View Single Post
Old 05-29-2020, 09:41 AM   #11
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
FWIW I don't keep a track model and largely consider it a waste a time. Its really over rated. When it was highly rated it was effective. What changed? Well the program changed and became much more refined.

For those that don't want to do the work you can consult the summary of the PP's from Bris. The stats there are decent. Notice I said decent and not great etc. Their downfall is that they use the visual ESP which isn't that accurate as the % Med. within the program. If any one does use the exporter within the program than you should be analyzing % Med by track , sex classes etc.

Well back to the program, the program contains the Match Up of the horses within it . And its the Match Up that supersedes any track profile or model. Also within the program is both the visual and % Med. ESP's. Now this confuses most and far too many default to the visual ESP. If it were my program, which it is not I would totally eliminate the visual ESP as its worthless today.

Few review the horses PP's within the program, there are all the ESP's for every race the horses has ran recently up to 10. Its easy to find the horses normal running style and also a change in running style which can produce some nice prices. This information greatly ups one's game. There are varying degrees of Early for an example with some too fast to win and can be eliminated, while others can adapt to todays POR save energy for the stretch and win, or be an EP or P. These correct ESP's also can help to pick correct pace lines.

I talked about this in my posts on "From the Top" Rather than taking the wrong fork in the road or not looking at the road signs along the way your answer to modeling, track profiles and the Match Up are within the program itself.

Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote