Paceline Validation and Pace Pressure on a Top-Ranked Horse
 

Guys, I had a couple races at Parx today that got me thinking about how much weight to give a strong RDSS ranking when the paceline or pace matchup may be questionable.
In one race, the horse was very strong on BL/BL, Rx, Primary and TPR, but there was another horse with a very strong Early profile. The top-ranked horse ended up chasing that pace, opened up a big lead, and then emptied in the stretch.
In another race, I had a horse that ranked very strongly across several screens, but afterward I started wondering whether the selected paceline may have made him look better than what he could realistically reproduce against today’s field.
So I have two questions:
Paceline validation:
When BL/BL, Rx, Primary and TPR all strongly agree on one horse, how much do you go back through that horse’s recent races to make sure the selected paceline is truly representative? Especially in cheaper claiming races, do you do an extra reality check on class, distance, surface, track and surrounding form before making that horse a key or Win/Place play?
Pace pressure:
If your top BL/BL/Rx horse is Early or EP and another horse looks capable of forcing a very fast first or second fraction, how much do you downgrade the top-ranked horse? Is that enough to pass a short-priced favorite, or do you mainly use the pace pressure to bring in a contra-energy horse underneath or alongside?
I’m also trying to get more disciplined about Doc’s old idea of passing Win/Place wagers when the odds fall below about 5/2.
Curious how the more experienced guys here handle these situations.

The shorter the odds on a runner identified
as an Early Pace Factor
the more you should insist the F1 & F2 scenario
is very likely to be friendly to single that horse.

Mike :)

The core issue for me is that a strong RDSS ranking tells us what a horse looks like if the paceline is valid and today’s race allows him to reproduce it. That’s why I don’t think the rankings should be looked at in a vacuum.

Before I trust them, I want to understand the Race Demand. Is this race unpressured and likely to favor Early or EP, or is there enough pressure to make it more favorable to a Presser or Sustained horse?

Then I look for convergence. From the testing we’ve done, I’ve found that when V/DC, Profit Line and Rx3 start agreeing on the same horse, that deserves serious consideration. But the paceline still has to make sense for today’s distance, surface, class and expected pace.

To me, rankings identify the contenders, but Race Demand helps determine which contender is most likely to reproduce that performance today.

Thanks Mike and Brian. That helps a lot.

The biggest thing I’m taking from both replies is that I need to stop looking at the rankings as the final answer and first ask whether today’s Race Demand and the selected paceline give the horse a realistic chance to reproduce those rankings.

Mike, your point about demanding a friendly F1/F2 scenario even more strongly when the Early horse is short-priced really hit home after the Parx race I was referring to.

Brian, I also like the idea of looking at Race Demand first, then using the rankings and convergence to identify which contender is most likely to reproduce its line today. That gives me a better framework than just looking for the horse with the most #1s.

I’m going to start paying more attention to those two checks before I call anything a key or a Win/Place play.

Exactly. IMO, that’s one of the reasons I love NewPace. Before I even start worrying about rankings, NewPace is already giving me a pretty good idea of how the race is likely to play out and what kind of energy distribution the race may reward.

Once I have a feel for the Race Demand, then the rankings start to mean something. Now I’m not just asking who has the most #1s. I’m asking whether the paceline I selected actually represents something that horse has a realistic chance of reproducing today.

That’s also why I pay attention to FW and V/DC. I look at FW as the adjudicator and V/DC as the underwriter. They help me decide whether what I’m seeing in the rankings actually makes sense within today’s race.

So for me, it’s Race Demand first and then convergence. I’m trying to find the horse whose paceline and rankings fit the race I believe is about to happen, not simply the horse that looks best on a rankings screen.

Brian, when you say you use NewPace first for Race Demand, then FW as the adjudicator and V/DC as the underwriter, can you walk me through the actual decision order you use?

For example, if NewPace suggests the race should favor OTE/Presser-Sustained, but BL/BL, Rx3 and V/DC converge strongly on an Early or EP horse, what gets the final say?

Do you use any specific thresholds or rankings with FW/VDC, or is it more of a judgment call based on whether the horse’s paceline fits the projected Race Demand?

