Contender Selection Situation (Apr 13, 2013 - OP Race 4)

[NeedForSpeed]

Hi again
I am continuing through practice races trying to make selections and I have come upon a situation I would think we would see a fair amount of the time. I am selecting contenders and am not sure what to do with this one. The race is OC 40/57 N2-X. Kates Main Man is the horse. Its last race pace line is "+" so we take it right? But the conditions were SA 20/28 N2-6M. I would think that race is a step below todays. The third race same thing. "+" line but step below. Now look at the middle race pace line #2. That race seems to fit today's conditions and it ran a "0" pace line. Now look at the odds. The "+" races odds are far below today's ML. The "0" pace line race the odds are higher and closer to today's ML.

So the question to all is this. Is he a contender or not? Is there methodology I can use here to make a determination? Thanks!

34435

[Ted Craven]

Setting aside that this horse was actually scratched from this race and dealing with it as an exercise in contender identification and paceline selection -

There are about as many 'methodologies' or nuances on 'the methodology' as there are individuals. The key is consistent application of what you have found to be economically effective (i.e. not just 'picking winners' but making money long term off the valid contenders in a race and series of races).

That said, here's an axiom I subscribe to: 'a horse runs as fast as it needs to, not as fast as it can.' Whether a horse's Total Energy (as a measure of its ability that day) is higher or lower than a previous race is sometimes just a function of what it had to do to win or finish the best it could against that particular competition. So, while the last line is often a good one, and a measure of what it is capable of NOW in its form cycle - it may also be capable of BETTER than that recently and simply did not have to exert itself that much in its last line.

This horse won its last race and worked 6 days earlier so we have no reason to think it was not fit to run this race (before it was scratched). Lines 1 and 3 were about the same Total Energy and the Perceptor Total numbers are close as well. The Total Energy Pace of Race (cumulative fractional velocities of the pace setter(s)) is somewhat faster for the last race, so we would say it faced a faster Pace of Race in that last line. All things being equal, prefer a horse (or prefer a recent paceline) who ran well against the faster pace of race.

Another important guideline, IMO, is to examine how the horse distributed its energy in lines you are comparing. Check the TPR/EL graph. Lines which are aberrant, or not in a typical range of how it usually runs, should generally be avoided - i.e. they're not typically how it will distribute its energy today, even if the Total Energies are similar. This horse's last and 3rd lines are both Late (typical of routes anyway) and it has generally distributed its energy in dirt routes between 10.0 and 3.2 to the Late side (i.e. more LPR than EPR per the numbers to the left). I don't know if 10.0 (lat line) is more atypical than 3.2 (3rd line).

You will notice that if you pick line 1, then swap it for line 3, it won't likely change its position on the BL/BL line score tier - so both are fair lines (which in itself it good to know: you have recent confirmation of what the horse is capable of versus the rest). I make the horse a Contender off either line. If it makes it into the Top 3 BLBL, it is a Win (and likely also Place) bet at the ML=15 odds.


Other guidelines I use are:

- all things being equal, prefer the more recent line
- prefer a line clearly more typical of how it distributes its energy, even if it makes the horse look worse (i.e. on the resulting BL/BL odds line)
- don't use a line for a horse which is a 'Bad' line (i.e. one you would designate a 'O' race) just because it has a better Total Energy, SR or Perceptor number: in these cases, this horse did not set this pace or respond to the pace - it merely got 'sucked behind' a faster pace of race. If it ran competitively for a portion of the race, say through the 3nd or stretch call, then faded, you might consider this a O+ race and still use it if there's a chance that the reasons it faded previously won't duplicate today.

Whether it can only win in the presumed lower calibre races of its last and 3rd lines is sometimes a fraught decision, but making decisions that way will definitely put you squarely with the rest of the crowd, and earn you the mutuels which the rest of the crowd gets, i.e. insufficient for long term profit. Analysing races by placing primary importance on velocity/energy distribution and how the horses will respond to the matchup of running styles today, and secondary importance on presumed race 'class' equivalencies (and trainer and jockey and post position, etc) is a hallmark of the Sartin Methodology.

The Methodology is however a 'big tent' and individual practitioners will establish, and teach, their own guidelines about what to consider first, what second, etc.

All that said (and perhaps too much said ;-) you have my admiration and respect for diving in and reading and asking questions in public and doing your own thing. Congratulations!

34436

[Because I Can Jim]

I agree with Ted.

There are many different "things" when it comes to the methodology. Everyone must find their own way even if they do have some guidance. Sure everyone is going to get "stuck" and posting helps to get that guidance. But, in the long run, the answers you find for yourself are the ones that are going to resonate with you. Notice I said the answers you find yourself...posting is part of the finding yourself. So keep on posting!

(That may sound strange from someone who looks like they have only 4 or 5 posts. However, what you see is not necessarily the whole story. Back in 1985 or there abouts, I travelled to Beaumont, CA, went to seminars, sat with Brohamer, Pizzolla, Purdy and others, talked on the phone with Bradshaw, achieved the goal of 60% winners at an $8 mutuel, which was considered nirvana at that time, etc... Writing about that is a post for another day.)

