Hollywood

[RichieP]

The 8th at Hollywood tomorrow.

3 "E" runners look to go strong from the get go including fighting. Because of the fighting tendencies of 2 of the earlies we need all 3 to run as the 3rd is a wild early.

Nice potential setup for O.T.E. to get the win.

Full field and we need to get our proj pace and see if there are any fast O.T.E. bucks against it.

[RichieP]

cont

[RichieP]

...

[Tanico]

Well it looks the pace has to be 44 and change. I like the 6 the best and maybe the 10 to get a part. I am not very good with the matchup like you guys but I am trying to learn.

[Charlie D]

1c 21.8 -22.0 and lookng for a 4/5th position horse


Tanico, see Richie's post for getting started with The Match Up

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4474

[Charlie D]

Projected Pace and Contenders (If one of the E come out, another look may be needed. )

[Tanico]

1c 21.8 -22.0 and lookng for a 4/5th position horse


Tanico, see Richie's post for getting started with The Match Up

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4474

Thanks Charlie, I will most surely take a look

[Bill Lyster]

The 1 and 7 fought the entire way and no one gave in - final time was 108.6 off a 22-44.3. The 4 has attended sucha lead but faded badly; the 9 has led in sub 22, but gave way thereafter - he might force the 1 and 7 because 1 never did well if first fraction was sub 22; 7 has some cred vs sub 22 in line 4 where he fought off 21.5-44.0. 9 cant go that fast so he fades too; 7 finished the 21.5-44 race in 109.7, but he might get a little relief if the 9 gives up quickly. I think the OTE contenders are 3 off line 4 4th-3rd at first two calls; the 5 off line 2, 5th - 6th. the 6 off line 4 5th and 5th and the 10 off lines 1 and 6, 3rd-2nd-2nd and 3rd-3rd-2nd; even line 4 is 4th-2nd-2nd. The two best power moves would be the 10 and 3 and so far I think the 10 being closer is better than the three. However, factoring in price considerations it looks to me that the 10 with morning line at 3:1 might go down since he's dropping from C20. All that work with a number of ? marks and no price - bummer.

[RichieP]

Lets set the proj pace from the #1 and #7 last line
22.0 - 44.3 (in tenths)

The #9 will run to any 1st fraction it seems to get the lead which is just what I believe we need here to screw up the 2 lead fighters. If the 9 scratches I have seen too many races where one of the fighters goes on to win to have much faith in an OTE finish.

Here are the pps "lit up" with all pacelines that fit the proj pace

I am deliberately not marking lines, running styles etc as each of us has a MInds Eye that is different.

So see what you see if you like.

Here are the full pps again marked with proj pace of 22.0 and 44.3

[RichieP]

...

[mikesal57]

Hi Rich...nice race..

#1...speedy fighter ,beat alot of these.....in
#3...interesting ..beat the #1 tandem 3/5..2race off layoff...in
#4...no form last 3 races and #10 beat him...out
#5...power move last race & lost to the #6...no wins on PP and vs this proj pace...out
#6...in form and has won vs this pace...in
#7..in form and ran good vs pace, but lost to 2 tandem horses...out
#8...like longer races..will be back to far at 5.5 furs...out
#9...speed horses but quits at this pace...out
#10 in form...won from 3 & 4th positions vs pace ...in
#12..lost to #10...nothing vs pave...out


1-3-6-10

i see it between the 3 & 10

mike

[mamojica]

Well it looks the pace has to be 44 and change. I like the 6 the best and maybe the 10 to get a part. I am not very good with the matchup like you guys but I am trying to learn.

Hi Tanico,

I'm a new matcher just like you. I have been at it for two months. I'll give you a little history about myself so that you will avoid some of the mistakes I made.

This is my second go round with the Match-Up. Two years ago I gave it a shot, but I ignored Richie's and Mr. Bradshaw's advice. I tried to learn everything at once. I read the 5 step approach and then everything in the Hat Check forum and tried to apply everything to my handicapping all at once. Needless to say, it was too much too fast. I was unsuccessful at the track and gave it up. I wasted the next couple of years trying other things, and did no better.

