American Pharoah in BC Classic
 

RDSS readouts in 2015 BC Classic

Attachment 40680

(JMHO)Personally, I would not use 10 furlong races in its entirety; I would have used all the fractions up to the mile marker per Jim Bradshaw's Marathon Method.

Here is the past performances of American Pharoah

Attachment 40681

Let’s evaluate American Pharoah’s last two pacelines, where the running styles are highlighted...look at the change in energy exertion.....

In the last race in the Travers Stakes, American Pharoah expended its energy late even though it is positionally early....

In the second paceline, in the Haskell, American Pharoah expended its energy early as shown by the fast early pace......The trainer puts in three blitzing workouts before the big race- this horse is ready to rock!!!

Now, whether you want to subscribe to this method of evaluating races or not..it is a different point of view...But if I was a trainer of horses or track athletes (Hey, wasn't Jim Bradshaw a track coach???)....I would train a horse/athlete to work on two parts of a race before my main objective race...

The EARLY PACE and the LATE PACE......

I would train for the early fast pace in one race and in another race, I would work on the late pace or closing kick of a race.....

Then in the objective race...all of the training on early pace and late pace are put together for a maximum effort. This is why we haven’t seen the faster speed figure as it won’t appear until today’s maximum effort.

I do remember in the match up manual that Jim Bradshaw would paste the closing fractions of one paceline to the early fractions of another paceline.....

I had one acquaintance who called this type of horse, the PAIR HORSE....the horse pairs or runs two similar effort races or "number" races, then in the objective race, this horse will move up about 4-5 lengths... I will not go into details here, but the ideas came from Thorograph....Usually, you find these type of horses from developing horses, especially three year olds and from their layoffs from their two year old season into the beginning of their three year season....

lone speed: We're in agreement 100% Here's a excerpt from a post I made a few months back ( in another forum) in reference to the new Beyer numbers that were changed recently.

Beyer numbers do not consider the pace of the race and are weaker for that. Beyer's numbers only consider final time. Actually if two horses have the same number as an ex. the one with the fastest Second Call is the better of the two.(after adjusting for beaten lg.'s)I.e. both have an 80 Beyer but horse A had the lead at 45.0 and B had the lead at 46.0 then A is a better horse or if A was beaten by 5 lg.'s (technically beaten by 6 lg., keeping it simple here) and B was beaten by 2 lg.'s A is still best by two lg.

Anyone that are using Beyer's or any SR can improve on them by including a pace factor. A simple rating of 44 in sprints gets a 100 and in routes a 109.0 at 6 F gets 100,then deduct 1 point per lg. E.g. a 45 second SC would get a 95 then minus BL 0, ie. B ran a 111.0 in a route and gets a 90 while on the lead. Add this 95 & or 90 to the Beyer of 80 in this ex. + 175 & and 170. A simple pace factor from PMTR or phase 1.

While this would improve their numbers greatly I still don't recommend it because their basic numbers are flawed. In the example above the 80 can be flawed. The reason is that many different people make up the Beyer numbers and their not always on the same page. In fact in some races they combine all their brains to come up with a number and have been know to change numbers later when a horse runs back. An inconsistent approach at best.

It would work with a speed rating that is computer driven because the program would get the same results always. A speed rating such as BRIS or Trackmaster and adding pace to it can improve those numbers. This is nice if your out of town and have little to go by. You'll do much better than just a Beyer number or any SR for that matter.

Its just a simple down & dirty approach if that's all you have. Its an improvement but can't compare to using all 3 fractions and later advances in the Sartin approach or even TPR However it can up ones game if they can't juggle more than one ball at a time and its definitely an improvement. Using TPR or all 3 fractions is even better than just EP & a SR.

Mitch44

Mitch,
Thanks for your contribution to this thread...

Thanks lone speed. Yes the line should always be evaluated, especially those doing the match up, if you selected a line for RDSS than that line is evaluated.

The big problem with a SR is deceleration and while adding a EP to it is a help it remains lacking. One could argue that the SR considers deceleration because its all in there and is a composite. To an extent their correct but in no way is it as exact or as finite as in RDSS readouts such as DCL or V/DC or even Feet Per Second 3rd Fraction measurements. Incremental velocity and deceleration will always trump a single SR number.

Players like the simplicity of a SR because they can understand it. Let them have it as we need their money. Actually I don't know why the Doc didn't simplify some readouts more.
Mitch44