Segments Screen Question

[GeorgeC5614]

Hi,

I have just downloaded the trial and was going through some of the sample databases. I was working on Race 2 at Tampa Bay Downs from the April 7th database. I was pretty confident in my pace line choices, and when I got to looking closely at the Segments screen I noticed something that struck me as strange.

37016

The TS + F3 section showed the order of finish as 7-4-5, but the Lengths/Fin # showed the order of finish as 7-5-4. My question would be why/how are these different, and which should I look at first. The BL/BL showed the 7 (20.5) on top with the 4 (20.0) right behind, and the 5 (19.5) slightly further back.

Thanks
George

[Ted Craven]

Welcome George, and thanks for taking the time to frame your question so clearly!

A little refresher on terminology, and equivalences:

TS = True Speed = Adjusted Speed Rating (ASR) = average velocity from beginning to end of race (i.e. no race segments involved). See TS on the the Velocity (Horse) screen.

CBL Fin. (Computed Beaten Lengths, Final - Segments Screen) = TS True Speed (simply a different way of portraying the gaps; compare the ranks with TS: they're identical ;))

F3 = Fraction 3 velocity (Velocity screen): velocity of the horse for the race segment between the 2nd call and Final.

TS+F3 = True Speed + Fraction 3 averaged (Segments screen).

BL/BL = the weighted line score or the 7 Primary Factors shown on that screen.

Total Energy (TE) - sum of F1+F2+F3 velocities

Thus, the difference between CBL Final (aka True Speed) and TS+F3 is ... F3! TS+F3 is a weighting of the average race velocity by the 3rd fraction velocity. It shows not only who possesses the ranked faster average velocities (or final time SR) but ALSO who had relatively the better remaining 'gas in the tank' during the important 3rd fraction (which leads to the finish line, after all).

TS (or the Adj SR) alone an be deceiving in that it can be the result of good effort in the early fractions of a race, perhaps against a faster pace than the horse can innately handle (or could handle in that particular race) - but then the horse may perhaps have faded due that fast pace (or return from layoff, or trouble, or whatever). You can see where this may be so by simply analysing on the Velocity screen pacelines for a horse against fast paces with good performance through the 3nd call and poorer performance in F3 and at the finish line.

By adding in F3 to that TS/Final Time - you get the nuance that the horse not only had to be fast (or, faster than its competitors ...) but it had to be so - in the final part of the race, and after having set or kept pace with the others.

Personally, I always favour BL/BL for its weighting of ALL the race segments including compounding such as Hidden, FX and FW - over TS+F3, but I also inspect the WHY, if TS+F3 rank is seriously out of whack with the BL rank.

V/DC however, is the purest expression of remaining energy during F3 (deceleration) relative to how fast the horse was going during the earlier segments of the race, and also blended with the BL score. Probably that just sounded pretty esoteric or mumble-jumble ;) (sorry), but there has been a lot written about it which you can read both on P&C (try the Google Site Search) and in the Follow Up Issues (~ #72 - #74 ??).

So (from my own usage) -

1) BL/BL and V/DC
2) TS+F3
3) Total Energy

Plus - ALWAYS understand when an Early horse, especially with lower TE/BL, etc - will be unopposed (or less opposed) today, OR was compromised by too much early pressure in a past race. Conversely - understand when too many Earlies will vie with each other today and NOT be able to retain the measure of F3 they showed they could run to in their PPs.

George - after you've finished your work on this example race, share with us the Result and mutuels if you would, since you were kind enough to lay out the moving parts of the race on the Segments screen for us, and spark this review. Nice race ...

Again, welcome, along with all questions - it's how we learn!

yours,

Ted

[GeorgeC5614]

Thank you for the very detailed answer. That is what I was looking for, and I still have much reading to do! There is a ton of information to digest. I had actually worked this race through and this is the BL/BL screen I ended up with:

37018

I had originally like the 7 horse, and the BL score re-enforced what I came up with. My 'paper bet' that I wrote down was 7 W-P-S with 7-4 and 7-5 exactas.

