Paceline thoughts

[DontSayDont]

I have been thinking about paceline selection since reading the posts about Race 8 at Prx. Didn't want to derail either thread so am posting here.

Firstly, I believe I read something to the extent of "If you are doing what everyone else is doing at the track, you are doing it wrong." Well, where does most of the information used by a large percentage of the betting public come from? IMO, it would be the last race. So if we are using the last race where it is a + line, we are going to be using a lot of the public choices.

Most (+) lines, at least for me, are by horses that lead early and then folded in the stretch. Should we then look for a race where it had led and held that to the finish or at least ran 2nd or 3rd and use that as a line to compare his "overall" ability. If I don't I am left with betting horses that will only be in the top of 1st and 2nd Call but lacking in Late Pace and Final Time. If they make the top 5 list, they are mostly 4th or 5th. My 5th rated horses are only winning 5% of the time and paying on average $9.85. The 4th rated horses are winning a bit better at 12% with an average payoff of $8.26. Still that make only 17% of the winners, ave. pay $9.00

Most + lines are horses that finished 1st, 2nd or 3rd within 3 - 4 lengths. These are horses that the betting public are going to be using the most reducing the betting odds. I had many + last lines yesterday while hcping FL. What it did was give me 7 winners from my top 2 choices but almost zero bettable races because the public was on these as well.

We are taught to eliminate 0 line horses, UNLESS. In the Prx race example the winner was "eased back" in its last race but had + races in its 2nd and third race back. (Nicely explained in a recent post in another thread about that race). I had however thought the horse was eased back to get to the outside as it seemed to want to run out from the rail. Excuse or not? This horse had a + 5 fur. race 2nd back and the OP and replier do not use 5f races. Correct or incorrect probably not the question as it is just their way of picking line.

But when can we go back a line on a 0 line? Take a An2L. Horse wins in a MSW in its 4 or 5th try. Then first time in an An2L it just runs an even race and finishes 6th in a 10 horse field. 14 days (or there about) later it is meeting the same field (minus the winner or course). The public will see 4 horses that beat it in its last race. But is that the best line to use, even if there doesn't seem to be any excuse? Could/should the race be looked at like a second race after a layoff and expect an improvement and use the horses race when it broke its maiden or other + or (+) line from its past performances.

What I am trying to find is a way to not be in tune with the public as much or do I just need to be more patient and just wait for the opportunity when the public does overlook a + line, last race, horse.

The stats I posted come from a limited sample as I have just re-started handicapping after a long time away. The following is the total stats I have:

# of Races	210
	Win %	Ave. Paid
LS #1	0.35	6.78
LS #2	0.20	8.06
LS #3	0.14	10.08
LS #4	0.12	8.26
LS #5	0.05	9.85
LS #6+	0.13	22.50
Top Pick	0.35
Top 2	0.55
Top 3	0.70
Top 4	0.81
Top 5	0.87

Sorry for the long post!

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by DontSayDont

But when can we go back a line on a 0 line? Take a An2L. Horse wins in a MSW in its 4 or 5th try. Then first time in an An2L it just runs an even race and finishes 6th in a 10 horse field. 14 days (or there about) later it is meeting the same field (minus the winner or course). The public will see 4 horses that beat it in its last race. But is that the best line to use, even if there doesn't seem to be any excuse? Could/should the race be looked at like a second race after a layoff and expect an improvement and use the horses race when it broke its maiden or other + or (+) line from its past performances.

What I am trying to find is a way to not be in tune with the public as much or do I just need to be more patient and just wait for the opportunity when the public does overlook a + line, last race, horse.

If you don't mind, after reading your post, my first question is, are you using RDSS or some other software? if the answer is RDSS, this will help me to know what you are looking at.

As to your question (above), I will take it that "An2L" means "Allowance Non-winners of 2 races lifetime".

Many times a horse that moves to a new condition off a winning race does not perform well. It doesn't matter if it is moving from a Maiden Special Weight race to an Allowance NW2L or a $5000 claiming NW2L to a $5000 claiming NW3L. Keep in mind I said "many times" NOT all the time. It is acceptable to "excuse" that first race in the new condition and use the previous line where the horse won. (do you see how that gets you right off public perception?)
Specifically to your question, it is part of the methodology guidelines that using a maiden win in a NW2L condition is acceptable. A word of caution since you mentioned it. I would NOT use a maiden line where the horse did NOT win when the horse is in a race for winners.

I'll answer your final thought in three parts.

1 - I think I have already shown you one way NOT to be in touch with the public. There are many more.
2 - Yes, you do need to be patient.
3 - You are not necessarily waiting for the public to be overlooking a last line "+" horse...although that happens, too.

[For The Lead]

I would also suggest reading ALL the postings at the following link.
http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8784

[DontSayDont]

If you don't mind, after reading your post, my first question is, are you using RDSS or some other software? if the answer is RDSS, this will help me to know what you are looking at.

I am not using RDSS but a home grown product in excel.

As to your question (above), I will take it that "An2L" means "Allowance Non-winners of 2 races lifetime".

You are correct in that assumption.