A couple of months ago, I decided to try the Match-Up again, but do it right. I decided to bite the bullet, and take as much time as necessary to master the 5 step approach before I tried anything else. It's hard work. At first you will lose more often than you win. But eventually, things turn around if you work hard and (as one person told me in another thread) practice, practice, practice. Work as hard on practice races as you do with races that you bet. And take notes. Every time you make a decision in a race, write it down. If you decide to eliminate a horse as a competitor, write down the reason why. Most of the time, you'll eliminate horses simply because they are too slow. Write down "#6 horse - too slow." If you have gotten the field down to two or three horses, and in the process of matching you decide on the horse to bet, write down the reason. You need to be able to see whether or not your reasoning is sound. The process of writing down your thought process will actually help you think better. This has been an important part of the learning process for me.

Practice the 5-step-approach exclusively for at least two months, as RichieP says. You should probably do it longer. After two months I feel that I need at least one, and probably two or three months more. Print out the 5 Step Approach and keep it handy when you go through a card. Based on my experience, limited as it is, I believe that the 5-step-approach is all you need to become profitable. But you shouldn't stop there. The Hat Check forum gives you advanced teaching on the subject. But don't try to run before you can walk. Before you really delve into the Hat Check, try to become proficient with the 5 step approach. I tried it the other way and wasted two years.

Feel free to read through the Hat Check forum. You will pick up things that will be helpful in the 5 step approach. But don't try the advanced concepts until you can handle the basics.

Good luck and best wishes,
Marc

[tfm]

Spot the Diplomat

The cutback in distance will mitigate, somewhat, the premature move tendencies of the jock.

[Tanico]

Hi Mamojica thanks for that well thought out post. I will take your advice and just start over doing thinks the way you suggest. I think it is certainly worth the effort :)

Thanks again

Tanico

[Charlie D]

There may be a bar room brawl up front :)

[Bill Lyster]

After Richie put the lights on, I like the 6 much more. I can see that usually he makes up ground from 1c to 2c and again to the stretch, so if we voodoo a bit with line 4 and note that the 5f time of 56.3 is one of the faster races I can see this horse about 7th or 8th, moving to 4th or 5th and being in prime position at the stretch call to pass gasping early types. As for the 10, recent races near this pace produce kinda of a hanging pattern and until you go back 208 days you really don't find convincing proof that he can maintain his closing kick.

#6 to win

[RichieP]

Here is my O.T.E. grouping.

1st screenshot is Bl/bl
2nd is raw lines that match proj pace

If the race does go OTE I have a funny feeling both the 3 and 10 might get sucked in around 2c.

That leaves the end around deep closing 5 and 6 as win contenders for me. Hat would be hollering at my ass for picking "mars" runners so one of them better pop :eek:

no scratches which is good :)

[Charlie D]

I chucked #5 because of it's two Tandem losses to #6 and #1

[Charlie D]

I reckon those very fast OSA lines are more to do with track condition than horse ability and from the March 5th race, i figure #3 went from 6th - 1st because others just stopped. A similar scenario to March 5th could happen here, but i chucked #3 OUT as overall it made no appeal here .

Leaving me OTE #6 and #10

[Bill Lyster]

Re: the 6:
Since the return to racing after the lengthy layoff he has shown no real desire to attend faster paces the way he did before he took a vacation. Agree on the 6

[Bill Lyster]

Okay, Richie I'll bite on this one. What was The Hat's guidance when he was left with Mars type horses, pass the race or match up as best you can or look for the next closest horse with some kind of power move, or other?