One thing I did change was to use the 4th line for the 7 horse. He had three races since a lay off, two were sprints and the third was a route that looked atypical to his running style. I watched a replay of the race, and it did not look like the jockey ever asked the horse for anything, and had him check for most of the race. That is why I did not use line 2 which would have been the logical pick from a recency stand point.

Here is the results from Equibase.

37017

[Bill V.]

Welcome to Pace and Cap

Great work on this race.

To Ted

So if we are using Val 4 mode the little positions of the horses ala Thoromation
are not the VDC ranking like on the Dos version
See my screen -race 6 Parx 3/31/14

The Validator, The IMG and The % of VDC from the best 0.0 are in the same order but not nessacarily the little horses

37019

[Rivegauche610]

FWIW, I searched for and found this thread, and did my own small experiment. it is Woodbine's 6th race for tomorrow, June 8, 2016. I had selected the first paceline for the 6 horse while working with the Trackmaster MPH Pro program and so I set that paceline in RDSS. I then compared it to paceline 3. Here are the differences, which I find most interesting, along the lines of George's post from two years ago. My thought on choosing the third paceline was to capture the horse's running characteristic at the same distance, rather than its recency, but I see recency as relevant here; paceline 1 was also the selection of RDSS using the Best Perceptor/Last 3 Comparable criteria.

[Ted Craven]

If you are using Perceptor as guidance for line selection, line 3 is clearly best (also best Adjusted SR) within the last 3 (and general recency), thus the one that particular automated procedure selects.

The last line is a good one, though against a slower pace, thus the SR and Perceptor of our horse (who won) was slower. The question is: is the horse capable of running better when fit? Well, yes! It ran 82 Speed Ratings twice in the past year so we know it is capable of that. We know it is fit because it returned from the winter vacation to win at first asking. We know it can win back to back in the same campaign. In its return race, it ran its typical running style against whatever pace it faced (closer) - it's not the horse's fault it didn't have to run faster to get the job done - LOL!

That's why I think it's unfair to use the last line to represent it, and why the 3rd line shows it ranked 1st on TS+F3. Though, for me that alone is not good enough to decide to make it a co-bet, and why I use BLBL and VDC instead. And lately, also consider the Class Rating and CSR to make sure the horse is earning its ratings against relatively higher class company, and has a history of consistency in its SRs.

I like this adage: 'a horse runs as fast as it needs to, not as fast as it can.'

Ted

[Mitch44]

Hi Rievgauche610,

FWIW on the # 6 I would use line 3, I always try to stay within 1/2 furlong of todays distance for a pace line and never more or less than 1F. The reason for that is that different distances change the POR, E.g. in this instance 5 F probably would be run faster than a 6.5 F race. This changes a horses normal deceleration making it greater than at a 6.5 F race.

Also in this case regency isn't an issue for me because he ran very good at 5F
since line 3. I don't know his workouts since then but for myself going back wouldn't be an issue in this case.

Then again there are always the naysayers who will take the contrarian view. Pace line choice is an art and also an individual thing. Only after the race can a right or wrong be
determined. In this case appears that either line won't make any difference because based on "your" data I would get this horse better than fourth. I don't like the 5F line on the 2 either and wouldn't trust any of its ratings or ranking because of that 5F line. With that I'm leery your ranking are correct.

Best of luck,
Mitch44

[Rivegauche610]

This is just an observation not intended to say one is better than the other. I use the Brohamer/Trackmaster MPH Pro system as an adjunct to RDSS. Tonight as I examined tomorrow's 8th at WO I found an interesting discrepancy as to interpretation of identically applied pacelines. First, the MPH Pro screen shot and then the RDSS... I speculate it is because MPH is pure Brohamer inside and out and RDSS is a synthesis of many algorithms and calculations, including velocity.

[Bill V.]

