Paceline Selection / Adjusted Speed Rating Query

[Segwin]

From PRX Nov 26, Race 2 - a query from another Thread, initially about the !SAR Workout Form Pattern shown below. Moved to its own thread as the discussion went on from Workout Form Patterns.

36246

[Segwin]

Thanks very much Bill - great information.

With regards to the horse her last race was 159 days but I was giving the horse a second glance due to the good works. I decided against it because of the long layoff and that she was moving up in class where she doesn't belong. I think she ran 6th.

[Bill V.]

Hi Terry

I was happy with these results.

I used line 2 for the winner because even though line 1 is a zero race
I excused it because of the 5.5 to 7 furlong " different distance" excuse.

Here is the winner. BTW line 1 and 2 are the same condition
SA for Non Winners of 2 Life. I am not sure why RDSS puts the full conditions in some lines and not all lines ?

36256

36254

36255

[Segwin]

Bill, I'd like to discuss the use of line 1 vs 2.

What I'm seeing is adjusted speed rating of 76 for line one and an adjusted speed rating of 73 for line 2. Using Best Perceptor the pick is line 3 with an adjusted SR of 77.

In just looking at SR for his PP - if we add all the SR together and divide by 7 we come up with a mean of a SR of 75. I'm not sure if 2 points amounts to much of a hill of beans but wouldn't the SR of 76 on line 1, even though it may be a 0, be a better representation of the capabilities of the horse?

(Is 2 points on a SR enough to worry about???)

Should we split this off in a new thread so as not to derail this one Bill?

[Bill V.]

You make a very good case for using line 1.
However the official Methodology guidelines are to use the pace line with the best adjusted speed rating speed rating at a comparable distance surface and competition level.
In on of the follow ups Doc is demonstrating how he uses the F1 pace line
indicator in Validator. He goes by what the program says is the best,
That is kind of what you are doing with the best of the last 3 preceptor,

However Doc does say when there is a difference in sprint distance he advice's clients to consult their own record to determine if those different distance are comparable.

Since there was no way for Doc to know how every track's various distance played out to each other, he devised a kind of one size fits all guideline or
method of using the best of the last 3 adjusted speed ratings

I however feel that I have gathered enough evidence to also follow his guidelines of letting my records tell me when a 5.5 pace line is not comparable
to a 7 furlong race. and to stay within 1 furlong of today's distance.

As far as yesterdays 2nd race I used line 2 because line 1 is a zero race but at 5.5 furlongs. If you look at a confirming pace line, look at its maiden win line 2. It is very close to that effort in total energy, TPR early late speed rating.
It also is at a comparable distance of 6.5 furlongs.

Line 2 also is within 1 furlong of today's distance

I can not see any reason why I should not use line 2.
Terry would you agree with all my other contenders pace lines ?
If so since line 2 places the winner right on top that also supports using the more comparable distance of 6 furlongs

Good Skill
Bill

PS also I want to add all 3 of horse 2 lats 3 races are the same condition
its just that RDSS is adding the N2-L notation to some but not all the lines

[Segwin]

Bill, I need some time to chew on your post. My eyelids are growing heavy and I have a busy day tomorrow. I ask for some time to respond.

I do however look forward to further discussion.

Till then.

[Segwin]

I've reread everything and fully concur Bill. Although new to the methodology the guidelines fit and worked.

[Mark]

