5-25-19 Fulcrum

[Hanger]

I reviewed some old posts, and wanted to post something from today, and see how I got there, and hopefully get some critique along the way. I made notes from this race today in real time, and am typing it up now that I am home..

SA Race 7
Last Line
https://i.ibb.co/0VR4Fbf/LastLine.jpg
Who is the Fulcrum?
https://i.ibb.co/BPDxKdF/TPR-Screen2.jpg

The 2 has the fastest EPR, but was not within 5 BL which takes me to the 4. Sure enough the 4 was the EPR of 85.0 and was within 5 BL at both calls.


Is this normal for the 4 horse?
https://i.ibb.co/v3LY54B/Ya-Gotta-Wanna.jpg

Here is where it gets tricky....One could argue in my opinion that this is not normal for the 4. Which moves me on to the 5. 3rd best EPR, but look how much more consistent this horse is.
https://i.ibb.co/ZHTKvMM/United.jpg

So I call the 5 horse the Fulcrum here. at an 83.5EPR. Going by this my contenders are-
1- No Too Much EPR and Not strong enough LPR
2-Competitive EPR, but lacks the LPR to finish
3-2nd slowest EPR, but Strongest LPR- must consider
4-2nd best EPR, middle of the pack LPR- maybe? we already know inconsistent
5-Our Fulcrum- Good EPR, but again middle of the ground LPR
6-3rd Slowest EPR, 2nd best LPR- will have to consider and dive deeper.
7-4th slowest EPR, 3rd best LPR- maybe a tri/super contender?

So right now I am looking at 3,5,6 as my win contenders in this race.

Looking at the segment tab, all these horses are close on total energy- given what we know about Route Turf races, I am gonna have to say the closer gets this job done. Im tempted to play the 6 here as its truly the overlay, but feels like the 5 and 6 get lost in the middle of the pack- hopefully the 5 can hold and stay on the board.

[Hanger]

The result- Followup questions-

Was I wrong for not taking the 4 as the fulcrum?
How much to value LPR vs weak EPR in this scenario?
I used last races for the fulcrum, but usually have been preferring selecting my own pacelines or the best preceptor- at what point do you switch from last line back to best preceptor to ensure its a good analysis?

Any other info?

https://i.ibb.co/M19jx57/Result.jpg

[Mitch44]

Dave;


You ask some very good questions and obviously are doing some research. Old research can get a person into trouble because the concepts of Sartin evolved very much over the years.

With the fulcrum as with anything you'll find believers and non believers I'm in the non-believer camp. Jim Bradshaw, an icon of much of this specifically stated "I don't believe in the fulcrum." Nor did Sartin. That has always been good enough for me. I also consider it a waste of valuable handicapping time. By picking proper contenders and pace lines one gets the true match-up and the program figures all that out.

I also follow Sartin guidelines of picking the best line of last 3 at a comparable surface and distance. Of those lines I use the Preceptor which outperforms human judgement as to which line is correct. The Preceptor is one of Sartin later tools he came up with prior to passing. Essentially he figured why not rate every line with the computer to find the best one. Then took it a step further by rating each line with the 7 Primary Factors against itself. Note: don't use the preceptor for final decisions. There are a few better factors which consider the match-up etc. that outperform it. But for selection of pace lines its the ultimate bomb of a tool.

As far as pace lines there are many times the last line is correct and many times it isn't. Those that rigidly lock themselves into always selecting the last line will win races and lose races because of it. I.e. 3 yr. old tend to improve and mature as the season progresses, whereas older have already reached maturity. The last line is more of an indication of form more than it is the correct line. One would have to do a complete study on that to actually see it from the results. Sartin has already done this which is why he says;"best of last 3 at a comparable dis. & surface." It flat out produces more winners and better prices.

Just looking at your first screen shot and assuming the lines were correct my contenders would have been the 3.5.6.& 7 based on analysis of the TPR screen.

One of your best questions was "Is this normal for the horse? This is a question I frequently ask. To get its true running style and other things. The match up will cause a horse to get out of its comfort zone and run counter to its true style causing it not to win and or run a bad race. I don't want to pick a line that is counter to its true running style.

This is my opinion and the naysayers can have theirs. Some just never progress and its like wanting to remain in the first grade because you like the teacher.


Onward to a diploma,
Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Hi Sir

If you feel the fulcrum will help you please use your own feelings,
You really put a great deal of thought into your use.
I believe in the fulcrum, Its a quick and easy way to do pace analysis'
The fulcrum is from the book Pace makes the race written by amongst others
Doctor Howard Sartin
As you know finding the fulcrum is not a "waste of time " Its only a negative if you want it to be.
Anyway, in your example, I would not have used the 3, 4 or 5 as the fulcrum
because of the 8-furlong distance. I find that its best to use a race from the same distance and surface and within 1/2 furlong as today's distance.
Today's distance is 10 furlongs. since there are few 10 or even 9.5 distance races , I will forgive and use only the 9 furlong races for my fulcrum .