Like Ted, I like staying close to a recent line.

I also like to glance at the TPR+E/L Graph and may go back because a line because of it. For Kate, Aug 4 and Jul 22 are not typical of how the horse expends its energy. But be warned, this is the way the horse expends it energy whether that race was a good race or poor race, in form or out of form, etc... which is different from its running style. Have you noticed how the running style from Jul 22 is a presser, yet, its energy distribution is early? (See Jul 22.) Be careful with this. (Again, going down a topic for another post.)

Yet, your question was - is this horse a contender?
If you are not sure, keep it and then throw it out later. Contender Selection and "Paceline Selection" has always been a hot topic from the start of the teaching of the methodolgy. Yet, it is interesting to see in one of the seminar videos from the video collection (I don't knw which one because I am remembering it) where the gentleman sets up the scenario and asks the question about which one of two pacelines to use and Marion Jones says "Use both!" I cannot even begin to think about how many times I have seen that seen played out ever since 1985. If you are not sure about a horse, keep it in. If you are not sure about a paceline, use it too. If you have 6 horses as contenders in a race, you do not need to get it down to 5 because you read about or hear about getting the race down to the "5 contenders in a race". Or if you eliminate, eliminate, eliminate adn low and behold you have 4 horses, don't go looking for another horse to put back in.

It is a "methodology" and not a system. They are guidelines which leaves grey areas that need to be interpreted which is what we get paid for. If it was black an white, black boxes would abound and handicapping would be finished (yet, I think if there was a black box that guaranteed 100% success under a specific set of rules for using it, people would find a way to screw it up.)

Finally, for this rant, (sorry, I get long winded about things I am passionate about and end up going off in different tangents because everything is so interrelated), you are posting only Kate's PP and asking if it is a contender. Let me ask you this....

Let's say we have a ficticious racetrack called Theoretical Downs (TD). There are 10 races on the card for today. In the first race on the card, we have the same race conditions as on April 13, 2013 for the 4thh race at OP. Only, here at TD we have the following horse(s) entered... in the number 1 post postition is Kate's Main Man.
That is it. there are no other horses entered in the race.
My question is "Is Kate's Main Man a contender?"

Before you think I am off my rocker...LOL - think about it. Why? (Other than it is the only horse in the race.)

Did you pick a paceline, look at APV, speed ratings, or any of the other various methods, techniques, etc... to decide if Kate's Main Man is a contender?

Now let's alter the race a little and enter a second horse in the race - Secretariat.
Which horse or horses would you think are the contenders in the race?

Really???

How did you decide that (other than "knowing" Secretariat is a Triple Crown winner)?
Would you look at Kate's Main Man and apply all of the techinques of class, speed, paceline selection, etc... when looking at Kate and determined Kate would be or not be a contender based upon your looking only at its past performances before you even looked at Secretariat's past performances?

Or did you do something else? Did you look at Secretariat too?

I feel - and granted it is only my feeling and my opinion (and we all know what opinions are like - mine included) that we read we are to select the contenders in a race. We also read that we should select a representative paceline of how we think the horse will run today (I am simplifying this satement and the factors involved, because once agian that is a topic for another post). So what does everyone do? They skip the contender selection process, begin with any horse and analyze that horse to death to include selecting a paceline and determining if that horse is a contender or not even though it is the first horse they are looking at.

This horse shows first through the stretch and is beaten 4 by 3-1/2BL in its last race. Wire to twre in the previous two. Contender.

The next horse is 4th or 5th through all of the calls is the last race beaten on average 3-1/2 to 5BL in its last race which was 32 days ago, two workouts since then and was pretty far behind at the first call in its previous two races with positions around 4-5 and 3-6BL. Out. Non-contender. Oh really?

Yes, I know I did not include times but that is not the point. I also realize that I am not including other horses, factors, variables, that could/would effect the answer to that questions such as if there was another early, neet to lead horse, that would setup teh race so that the first horse, while it will have an effect on the race, might not really be a true contender. Notice I didn't select a paceline, etc...

The point is that we focus on a horse and try to determine whether it is a contender or not without focusing on the interplay of all of the horses in the race which is not about paceline selection.

I went through this, looking at the tree instead of the forest, so I am not pointing fingers at anyone. It is just that I see so many posts, writings, etc... about paceline selection as if that was going to give us our true contenders. It is the other way around. We need to determine the true contenders in the race first. Then select the paceline. Doing it that way, you are more apt to select the correct paceline for the horses who have a viable chance to be in the money.

I am sorry. I know that this is long winded (how many hours did it take me to write for you to take only a few minutes to read??? LOL!!!). I also know it might cause contraversy, heated debates, etc... But, as I tell my students, when you take a test and you get the queestion right, you are nto learning anything. you already know it. It is when you get a question wrong that a window of opportunity is open for you to learn what you did not know.

I hope this helps in some way. Feel free to ask questions. I try to anwer them as well as I can.