I’m trying to make the process repeatable instead of bouncing between screens after the fact.

School is in session. This is going to be kinda long but I wanted to be as detailed as can be. Newpace and Race Demand 101!

The process begins with NewPace because NewPace establishes today’s Race Demand before I begin comparing rankings or forming an opinion about individual horses. The objective is to determine the examination the field must pass before deciding which horses are equipped to pass it.

1. Establish today’s Race Demand

The toggle at the top of the NewPace screen identifies the race as Unpressured High or Pressured Low.

In simple terms, it tells me whether the projected conditions should be more favorable to early speed or to horses capable of surviving from off the pace.

An Unpressured High projection suggests that the early horses may be able to establish position and dictate the tempo without facing destructive pressure.

A Pressured Low projection suggests that the early horses may be forced to expend considerably more energy while competing for position, creating an opportunity for pressers, sustained horses and late runners.

This classification is the starting point. It does not select the winner by itself. It defines the type of energy demand the winner will probably need to survive.

2. Understand the NewPace performance range

The Pressured Low and Unpressured High ratings are not simply the slowest and fastest raw ratings in the horse’s past performances.

NewPace uses a population sampling method adapted from concepts discussed by Douglas Hubbard in How to Measure Anything. The objective is to estimate a realistic performance range without allowing one unusually fast or unusually slow race to define the horse.

Dave Schwartz adjusts the selected observations according to the number of available pacelines.

With nine or ten pacelines, he uses the third best and fourth worst ratings.

With six through eight pacelines, he uses the second best and third worst ratings.

With one through five pacelines, he uses the best and second worst ratings. If only one paceline is available, that single rating supplies both ends of the range.

The resulting Pressured Low and Unpressured High form what Dave presents as approximately a 90 percent confidence interval. In other words, NewPace estimates with approximately 90 percent confidence that the horse should perform somewhere within that range today.

This process does not literally remove every outlier. It prevents one extraordinary or abnormally poor performance from controlling the projected range.

The Unpressured High represents the upper end of what the horse can reasonably be expected to produce under favorable circumstances. The Pressured Low represents the lower end of its expected performance when required to operate under pressure.

3. Identify the horses capable of establishing the Pace of Race

Only the early horses can establish the Pace of Race. On the NewPace screen, these are the horses represented by the red pacelines.

Late horses respond to the pace created by the early horses. They do not establish that pace. Therefore, the LOW ratings of the late horses should not be used to determine the POR.

Among the early horses, I begin with the highest LOW rating as the proposed Pace of Race. This represents the minimum level at which the strongest early pace participant can reasonably be expected to operate.

4. Apply Dave’s 12 point rule correctly

Dave adds an important qualification when the highest early LOW is 12 or more speed rating points above the second highest early LOW.

This does not automatically mean that the second highest LOW becomes the POR.

When that 12 point separation exists, the projected POR cannot be higher than the Unpressured High of the top ranked early horse, meaning the early horse most likely to secure the lead and govern the tempo.

The reasoning is that a faster horse may not need to use its complete speed capability when another horse establishes a slower pace. It may rate behind that horse and conserve energy rather than forcing the race to its own maximum.

However, if the horse possessing the exceptional LOW is also the top ranked or dominant early horse, its LOW can remain the POR because that horse is expected to establish the pace.

Dave also explains that the 12 point rule refers to conventional speed rating points. When using Beyer figures, he recommends an adjustment of 28 points in a sprint and 22 points in a route.

5. Test every other early horse against the established POR

Once the Pace of Race has been established, the remaining early horses must demonstrate that they can meet it.

Dave’s instruction is straightforward. Eliminate any early horse whose Unpressured High cannot at least equal the established POR.

The Unpressured High represents the upper end of what that horse can reasonably be expected to produce under favorable conditions. If its projected ceiling cannot meet today’s POR, it should not be considered capable of winning the early battle.

This is not a subjective elimination based on personal preference. The horse is being removed because its expected performance range indicates that it cannot keep up with the pace today’s race is likely to demand.

