Paceline Selection / Adjusted Speed Rating Query

[Segwin]

From PRX Nov 26, Race 2 - a query from another Thread, initially about the !SAR Workout Form Pattern shown below. Moved to its own thread as the discussion went on from Workout Form Patterns.

[Segwin]

Thanks very much Bill - great information.

With regards to the horse her last race was 159 days but I was giving the horse a second glance due to the good works. I decided against it because of the long layoff and that she was moving up in class where she doesn't belong. I think she ran 6th.

[Bill V.]

Hi Terry

I was happy with these results.

I used line 2 for the winner because even though line 1 is a zero race
I excused it because of the 5.5 to 7 furlong " different distance" excuse.

Here is the winner. BTW line 1 and 2 are the same condition
SA for Non Winners of 2 Life. I am not sure why RDSS puts the full conditions in some lines and not all lines ?

[Segwin]

Bill, I'd like to discuss the use of line 1 vs 2.

What I'm seeing is adjusted speed rating of 76 for line one and an adjusted speed rating of 73 for line 2. Using Best Perceptor the pick is line 3 with an adjusted SR of 77.

In just looking at SR for his PP - if we add all the SR together and divide by 7 we come up with a mean of a SR of 75. I'm not sure if 2 points amounts to much of a hill of beans but wouldn't the SR of 76 on line 1, even though it may be a 0, be a better representation of the capabilities of the horse?

(Is 2 points on a SR enough to worry about???)

Should we split this off in a new thread so as not to derail this one Bill?

[Bill V.]

You make a very good case for using line 1.
However the official Methodology guidelines are to use the pace line with the best adjusted speed rating speed rating at a comparable distance surface and competition level.
In on of the follow ups Doc is demonstrating how he uses the F1 pace line
indicator in Validator. He goes by what the program says is the best,
That is kind of what you are doing with the best of the last 3 preceptor,

However Doc does say when there is a difference in sprint distance he advice's clients to consult their own record to determine if those different distance are comparable.

Since there was no way for Doc to know how every track's various distance played out to each other, he devised a kind of one size fits all guideline or
method of using the best of the last 3 adjusted speed ratings

I however feel that I have gathered enough evidence to also follow his guidelines of letting my records tell me when a 5.5 pace line is not comparable
to a 7 furlong race. and to stay within 1 furlong of today's distance.

As far as yesterdays 2nd race I used line 2 because line 1 is a zero race but at 5.5 furlongs. If you look at a confirming pace line, look at its maiden win line 2. It is very close to that effort in total energy, TPR early late speed rating.
It also is at a comparable distance of 6.5 furlongs.

Line 2 also is within 1 furlong of today's distance

I can not see any reason why I should not use line 2.
Terry would you agree with all my other contenders pace lines ?
If so since line 2 places the winner right on top that also supports using the more comparable distance of 6 furlongs

Good Skill
Bill

PS also I want to add all 3 of horse 2 lats 3 races are the same condition
its just that RDSS is adding the N2-L notation to some but not all the lines

[Segwin]

Bill, I need some time to chew on your post. My eyelids are growing heavy and I have a busy day tomorrow. I ask for some time to respond.

I do however look forward to further discussion.

Till then.

[Mark]

Bill,

You are an old hand at this game and have developed the tools you need to be successful. I personally, use Bradshaw's guidelines to project an initial pace and then once I have eliminated those that can't run to it and have selected pacelines I will reset the pace faster or slower based upon my final contenders.
There are those that view this site that are just starting out or have limited experience and those were my intended audience.
Tom Hambleton and I worked together in 1993 with his programmer Michael Perry, prior to the latter's death and I have great respect for his TPR method and admiration for the man. However, prior to his going back to Kentucky in the mid 90's Tom acknowledged to me that his method was not working as well as it once had and couldn't explain why. He was quite despondent about it. I lost track of him after that. I understand he returned to Las Vegas and drove cab for a living and unfortunately passed away. He was a man well over 300 lbs.
Tom as you know was the primary author of "Pace makes the Race". Never much cared for Pizzola and the Fulcrum pace, in my view, was just a rehashing of Bradshaw's work.

[Ted Craven]

Mark (and everyone),

You'll be happy to learn that, at least as of last December 2012, Tom Hambleton was alive and feeling better than he had been for some time, even getting back into handicapping. This, from Ron Tiller of HDW, in a post at PaceAdvantage: http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...ad.php?t=99810

Tom's email address is given in that post, and apparently he is happy to hear from old friends and acquaintances!

Only Tom can fully elaborate on what his feelings about TPR were or are, though I know that nowadays, at least Dick Schmidt still has stated he felt they were valuable numbers, on the occasions he still goes to the track.

But if Tom was ever disappointed in them, or at least in their incompleteness, he would not be the only one - Howard Sartin stated on several occasions, in videos, in print and in at least one seminar I attended (sorry I cannot remember the specific references right now ...) that TPR was a good introduction for beginners, but that like most popular methods, it could account for reducing the mutuels it did hit and that one needed to delve deeper to find more obscure prices (hence the advanced section at the back of the book).

That's why EPR, LPR (FFR) and CPR (TPR) are only 3/7th of the Primary Factor set which, weighted, constitute BL/BL and which along with segmental deceleration measurements, feeds into VDC.

It's possible that Doc was after a certain point, and a certain amount of 'bad blood', damning TPR with 'faint praise' - but that's not for me to speculate on further. Many RDSS users certainly use it to good effect, though I hope, not to the exclusion of all the rest of the readouts.

Which includes the Matchup tools and markups. Perhaps there are 2 main 'camps' in the Methodology: the velocity, energy/deceleration based, rankings of line scores (Sartin) and the visual, positional, early pressure and response thereto of Bradshaw's Matchup approach. It is folly (and just plain untrue) to imagine that serious, thoughtful practitioners of BOTH aspects can not each be winners. I have seen it (both) with my own eyes.

Also, there is a convergence between the two - Sartin's approach being an attempt to numerically quantify the Early versus Late measurements which Bradshaw practiced intuitively (though don't forget who programmed Energy, and Kgen and Thoromation, and was responsible for Aodds ...)

I am thankful for the presence of BOTH aspects within RDSS, and for those who have taught me more about how to apply Bradshaw's matchup, which I do in conjunction with Sartin's numbers.

Hopefully someone can get in touch with Tom Hambleton and find out how he's doing now.

cheers,

Ted

[Bill V.]

Its funny how a post about work out patterns went from that subject to a new post here about adjusted speed ratings to projecting the pace of race to Ted and Marks's
feelings about Tom Hambleton and TPR numbers.

I would like to add that things happen in any of our lives that can effect weight gain, a loss of job and despondency to things that one once loved.

I have written many times of my own demons and skeletons that were
in my past, none of which were caused or cured by a anything but my own ability to cope. and mostly I benefited from the love of friends and family.

To say what has been written above about any man, happened because a Sartin methodology tool works or not was the cause of a mans troubled times is sad.

The book had 4 authors The title is Pace Makes The Race
an introduction to the Sartin Methodology

PMTR is a Sartin Introduction, It is not a TPR book. The TPR ratings are just one part off many tools in the methodology, things like Form, Money management
the Match Up of early and late runners, energy , running styles and
yes turn time and balance So Pace Makes The Race is more than
"just a small part of the primary factors"





Thanks
Bill

[Bill V.]

Getting back to the subject of projecting the pace
I just saw the results of race 10

I see I was very close to the actual second call POR

I am look forward to seeing how you projected the pace
Pizzolla's Fulcrum from Pace Makes The Race was just about right on

Bill