The 6 is a interesting horse, I would not use line 1 for the same reasons Mitch outlined, The 5 furlong come back race is a good sign, after the long winter layoff, but your looking at some big adjustments with the turn and a longer run down the backstretch in 6.5 and 7 furlong races.
The 6 even with line 3 looks like she is in for a battle with the 5 and 2 who both show better TPR's than horse 6 good rating in line 3 Both the 5 and 2 also look fast early so a 87 EPR needs to maybe be bumped up, I figure about a 91 EPR fulcrum

I am concerned with line 2 It was entered to be claimed at age 3
Line 3 is restricted to 3 year olds, late in the year so the class was a little easier. So line 3 is the line if you are okay with going back over 200 days


40803

40804

40805

[Mitch44]

I agree with Bill on Line 1 for the 2, as a young 3 yr old it should be improving with each race. Its last race showed greater stamina (7F & TPR). It also changed running styles in last as it is learning and to get distances beyond 5F it needs to learn to relax and rate. So the new ESP doesn't worry me.

On the 5 either L1 or 2 would work and my final choice would be dependent on the pace its likely to encounter in this race, which right now I don't have.

Now that leaves the 7 with a 5F line, the reason I didn't mention his 5F line before is he was the best of all the three horses that had 5F lines ,therefore a contender if all 5 F lines were kept, however now that lines have been changed lines on the 2 & 6 the 7's chart need to be revaluated for a line closer to todays dis. of 6.5F. This goes with **** " treating all the horses the same" ***** We can't change the 2 & 6 lines and not consider the 7 for change also.

With all this you can see how critical line choice is. Your final choices and decisions should be interesting.

Good luck,
Mitch44

[ray lopez]

I have a question mark on the #7 horse.I didn't want to use line 2.I put in line 4 but still a ? mark.Here's my print out on notepad.

[ray lopez]

Horse #7 line 2 has a TPR of 174 but it's a 5 f race,so I went down to line 4,which is 6.5 f with a TPR of 174.
I also did not like the Trackmaster speed ratings/variants,so I went with HDW data and I'm happy with the TPR and adjusted times on my own program.

[ray lopez]

I am not betting this race because a few horses have recency and form issues,in my opinion.

[Hoof 11]

Horse #7 line 2 has a TPR of 174 but it's a 5 f race,so I went down to line 4,which is 6.5 f with a TPR of 174.
I also did not like the Trackmaster speed ratings/variants,so I went with HDW data and I'm happy with the TPR and adjusted times on my own program.

Care to expand on why you didn't like the speed ratings/variant?

[Lt1]

If I remember correctly at the 1993 Vegas seminar Ted asked the question about horses coming off long layoffs at WB. The Doc answer was to treat the horses as if they had been running on a regular basis and not to worry about the layoff. His reasoning was trainers had been working the horses both on and off track over the winter. I also would not have a problem going back for a line under these conditions. Finger Lakes in NY is another track where this problem occurs I've found that most tracks 5f lines don't translate well to races at 6f or longer.
Tim

[ray lopez]

Tim,

I had the same concern with Bill V. as he mentioned this a few times here and the last time was in the topic,"track to track adjustments" under the forum "Sartin Methodology 101".
Ray

[ray lopez]

My last post was an answer to Hoof11 question.I prefer to use HDW data than Trackmaster and i'll just keep quiet on that because Trackmaster is revered here.Maybe Bill V. can explain that better.

[Hoof 11]

What you use is your prerogative, i was just curious as to why you don’t like the ratings, no one is trying to roast you here, your opinion matters.

As well, which rating do you have an issue with, the second line from the 7?

[Mitch44]

I can't say which line is correct because I haven't seen the PP, only what was posted here. Going back doesn't brother me. Using a 5F line for a 6.5 F race does brother me. As I said earlier treat them all the same.

Mitch44

[ray lopez]

Mitch44 and Lt1 answers why line 2 of horse #7 is not a good paceline to use.
In regards to using Trackmaster data,i just don't trust their data.I found out there was an error some of the time...not all the time,but sometimes.The reason I found this out is I have a conversion program that converts their .exe files to .drf files.

