Race Analysis Process - One Way Pt 1 of 4

[vderdak]

I only see bets totaling $28.00, what other bets for the remaining $14.00 is not shown, who else did you wager on, just curious.

[Because I Can Jim]

Tim,
Thanks for the kind words.
I had not considered what a 2w/4p/12s wager would look like. I definitely will look into it and if you see me change, you will know why!

vderdak,
In the 6th race I wagered on H5. See the Amwager log.
I included the Segments screen. I was considering at 1 MTP the:
H4 at 4-1
H5 at 5-1 placing a 2w/4p/8s wager on this horse
H6 at 2-1
Hindsight being what it is, I was placing too much emphasis on the early running styles in the race instead of the sustained. My intuition was hitting me in the back of the head to pass the race, but, I did not listen (a skill we all must learn to develop). As you can see from the results the H4 wired the field and the contra horses 1 and 2 came in as place and show. The H2 going off at 19-1 and paying 8.20 was a killer. For a $14 wager, the return would have been 32.80 for a profit of 18.80.
WOULDA, SHOULDA, COULDA!!!

And that is handicapping. I made a mistake even though I had the winner as one of the horses I liked.

Hope that helps.
Jim

[Because I Can Jim]

Hey Bill,

This video is in response to you question in this thread about why I chose line 5 for H5.

I hope I answer your question and that anyone else watching might get something out of it as a further look at this 7th race from MNR.

Enjoy!

Jim
P.S. Anyone having any questions, comments or even the next winning number for the next $400 million Powerball Lottery that you get from your psychic hotline, I am sure would be most appreciated if you post them here on the forum! LOL

[Bill V.]

Thanks for the video I will take a look
While I look at it, please look at this video.
This is in reference to our conversation in the thread
http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9321

I see were you bet the 5 in the 6th race at MNR
This video is in my reply and supports that,When you follow a consistent set of guidelines,
It doesn't matter if you do the race before it runs or after it runs, you will get the same result, right or wrong.
As you will see I did the race in the same manner as I did in the race 7 video
I posted in this thread
http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9329
I hope you and others enjoy the video
show to Jim.mp4

[Because I Can Jim]

Hi Bill,

Sorry it took a bit of time to post this video going to Saratoga and all.

I was thinking maybe you could start a new thread in response to this video. In the video, I sidetracked a bit (actually a lot) about the tandem concept on the 1 horse if one went back to the third paceline.

The question I primarily was asking - you said several times that you select pacelines on how you think they are going to run in today's race. However, you did not explain how you "think" they are going to run. (I know that trying to explain "thinking" is like trying to catch light in a bottle.)

But, while you were talking about the 1 horse as an example, I wasn't following how you think it was going to run in today's race. You decided to not select either of the first two lines and then made it a non-contender. Which was all fine.

Then I got off on the tangent of tandems which was a separate concept unfortunately as part of my thinking on the 1 horse.

So, if you will after watching the video, don't even discuss my thinking about the tandem unless you feel you would ike to address it. That is why I suggest you start a new thread dealing separately with how you think today's race is going to run.

I am interested in hearing about it.

Thanks Bill for making some videos. Now I am off to watch the one you made for Latekick after I handicap today's card(s).

Best of luck.

Jim

[Bill V.]

Hi Jim

I made this reply video. In the video I go into more detail on why I did
not enter a line for the #1 horse.

I apologize for the quality, I made it from here at Del Mar. It was early and I was watching the workouts, I wanted to reply while I had a minute.
There is lots of back ground noise. anyway I hope you get something out of it.

Anyway here is my opinion in a nutshell.

I always look at the conditions of the race
I look at how the horse has run in each pace line.
If the last line is a zero race, I look for a valid excuse
as to why it was not a (+) or a + race.
If its a zero race with no excuse I will strop there.
To me this is not a good win bet.
Horses with 0 races with out excuses are bad risk
and very poor candidates to win.
In the case of the #1 horse I saw 2 zero races, but both were off tracks.
When I looked at horse #1 and saw his + race in line 3.
I would have used line 3 but my analysis goes deeper.

I had suspicions about that last pace line.
In the video you will see the steps I took to come to the conclusion that the
# 1 horse was not a win contender.
They are

• APV,
• Running Style
• Life Time Record
• Previous Races At The Same Condition

Here is a screen shot
and here is the video

pace lines.mp4

[Because I Can Jim]

Thanks for that Bill.

Now I have a better understanding of your perspective which will help me in the future.

And I agree that horse 1 is not be a choice for win which you said in your video that you look are selecting to to win.

The thought occurred to me that due to our use of the English language, what we try to convey can oftentimes me misconstrued. (That is why I hope no one takes any offense to what I say or write. I am only presenting in everyone's best interest.)

For example, we use the word "contenders" freely in our explanations. Yet, what does that really mean? When I talk about my "top 5 contenders" does that mean for win only or deos that mean from the other side of the spectrum to mean horses that are going to hit the board or somewhere in between such as I'm selecting contenders to win but have a chance to hit the board?

This is made all the more complicated by having contra-horses who have a chance to win and if they don't are most likely to place, etc...

And this applied to my understanding of what you tried to convey about your paceline selection and how it is most likely going to run today.

Thanks for that explanation.