6. Interpret the projected POR through my pressure ranges

After establishing the projected Pace of Race, I place it within one of four pressure ranges.

These ranges come from my own race modelling. They are not presented as official NewPace rules, and they do not select the winner automatically. Their purpose is to help interpret the likely energy environment.

0 through 65 represents an early favoring or unpressured race.

The early horses should be able to establish position, control the tempo and dictate the terms of the race without paying an excessive energy cost.

This environment is generally favorable to Early and Early Presser horses, particularly when one runner possesses a clear positional advantage.

66 through 72 represents the chaotic or grey zone.

The early horses will feel pressure, but the projected pace is not automatically destructive. A capable Early or Early Presser horse can absorb that pressure, retain position and survive through the finish.

This is the range where making an absolute declaration about either speed or closers can become dangerous. The pace may weaken some early horses without eliminating all of them. Both the early and late groups require careful examination.

73 through 82 represents a pressured or late leaning race.

The early horses are being asked to expend considerably more energy to establish and maintain position.

As the POR moves through this range, I place greater emphasis on pressers, sustained horses, finishing energy and third fraction survivability.

An early horse is not automatically eliminated. However, it must demonstrate through an appropriate paceline that it can withstand comparable pressure without surrendering its finishing ability.

83 and above represents potential pace meltdown territory.

The projected demand may be severe enough to compromise nearly every horse participating in the early battle.

This creates favorable conditions for a genuinely sustained or late running horse to inherit the race after the early horses have paid the energy cost.

These ranges provide context, not commandments. A POR of 75 does not mean that every early horse must lose, just as a POR of 60 does not guarantee that an early horse will win.

The ranges tell me which type of energy distribution today’s race is most likely to reward.

7. Select pacelines that represent today’s examination

After establishing Race Demand, I want pacelines that demonstrate how each horse distributes energy under comparable circumstances.

Paceline selection is critical because every subsequent readout depends upon the line being representative.

If I use a line in which an early horse controlled a soft pace without opposition, that line may exaggerate the horse’s chances in a race projected to contain significantly more pressure.

Similarly, if I use an unusually poor line for a late horse when its normal performance range is stronger, I may underestimate the horse’s ability to benefit from a pressured pace.

The question is not simply whether the horse has run fast.

The question is whether the selected paceline shows that the horse can handle the examination projected for today.

Paceline is evidence, not identity.

8. Use FW as the adjudicator

I call FW the adjudicator because FW helps answer an important question:

What did the horse’s internal move cost from an energy standpoint?

A horse can make an impressive middle move and briefly appear to take control of the race. However, not every powerful looking move is efficient.

If the horse expends too much energy making that move, its velocity will deteriorate during the third fraction. It may gain position during the middle of the race but lack the remaining energy required to complete the performance.

The velocity figures and vector graph can reveal that deterioration. They help distinguish an efficient move that the horse can sustain from an expensive move that leaves the horse vulnerable before the wire.

FW adjudicates the quality and sustainability of the internal move. It tells me whether the move strengthened the horse’s winning position or consumed the energy it needed later.

I do not use FW in isolation. It must be interpreted within the early or late context established by NewPace and the selected paceline.

9. Use V/DC as the underwriter

I call V/DC the underwriter because it evaluates whether the horse’s complete energy distribution remains viable through the finish.

FW asks what the internal move cost.

V/DC asks which horse still possesses the energy efficiency necessary to survive everything that occurred and reach the wire.

A strong V/DC ranking becomes especially meaningful when it agrees with the projected Race Demand and comes from a paceline representing comparable pressure.

There are handicappers who are not enthusiastic about V/DC, and that is their prerogative. Anyone who genuinely wants to understand its intended purpose should read Follow Up Issue 85, page 7, particularly the discussion of the multivariates of probability convergence.

I do not treat V/DC as an isolated command to bet a horse. I treat it as underwriting evidence.

V/DC becomes most powerful when the horse has already demonstrated that it belongs in today’s pace environment.

