Parx and those 1m70yds routes [Archive] - Pace and Cap

View Full Version : Parx and those 1m70yds routes

mick

02-25-2017, 10:20 AM

I have slowly become enamored with Parx. The racing secretary cards a lot of dirt sprints and routes for average claimers and for me, that's where RDSS really shines. (Although The Pook recommends MVR, I can't cope with all those 1 for 45 horses. He's just a better player than I am.)

Parx runs 1 mile and 1m70yards routes, which I find curious for a one-mile oval. Why not back those races up to 8.5 furlongs? I had assumed the outside horses would be toast with the short runs to the clubhouse turn and being hung wide.

As a general question, I've always wondered why tracks card 1m40yds and 1m70yds races. Does anyone know? Is there some historic reason for it? (Like golf has 18 holes because St. Andrews had 18 holes.) Does it have to do with the configuration of the grandstands and the finish line? It's really not important but I am curious.

Now for the kicker. As I said, I thought the outside horses would be toast but the opposite is true! According to BRIS, it's posts 1-3 that are dead in those 1m70yds routes. Posts 4 and out, and especially 8 and out, have much higher win percentages and impact values. With the one mile routes where there's almost no run up to the turn, there doesn't seem to be any bias; the outside posts win as often as the other posts. Go figure.

I first noticed this when posts 8, 9 and 10 kept beating me. I was betting against them, taking the inside horses of roughly equal ability. It was an expensive lesson and I should have caught on more quickly.

I know Bill V. and RichieP like Parx. I'm sure there are others on P&C who do, too. Can anyone explain the anomaly? How is it that the outside posts at Parx, especially 8 and out, are an advantage, not a disadvantage?

mick

Lt1

02-25-2017, 10:57 AM

Hi Mick. I play Parx and MVR regularly. I don't worry about post positions at Parx except when it is sly or mdy then the inside horses tend to be at a disadvantage. People tend to forget that when Bris or DRF show those post position standings it never accounts for who was in those positions. If non contenders are there it stands to reason the numbers will be low. The same thing with alleged track bias. Rely on the horse not post position. At MVR off the pace horses do well.
Tim G

The Pook

02-25-2017, 11:26 AM

mick

02-25-2017, 12:02 PM

Hi, Pook. You chose a MVR race in the Match-Up contest and the winner paid $72+. No one had it and the best decision I made was to pass. I remember that race and being thoroughly confused. :confused:

I guess that's where my comment came from. It was also my first exposure to MVR. I wish I had more success playing that track because NHPlay gives fair rebates at MVR.

mick

Mitch44

02-25-2017, 12:55 PM

Mick: Races are carded at different distances to spread the money around so that one horse doesn't win all the money along with conditions of the races. Every horse has a best distance and as little as 40 or 70 yards can cause it to lose because of the deceleration factor, a horses stamina etc. Horses that win at 6F can't win at 6.5 F .Now there are the EXCEPTIONS that win at multiple distances and surfaces but they tend to be classier horses,rare and even those have a best distance and surface. Even a Jack of all trades is better at some things over others. A good trainer quickly learns a horses capability and limitations and places it to capitalize on its abilities. Minor tracks are full of horses who can't get the 6F dis. at major tracks and become winners at the minor tracks where they card a lot of 5.5 and 5.0 F races. Even at major trk's the purses increase as distance increases.

As far as post position studies their not reliable because they fail to account for true contenders, make-up of the field and are a non factor in handicapping as is weight.. Classier horses tend to be able to carry their speed and if outside are able to get position quickly over inside horses and go on to win.

Bill V.

02-25-2017, 02:08 PM

Sorry Mick,

There were way more races in my records for 1 mile than 8.3 and way more races at
8.3 than 8.5. It's been this way for many years, but I have not keep track of Parx in the last few years , I used to have a large spreadsheet but its stored on a different compute r than what I,m using now.
To answer your question,

Why ? , I agree with Mitch He nailed it , The class structure of Parx is such that there are not enough horses that the connections feel can run over 8.3 furlongs,
The ones who are successful would be just running against each other and you would have very small fields ,

mick

02-26-2017, 10:09 AM

Thanks Mitch and Bill V. Your response makes perfect sense, although I had never thought that an extra 40 yards would make that much difference. I've learned something. :D

mick

Mitch44

02-26-2017, 01:19 PM

mick: If you observe some races at any distances I.e. 6F this can be observed. In the last 1/2 F,330 feet or about 100 yards some horses appear to be making up ground while others appear to be slowing down. We then watch to see if our horse will hold up or our other choice will catch it before the wire. If the closer is really accelerating he may need more distance to win or if the leader is constantly being caught near the wire he may need a shorter distance. In many cases both are decelerating however one is decelerating faster than the other,such as the leader in my example above.

Keep in mind that some horses run as fast as they can from the time the gates open till they peter out. These types can be identified by their high % Med. Others only run as fast as they need to based on the match up and get up to win if not challenged. In most races they get challenged by cheap speed. However for matchers and the "Hat's" (Brawshaw) concept the more early challengers the better.

