Paceline selection is important but

[shoeless]

Bill V and FTL thanks for the responses


I thought this was a good race to bet into as I threw out the 2.My reasoning
was correct as a 8-1 won the race but like I said unfortunately I did not
have it.

[trotman]

For me the lines before the layoff didn't look all that bad, but I always look at the line before that line which put him in the barn and the difference makes to me anyway, think a false probable favorite and no value. Not seeing the rest of the form of the other horses, I have no opinion of who might win.

[ranchwest]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

I don't want to say that the horse's wins have nothing to do with it, because to some extent they do. I'll explain.

If you are not familiar with the Quirin Point System, a horse gets 3 points if it is on the lead at the first call, 2 points if it is second at the first call and 1 point if it is 3rd at the first call. Therefore, this horse gets 3 points for its' last race + 2 points for its' race 2 back + 3 points for its' race 3 back for a total of 8 points. This is how BRIS calculates early horses and therefore the designation they show is "E8", to the right of the horse's name.

As to my point, all horses do not run the same style even within "similar"
distances.
Not all horses run on the lead in all sprints.
Some will and some won't.
Some horses will run on the lead at 7f, but will "press" at 6f.
There are many examples, this is just one.

That's not an accurate explanation of Q speed points. A horse can never earn 3 points for a race. There is 1 starting point which can be denied. Up to 2 points on 3 races. Then there is a possible bonus, for a max total of 8. The full explanation is in Quirin's book.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by ranchwest

That's not an accurate explanation of Q speed points. A horse can never earn 3 points for a race. There is 1 starting point which can be denied. Up to 2 points on 3 races. Then there is a possible bonus, for a max total of 8. The full explanation is in Quirin's book.

I have never had Quirin's book and wrote the point system as I remembered it from more than 25 years ago. There is a good chance that the system was either updated or I misinterpreted the system. Since your post only stated I was in error and what you thought was the correct method not outlined, I did some research and you are correct. I have posted my findings here for all to review. IF you use the QPS and find it of value, then good luck to you.

[ranchwest]

Quirin points are interesting as a quick look aid, but it does have some shortcomings, as have been pointed out in this thread. It doesn't take into consideration early pace and basically splits races into sprints and routes. As most readers here know, there is a difference among dashes, 6f and long sprints and there are even subtle differences with every different distance. Of course, QSP also don't take into consideration class and recency, either.

I find QSP the most useful in seeing that an E8 is often a must lead horse and I can quickly pick up on that. It is one of a number of ways that I evaluate early speed and positional tendency.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by ranchwest

I find QPS the most useful in seeing that an E8 is often a must lead horse and I can quickly pick up on that.

In which case you really didn't need QSP to tell you that.

[trotman]

Personally I have never used QSP because I think as been discussed they are flawed. William Quirin has long given up horse racing and again my thoughts are that his sample was not extensive enough, but at the time it was the flavor of the day. The truth be known Taulbot originally had a method which was similar but incorporated pace and position which would determine who would have the lead and from that his belief would be how the race would shape up.

[ranchwest]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

In which case you really didn't need QSP to tell you that.

I use many tools, including QSP even though they are not ideal. I use a number of tools because if the tools are contradictory, then I need to figure out why. Not all tools have to be perfect. Raising red flags can also be useful even if the red flag turns out to be bogus. The red flag is still useful because it causes me to be more thorough.

Ted's screen prints show the real key to this race. The race was heavy on the early side with a lot of questionable horses. The winner was a late horse. I wasn't on it, but the 8 had the price and the running style to be a good wager.

I know most people wouldn't, but I went back to line 7 on #8 and that is an impressive late run. When the pace set up for him in Saturday's race, he took advantage.

I bet the 5, but that horse needed to be moving at a good clip early because he was not going to have much in the tank late. When he got boxed in early, he was doomed. In hindsight, he looks to have some serious question marks and I fault myself for failing to give proper credence to those.