Jim
Any Questions, Any Time.

[Bill V.]

man I like post like this :)

Hi Need For Speed

I would use line 3
my reasons
Horse has 14 wins it has won 22% of its races
Its in the money 62% of the time. this tells me that we know what we have
and what the horse does when it runs well which it does most of the time.

Line 1 is a off track with a SR of 78
I only use off lines when its the last line and I have to because I will never know one fact, We can always compare the horses off lines to its fast lines and make a judgement if the off track effected the horse BUT
We don't know without lots of extra work about the OTHER horses in that race.
Is the off track line helping this horse or hurting the other horses Maybe they all hated it :eek: That is a little factious but
lets say there are 3 other true win contenders in the race and they all run poorly because of the slop, it makes horses who don't care advantaged.
Anyway back to the race. Lets look at Adjusted Speed ratings
the tool that Doc himself used.

In its plus races it runs from the bottom up ASR's of
81,78,82,83,78 81 and down to 78
The horse is coming back from a nice 5 week freshening
a Tom Brohamer Positive. after the off track win.
I would use line 3 because as Ted points out its representative of its good form races in speed rating and E/L energy
Running a 81 speed rating

I would use line 3
Bill

[NeedForSpeed]

Wow love the responses! I just want to thank all of you before I chase my 6 year old around the yard. I want to soak all this in before I get back on it probably tonight over a cold frosty one. Can't wait to read em and respond back!

[NeedForSpeed]

First off Ted don’t ever think you’ve got too much to say. Everything you’ve got is appreciated and needed. Like you said I can think like the masses and lose and that’s exactly what I’ve always done. I’ve got a lot to unlearn and it’s going to take time and practice to do that. As far as the race goes it appears it’s lucky we are even talking about this. I entered all the scratches at one point but because I have been clearing and starting over so much I’m sure I erased them. So it’s a good thing this came up because it’s something I will see a whole heck of a lot going forward. Thanks for showing me the proper way to read the TPR+EL tab. I will use that as I look at contenders. Your reasoning makes it clear to me that this horse is a contender.

Jim it’s really cool you can respond to my start up ramblings and bring a ton of experience. When you get to that “other day” I hope I am there to read about it. You gave me a lot to think about which is why I am here. Go off on as many tangents as you like you are right they all interrelate and I can take a lot from them. One thing I am doing that I’ve learned is to decide my contenders first and to leave pace line completely out of it. I look straight at that horse and only that horse. If you are saying that during contender selection I can try to interrelate all the horses then great I would love to learn how. If you want to see how I have been going about things here is the first race I broke down on here. I separated contender from pace line but I may not be looking at it the best way that I can.

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9200

I want to become decent at this so with someone as accomplished such as you are there are no limits to what I would like to hear. I need to do things wrong so I can learn from it.

Bill V you have always been great with your responses I am always learning something new from you. I like what you said about Sartin and the use of ASP. You read off a number of values for the horse in question. Can you expand on that? How can I look at those numbers and make a judgment?

After reading all of these posts I am going to use line 3 from this horse. But then again I’m not going to use any line since the horse has scratched. :-) I’m going to renter the scratches and post a work up of this race with my selections making sure I use the advice you all have given.

My goal is what it will always be here. Use the Sartin methodology and learn what works for me by working hard and practice practice practice.

[For The Lead]

Hi again
I am continuing through practice races trying to make selections and I have come upon a situation I would think we would see a fair amount of the time. I am selecting contenders and am not sure what to do with this one. The race is OC 40/57 N2-X. Kates Main Man is the horse. Its last race pace line is "+" so we take it right? But the conditions were SA 20/28 N2-6M. I would think that race is a step below todays. The third race same thing. "+" line but step below. Now look at the middle race pace line #2. That race seems to fit today's conditions and it ran a "0" pace line. Now look at the odds. The "+" races odds are far below today's ML. The "0" pace line race the odds are higher and closer to today's ML.

So the question to all is this. Is he a contender or not? Is there methodology I can use here to make a determination? Thanks!

34435

There is a lot of good responses here, so I don’t think I have to cover that same ground again, instead, I’ll look at this horse from a different point of view.

Since you were concerned with lines 1 and 3 being a step below today’s race, I will try to cover that aspect first.

The first thing I did was get rid of the races that are not comparable, such as sprint races and races on the turf.

34437

Before I move on, I think there is some questions that need to be asked and answered.
Question: – Once a horse breaks its’ maiden, can it ever run in a maiden race again?
Answer: NO. A horse only gets to beat maidens ONCE.
Question: Once a horse beats NW2L or NW3L or NW4L, can it ever run in these races again?
Answer: NO. These conditions are referred to as “life” conditions. A horse only gets to beat each of these conditions ONCE.
Question: Once a horse beats a NW1X (non winners of a race other than) condition, can it ever run in that condition again?
Answer: NO. Once a horse has won a “non winners of ONE other than” condition, it cannot race in that condition again. It must move on to the next level. The same is true for NW2X and NW3X.
Question: If a horse beats a NW16M (non winners of a race in the last six months) or NW26M (non winners of two races in the last six months) condition, can it ever run in either of these conditions again?
Answer: YES. Any time in a horse’s career that it has gone winless, or has only won one race in the last six months, it becomes eligible to run in these conditions again. In some cases the horse doesn’t even have to go winless, as long as the win came at a lower level than today’s race. This will be stipulated in the condition.

