AQU 12-01-11 Race -1 (Synergism & PaceAppraiser)
 

aqu race 1
 

2 wins pars for 30.00!!! very nice. its interesting when i had syn 2 many yrs ago i modled the inner dirt and the FW horses who were ranked 1st 2nd and 3rd. won 70% of the races. Wish i still had that program.


Bob

Hi Bob,

My big mistake in this race was that I opted to put the (7) in the top 2.
Actually, the race set up for Early so I should have put the (2) in second postion because he projected to be closer to the pace and also complied with the power of 50 rule.

be careful about the power of 50
the power 50 is based on handicapper pace line selection, set up time and not the 3 years best time.
If you don't abide by the Syn2 rules, you might win a few races in the short term, long term....?????

gl45:

Pino, thanks.

When I use SYN 2 I never use the best 3 year times.
I make my SYN 2 files with the SpeedPlus program.
I use the auto variant feature in SpeedPlus.
When Ted releases the SYN 2 export feature in his next Beta update,
I will use RDSS to create the SYN 2 adjusted files.

Not to worry, there are some that will take advantage of this and might know how to best interpret SYN 2 readouts and benefit by them but all in all not that many will even pay attention or know how or what to do with them.
I learned a long time ago that you can't tell a horse player very much.
It's like the old saying goes,"you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.:D

I wouldnt mind one of you guys go into depth about using the dream race readouts.

:) amen :)

Hi Bill way to go getting the nice $30 winner in your top three

Bill I think your a student of the masters Im lookijng at horse 7
I know pace makes the race but does a horses lack of winning
play into your selection methods. I think Tom Brohamer says often
he would be weary of a 0/17 maiden like horse 7 that was beaten
34 lenghts in its last two races

Just thinking out load ..
Good Skill and health always

Bill

Bill V,
You're right. I was not careful in my interpretations of the screens
and because the race did favor early, I literally went against the grain with the (7). Actually, I should have had the winner in my top 2 because that winning horse was closer to the lead at the second call.

It seems that lost in this analysis is the fact that your screen shots show numbers 1 AND 5 as the early horses based on the following;
1 - first call "feet per second"
2 - median energy
3 - column "EP" in the rankings
4 - second call beaten lengths

All these factors clearly show the #1 AND #5 as the early horses
If the program "suggests" early, then those are the two horses.
The chart of the race bears this out.

For The Lead:

Your observations are correct.
Those 2 horses that you indicated were the speed.

Although the race favored an early type which was my conclusion and not the programs,
a presser or early presser can qualify if neither front runner, in my opinion, is not sustained enough to win. This was the case here.
The (2) and (7) were both the best sustained but the (2) was closer to the pace. I failed to see that and went with the (7) who was the most sustained contender.
There were other proven factors that I looked at and used to make a decision which was the 1,7,2.

Synergism 2 seems like a fairly simple program but if you can't interpret the screens correctly you will not succeed with it. My mistake is an example of what happened. I did not make a correct analysis of the read-outs and had my contenders in the wrong order.
So we will chalk this race up as a learning experience.