Picking Contenders & Pacelines

[For The Lead]

Please don't become confused where Doc mentions "Early Energy %". Today, you know this as "Median Energy". It is the same thing expressed as a different number resulting from a different calculation.

[shoeless]

I know Bill V does the X and O's and it really has stepped his game up

[Bill V.]

FTL

This horse looks to me like a bad bet at 5/2 I don't want to use line 4
Its its best ever race. To me it looks like the horse maybe injured itself
in that race.
Its been dropping and going shorter distances since that race and running
zero's
If I used this horse Should I rate it off the last line Even than its shaky as a (+)

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

FTL

This horse looks to me like a bad bet at 5/2 I don't want to use line 4
Its its best ever race. To me it looks like the horse maybe injured itself
in that race.
Its been dropping and going shorter distances since that race and running
zero's
If I used this horse Should I rate it off the last line Even than its shaky as a (+)

Attachment 31874

Bill,

This horse is a bad bet at any price.
I would not consider it a contender in today's race....and DIDN'T consider it a contender since I was watching PRX today.

Line 4 is out of the question. If this line is so predictive of today's performance, then why wasn't it predictive in its' last three races and why did the horse run so bad in the last three races?

I would never give this horse a '(+)" in its' last line, for the following reasons.
1 - did it run 1st,2nd or 3rd?
2 - did it run 1st or 2nd at the first and/or second calls?
3 - did it make a good middle move(from first call to second call) to be within 2 lengths of the leader at the second call?
The answer to all three questions is "NO"! Therefore it gets a "0" from me.

This is a 5 year old at the end of its' 5 year old season. Although it may have sustained an injury in line 4, as you suggested, I don't think that is the case since the horse was right back to the races 13 days later.

Actually, until its' last race, the horse had been running longer distances since line 4. It went from 5.5f in line 4, to 6.0f in line 3, to 6.5f in line 2 and then it dropped back in distance to 5f in its' last line.

Rather than use a "shaky" last line, just throw the horse out as a non-contender. That's what I did.

The winner of this race paid $9.20 and I suspect it paid that much for 3 primary reasons. Those reasons are....the #3 horse, the #6 horse and the #7 horse. All are taking a fairly significant drop in class. Had it not been for those three horses, I suspect the winner would have paid more in the neighborhood of $4.00. The public likes drop down horses and this race gave them three to bet on.

That pretty much covers your question(s) to me. The rest of my comments here should really go in the "Making Money With Early" thread, but I'm here talking about this race anyway, so here goes.

All you have to do in this race is look at the first two calls for each horse. I'm going to suggest you look at the first two calls for each horse using their last 5 races. Why? The last 5 races are the most recent. Most horses don't run 5 races in the last 90 days, so this will generally take you back a little further, but what the horse has done in the "recent past" is of much more importance than what it has done in its' "ancient history past".

At any rate, if you just look at the first two calls for each horse, eliminating any turf race or route races that may be part of those last 5 races, I don't think anyone will have a problem identifying the "TRUE EARLY" horse in this race...the winner #1. In its' last 5 races it has failed to have the lead at the first two calls just once, line 4 at the second call where it was behind by a half length.

Beside that, review each horses first call ONLY. What horse is consistently close to the lead that can challenge the #1 horse? None.

The result? A fairly easy wire to wire win.

[Bill V.]

Hi FTL

I see what your saying about the 3. I still think something went wrong after
that line 4 race, maybe you can expand on why and if they are dropping
it in class way down to 7500 Nw 1 Y and after nearly winning for 16000?

I gave the 3 the "Shakey" plus with a zero 'because it finished 5th
but only beaten by 3 lenghts. It made its move late and only had 5 furlongs to do I thought I should rate it off the last line since it was dropping in class down from 12000 to 7500 an d going back to 6.5 furlongs

You bring up many good points about the winner # 1
I would like to add todays parx race 3 into the making money with early
thread I have arked my pace lines
I then will post the RDSS segments screen
GS

[shoeless]

FTL,

When you say look at the 1st two calls of every horse are you taking
in consideration what track the horse is coming from or daily variant.

There is no way that a 6.5 horse from CT will be able to compete fraction
wise with a 6.5 Parx horse.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

Hi FTL

I see what your saying about the 3. I still think something went wrong after
that line 4 race, maybe you can expand on why and if they are dropping
it in class way down to 7500 Nw 1 Y and after nearly winning for 16000?