Ray

[Mark]

Using the Bradshaw recommended method of selecting initial pacelines, choosing the POWER LINE for each horse, I end up with:
40808
The #5 horse should be sitting 3rd behind the dueling #2 and #7 and overtake them around the turn into the straightaway.
One of the best ways to determine how a horse will run off a long layoff is their first lifetime start, which info not always available. Look at how this horse has been trained it is "Old School" textbook. They did all the preliminary stuff at the farm and brought her to the track for 3 5f works for stamina and then worked on speed 4f, 4f, 3f and a 2f blowout 5 days ago. This mare is a full year older than when she won her first lifetime start, more mature, stronger.
Going to carry a prime bet for me at 3/1 or better

[Mark]

Same deal, only in this case the horse is either broken and they are trying to lose him for $10,000 or he is set:
40809
POWER LINE from first lifetime start, fastest horse in the race, also versatile and can run off the pace. Good works for the return, fought for 1/2 mile head and head on a slow surface, back in 12 days. At anything over 6/1 I would bet this horse to win and place.

Feeling Froggy today

[Rivegauche610]

Mark, thanks for this insightful post. I'd like to talk to you about your paceline selection; I'm going to speculate you choose them yourself based on your own analysis. I've been relying on the algorithms, and its very interesting to me how a slight change in one paceline on one horse changes the whole complex of the race on the segments screen. - Kevin

[Peteman]

Old model says sp-1-2, win ap-1-3 place.

[Mark]

I don't use DTV, I only use ITV. Actually I only look at the Original screen as the others use adjusted data, especially when you use track variant. I am an advocate of Jim Bradshaw and his student Richie P.
This is not a method for everyone. In fact, few seem to either understand it or just don't believe in it. It ignores most of what mainstream handicapping espouses. This is the way they handicapped before computers and speed figures and such. That's why you still can get very good prices.
The #5 horse has been off 193 days. Most everyone will tell you not to bet this horse. Not recent! Well, every horse has a story and if you fixate on one race and don't look at the entire horse's resume, then shame on you. WO is a tough track to win over first time off layoff so this is a risky proposition. But the horse has had phenomenal handling. Owned by someone who has a training track to prep the horse over, won her first lifetime start. Off that race over a year ago she looks to be nearly unbeatable. And she has matured in the last year and probably will be a bunch faster now. She could win by 5 or fade in the stretch but at the right price, she is worth the risk. But you don't see this horse if you are only looking at the last line or best of the last 3.

[Ted Craven]

Since this thread is no longer exclusively focused on how to reconcile the RDSS Segments screen with MPH Pro, using WO Race 6 and Blurricane as an example, and since Kevin doesn't seem to mind the wandering focus, well, here's my 2 cents with yet further screens:

Odds seem generous enough to bet on both #2 and #5, Top BLBL, VDC and several other factors (Sartin Methodology, 2-horse wagering ...??). Using longer than 5f lines, though the top 2 don't really change if you do.

40811

Let's see where odds settle at post time ...

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Result: 2-6-1. The 2-5 combo Win bet is one I would take regularly, even with the #2 going at 7/5 finally. They were Top 2 (on my preferred readout screen) and the #5 was a generous 4-1. Betting the #2 is essentially a hedge against losing the wager (and making a modest payoff), while rooting for the #5 (who perhaps still needed another race returning to action).

40812

Ted

[Peteman]

Good call on 2 Ted,I liked but was bet down.I went 5-6,sorry these threads
wander with every post.

[Rivegauche610]

The results in screen 2, and my RDSS analysis of the race, screen 1.

[Rivegauche610]

Here is my BL/BL screen:

[Ted Craven]

Those screens worked quite well for you Kevin! We had the same readouts.

Ted

[Bill V.]

Kevin

You picked a very nice race to post. I was glad to see the results

Hey Ray Lopez long time, Nice to hear from you, Nice work getting the winner with the best TPR on your home made program.

Mitch, Sorry I could not post the complete PP's I am deep in the heart of Texas
and I guess the cows and the oil field workers don't need WI FI .

I did manage to snag horse 7 before my service cut out


40817


Bill

[Bill V.]

Hey Ted Nice work on the race too , The 5 probably needed this race,
It has the numbers and it earned a *SAR workout, , In PMTR Pizzola
talks about layoffs and their patterns. Horse 5 although it won first out ,
and was Marks power line, It has not won after its previous layoffs

40818

[Bill V.]