There was a good example put up by the POOK the other day named Tall Trees I believe at Park in a MDN Clm. race. A recent claim the new trainer was dropping the horse back in dis. form 6F to 5.5. A zero for 13 horse I believe. I viewed the move as positive however he still lost by a nose or so. Note: "cutbacks in dis. are more reliable than stretch outs" because the horse has already ran the distance. A quote from Doc Sartin.

Now if I'm the trainer of Tall Trees I'm going to drop that horse back to 5F,problem is Park may not run many 5F races if any at all and the owner having invested many dollars, where even trainer costs are about $2,000 per month may not want to ship tp Penn Nat. etc. where they card lots of 5 F races. Well when condition books and races aren't carded they keep running at inappropriate conditions to win and their form gets darkened.

Eventually a better trainer or smarter owner through a clam will find a race to ship into and the horse wins paying much more than it should because of the darkened form.

A big point here is to analyze each horses chart you make a contender an approach the race as a trainer would do, according to todays conditions. That's where the analysis should begin. Even in a loss valuable information is obtained on different horses. For those create a horses to watch list (free from BRIS). How many will put Tall Trees on that list with a comment , play only when dropped back to 5F as needs further cutback in dis. You'll get good odds on many cutbacks and if not it may be the key to a nice P3.P4 or ex.
Beast of luck,
Mitch44

Lt1

02-26-2017, 01:24 PM

Very well stated Mitch.
Tim G

Bill V.

02-26-2017, 03:21 PM

Thanks Mitch,

Very well said.

Bill

mick

02-26-2017, 09:47 PM

In one of the Follow Ups, Doc Sartin recommended creating your own "imaginary" stable (might not have the correct adjective) and acting as the trainer of this stable, you place "your" horses where you think each might be competitive. Subsequently, you compare your placement with where the real trainer actually ran the horses.

When I read that Follow Up, I thought the idea had real merit (like many other things the man recommended). Reading Mitch's post, I wonder if he followed the Doc's recommendation. Or perhaps he's actually been the business himself.

mick

Mitch44

02-27-2017, 10:51 AM

Hi Mick,

I never trained or been in the business.

The Doc recommended creating a stable in the original yellow manual by analyzing a horses record. He used the horses pace against the Pace of the Race that he ran against pages 34-38 of Yellow Manual. This takes some serious work but you can determine where a horse properly needs to be places. Many times better than their own trainers. Note: This much easier to accomplish in todays RDSS because both the total Pace of the Horse and Pace of the Race is already computed for every race the horse has ran, This saves some serious work to do all this by hand. But the Doc's rating can be easily be obtained. I don't actually do that to get a stable. I can analyze those two things( POR & POH) and as compared to finish positions on different surfaces and distances to see where a horse should be placed.

To pick proper pace lines one has to start with the conditions of the race. James Quinn book ," The Handicappers Condition Book" is an excellent book about placement of horses and conditions of races. Highly recommended! Before all this computer stuff, before 1990 or so, handicappers had to analyze a horses chart from the Racing Form to pick winners.
With todays computers and the public's taste for instant gratification they have become lazy and therefore heavily relies on computers as a black box type approach.

What I do with a contender is to fully analyze the horses chart from bottom to top which helps me to pick a proper pace line and determine if the horse is properly placed or not, Answering questions such as; Is this horse properly place as to distance and surface. Can this horse stretch out or need to be cutback in distance. If I was the trainer of this horse would I run him in this race etc. etc.

In my placing of a horse into a stable Mick my point is once you have done that analysis and gathered important information why discard it. Save it and catch that horse running back in the future. About 2 years ago in the BC 6.5 F Turf race at SA I caught a Chad Brown horse cutting back in distance from this and the horse won paying $16 and change along with keying a nice EX & P3. Forget its name but it had lots of 2nd & 3rd at 7F and 8F. Many take those finishes that a horse can win at those distances, not necessarily so. Maybe way down in class against a weaker pace of the race but that move may cause you to lose a good thing through a claim or not win as much purse $ that a horse is capable of winning.

I don't use the stable as much as I use to because my time is so limited, barely have time to handicap. Hoping that will get squared away in a few months or so.
Of course the great thing about your stable is the feed bills and trainers fees are free.
Mitch44

The Pook

02-28-2017, 10:02 AM

Mick, in addition to Mitch's advice above one guy you might want to reference is For The Lead's posts on this site. He doesn't play anymore but apparently was a professional. He always started every handicapping session with very specific rules. Eliminated all entrants with a 20-1 or higher ML and any out of action for 90 or more days. He based this on his extensive database of millions of races. I've tested this in my smaller database and his numbers hold up more or less.
My point though is that he was an excellent condition handicapper which was where he would look after the rules above. In the M4$ last year he PM'd me more than once after the race pointing out how one could eliminate more than half the field based on conditions alone. Reading the conditions correctly is an art in itself.

Pook

mick

03-01-2017, 02:51 PM

Thanks, Pook. I will. I've started a "track model" database on Parx primarily for eliminations. You read my mind.

And thank you, Mitch. Yes, it was in the Yellow Manual. The instant that I read you post I remembered.

mick