I don't wish to sound combative here but for the life of me, I do not know how you can make a serious attempt to handicap a race if you do not make the attempt first of projecting today's pace.
If you do not project the pace of today's race, how can you successfully pick pacelines for the runners?
Did any of you run track or cross country in high school? Do you run for exercise today? Whether you did or didn't let me suggest to you that if you start fast you can't run the whole way at top speed.
You will tire. If you start slow, you will be way behind the leader and chances are if you are not a superb athlete you will never catch up.
Based upon Pedigree, conformation, herd behavior and training techniques, horses have preferred distances at which they excel. They generally will be either a sprinter or a route horse. At peak conditioning, fitness and
soundness they will run most often with a particular running style and are capable of certain times probably best represented by good speed figures.
I utilize The Match Up so the first thing I want to know is what kind of pace is likely in today's race? This group of horses most likely have never competed against each other before but I can tell fairly quickly looking at
the original screen in RDSS2 at what distances, surfaces and against what paces each horse has run their best speed figures against. The program will also tell me the running styles these horses most often display in their races.
If you will go to the Hat Check Blog and look at the thread in which Jim Bradshaw explains his methods for projecting the pace of today's race you will have a significant advantage over those that use any other method in selecting pacelines. Using best of the last 3 or any other canned paceline selection routine you are just as likely to ignore the likely pace of today's race and thereby minimize your opportunity to make an educated wagering decision.
Are there multiple Early horses in today's race that may exhaust themselves and set the race up for a closer? Can that closer run effectively against today's pace or will a Presser that shows he can press today's pace beat him to the punch? Is there a speed of the speed that will get his comfortable open lead and wire the field? You just can't decipher these things if you are mechanically approaching the race.
I offer this for no other reason than I read these threads and the information provided by others and I'd like to add my two cents. While you may not want to work in raw numbers as I do, if you do a better job of selecting your pacelines you increase your likelihood of success a 100 fold. If you have good pacelines then the other adjusted screens in the program will have a better chance of ranking your contenders.
I am not bound by the last 3 or 4 lines on a horse. If there have been layoffs recently and I determine the horse is coming fit I use the line that represents his ability from a previous form cycle. And sometimes it bits me in the ass but I also get alot of high priced horses that more than make up for it. There are methods used by trainers to improve their horses: distance and surface changes, condensing and expanding days between races, class and equipment changes. These things
are not readily obvious to new players but over time you will start to focus a little more on these things.
Databases are great but I have rarely seen winning percentages and ROIs that lead to profitability unless you insure that the pacelines you select are realistic in today's Match Up.
One of the most common methods for projecting today's pace is from the last race of all runners: RDSS2 will select these for you as you can see below.
What pace would you project for today's race and once you highlight that in the little boxes you can review each horse and his past performances with a new dimension of reality. Can he compete successfully against today's pace?


One Man's Opinion

[Bill V.]

Hi Mark
The way I project the pace of race is to use Micheal Pizzolla's Fulcrum method
from Pace Makes The Race pg. 102

Just by looking at your CD race The only horse that qualifies
off the last pace line are horses 4 and 10

The fulcrum method is to only use the last line
The fulcrum must come from the same track as surface
The horse must be with 5 lengths at both the second call and the finish
The pace is not atypicaal for that horse

The only horse who qualify are the 4 and 10
I think CD is a 1 turn mile
so I will use horse 4 and set the pace at 46.4

Now I just need to see if 46.4 is atypically fact for this horse
Then I would look to see if any horse can run a plus pace line against a 46.4.

In the race from Parx that Terry and I wer discussing there is no Fulcrum horse, therefore the race is pace less and As Micheal Pizzolla writes" When there is no fulcrum pace of race very often the TPR numbers do an exceptional job," They did here getting pointing to a $17.00 winner

Bill

[Mark]

Bill,

You are an old hand at this game and have developed the tools you need to be successful. I personally, use Bradshaw's guidelines to project an initial pace and then once I have eliminated those that can't run to it and have selected pacelines I will reset the pace faster or slower based upon my final contenders.
There are those that view this site that are just starting out or have limited experience and those were my intended audience.
Tom Hambleton and I worked together in 1993 with his programmer Michael Perry, prior to the latter's death and I have great respect for his TPR method and admiration for the man. However, prior to his going back to Kentucky in the mid 90's Tom acknowledged to me that his method was not working as well as it once had and couldn't explain why. He was quite despondent about it. I lost track of him after that. I understand he returned to Las Vegas and drove cab for a living and unfortunately passed away. He was a man well over 300 lbs.
Tom as you know was the primary author of "Pace makes the Race". Never much cared for Pizzola and the Fulcrum pace, in my view, was just a rehashing of Bradshaw's work.

[Ted Craven]

Mark (and everyone),

You'll be happy to learn that, at least as of last December 2012, Tom Hambleton was alive and feeling better than he had been for some time, even getting back into handicapping. This, from Ron Tiller of HDW, in a post at PaceAdvantage: http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=99810

Tom's email address is given in that post, and apparently he is happy to hear from old friends and acquaintances!