[RichieP]

Okay, Richie I'll bite on this one. What was The Hat's guidance when he was left with Mars type horses,

He told me they win when the early AND the pressing groups fight through the 2c-sc, exhaust themselves the mars guys can win. He did not like them Bill

Then he told me I better be right picking them otherwise he>>>>>>
:)

[tfm]

He told me they win when the early AND the pressing groups fight through the 2c-sc, exhaust themselves the mars guys can win. He did not like them Bill

Then he told me I better be right picking them otherwise he>>>>>>
:)

This might've been the case (and still is) on dirt tracks. POLY (and turf) is different in that a horse can close from far back without the benefit of middle movers or a contended pace up front. This is why I just love CALI racing. Sure, some of the traditional ways of looking at things still hold but the racing is a hell of a lot fairer and the best horse has a better chance to win. This type of racing puts entails more of an emphasis on WHEN a move is made, and the type (in terms of setup) of race rather than (numeric) pace.

[Tanico]

I don't know what I was seeing when I posted that I like the 4 and 6..... I do like the six but the 4 was a speed horse and I knew we were looking at closers. My only guess is I meant to say the 5 and 6 which is what you came up with.
I guess this is sorta like reboarding LOL... only the race has not run,,, so maybe not.:)

PS - Spent some time today in Hat's Forum , I have a lot of work to do

[RichieP]

This type of racing puts entails more of an emphasis on WHEN a move is made,

John
That is EXACTLY what Hat used to tell me to look for in the result charts when trying to figure a poly track out.

He would tell me to look and see WHEN the winners were moving to the leaders. I'm dead serious. You sounded like an echo for a minute

[Charlie D]

At current odds the #10 is gone from my mind

[Tanico]

Darn, I can't believe the other jockeys let the 7 get by with such an easy lead. The 6 caught everybody else but the 7 had the jump on him after that trip.

[RichieP]

7 wires, 1 and 9 no shows early.

Fat price :(

[Bill Lyster]

Couldn't force myself to put 7 in one hole. Bet 6 to win/place and boxed 6-7-10 for a buck. Thanks for the example

[gl45]

the contrarian way of handicapping
38934955659640 HOL #8 $1 Exacta BX,1,6,7,8 $12.00 $69.40 + $57.40

[Charlie D]

:eek: No bar room brawl :(

[Bill Lyster]

Richie:

Could you post the velocity screen from the last race at Hollywood using the horses in your last posted screen shot and line 1 from Horse 7 please. I didn't download the card, just played from your screenshots.

Thanks and I Appreciate it

[Charlie D]

Well guys i didn't get the winner, but i enjoyed taking part and :cool: to all
who make these type of threads interesting with thier pre-race analysis.

[BJennet]

With all the E types in this race, I also thought it would run as a 'match-up' race until I ran the download. None of the OTE horses were in the top 3 TE, AFAIK. It's very hard to win at either SA or HOL without it. Hard, in fact, even to win as #3 TE. I've been tracking this and a few other stats at various tracks and been blown away by the dominance of TE at HOL. For example, during 5/14-5/17 last week, 13 out of the 16 races I checked were won there by either #1 or #2 TE, two by #3, one by #4. This is using typical Sartin filters of best of last three at comparable distance and surface, and also filtering out maidens and 3yos races.

BTW in this race the #7 was the 2nd ranked TE, winning at 9.5-1, a good example of why the Methodology is so great.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[mamojica]

I had the #1 in this race. I expected the #1 and #7 to battle for the lead. The 1 beat the 7 in the 24Apr09 Hol 6 tandem, and appeared to have a slight edge over the 7 when I compared the other lines. I'm surprised that the #1 didn't fire. He led at the first call in 8 out of his last 10 races.

Marc

[BJennet]

I had the #1 in this race. I expected the #1 and #7 to battle for the lead. The 1 beat the 7 in the 24Apr09 Hol 6 tandem, and appeared to have a slight edge over the 7 when I compared the other lines. I'm surprised that the #1 didn't fire. He led at the first call in 8 out of his last 10 races.

Marc

Marc,

I looked at the race exactly the same way, and was surprised the 1 didn't run better. As far as the tandem thing goes though, H. Sartin often pointed out how often tandem horses at the same class level often traded wins. I had the #1 as top TE. Actually 1 & 7 were very close, and at those odds you could have played both to win, and put both under the 6 in exactas. The way I play, I just would have played the 7 to win and put him under the 10 and 6 in exactas.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[RichieP]

Richie:

Could you post the velocity screen from the last race at Hollywood using the horses in your last posted screen shot and line 1 from Horse 7 please. I didn't download the card, just played from your screenshots.