Hey Hoof and Ray
My feelings about the adjustment problems have softened
I still do not trust them fully .
. I wanted to use Doc's product and that means using Trackmaster. Perhaps I was a fool to take
this to seriously, I decided to find a method where I did not depend on too many adjustments, I found that in Pace Makes The Race and phase 1
and from the Match Up lessons from Richie and Hat .

So yes I download from Trackmaster and try to watch the lines I use that the DTV is not too extreme, I download and I just go with it.
I do use the adjustments offered but I no longer take any of this too serious
I bet for fun, I do best when I am happy and having fun,

Bill

[Mark]

A saying I have remembered for years: "Sometimes you eat the bear, sometimes the bear eats you!" As soon as the gate opened it was obvious that the #5 was in for the conditioning. That's something I failed to honor at WO. It is very hard for layoff horses to win off long layoffs. That was the way it was before they changed the surface this year and appears the same after. Hope I didn't cost anyone any money. That said, these types of plays tend to be streaky as when horses have been running consistently over a season start going to the sidelines and a number of layoff horses return from their breaks. In the 8th race, the #3 got bet and once it dropped below 5/1 I lost interest. There's no question the horse had a horrible trip, and maybe he is worth a bet the next time if he comes back in a couple weeks and drops. But this guy was not going to beat these horses yesterday, wasn't good enough or lacked conditioning. You have to know what type of win% you personally have with this type of wager and I really get excited when the horse goes off at high single digit or double digits. Still my favorite angle is 3rd off the substantial layoff and that may be something to stick with at WO.

[Hoof 11]

A saying I have remembered for years: "Sometimes you eat the bear, sometimes the bear eats you!" As soon as the gate opened it was obvious that the #5 was in for the conditioning. That's something I failed to honor at WO. It is very hard for layoff horses to win off long layoffs. That was the way it was before they changed the surface this year and appears the same after. Hope I didn't cost anyone any money. That said, these types of plays tend to be streaky as when horses have been running consistently over a season start going to the sidelines and a number of layoff horses return from their breaks. In the 8th race, the #3 got bet and once it dropped below 5/1 I lost interest. There's no question the horse had a horrible trip, and maybe he is worth a bet the next time if he comes back in a couple weeks and drops. But this guy was not going to beat these horses yesterday, wasn't good enough or lacked conditioning. You have to know what type of win% you personally have with this type of wager and I really get excited when the horse goes off at high single digit or double digits. Still my favorite angle is 3rd off the substantial layoff and that may be something to stick with at WO.
Regardless of the outcome, i like the way you think. Are you in Toronto by chance? You seem to have some knowledge on the inner workings at Woodbine, i'm just curious.

This quote was particularly refreshing....

“One of the best ways to determine how a horse will run off a long layoff is their first lifetime start, which info not always available.”

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could scroll through the horse’s history without having to go back to the database? cough cough Ted... lol

[Hoof 11]

Hey Bill

I couldn’t tell you one way or another how accurate the Adjustments are, or the DTV, but it would be nice to see an example of why some find them inaccurate. I was fishing yesterday when i made that post, and was curious to see if someone would question the SR/DTV on a particular date.

For future reference Bill, can you include the header when you post a screenshot of a race, in the past you have left me scrambling to figure out what race you’re talking about, thanks in advance. ;)

[Ted Craven]

I couldn’t tell you one way or another how accurate the Adjustments are, or the DTV, but it would be nice to see an example of why some find them inaccurate.

Ditto. Adjustments seem to work well enough for me ...

40819

Result: 10-9-1

[Hoof 11]

Ditto. Adjustments seem to work well enough for me ...

That is my thought process, i along with many others have had success with RDSS and Trackmaster’s data, if it was that faulty we would all be falling flat on our face on a daily basis.

I can understand the occasional incorrect data entry at Equibase, that would be a horrible task to deal with everyday, but overall, i have no issues with the product.