The point is this, there are some conditions that a horse cannot revisit and there are others that it can revisit. You have to know which conditions are which.

Let’s take the horse in question as an example.
In line 3 this horse beat the NW1X condition. It is no longer eligible to run in that condition and has to move on, which generally means move up. This is not necessarily a bad thing. A bad thing would be to see a horse win and move down. In line two we see that it did, in fact, move up to the NW2X condition. More often than not, horses moving up will fail. This does not mean they aren’t capable of beating this new condition, they just don’t get the job done the first time, so I don’t discount the horse because of that effort.
In line 1 I see a terrific placement by the trainer. He put the horse in a “SA” (Starter Allowance) race where it cannot be claimed. The condition for the race is that the horse may not have won 2 races in the last six months. It hasn’t. It has only won one race. This is a much softer spot for the horse than line 2 and we know the horse was “in shape” in line 3 and can give the horse an excuse for line2.
The ONLY race in this horses PP’s that doesn’t “fit” is line 4. I would have expected this horse to run better in a condition that was for non winners of a race in a year (NW1Y), but since then it has won 2 of 3 starts, so I’m really not concerned about line 4.

At first I thought line 1 was out of the horse’s ordinary running style, but line 10 also shows an early effort from this horse. Excluding lines 2 and 4, which I have already discussed, there are 4 comparable races for this horse. Two of these races were early type efforts and two were sustained efforts. It appears this horse can go either way.

This horse would be a contender for me in today’s race, which is to say, I would give this horse a line and then see how it matched up against the other contenders chosen. Lines 1 & 3 are considerably different in both time and running style. If you follow the guidelines, you would throw out line 1 for being on a sloppy track. You would excuse line 2 for having moved up in class, which I have already covered. Line 3, therefore, becomes the most logical line to use.

[NeedForSpeed]

Thanks a ton FTL! I love to hear about conditions and if a trainer is making a smart move like the one above when he went with an SA race for his horse. You've given me some great pointers on this phase of handicapping and I will use all of them going forward. I will search the net for some readings so I can interpret them from the pace line. For example I saw one that just said "SO" and in this horses line you see "ST s85". I'm pretty sure I can hunt those down when I need them.

Its interesting I ended up with a horse that didn't run I think it helps a ton not knowing where it would have finished up. My brain won't be swayed by the results and trying to fit it instead of really looking at it. As objective as I want to be knowing the results is still in the back of my mind.

[Bill V.]

The best book on handicapping I ever read was Pace Makes The Race
I learned all about TPR numbers but It was all the other aspects of
how to win with the methodology that hit me.

The lessons on record keeping helped me the most

I did races with TPR numbers for close to 6 months, I tracked
what winners looked like and earned as a rating.
I used the raw numbers from the charts in the book at first, then I used the Phase 1 program.
What I started to notice was that the horses with the best TPR numbers also had the best ASR - Adjusted Speed Ratings
I had all my records of winners ratings and plus race efforts.
I eventually went back to using the ASR instead of TPR


I really am impressed by your work ethic and desire to learn
and that you are practicing with the example data base races.
I do the same thing but I download Parx every day.
and go back over races for many years to practice.

I use the ASR as a grade or measure of its ability
RDSS2 color codes the plus races, so I just run my eye from bottom to top
and note the ASR a horse earns in its plus races by the colored lines.
That is what I did for your example race.

FTL gave a great example of the problems the horse had in race 2
The 69 ASR to me says DANGER DANGER Will Robinson
So I look at the reasons why this line is so low in ASR

Bill

[NeedForSpeed]

OP 4-13-2013 Race 4

CONTENDERS
1- Banjammer > "+" last pace line. Distance, surface and conditions match today's event. WIN CONTENDER
2- Bid Til Included > This horses last race was a “0” and the next pace line is 175 days away. I don’t want to go too far back and this horse hasn’t shown a strong win tendency in recent races. OUT
3- A Student > "+" last pace line. Distance, surface and conditions match today's event. WIN CONTENDER
4- Tiz Tee Time > 3 “+” lines out if its last 4 races although all are sprints. WIN CONTENDER
5- Nehro > I may need help with this one. 301 days off? I just can’t justify this. Also I noticed (it may or may not mean anything) as much class as it has its only wins are maiden and NW1. OUT
6- Kates main man > SCRATCH
7- Omniscient > "+" last pace line. Distance, surface and conditions match today's event. I wanted to make him ITM contender because he hasn’t won in his last 10 but he is 5 out of 31 lifetime. My decision was WIN CONTENDER
8- Runaway Pepper > SCRATCH
9- Truetap > This horse’s pattern is “0”, “0”, “+”, “0”, “+”. He was claimed 3 back and has been dismal in his last 2 NW2X races. Today’s race is NW2X. Do I toss the horse? There’s just enough in the overall PP’s to keep him in. WIN CONTENDER
10- Livonzin > There are no routes in his 4 races. Started 2 for 2 then came up short as a favorite and was put on the shelf. Maybe the first race back was a tune up for this new attempt at distance? Because of its record I am keeping it in. WIN CONTENDER