I would use horse 7

If you feel the fulcrum is a good tool for your complete tool kit use it
You did a good job, today congrats and good skill

48124

[Lt1]

At one time the fulcrum may have been the in thing but as Doc states in his 1998 1on1 video he no longer believed in predicating the pace of the race as he once had. He pointed that visual perceptions were far less predictable then the compounded ratings in the newer program. As has been stated one is free to use what ever approach they chose but I myself go with the Docs' latest teachings. Wishing much success on your journey to profits.
Tim

[Bill V.]

hello friends



Tim the fulcrum is not a "visual perception" of predicting the pace of race
It is very much is a calculated representation of the EPR,
EPR is a primary factor, one of the many compounded ratings in both the primary and preceptor readouts. Instead of saying the horse is #1 EPR
Phase 1 and the fulcrum uses the horse with the highest numerical rating
for the Early Pace Rating

The issue here is not saying fulcrum is better than what you guys believe
It's a specific tool being discussed in a specific forum

"I HATE FISH ! said the man in the seafood restaurant

[Lt1]

Bill I didn't say it was, I said the Doc went away from the visual matchup where we attempted to project the pace of todays' race. And like Mitch I did hear both Doc and Jim state they weren't using the fulcrum.To be honest I don't recall ever hearing the fulcrum mentioned at any seminar I attended. Like I stated folks can use whatever the want as long as they win with it. More importantly I hope you are feeling good my friend and looking forward to seeing you at he Spa.
Tim

[Bill V.]

Thanks Tim

Yes today i feel pretty good. I am at Del Mar. I cashed my super Friday tickets
I am busy at the table west and we are ready to roll.

In race 3 at GP


This is how I use the fulcrum ( one way)
Look at the EPR ratings, I fully expect the ERP to be within 3 of a 78

48126

[Bill V.]

i am alive in the pick 4 and 5 at Santa Anita
But we are looking at incredibly short prices for both

In the all-important fifth race, The 2 is the fulcrum.
He/she should control the early pace, having come out of a front running ITM showing against graded company


48127

48128

[Mitch44]

Its a misnomer to associate Sartin writings within the PMTR book as condoning the Fulcrum. He wrote an introduction, overview and a chapter on Advance concepts. He would also say later that the only thing of value in it was the Advance Concepts chapter, and much of that still resides within RDSS.

I challenge anyone to show me in writing where he condoned it or for that matter endorsed it. He did allow members to express themselves however that does not mean he condoned it or endorsed it. If it had any worth at all it would be part of the RDSS program of today.

In Follow Up # 83 on pg. 64 he states; "Our own book, PMTR was purposely removed from the market by me because it outlined a method far too simplistic to be of current value to all but the simplistic. It is my firm opinion that when a couple of my original co-authors hawked the title, they edited out anything that was of the slightest value in the original."(2nd edition)

He also later would state that one of his biggest regrets was putting in the Pace Line manual to use the last line unless there was a valid reason to go back. This is exactly why he went to using a line from the last 3 at a comparable distance and surface in later teachings along with proven regression analysis that it out performed the last line for both winner getting and for higher paying mutual.

Bill I wish you great health and success with those p-3 & P4's.

Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Thanks Mitch

But don't short change me I have the pick 4 and pick 5


Mitch and all Never be put off by " too simplistic " those very words are the major reason
I began to use TPR and ALL factors of PMTR I am a limited educated ex truck driver The simplistic approach to paceline selection and TOR is what made me a consistent winner

I marvil at folks much smarter than me like yourself but I will never go past the Simplistic Teachings of PMTR and the paceline manual

The Pick 4 and pick 5 comes in for me !

The fulcrum # 2 did set the pace and placed ( what often happens) for a solid excata


r

[Lefty]

I guess all this analysis is okay, and could be satisfying, but in later Follow UPs, Doc said it was unnecessary, and to use BL/BL and the VDC. So that's what I'm doing. It's working well for me for the short time I've used RDSS.

[Lefty]

BTW, Bill, congratulations on you pick 4 and 5.

[Mitch44]

Lefty the fulcrum could never challenge the power of BLBL or V/DC. When money is on the line go with the best, of course picking correct contenders and lines are a prerequisite.

The Fulcrum was and still is a Pizzola creation which never made it into any Sartin program, obviously meritless to Sartin, Bradshaw and BTY I never heard Brohammer mention it either. The match-up within the program supersedes it.

Additionally using the last line for a Fulcrum is another farce because as with selecting lines a horse could have ran at the wrong class, distance, surface or it was a race before or after a layoff. Not a true representation of what may occur today.
Simply a waste of time which should be spent on evaluation of top contenders both by their readouts and their past performances. Use it if your bored, have time to spare, oh well I guess it does beat picking your nose.

Mitch44

[Bill V.]

As long as the haters hate they will be blinded.

Mitch, The fulcrum is not anything like BLBL and VDC

It's simply a numerical rating of the fastest pace in the last race

The fastest pace in the last race is a Bradshaw tool

BTW At one time Ted was working on adding a fulcrum rating to RDSS, I think he had trouble ,
not with the concept, but how to program the variants

[Bill V.]