[Mark]

The only source for lifetime pps is Formulator, that I know of. No, I am California bred, born and raised. Although I have made my way around the US and parts of the world in military and business. I have been to Woodbine once and it is a beautiful track. Probably in the late 80s, but I think it has undergone major renovation since.
Know thyself! If you are extremely comfortable, even desire the security of dealing with numbers than you are somewhat limited to handicapping programs that present that information to you. RDSS2 allows you some flexibility in how you apply DTV to a horses paceline and once you make that choice, then all the screens other than the Original Screen will include the application of those variants. I think that is nuts personally, but then I am a Matcher and Jim Bradshaw devotee.
Pars and variants are based on Averages. We may think that they are state of the Art because everybody uses them. Par charts and class Par are also based on assumptions that each class level is "X" faster than the nearest lower one. Well, there may have been a day, I can remember them when there were enough of the same class and condition of horse to derive an average, but that is old news. $10,000 claiming was the class level chosen because in the old days nearly everyone ran enough of them to make a reasonable average. Gone! And why is it that we want to know the average. Aren't the exceptions to the average where we are going to find the higher paying horses. And who came up with the idea that it makes any sense at all to apply the final time variant in percentages to the first and 2nd calls. Final time speed is the dependent variable here and it is completely reliant on the speed of the 1st and 2nd call and the interplay of the runners.
I'm getting wound up so I will stop. I think Bill V who founded the Pace and Cap website and is a loyal supporter of Doc Sartin would like to see a little more faithful consideration of the changes forthcoming in the RDSS2 future release as it relates to the Sartin Methodology. But Bill, don't let me put words in your mouth. That's the hit I get.

[Bill V.]

Hey Bill

I couldn’t tell you one way or another how accurate the Adjustments are, or the DTV, but it would be nice to see an example of why some find them inaccurate. I was fishing yesterday when i made that post, and was curious to see if someone would question the SR/DTV on a particular date.

For future reference Bill, can you include the header when you post a screenshot of a race, in the past you have left me scrambling to figure out what race you’re talking about, thanks in advance. ;)

Hi Hoof I don't know why that is happening, I always try to show the race information but for some reason when I make the screen captures, my computer is not picking up that info and I just get a blank box

If I copy and paste it works like so,

40822

[Mitch44]

Bill thanks for posting the PP for the # 7 horse. I didn't do this race and was only commenting on the paced line selection. Now that I've seen the # 7 PP I also would have used line #3 for the #7 and not a 5F line, goes with my "treat them all the same " also to preferably stay with in 1/2 F of todays distance and no more than 1 F of todays distance. Bill we agreed on the line of three horses that originally had 5 F lines in a 6.5 F race. We seem to be in sink Bill on our line selection.

As far as data, all sources get their data from Equibase. The difference lies in how they achieve or arrive at their daily track variant etc. The "Doc" worked very hard with TrackMaster to get the variant he deemed to be the most accurate. I trust his judgement and the other top teachers that worked for him on this achievement. I have no problem with TrackMaster data and each user can adjust it in RDSS to whatever % of the variant they want. I use the recommended settings (by Ted Craven). Nothing works 100%. I believe his recommended setting captures the highest percentage of winners and that is what this game is about.

There is a simple solution to this problem and that is to record the results of the same races with the adjustment and no adjustment. Find out for yourself, case closed.

Mitch44

[stugots119]

New to the forum and rdss. Trying to get a better understanding with choosing the correct line and pace per horse. In reference to the #7 above why wouldn't you choose the 4th line down which represents a better energy at the same distance compared to line #3? Also why do I get different winners from the segment screen compared to the BL/BL? Thank you for all your assistance.

[Mitch44]

stugots: I don't see anything wrong with using line 4th line.The only thing I can say bad about it is its another (almost) 30 days back. Either or in my opinion would be acceptable. Many horses like this can be gotten with more than one line.