PACE LINES
1- Banjammer > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
3- A Student > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
4- Tiz Tee Time > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
7- Omniscient > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
9- Truetap > The only usable pace line within the last 90 days is the 3rd pace line. But the 2nd pace line has no excuses. Should I now toss this horse due to that? LINE 3
10- Livonzin > This horse made a big move between 1st and 2nd calls to get to 2.7 lengths behind. Is this a usable pace line? Or is this horse out without a good pace line within 90 days? LINE 1

RACE ANALYSIS
Velocity PoH shows the 10 to get the early lead and be the pace setter. But the 10 is weak late and will fall off. There are no other lead or presser types so I can’t see any projected “L’s” winning the race. I eliminate the 9 from win status. I now have 2 “SP’s” and 2 “S’s”. I give more weight to the “SP’s” because the pace is weak and unless the “S’s” show a clear advantage I want to stick with the “SP’s”. First thing I see is the #1 horse. He has the best ASR at 82 and is an “SP”. Win selection. That leaves 3 horses and they are all very close in all categories. Their ASR’s are basically the same so with the #4 as the only “SP” of the 3 horses #4 is my other win selection.

My question coming out of this concerns the 9 and 10 horses. At pace line selection if pace line 2 has no excuses do I toss the horse without going to a valid pace line 3? For horse 10 can I use that “big move” pace line?

[Bill V.]

Hi NFS

I my self would have lost this race no matter what line I used
Because I would not have a used a pace line for the winner

But in regards to the 9 and 10

The 9 is 30/1 on the ML there are 3 scratches in the race, but 20/1 ML horses hardly ever win so when I see 30- 1 just pass them by
Line 3 is a plus race but for this horse that 76 looks like a best case
A horse moving up after a loss is good for value but a bad bet statistically

The 10 has no route lines and its ability to run 6 furlongs is in doubt, let alone
2 turns against $40000 horses. No line

Bill

[Because I Can Jim]

Pace Makes The Race (PMTR)
Ahhhhh....I remember....Because I am restudying it for the umpteenth time right now!!!

Back in the day...for me PMTR was just being published. At that time, as Bill said, "The best book on handicapping I ever read was Pace Makes The Race." (By the way, Bill is a living, breathing Sartin encyclopedia IMO. Pay attention to what he has to say.)

The software program of choice at that time was Phase III. Ultrascan was just ready to be released. Phase III was all about incremental velocity. You had to manually input the times and beaten lengths for each paceline you wanted to use. It was being used two different ways. First was to enter all of the lines for one horse's past performance and the other was to enter the lines of the contenders. Notice that you were picking contenders and selecting pacelines before you entered them into the program. Although it could be used to select contenders and pacelines using it the first way, it is obvious that "it was a lot of work." More work than the average person was willing or able to do. I worked full time. Had family considerations and was aspiring to handicapping professionalism. The amount of work between that, track profiles, par charts, variants, Brohamer Models, etc... was very overwhelming.
On top of that, for me, the readouts were very confusing. See the Yellow Manual for some examples. I would look at a readout with velocities of 1F, 2F, 2C, FT, Total for not just the POR but POH for 5, 6, 7 horses. Sure, my pea sized brain could see that 58.25 was less than 58.32, but it did not mean anything to me. Still doesn't. I could not get a "feel" for what the difference of 0.07 meant other than this number is higher than that. So as a personal preference I don't use the Velocity POR & POH tabs in RDSS.

What PMTR did was simplify things and it provided some structure as to process and workflow. While the Follow Ups were being published every couple of months and did provide information, they left me confused. You were always given glowing reports from how this person was doing well by doing this an that, yet, I struggled because it was not geling for me from the bits and pieces that were being written. (Now I am no dummy. I graduated Magna Cum Laude with a degree in Accounting. Yes, I am an accountant and just like doctors and lawyers, you are trained to be able to apply concepts and theory and not just memorize and repeat.) Even today, as I go back over Follow Ups and Manuals, I still shake my head. PMTR changed that. It simplified the numbers, but, more importantly, it provided a workflow, and the thought process that you could wrap your mind around and get better at the more you practiced.

My recommendation - it does not matter if it costs $50, $75 or even $100... Buy that book!!!