Thanks and I Appreciate it

Here you go Bill and you are most welcome:)

[mamojica]

Marc,

I looked at the race exactly the same way, and was surprised the 1 didn't run better. As far as the tandem thing goes though, H. Sartin often pointed out how often tandem horses at the same class level often traded wins. I had the #1 as top TE. Actually 1 & 7 were very close, and at those odds you could have played both to win, and put both under the 6 in exactas. The way I play, I just would have played the 7 to win and put him under the 10 and 6 in exactas.

Cheers,

B Jennet

I agree that the 1 & 7 were very close, but I felt that the 1 had a 3/5 second to one full second advantage over the 7, and if the 1 had run his usual race he would have won.

If the odds are right, I'll bet two horses if I've narrowed the race down to two and can't figure out who is best. But in this case, I truly felt that the #1 was better and would not have bet two horses.

Could you please explain what TE is? I don't have a Sartin background and am unfamiliar with the concept.

I use only printed past performances at this early stage in my match-up education. I feel I should learn how to match-up with pencil and paper first, just as one should learn how to do arithmetic manually before using a calculator. Eventually I'll use software, probably RDSS because it was designed to accomodate the matchers on this site. It would save a lot of time. For now, I'll stick with printed PP's until it becomes second nature to me.

Regards,
Marc

[BJennet]

I agree that the 1 & 7 were very close, but I felt that the 1 had a 3/5 second to one full second advantage over the 7, and if the 1 had run his usual race he would have won.

If the odds are right, I'll bet two horses if I've narrowed the race down to two and can't figure out who is best. But in this case, I truly felt that the #1 was better and would not have bet two horses.

Could you please explain what TE is? I don't have a Sartin background and am unfamiliar with the concept.

I use only printed past performances at this early stage in my match-up education. I feel I should learn how to match-up with pencil and paper first, just as one should learn how to do arithmetic manually before using a calculator. Eventually I'll use software, probably RDSS because it was designed to accomodate the matchers on this site. It would save a lot of time. For now, I'll stick with printed PP's until it becomes second nature to me.

Regards,
Marc

Marc,

TE is total energy. If you look at Richie's screen shot, you should be able to locate it.

I understand the idea of feeling stronger about one horse than another, but you might consider thinking about racing in terms of 'wager value'. Let's use this race as an example. Let's say in this race you made the #1 5/2 (.28 win probability) and the #7 4-1 (.20 win probability). The #1 has a wager value of .484, which is very good, but the has a wager value of 1.1 - twice as good. Of course, you could just bet the #1, which is an overlay but you would be leaving money on table by not playing the #7, if you considered him only a slightly worse alternative. However if you had thrown him out, there was no reason to bet. On my numbers, though, they were very close.

If you want to investigate the concept of wager value, Dick Mitchell's 'Commonsense Betting' discusses it in detail, along with a great deal of other useful material. It's out of print but you should be able to find it on the internet.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[Tanico]

Hi Richie, don't know if you downloaded Chruchill Downs today but if you did the 1st race only has 7 horses but 5 of them are E, or EP .. actually I think its maybe 4 or 5 true E's and 1 or 2 Ep's and a 2 Sustained. Thought you might find it interesting, if you are online. The race runs at 2:45.

Doug

[RichieP]

Hi Richie, don't know if you downloaded Chruchill Downs today but if you did the 1st race only has 7 horses but 5 of them are E, or EP .. actually I think its maybe 4 or 5 true E's and 1 or 2 Ep's and a 2 Sustained. Thought you might find it interesting, if you are online. The race runs at 2:45.

Doug

Hi Doug
Just seeing this now. I didnt see the race.

Hey please let us know next time there is a race that interests you. Good gang of folks here man :)