Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up

Quote:

Ted, I’m in the process of reading a Day at the Races and noticed that some of the older programs had a section on the Matchup (Pace- Dream Race). How if any is this concept calculated in RDSS? For instance if I use the recommended Best Preceptor, last three comparable is this concept taken into consideration in the RDSS readout?

The reason I ask this question is that I use RDSS as a match-up tool and select the pace line (with some other things taken into consideration-Tandem/Form/Class) that best represents today's predicted pace line.

Another question I have is to how APV%/Class is used in the BL calculations?

I’m on part one and my thought is that I will have other questions, so I hope I’m not covering old topics, but if I am can you point me in the right direction?

Thanks, Mike

Mike, good questions! Look at Pages 7 & 8 which show some readouts from Synergism II and Energy, including 'Dream Race' grids. Synergism shows velocity numbers and Energy show % of Total energy by segment. The portrayal is similar: The BEST value of any segment (the 'Dream') is shown on Top so you can see how the other values compare to it (if you do some mental comparisons).

On the (upper) Synergism readout at the right, you also see the 'computed 2nd call beaten length' dream-race readout, showing variance from the Best 2nd call number (not shown) expressed in a beaten-length style where in-the-lead is 0 beaten lengths (aka 0 variance from the best 2nd call number).

Attachment 39419

RDSS shows a similar portrayal on the Segments screen and also on the Primary Screen. On the Segments screen, we extend the 2nd call differential from best (difference from the 'dream number' to also show the 1st Call and the Finish (we don't show 2nd fraction or 3rd Fraction in this format). But it is attempting to deliver the same information, perhaps with more impact?, as the Dream Race Grids of earlier years: which segmental value is the best of all horses in the grid, who set that best value and better yet, by how much do they deviate from it, where do they fall short, etc. The colour coding, ranking and showing gaps between, do a lot better job showing the 'dream' concept - we just don't duplicate the best number at the top of each column, though we certainly use it internally. The Segments screen is (currently) sorted by Final Computed Beaten Lengths, though it could be (and will be) sortable by any other column, such as the 2nd Call.

One way of seeing in RDSS the otherwise missing F2 and F3 'dream race' info (though not the differential gaps) is simply on the Velocity Screen: all colour coded and ranked to make it easier to see who possesses the best F2 and F3 values

Attachment 39420

Another way of showing the 'dream race' portrayal of information is on the Primary Screen. All 7 Primary factors, and including the TPR factor set (in RDSS: EPR, LPR, CPR) show not only who has the Best value, but also the gap between values. Using your eye to scan for RED colour, you can easily see who has the Best of each factor , and by how much that is better than the competition (aka - all the components of the 'dream' concept). These % differentials for each factor are what makes up Perceptor Total (a horizontal sum of % differentials, which sum itself is then shown as a % differential from Best). FYI, Perceptor Total is none other than the 'F6' key in Validator (a means of ranking pacelines by the line score of their Primary Factors).

Attachment 39421

APV and CR Class Rating are not mixed into BLBL (the weighted line score of the Primary Factor set). However, CR is displayed on EVERY Analysis screen in the colour coding of the Program #, which is a measure of how impactful that rank can be in getting contenders, if not finally betting prospects. I have seen that any amount of modeling of CR (and perhaps to a lesser extent APV) will show that the Top 3 are present in in-the-money finishes in an impactful percentage of races across tracks and (probably to a fluctuating degree) by race classes. Not sure anymore if it does a better job than Composite Speed Rating (CSR), but there it is.

For myself, I would rather make independent decisions on Class derived from relative Purse value (APV), Earnings per Start and ITM finish % (which is what CR is), rather than have it muddy the velocity/energy derived BLBL, and the velocity/energy/deceleration derived VDC readouts. The more 'non-correlated' (and reliable) readouts that point to the same horse(s), the more weight I would place in the 'consensus' of those 'opinions'. (Other readouts non-correlated to various ways of slicing and dicing and mixing velocities would be money and consistency derived CR, public betting opinion and biases from live tote, past odds readouts, position-bias and pressure based readouts like NewPace and The Matchup. I omit trainer, jockey, breeding info, though some people are into that).

Mike. hope that helps give a perspective of the continuity (or evolution) of traditional concepts to their present day representation.

Ted