A word of warning though, get the first edition. As I wrote before, I have a unique perspective. I was around back in 1985. But walked away from handicapping. I decided in February 2013 to return to handicapping. That is why I am "new". A lot has changed, but, a lot has remained the same. I did not get the RDSS software until it was released as RDSS2 to everyone back in April I think. I had searched for the Methodolgy and was lucky enough to find Pace and Cap. (My undying appreciation to Bill and Ted for keeping the Methodology alive through this site and the software and to other oldtimers on this forum such as ForTheLead, Shoeless, lone speed and many others who I have not mentioned but are equally appreciated for keeping this sense of community and sharing strong.) When I looked back, what I found was that Michael Pizzolla went in another direction. Now my understanding is that in later editions of PMTR (I think the 3rd ed.), his contributions were taken out of the book. (I am not sure about this.) I personally was able to find a pristine copy of the 1st ed. and spent the good money to get it. Pizzola's contribution is very important. Again, I may be wrong about later editions, so be careful, but, do get the book.

Next.....LOL
Back in the day....again...LOL
Class was something that was being struggle with. Studies were done and a chart of track class was created that you were to follow and a brief explanation of what to do but no real practical application was presented on making your own. "Keep track of this and that at your own track and circuit and if a horse is coming from another track and you do not have class charts, extrapolate it." HUH???? Again, it was one more thing that required data collection and interpretation. So many of us would do a quick APV calc along with a cursory look at the lifetime winnings chart when it came to class. We read the saying "Pace is Class, is Form, Is Pace..." and that was about it because we were using pace so we did nto consder class. The amount of staggeringly, overwhelming amount of work involved (I said that before right? LOL) that class did not seem as important and APV "sort of got you there" so I just let it be.
ForTheLead is someone you should hang on to every word he writes. His knowledge about class (and other things) is immense. For me, obviously, I am extremely weak when it comes to class, yet, I can see how it can be effectively used for contender selection. Therefore, it is definitely an area of study on my list along with everything he has to say.

Now, for my humble opinions....
On to 9 Truetap...
For me a non contender and therefore I am not agonizing over a paceline. There are a couple of sprinters in the race who can run around a 111 in sprints. While I don't think that will be the POR at the 2C, Truetap recently shows that it isn't competing at 113 - Out - slop or no slop.

For 10 Livonzin - Out - no need for selecting a paceline. There is another sprinter in the race. Can Livonzin compete with Tiz Tee Time? Possibly...except that Tiz likes to move in the final fraction and today is running at a longer distance. Livonzin was laid off for 147 days and is now on its second race back. While it ran as expected for the 1C and made a move in the 2F, today's race is a route. A move to the 2C is only the 1F of a route. Not enough for me. Granted, we don't know what it will do in a route, but, neither do we know that about Tiz. When I compare the two - out goes Livonzin - even before I have considered the other routers in the race.


Hope all of that helps.
Jim

[NeedForSpeed]

Bill thanks for recommending Pace Makes the Race I can get one for $20 so I will order one up tonight. As far as the race for the 4 horse you would have had him out? Because of the distance change? I like that you tossed the 9 and 10 with your logic. I am trying to look more at ASR like you are and will try to learn a lot more about it as we go on.

A question just came to me and I would love to hear from anyone on it. FTL it looks like you have a rule about not going back past 90 days for a pace line. So here in the case of Nehro would you automatically toss him out? With this being a distinct possibility and him being such a favorite in the public betting is this a good betting race?

[NeedForSpeed]

Jim thanks a ton for your insights. You take a different approach and that helps me relate and give thought where I wouldn't normally. I see you are using numbers to try to convert the sprinters to see if they can route today. I want to look into that some more as we all know that's a common make up of a race. This race might be a good example for me. The #4 horse might have the numbers to compete in a route. As you approach it we now know that the #10 horse does not.

As I stated earlier I found a Pace Makes the Race book for $20. I will stop and make sure its first edition now that you warned me. Its a book that others have recommended also so I won't let price get in the way of things. I really look forward to reading it.

Thanks again everyone I'm taking all of your advices as I find my own way to do things. That's going to take some time and not something I am going to rush. I'm concentrating on the basics. You all have a way to win yet you all have a different and unique approach as I can see clearly the more I go forward. There are common grounds though and that's what I am watching very closely for.

[Bill V.]

The original version will probably cost much more than that
The update versions have been edited and some important work by
Doc and Pizzola may have been taken out

I would suggest looking for the original

Bill

[NeedForSpeed]

Bill versions are a bit hard to find out about. Is hard cover the original? I can get one for $36. Let me know what you think.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/096307430X/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used

[Ted Craven]

.
Hard Cover is the original Edition. Dr Sartin and Michael Pizzolla are included among the authors, along with Hambleton and Schmidt. Subsequent editions were published only by the latter two.

That Amazon listing almost the same listing as the one which leads from the Sartin Methodology Amazon Bookstore (http://www.sartinmethodology.com/amazon-bookstore):

http://astore.amazon.com/sartinmethodo-20/detail/096307430X

Ted

[NeedForSpeed]

Ted it looks like you are giving the green light on the one for $36. Sorry just want to double check before finalizing the payment.

[Ted Craven]

Send them an email to be sure it's the hard cover Edition 1.