This is a key horse for me

The 7 in race 9 should control the early pace

48129

[Mitch44]

Bill as long as the closed minded remain so, they will remain blind to success.

At the 1990 seminar at Saratoga the specific question was asked about the Fulcrum to which Bradshaw replied he doesn't use it and "does not believe in it." In fact Bradshaw time again always placed emphasis on the fact that; "The race starts when the gate opens not at the SC." How conveniently that is left out, also the fact that the 1st call / Fr has a tremendous effect on the race and match up.

Sartin also placed emphasis on all 3 Fractions and said it wasn't pace handicapping if the 1st Fr wasn't included. He evolved and the use of all 3 Fr's propelled his programs to much greater heights plus creating more factors that are still used in the 7 Primary Factors. I.e. FX,TT & HE, also was a great help to determine deceleration between FR's for V/DC.

I'm well aware that the fulcrum is nothing like BLBL & V/DC, as the fulcrum will never produce the winners that BLBL & V/DC produces.

No "The Hat's" match up began at the 1st call / 1st FR and still does within todays RDSS. BTW the program match up was originally told to Bradshaw by Sartin. Bradshaw took it to greater heights then any other students of his. Today's RDSS program does not in any way start at the SC for the match up. Sartin also said that projecting a race and getting the woinner are two entirely different things.


Bill have a great holiday and I wish you many winners today my friend.

Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Same to you, So far all my bets have yet to run, SA has a nice card, I have 2 pick 3's going .

Mitch I really hope you don't think that the EPR rating starts with the horses stopping and then starting after the second call, Your argument against the fulcrum is flawed

There is no EPR rating or fulcrum without the first fraction. That comes right out of the original PMTR hardbound copy, The one with Doc as an auther. If a horse runs a 21 first fraction and a 23-second fraction He runs a 44-second call or EPR
He gets a 100 EPR phase 1 rating

Now what is he going to do in the 3rd fraction? well if he generally runs 88-92 EPRs and there is another horse in the race that generally runs 93-96 EPRS The 100 EPR is the fulcrum, therefore the pace will be wicked fast.
But now I look at the 3rd fraction, and I can bet with confidence that the 100 EPR (fulcrum) is toast

The fulcrum on measures 1 thing the expected 2nd call POR period
But there is no EPR or secound call with out the first fraction figured into it

[Mitch44]

Good luck at SA and with your P-3's Bill.

Stopping and starting at the SC? I've watched many races and yet to see that one.

The horse that has the lead at the 1stCall may not be the same horse that has it at the SC. The 1st call does have a cause and effect which is why both of the great wizards of the matchup ( Sartin & Bradshaw) do the match up starting with the 1st call and not the SC. Sartin's best stuff includes all 3 FR's as does the present day RDSS.

Now what is he going to do in the 3rd fraction? Well what I'm going to do is follow Sartin teachings and let the computer figure that out. He recommended not taking into the 3rd Fr because of the Huey effect and most not being able to properly carry it that far into a race. Again you fail to account for the 1st FR.

BTY I took a quick look at your 9th at Mth. While the 9 horse does have the ability to lead it appears that is against his ESP, therefore doubtful at best. Then again just because a horse has the lead at the SC does not make him a winner. Being in the lead at the SC is somewhat a misnomer in racing. What's more important is how he obtained the lead or earned it so to speak. Horses that don't carry their speed into the 2nd FR are false Early types.

Projected POR is pointless to getting actual winners, or in other words they don't pat for POR predications but they do pay for winners.

Again best of luck today Bill,

Mitch44

[Lefty]

I think that people who like the Fulcrum and who don't are right. It's a matter of personal taste and success. Some of us can do great without and some can do great with it.
More han one way to skin the parimutuel cat.
Best to all.
Chuck

[Mitch44]

Lefty you're exactly correct;"More than one way to skin the pari-mutuel cat."

The yin and yang or back and forth is to better inform those unaware, both newbies and old heads, of workings within the Sartin concepts. Also the pros and cons within such a discussion,such as time consummation, so they can therefore make a more informed decision in their approach.A single option may not be very informative.

Brainstorming and open discussions produce better results.

Mitch44

[shoeless]

Hi Bill

You got me rereading PMTR

Hope your feeling better

Tell Dad hi

Jeff

[Bill V.]

Good Reading..

Dad says hello

If i can start to get stronger we are talking about maybe going back east
for an extended stay maybe next sping

[Bill V.]

MP writes .. "in races were there is no fulcrum horse
The TPR ratings are especially strong

Race 6 GP NO FULCRUM

48144

[Bill V.]

MP writes .. "in races were there is no fulcrum horse
The TPR ratings are especially strong

Race 6 GP NO FULCRUM

48144

Yes sir The 3 wins race 6 and I backed it up with confidence in race 7 for a nice double


48145

[gandalf380]

very nice bill

[shoeless]

Great job Bill, hope to see you and Dad if you get back here. Would like to
see Richie as well be like old times minus our old friend Pino.

Jeff