Only Tom can fully elaborate on what his feelings about TPR were or are, though I know that nowadays, at least Dick Schmidt still has stated he felt they were valuable numbers, on the occasions he still goes to the track.

But if Tom was ever disappointed in them, or at least in their incompleteness, he would not be the only one - Howard Sartin stated on several occasions, in videos, in print and in at least one seminar I attended (sorry I cannot remember the specific references right now ...) that TPR was a good introduction for beginners, but that like most popular methods, it could account for reducing the mutuels it did hit and that one needed to delve deeper to find more obscure prices (hence the advanced section at the back of the book).

That's why EPR, LPR (FFR) and CPR (TPR) are only 3/7th of the Primary Factor set which, weighted, constitute BL/BL and which along with segmental deceleration measurements, feeds into VDC.

It's possible that Doc was after a certain point, and a certain amount of 'bad blood', damning TPR with 'faint praise' - but that's not for me to speculate on further. Many RDSS users certainly use it to good effect, though I hope, not to the exclusion of all the rest of the readouts.

Which includes the Matchup tools and markups. Perhaps there are 2 main 'camps' in the Methodology: the velocity, energy/deceleration based, rankings of line scores (Sartin) and the visual, positional, early pressure and response thereto of Bradshaw's Matchup approach. It is folly (and just plain untrue) to imagine that serious, thoughtful practitioners of BOTH aspects can not each be winners. I have seen it (both) with my own eyes.

Also, there is a convergence between the two - Sartin's approach being an attempt to numerically quantify the Early versus Late measurements which Bradshaw practiced intuitively (though don't forget who programmed Energy, and Kgen and Thoromation, and was responsible for Aodds ...)

I am thankful for the presence of BOTH aspects within RDSS, and for those who have taught me more about how to apply Bradshaw's matchup, which I do in conjunction with Sartin's numbers.

Hopefully someone can get in touch with Tom Hambleton and find out how he's doing now.

cheers,

Ted

[Bill V.]

Its funny how a post about work out patterns went from that subject to a new post here about adjusted speed ratings to projecting the pace of race to Ted and Marks's
feelings about Tom Hambleton and TPR numbers.

I would like to add that things happen in any of our lives that can effect weight gain, a loss of job and despondency to things that one once loved.

I have written many times of my own demons and skeletons that were
in my past, none of which were caused or cured by a anything but my own ability to cope. and mostly I benefited from the love of friends and family.

To say what has been written above about any man, happened because a Sartin methodology tool works or not was the cause of a mans troubled times is sad.

The book had 4 authors The title is Pace Makes The Race
an introduction to the Sartin Methodology

PMTR is a Sartin Introduction, It is not a TPR book. The TPR ratings are just one part off many tools in the methodology, things like Form, Money management
the Match Up of early and late runners, energy , running styles and
yes turn time and balance So Pace Makes The Race is more than
"just a small part of the primary factors"





Thanks
Bill

[Mark]

Ted,

That's very interesting as I spoke to Jim Cramer not more than 6 months ago and he told me of Tom's demise. But I am happy if indeed your information is correct and I will find the email address and attempt communication if that is true. I have only related first hand knowledge concerning TPR from conversations with Tom in the mid-90s.
I have used many of the Sartin programs for many years and still have most of them stored away. I believe that the intellectual origin for most of these advanced deceleration concepts and even running style designations were Jim's. I don't feel they are mutually exclusive but on the one hand the energy numbers are mathematically derived and therefore subject to a great deal of manipulation while the other is strictly eye-balled. As in RDSS2 you must make assumptions about the application of final time variant, how much to apply and to which fractions. I am not comfortable with the current method you employ so I use the raw data on the Original Screen exclusively. However, the ability to stack pacelines and divide contenders into Early and OTE is terrific!
I am not suggesting to anyone that they abandon their approach to handicapping. I have merely expressed my opinion particularly when it comes to projecting the pace as a first step to picking pacelines. I have also pointed out what I feel are the serious flaws using a factor such as CSR as a guide to contender selection and given a rather lengthy discussion as to my justification. If you can't get the right contenders and pacelines into your analysis it is virtually impossible to make a profit.
Lastly, I will always be thankful to the Pace and Cap website for the Hat Check Blog. It is in finding this about this time last year that I was finally able to understand the tenets and concepts of Jim Bradshaw both in his posts and Richie P. This has been my most profitable handicapping year as a result.