Ted

[For The Lead]

OP 4-13-2013 Race 4

CONTENDERS
1- Banjammer > "+" last pace line. Distance, surface and conditions match today's event. WIN CONTENDER
2- Bid Til Included > This horses last race was a “0” and the next pace line is 175 days away. I don’t want to go too far back and this horse hasn’t shown a strong win tendency in recent races. OUT
3- A Student > "+" last pace line. Distance, surface and conditions match today's event. WIN CONTENDER
4- Tiz Tee Time > 3 “+” lines out if its last 4 races although all are sprints. WIN CONTENDER
5- Nehro > I may need help with this one. 301 days off? I just can’t justify this. Also I noticed (it may or may not mean anything) as much class as it has its only wins are maiden and NW1. OUT
6- Kates main man > SCRATCH
7- Omniscient > "+" last pace line. Distance, surface and conditions match today's event. I wanted to make him ITM contender because he hasn’t won in his last 10 but he is 5 out of 31 lifetime. My decision was WIN CONTENDER
8- Runaway Pepper > SCRATCH
9- Truetap > This horse’s pattern is “0”, “0”, “+”, “0”, “+”. He was claimed 3 back and has been dismal in his last 2 NW2X races. Today’s race is NW2X. Do I toss the horse? There’s just enough in the overall PP’s to keep him in. WIN CONTENDER
10- Livonzin > There are no routes in his 4 races. Started 2 for 2 then came up short as a favorite and was put on the shelf. Maybe the first race back was a tune up for this new attempt at distance? Because of its record I am keeping it in. WIN CONTENDER

PACE LINES
1- Banjammer > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
3- A Student > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
4- Tiz Tee Time > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
7- Omniscient > The last pace line is a good pace line. LINE 1
9- Truetap > The only usable pace line within the last 90 days is the 3rd pace line. But the 2nd pace line has no excuses. Should I now toss this horse due to that? LINE 3
10- Livonzin > This horse made a big move between 1st and 2nd calls to get to 2.7 lengths behind. Is this a usable pace line? Or is this horse out without a good pace line within 90 days? LINE 1

RACE ANALYSIS
Velocity PoH shows the 10 to get the early lead and be the pace setter. But the 10 is weak late and will fall off. There are no other lead or presser types so I can’t see any projected “L’s” winning the race. I eliminate the 9 from win status. I now have 2 “SP’s” and 2 “S’s”. I give more weight to the “SP’s” because the pace is weak and unless the “S’s” show a clear advantage I want to stick with the “SP’s”. First thing I see is the #1 horse. He has the best ASR at 82 and is an “SP”. Win selection. That leaves 3 horses and they are all very close in all categories. Their ASR’s are basically the same so with the #4 as the only “SP” of the 3 horses #4 is my other win selection.

My question coming out of this concerns the 9 and 10 horses. At pace line selection if pace line 2 has no excuses do I toss the horse without going to a valid pace line 3? For horse 10 can I use that “big move” pace line?

Let's look at the #9. The question is, "should we go back to line 3?" My answer is "NO" and here is the reason.

You will find that in many of my answers, "conditions" usually play a part. This case is not different, so let's look at the conditions for the last three races. But before we do that, what is today's condition? it is an "OC" (optional claiming race) with a NW2X (non winners of 2 race other than) condition. So is line 2. Line 3, however, is different. Line 3 was a "CL" (claiming race) with a NW3L (non winners of 3 races lifetime) condition. There is a BIG difference between the conditions of lines 1 & 2 when compared to the conditions of line 3, with the conditions of lines 1 & 2 being MUCH tougher. Since this horse ran well in line 3 and ran so bad in lines 1 & 2, we can logically conclude it will NOT run well in today's race. It is NOT a contender in today's race.
Now, having said all that, there is one more thing. This is NOT a Sartin Methodology thing, but rather, something of my own. I have no idea how many times I have written this, but since you are new to the site I don't mind writing it again. I have well over 5,000,000 horses in a database. This database is made up of well over 600,000 races. I can tell you that horses that have a morning line (ML) of 20/1 or higher win about 5% of the races, so I'm content with eliminating these horses as non-contenders. I rather work with the 95% that are among the most logical contenders. One thing everyone must learn, is that no matter how you approach handicapping horse races...YOU CAN'T WIN THEM ALL!" You have to learn to accept the losses and move on, continuing to use a consistent approach.
That was the long way around saying that the #9 horse also has a ML of 30/1 and for that reason would be dismissed out of hand. Ok, on to the #10 horse.

The #10 horse is straight forward. The idea behind picking contenders and pacelines is finding "COMPARABLE" lines from which to make a determination. Here is a screen shot I took from either the Paceline manual or a Follow Up, right now I'm not sure which, but it is something "DOC" wrote.

34443

QUESTION: Does the #10 horse have a race on the dirt in a route race?
ANSWER: NO.

This horse is NOT a contender.

[For The Lead]

A question just came to me and I would love to hear from anyone on it. FTL it looks like you have a rule about not going back past 90 days for a pace line. So here in the case of Nehro would you automatically toss him out? With this being a distinct possibility and him being such a favorite in the public betting is this a good betting race?