The BLBL contains all most all of the proven important and valuable things in RDSS, it's a composite. The segment screen only depicts where the horse is at in each of the three fractions and it's moves. It does not represent the race as it unfolds as many think I.e. the second panel shows how the horse runs that fraction only, nor who is in the lead at the Second Call such as the match up would. One can also see this by looking at the feet per second fractions etc. Some can't see those moves through the fractions and the panels allow them to visualize how that horse runs much easier. Ditto with the 3rd FR as many take that as the order of finish. Not so. It shows how horses run that fraction not the finish, although horses that run good 3rd FR's are often in the money many times they may not win.

This is confusing to old timers because many used Throuamation (EXDC)program where the panels did depict how the race unfolded and the finish. In today's RDSS program the panel depicts move the horse made or didn't make within the segment of the race.
Mitch44

[Bill V.]

I used line 3 because its the most recent plus race. Its a plus race at a comparable distance surface and competition level.

I start with the last line then if the last line is not the line i just go down
till i get my line

Line 1 is out "O" Zero race
Line 2 is a non comparable distance
Line 3 is my line. It is a + race
Line 4 is a + line but it is against easier competition
Its a state bred restricted AL N2-L. The horses in these type races
have only won their maiden race and possibly also against state breds
Line 3 is against open company. A horse with multiple wins can run in this class race. Today's race is a Alw N1X which is an open race.


This comes from the pace line manual

42506

[Lt1]

Since line 2 is non comparable I would look at both line 3 &4 and let the program make the choice. I would be careful when it comes to OC race ratings since I have seen enough times using BRIS pps where in fact they are not tougher then some state bred races and open claiming races with lower tags.. Entering 2 lines is no big deal since we can get rid of the lower ranked one. And as has been pointed out sometimes both those lines rank higher then the rest of the contenders making this horse a very solid contender.
Tim G

[stugots119]

Thank you everyone for your help. What do you do when you have a horse that is running at a new distance? Do you take the best energy line for a recent race?

[Lt1]

Hi Stu. Depends what type of dist change. For example if a sprinter is just changing to another sprint dist ie 5.5 to 6f or a router changing from 8 to 8,5 I take the best of the last 3 preceptor within 1 fur of todays race. If a sprinter is going to a route for the 1st time I prefer to use the best preceptor from the longest sprint in the last 3. I never use a 5 or 5,5 sprint in a route unless there is no other choice. I know the program adjust those lines however as Doc always said projecting is risky business so I want the least amount of adjustment. I check the %med against my record to see if the horse is too early to stretch out. For a router switching to a sprint for the 1st time I use the best of the last 3 preceptor but always look at the internals. In either case if the horse has a good line at that dist structure and its' form is ok I go back and use it.
Tim G

[stugots119]

Thank you. One more question, how many days back do some of you go to accept a line.

Example if a race is being run today at 6 F and the horse ran its last race 20 days ago at 8.5 F and finished 4th, but its second line was 180 days ago at 6 F and finished 4th. Do you use the last line because it was the most recent or do you use the second line that was at the same distance as todays race?

[Jeebs]

Thank you. One more question, how many days back do some of you go to accept a line.

Example if a race is being run today at 6 F and the horse ran its last race 20 days ago at 8.5 F and finished 4th, but its second line was 180 days ago at 6 F and finished 4th. Do you use the last line because it was the most recent or do you use the second line that was at the same distance as todays race?

It depends. In your example, Line 1 (the route race) is a non-comparable line. Ideally, you want to go back and find/use a comparable line. I would look at this horse's entire history and see how it does sprinting as well as analyze its previous E/L spreads and Total Energy. Look at the ASR and TV as well for clues. Some horses just don't scream "sprint" based on the E/L sticks and TE, and some horses may just be too slow a final time to factor. If you determine that this horse is capable of sprinting, I would either 1) go back to said comparable line or 2) project the route race to a sprint and see if the adjusted times make sense. You don't want to do anything that discredits a horse's performance if you feel that it could be a contender. Just my two cents. Others here are probably more qualified to answer that question than I! :)

[Lt1]

That's a tough question. What class was the last race and what is it facing today. Check the horses'record. Is it truly a sprinter. Myself I would have no problem going back to line 2 depending on the class of the horse. I tend to go back less on cheaper horses but it's a situational thing. If I feel it's justified back I will go.
Tim G