[Bill V.]

Getting back to the subject of projecting the pace
I just saw the results of race 10

I see I was very close to the actual second call POR

I am look forward to seeing how you projected the pace
Pizzolla's Fulcrum from Pace Makes The Race was just about right on

Bill

[Bill V.]

Hi Mark

Yes I do see some value in projecting the POR
I find the fulcrum better, The fulcrum is not meant to predict the POR
Its rather a base to judge if a horse can run competitively against it
From Pace makes the race.

" If you have set a conservative fulcrum pace,
horses which have demonstrated that they cannot finish competitively
after facing paces close to the fulcrum pace are not contenders to win the race
regardless of their TPR's"

Bill

[Mark]

Bill,
It is very exciting and reassuring when that happens. However, there are a number of situations that can occur when it doesn't and you still win the race. For example,
1)the horse or horses that you believe will force the early fractions don't break well or today don't want to go early. This will often lead to a Lone F who slows things down when unchallenged or runs off and sets a blistering pace and folds up at the 1/8th pole. How many times in a quasi paceless route race have you set the 2nd call and they run 2 seconds slower? That used to drive me crazy until I understood what had happened.
2) When track conditions via maintenance or weather change from the period of the pacelines used you can get both slower or faster 2nd calls than you might have projected. I handicapped and lost a race at WO today at 8.5f and no horse in the field had run better than a 1:10.8 2nd call in any of his route pacelines on that Poly surface. with the inclement weather they have been having all week, the surface must have partly frozen as they went along in 1:09 and change today.

By the way, you do me a disservice suggesting that my comments about Tom's weight had anything to do with his handicapping. Or that I suggest that overweight people are in someway flawed or scared by life. Our lifestyles contribute to our physical and emotional health. It's something that a great many of us fight with daily. We have to get exercise and attempt to eat healthful food when most
of the foods available to us at reasonable prices are highly processed, filled with sugars and carbohydrates. Genetics and upbringing also play a great role. But then you don't know me or anything about me.
I emailed the address from Ron Tiller's posting on Pace Advantage and am hoping to hear something from Tom soon!! Hell, I only live 4 hours from Las Vegas and can drive up to see him. I lived in Las Vegas for 6 years before I got married.

[Bill V.]

So is what your saying is even with a consistent method of projecting the POR
Because things happen where you totally miss and the actual pace of race
be it much fast or slower, you still do the same procedure race after race
Is the correct ?
The key is consistency ?

Bill

[Mark]

Bill,
Are you serious or are you just screwing with me?
You will never be able to take the pace from a race run 2 weeks, a month or 3 months ago and expect the same exact track conditions today or that the combined energy of today's runners to produce the same result 100% of the time.
That doesn't mean that you won't get the winner however. Horses distribute their energy from the gate onward but an E horse is still an E horse, a P is still a P etc. All other things being equal a deep surface will require more energy to get over and the times will be slower. A rock hard surface will require less energy and lead to faster times. If your race is made up of Pressers without any dedicated E horses, someone will inherit the lead and only run as fast as he has to or if he has never held the lead before, he may run off. This is why adjusting fractional times to par charts and final time variant can be so misleading. Yes it works at times but to the detriment of PRICE!

But my interest here is simply to point out a different perspective than you obviously hold. That is why I have posted. Mechanical paceline selection is so fraught with error that something as simple as projecting the pace may show a newcomer a different dimension and thereby maybe help him/her understand the game and not lose so much money initially.

If you want to espouse your view, I have no problem with it as long as others can express theirs freely.

By the way, to answer your questions about the POR of the CD race go find Jim Bradshaw's 5 step approach and his methods for projecting the pace in the Hat Check blog. I would have used the 6f line from the horse whose last race was from Indiana Downs as it was a fast sprint at the distance with a competitive finish, but have taken special note of the #3 horses 21.9 -45.9 off a hd in his last race at 6f at CD. Today was his third off a layoff and I would have bet this horse win and place at odds over 20/1 and collected a $28 place price.

[Bill V.]

Thank You Mark

As you have pointed out Jim Bradshaws 5 step approach method and the fulcrum method I used
both got excellent results

Thanks for your help

Bill