I have two 90 rules or you could call them guidelines if you prefer.

1 - Any horse without a race in the last 90 days is a NON CONTENDER.
2 - I only use a line if it occurred in the last 90 days, otherwise the horse is a NON CONTENDER.

The database information I gave you in my above post is the reason for these rules/guidelines. Like the statistic I noted on ML 20/1 or higher, horses that have not run in the last 90 days or horses without a good comparable line in the last 90 days also fit into the same scenario.
It's not the "needle" I'm looking for, it's the haystack! There are many, many terrific prices without "going fishing" for them.

As far as the favorite that has not run in the last 90 days is concerned, yes, I would eliminate the horse as a non contender as far as I am concerned, however, I will still look at the horse AND at the rest of the field. If I cannot find a horse "I believe" can win the race, I will pass the race. This is true in every race I look at. I will always look at the favorite and determine if I can beat it or not. I will look at what is "right" with it and I will look at what is "wrong" with it. In order for me to bet against the favorite, I have to believe I can beat it. Since I never bet on a favorite, I am either confident I can beat it and bet against it or I pass the race.

[NeedForSpeed]

Hi FTL. First up I want to say that I did read a post to someone else a while back where you stated your database contains over 5 mil horses. Once I got my jaw back in place I said well, I'm gonna make a separate category for FTL posts. One where I pay special attention to whats being said. That and I do have a curiosity to conditions and I want to push myself to learn everything I can about it. With that said can I ask you a couple of questions?

1- Can I myself automatically cross off 20-1 and above ML odds and make them non contenders? Again I am trying not to leave any stones unturned or dismiss horses so quickly even though the answer may be obvious.
2- I notice you tossed out the #10. The #10 doesn't have any route races. So would the same apply to the #4 horse? His last 10 races are dominated by sprints. He has a very good recent record. But are these lines comparable in the way Doctor Sartin intended them to be?

[For The Lead]

Hi FTL. First up I want to say that I did read a post to someone else a while back where you stated your database contains over 5 mil horses. Once I got my jaw back in place I said well, I'm gonna make a separate category for FTL posts. One where I pay special attention to whats being said. That and I do have a curiosity to conditions and I want to push myself to learn everything I can about it. With that said can I ask you a couple of questions?

1- Can I myself automatically cross off 20-1 and above ML odds and make them non contenders? Again I am trying not to leave any stones unturned or dismiss horses so quickly even though the answer may be obvious.
2- I notice you tossed out the #10. The #10 doesn't have any route races. So would the same apply to the #4 horse? His last 10 races are dominated by sprints. He has a very good recent record. But are these lines comparable in the way Doctor Sartin intended them to be?

In my experience, the best way to find solid contenders is to first find the non contenders. If you can eliminate the losers then only the possible winners remain. This must be a consistent approach. If and when you get beat by a non contender, and you WILL get beat by one, just go on to the next race and follow your consistent approach.

So in answer to your first question, yes. I understand what you are saying about leaving no stone unturned. If I could put my hands on it right now, I just don't remember where I saw it, DOC cautioned about putting non contenders "in". They change your readouts and could cause you to forget that they were really non contenders. ;)

I don't know about the #4 horse. I didn't look at it, but I'll try to let "DOC" answer your second question. This is from the Paceline Manual. There is more to it, but this is the pertinent part.
34449

This was on page 17 of the manual.

[For The Lead]

Thanks a ton FTL! I love to hear about conditions and if a trainer is making a smart move like the one above when he went with an SA race for his horse. You've given me some great pointers on this phase of handicapping and I will use all of them going forward. I will search the net for some readings so I can interpret them from the pace line. For example I saw one that just said "SO" and in this horses line you see "ST s85". I'm pretty sure I can hunt those down when I need them.

Its interesting I ended up with a horse that didn't run I think it helps a ton not knowing where it would have finished up. My brain won't be swayed by the results and trying to fit it instead of really looking at it. As objective as I want to be knowing the results is still in the back of my mind.

I thought I would post up a couple of conditions from Belmont.
One is an "SO" (Starter Optional Claiming) and the other is an "OC" (Allowance Optional Claiming), generally referred to as just an "optional claimer", just so you can compare them. Something to keep in mind is, not all tracks write the same types of races. Some tracks write "SO" others don't. If you read these conditions, you will find that they are very similar, with the difference being "class level". The "OC" (optional claimer) is written for better quality horses, while "SO" (Starter Optional Claimers) are for lesser quality horses. Here are the conditions.

34450
34451

As for the other part of you inquiry;
"ST" means Stake Race
"s" lower case "s" is a state bred designation. It is for horses bred in the state where the track is located.
"85" is the purse value of the race. In this case $85,000.

[NeedForSpeed]

Beautiful thanks again FTL. Time to go to work on all of your suggestions so if you don't see me the next 2 to 3 weeks thats where I am. Take care everyone.

[NeedForSpeed]

Send them an email to be sure it's the hard cover Edition 1.

Ted

dang someone bought the one for $36 last night! oh well