10. Resolve disagreement between NewPace and the other readouts

Suppose NewPace projects a pressured race that should favor pressers or sustained runners, but BL/BL, Rx3 and V/DC converge strongly on an Early or Early Presser horse.

I do not automatically eliminate that horse merely because of its running style label.

A running style describes how the horse normally operates. It does not prove what the horse is capable of surviving today.

I return to the paceline that produced the rankings.

If the horse earned those rankings while controlling a soft pace, receiving an uncontested lead or facing substantially less pressure than projected today, the convergence may be misleading.

The horse passed a different examination.

If the horse earned those rankings while facing comparable pressure, maintained efficient velocity through the internal fractions and retained sufficient energy through the finish, then it remains a legitimate contender.

NewPace predicted the battle.

FW evaluates what participating in that battle cost the horse.

V/DC evaluates whether the horse possesses the energy efficiency to survive it.

Therefore, NewPace does not automatically overrule every other readout, and the other readouts do not automatically overrule NewPace.

Race Demand defines the examination. The paceline evidence determines whether the horse has demonstrated the ability to pass it.

11. Distinguish Profit Line from Prime Power

I have found that Profit Line tends to become more useful relative to Prime Power as a race becomes increasingly pressured or late leaning.

Prime Power performs particularly well when the pace is honest and the early or fastest horses can establish position, dictate the tempo and have the race largely their own way.

In my opinion, Prime Power contains considerable early influence. That makes it useful when early speed is expected to control the race, but potentially less dependable when the projected pace becomes highly pressured.

Profit Line tends to hold up better under those circumstances because it is attempting to predict the order of finish rather than simply identify the horse possessing the strongest conventional attributes.

In an early favoring or unpressured race, I give Prime Power greater respect.

As the race enters the grey zone and becomes more pressured or late leaning, I increase the importance of Profit Line.

In potential pace meltdown territory, I want the horses whose energy distribution, FW, V/DC and Profit Line indicate that they can survive after the early horses have paid the price.

12. What receives the final say

No single screen receives unconditional authority.

NewPace establishes the examination.

The selected paceline supplies the evidence.

FW adjudicates the energy cost of the horse’s internal work.

V/DC underwrites the horse’s ability to distribute energy efficiently enough to survive through the wire.

BL/BL, Rx3, Profit Line and Prime Power provide confirmation, disagreement and additional context.

If the screens disagree, I do not count how many screens support each horse and declare the majority the winner.

I return to Race Demand and ask whether the paceline producing those rankings represents the conditions the horse is expected to face today.

That is what prevents the process from becoming a search for whichever screen supports the horse I already wanted.

The repeatable decision order is:

Establish Race Demand with NewPace

Determine the projected Pace of Race

Apply the 12 point adjustment when necessary

Eliminate early horses whose HIGH cannot meet POR

Interpret the POR through the appropriate pressure range

Select pacelines that represent today’s examination

Use FW to evaluate the cost of the internal move

Use V/DC to evaluate complete energy efficiency and survivability

Use the remaining readouts as confirmation and supporting evidence

The answer is not that NewPace always wins, FW always wins or V/DC always wins.

The answer is that every readout must be interpreted within the context of today’s Race Demand.

Evidence before opinion. Select the examination, not the advertisement.

Brian, this is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for taking the time to lay it out in that much detail.

Reading it this morning, I can already see where I was still doing things backwards yesterday. I was using NewPace more as supporting context and then letting BL/BL, Rx, Primary and TPR pull me toward a horse. Your process is much more disciplined: establish the POR and Race Demand first, then ask whether the paceline and energy distribution show that the horse can actually pass today's examination.

Your single on #1 Gallo De Fuego in the Churchill opener really has my attention because I missed him completely. If you don't mind, I'd love to know what POR you established for that race and specifically what you saw on the Energy screen that confirmed #1 for you.

I'm going to go back through that race step by step using your sequence before I work today's cards. This is great stuff. Thanks again!

Awesome
Your posts are much appreciated in their details and well versed in the sequential protocol that you go thru in using the methodology of the program. For lack of adjectives : they are “Awesome”!!!!

Well done, Brian

Jeff