I gave the 3 the "Shakey" plus with a zero 'because it finished 5th
but only beaten by 3 lenghts. It made its move late and only had 5 furlongs to do I thought I should rate it off the last line since it was dropping in class down from 12000 to 7500 an d going back to 6.5 furlongs

You bring up many good points about the winner # 1
I would like to add todays parx race 3 into the making money with early
thread I have arked my pace lines
I then will post the RDSS segments screen
GS

Bill,
I can only speculate on the reason for the drop in class. Before I do that, consider that after the race 4 back it was back in a race in 13 days, then it was back in a race in 19 days, then it was in a race again in 17 days and then again in 19 days. This is not the racing schedule of a horse that is injured. If this horse is, indeed injured, perhaps the trainer should be in some other line of work. Racing an injured horse 5 times in a period of 70 days is a recipe for disaster (breaking the horse down).

Ok, in the race of line 4, the horse was entered for 16K with a NW16MX condition. The class of the race in line 3 is clearly over the horses head. Then there was a return to the same claiming price and condition as line 4, where it ran poorly. Line 1 finds the horse in an "open" 12,500 claiming race at 5 furlongs. While it is true that it ran 5th, beaten 3 lengths, there were only 9 horses in the race, so this horse was only able to finish right in the middle, beating 4 horses but being beaten by 4 horses. It ran 7,7,7,5 having never impacted the running or outcome of the race. I suspect that today's drop to the same condition where it was last successful, but for half the claiming price, was an effort to learn just where the horse is at this point. In other words, to find out just what level of competition it is currently able to compete at. I know "I" don't want to bet on that type of horse.

Maybe the owner and trainer can afford to "speculate", but I can't. I have to see the horse for what it is. A horse that is currently out of form and searching for a level where it can compete. And it certainly can't compete early with the #1 horse. Obviously, it is not the same horse as it was four races ago.

One last thought. If you truly believe this horse was injured 4 races back, why would you want to make it a contender today?

[Bill V.]

Oh I do not think the horse was a contender That was my reason for the original post. I saw the 4th line selected in a contest selection and
that lead me to the what is going on with this horse train of reasoning To answer your question, and not this is not a contradiction
I will gladly admit when I make mistakes THAT HOW I LEARN

My reasons were
1. It made a move. all be it a late move in the last race
2.As you say its been running without any layoffs
3.They are bringing it back to a longer distance
4.The drop in class

Even now I see I was wrong but at the time I had my doubts thats why I asked.
Thanks for your help

Bill

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

Oh I do not think the horse was a contender That was my reason for the original post. I saw the 4th line selected in a contest selection and
that lead me to the what is going on with this horse train of reasoning To answer your question, and not this is not a contradiction
I will gladly admit when I make mistakes THAT HOW I LEARN

My reasons were
1. It made a move. all be it a late move in the last race
2.As you say its been running without any layoffs
3.They are bringing it back to a longer distance
4.The drop in class

Even now I see I was wrong but at the time I had my doubts thats why I asked.
Thanks for your help

Bill

No problem. Your doubts were well founded. TRUST your doubts.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by shoeless

FTL,

When you say look at the 1st two calls of every horse are you taking
in consideration what track the horse is coming from or daily variant.

There is no way that a 6.5 horse from CT will be able to compete fraction
wise with a 6.5 Parx horse.

I'm sorry. Somehow or another I overlooked your post. AND, I agree with you.

The answer to your question is "YES"!
I pay a lot of attention to the track the horse is running at and the track where the horse ran in the line I am looking at.

Keeping it close to home for you, in large part, where I see horses coming from CT to MNR, PEN or PRX, I basically eliminate the CT horse.
RDSS makes adjustments, "I" make adjustments and other software out there makes adjustments, but a bullring is a bullring. I find it very difficult to compare horses from bullring tracks to 1 mile tracks and visa versa.

Also, I give "extra credit" to horses coming FROM PRX TO PEN. However, I do not give "extra credit" for horses coming FROM PEN TO PRX.
When I say "extra credit", what I mean is, I make a mental note of it. From playing these tracks, I know the horses coming FROM PRX TO PEN tend to run better. There are other examples as well. This is just one.

It really pays to play just one track or, at least, one circuit. Using that approach you can "learn" things that other people who are just stopping by for a race and then moving on to the west coast or wherever, will never know.