to jump up and sustain the move up to the end and better the 1, 2, 5 (and 7!) and win.

So now comes the audience participation portion. Looking at RDSS' choice of pacelines vs. mine, does anyone have anything they can tell me that might better inform the decision making process?

Many thanks,

Kevin

P.S. probably a better topic for a separate post, but how do people use the third panel of the Segments screen, if they use them? I tend to take the F1 and F2 panels at face value, but the last panel frequently confounds me as it occasionally contradicts other data on other tabs (like the TPR and the BL/BL!!).

[Lt1]

I also am referring to the pps provided for RDSS. Besides what I mentioned above I find it annoying that TM doesn't show when a track is sealed. I don't want to use a sealed track line if possible. Another thing is we can't see things like trainer reclaims a pretty useful angle. There are no indications of an apprentice jockey riding. Outside of the sealed track notation which I think is important the rest are ancillary info but still nice to have.
Tim

[Hoof 11]

So now comes the audience participation portion. Looking at RDSS' choice of pacelines vs. mine, does anyone have anything they can tell me that might better inform the decision making process?


Kevin

I have to disagree with some of your paceline selections.

Projected Pace – 23 – 46

1 – You selected the 2nd line, the track was playing fast that day and you won’t get that bias today. Avoid lines with negative DTV’s, you won’t see those again until the temperature drops below zero. This horse needs a fast track to win.

3 – You selected the 2nd line, this is not the horses preferred running style nor does it match the projected pace scenario. The first line is not useable being a Turf line, so you have to look elsewhere. The 2nd and 3rd lines have a second call of 44 and change and you won’t see those fractions today, nor will you see a fast 3rd call, those lines are not useable in my opinion. The 4th line is the only option.

4 – This horse is due for an effort and does it’s best running late, with Moran aboard i believe that is exactly what you will get. Might not have enough to overcome but old Daveyboy is good at producing the unexpected.

6 – Toss

Contenders – 3-5-7

[Rivegauche610]

More evidence that perhaps one shouldn't take the "best Perceptor" selections as final!

For the #1 horse, RDSS chose line 2. The daily track variant needs to be factored in.

#3: Perceptor chose line 2, I wound up settling on line 5 because I suspected that based on the historical trend, the horse might regress after the new top. The 5th paceline to me says what that regression might look like, although the work on the 18th was so good it might indicate a new top is possible. The primary line score is definitely better with line 4, though. The 4th line gives an impressive array of Supplementary line scores, too (aren't they called "corollairies"?). Any concerns about fitness after the 88 new top is negated, I see, by the excellent work on 6/18.

#4: Perceptor chose line 3. I was thinking that meant perhaps that the horse might improve 3 or 4 speed points as previous patterns suggested.

Agree on tossing #6.

More good stuff to consider. Thanks again!

[Rivegauche610]

BTW, how do you guys get cool photos for your profiles? When I try to add one, I get a message about a 100 pixel on a side limitation!

[Hoof 11]

BTW, how do you guys get cool photos for your profiles? When I try to add one, I get a message about a 100 pixel on a side limitation!

Pics have to be 100x100, you can use an image editor like Microsoft Office Picture Manager to edit the size of your pic.

[mowens33]

Here is my workup

Contenders:5-3-1-7

[Rivegauche610]

The 5 & 3 were my resulting contenders, too. Let's see what happens...