Jim

[lone speed]

Originally Posted by Because I Can Jim

Thanks for that Bill.

Now I have a better understanding of your perspective which will help me in the future.

And I agree that horse 1 is not be a choice for win which you said in your video that you look are selecting to to win.

The thought occurred to me that due to our use of the English language, what we try to convey can oftentimes me misconstrued. (That is why I hope no one takes any offense to what I say or write. I am only presenting in everyone's best interest.)

Very True..

For example, we use the word "contenders" freely in our explanations. Yet, what does that really mean? When I talk about my "top 5 contenders" does that mean for win only or deos that mean from the other side of the spectrum to mean horses that are going to hit the board or somewhere in between such as I'm selecting contenders to win but have a chance to hit the board?

This is made all the more complicated by having contra-horses who have a chance to win and if they don't are most likely to place, etc...

This concept is so valid!!! Most of us are focused on the top five Total Energy horses for the win spots. Some have done exhaustive studies or extensive data-mining from data bases of past race files. The second horse or the (win-default) horse from races where the pace was challenged or was set by a speed demon horse. (Palace Malice).

This concept was stressed a zillionth times by Doc. The second horse may not fit the profiles of win models. The "contra-energy" horse can have more than 3.0 total energy scores less than the win model horses (examples; 170.0 total energy contra-energy horse 167.0 total energy.)

This phenomenon occurs more often when one goes up the class levels. We all have seen races where a dominant early sets blazing fractions and the "UGLY" horse who has ugly pacelines but finds a race where he runs his own race and runs second or wins in a race where the contenders for the early pace collapse from the grueling early pace duels.

And this applied to my understanding of what you tried to convey about your paceline selection and how it is most likely going to run today.

Thanks for that explanation.

Jim

Great points, Jim

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Because I Can Jim

Thanks for that Bill.

Now I have a better understanding of your perspective which will help me in the future.

And I agree that horse 1 is not be a choice for win which you said in your video that you look are selecting to to win.

The thought occurred to me that due to our use of the English language, what we try to convey can oftentimes me misconstrued. (That is why I hope no one takes any offense to what I say or write. I am only presenting in everyone's best interest.)

For example, we use the word "contenders" freely in our explanations. Yet, what does that really mean? When I talk about my "top 5 contenders" does that mean for win only or deos that mean from the other side of the spectrum to mean horses that are going to hit the board or somewhere in between such as I'm selecting contenders to win but have a chance to hit the board?

This is made all the more complicated by having contra-horses who have a chance to win and if they don't are most likely to place, etc...

And this applied to my understanding of what you tried to convey about your paceline selection and how it is most likely going to run today.

Thanks for that explanation.

Jim

I really don’t think there is a need to define the word “contender”. It has already been defined and most people understand the meaning without further definition. Let’s look at the dictionary definition.

Definition of CONTENDER
: one that contends; especially : a competitor for a championship or high honor

In horse racing, I don’t think running anywhere, other than first, constitutes a championship or high honor.

Now let’s look at an example of contender from the same dictionary.
Example of CONTENDER
1. There are several contestants, but only two real contenders.

In horse racing, the entire field would constitute the contestants and ONLY those horses that can actually win the race would be the contenders.

This is the reason, in RDSS, for having a section for contenders, those most likely to win the race and another section for secondary contenders, those most likely not to win, but may run 2nd or 3d.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Because I Can Jim

Hi Bill,

Sorry it took a bit of time to post this video going to Saratoga and all.

I was thinking maybe you could start a new thread in response to this video. In the video, I sidetracked a bit (actually a lot) about the tandem concept on the 1 horse if one went back to the third paceline.

The question I primarily was asking - you said several times that you select pacelines on how you think they are going to run in today's race. However, you did not explain how you "think" they are going to run. (I know that trying to explain "thinking" is like trying to catch light in a bottle.)

But, while you were talking about the 1 horse as an example, I wasn't following how you think it was going to run in today's race. You decided to not select either of the first two lines and then made it a non-contender. Which was all fine.

Then I got off on the tangent of tandems which was a separate concept unfortunately as part of my thinking on the 1 horse.

So, if you will after watching the video, don't even discuss my thinking about the tandem unless you feel you would ike to address it. That is why I suggest you start a new thread dealing separately with how you think today's race is going to run.

I am interested in hearing about it.

Thanks Bill for making some videos. Now I am off to watch the one you made for Latekick after I handicap today's card(s).

Best of luck.

Jim

Perhaps you could explain, to all of us, what "your thinking" was when you chose line 7 for the #9 horse in the 4th race at MNR last night.

What was it about the line you chose from 385 days ago, verses $5,000 maidens, and not even a winning line, that would lead you to believe that it is a REAL contender for the win in today's race?
Now Doc said it was 'ok' to use a horses maiden win in a NW2L race, but I don't recall that he ever said it was 'ok' to use a maiden line where the horse did NOT win!

8 out of the 10 races showing in its' PP's are route races. Today's race is at 6 furlongs.
If the line you chose was such a predictive line of the horses chances of winning a sprint race, then why have the horses connections been running it in route races?
Its' only win came in a route.
To make matters worse, the maiden line you chose was run at FP (Fairmount Park). How do horses racing at FP compare to horses running at MNR?

Here is your segments screen and the PP's for the #9 horse.