Many times a horse that moves to a new condition off a winning race does not perform well. It doesn't matter if it is moving from a Maiden Special Weight race to an Allowance NW2L or a $5000 claiming NW2L to a $5000 claiming NW3L. Keep in mind I said "many times" NOT all the time. It is acceptable to "excuse" that first race in the new condition and use the previous line where the horse won. (do you see how that gets you right off public perception?)

Yes, going away from the last race seems to get away from the public choices. Like you excusing the last race of the #7 horse in the Prx 8, 8-25 thread. That horse became very interesting at a nice price.

Specifically to your question, it is part of the methodology guidelines that using a maiden win in a NW2L condition is acceptable.

While I have started believing in the methodology, such as 2 horse win betting and some others, I still believe in using some trainer and jockey stats. Right now at FL, there are a few jockeys that I would not use on my win bets. There are also some, I am sure well intentioned, trainers that fit in the same category.

A word of caution since you mentioned it. I would NOT use a maiden line where the horse did NOT win when the horse is in a race for winners.

I'll answer your final thought in three parts.

1 - I think I have already shown you one way NOT to be in touch with the public. There are many more.
2 - Yes, you do need to be patient.
3 - You are not necessarily waiting for the public to be overlooking a last line "+" horse...although that happens, too.

Thanks for your reply. In regards to your other post, I have read that but will re-read to see if I am missing parts I shouldn't be.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by DontSayDont

Most (+) lines, at least for me, are by horses that lead early and then folded in the stretch. Should we then look for a race where it had led and held that to the finish or at least ran 2nd or 3rd and use that as a line to compare his "overall" ability. If I don't I am left with betting horses that will only be in the top of 1st and 2nd Call but lacking in Late Pace and Final Time. If they make the top 5 list, they are mostly 4th or 5th. My 5th rated horses are only winning 5% of the time and paying on average $9.85. The 4th rated horses are winning a bit better at 12% with an average payoff of $8.26. Still that make only 17% of the winners, ave. pay $9.00

And for me as well.
I''l start with this quote by Tom Brohamer from his book "Modern Pace Handicapping".
"The trickiest piece of the pace scenario is the analysis of Early Pace. MOST RACES ARE WON ON OR NEAR THE LEAD". He goes on to say,"A horse designated as "EARLY" WILL FIGURE IN EVERY PACE SCENARIO".

So the answer is "no", you don't have to go back for a line where your (+) horse ran 1st or a close 2nd or 3rd. Just use the line where the horse had the lead and faded down the stretch. What you are attempting to establish is, will the horse be able to lead in today's field? If it can't, then it probably will not win. If it can, then it is a solid contender.

When an early horse doesn't run its' best race, it goes out for the lead and fades down the stretch. When a closer doesn't run its' best race, it just runs around the track at the rear of the field. It always amazes me that people will excuse the former, but not the latter.

I haven't played "FL" in a long time, but I'm sure horses win there going wire to wire that faded in the stretch in their last race.

I wouldn't confuse your 4th or 5th choices that are NOT early types with those that are.

Here is another thread you might want to read.
http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8832

And here is a good writeup by Ted on getting an early that fades in the stretch (a "lone early") that went off at 17/1 in this years Queen's Plate and won.
http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9233

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by DontSayDont

We are taught to eliminate 0 line horses, UNLESS. In the Prx race example the winner was "eased back" in its last race but had + races in its 2nd and third race back. (Nicely explained in a recent post in another thread about that race). I had however thought the horse was eased back to get to the outside as it seemed to want to run out from the rail. Excuse or not? This horse had a + 5 fur. race 2nd back and the OP and replier do not use 5f races. Correct or incorrect probably not the question as it is just their way of picking line.

I don't think you have that first statement correct. It goes like this. "Always use the last line, unless...."

I can tell you that having written this many times here, as well as putting up snippets of it from the Paceline Manual, I think it needs further clarification.

It should read," always use the last line, as long as the last line is a '+' or a '(+)' line. If the last line is a "0" line and there is a VALID reason to go back 1 line, then go back 1 line and start the process over again. If there is NOT a valid reason to go back 1 line, then do not give the horse a line."

I don't have the snippet handy right now, but "Doc" once wrote that something people never realized when reading the Follow ups was, seldom did he ever go back more than 3 lines. SELDOM!

In addition to the above, I personally suggest not using any horse that has been off more than 90 days AND I suggest not using any line that is more than 90 days old. There will be those who disagree with me on that, but I didn't just pull those suggestions out of thin air.
As a group, horses off more than 90 days win 1 out of 20 races or 5%. The longer the horse has been off, the lower that percentage becomes.
The same is true for lines older than 90 days.
This comes from hundreds of thousands of races and millions of horses, so I feel it is statistically sound advice.

As to the rest of your comments above, you may be absolutely correct in your thinking, but either way, I take whatever happened to be an excusable race. Obviously the horse did not get a cleanly run race.

[Appy]

"As a group, horses off more than 90 days win 1 out of 20 races or 5%."

Great stat. I love that stuff. Is there an accessible source for more "off the beaten trail" statistics like that? I have been able to produce some conclusions from my database, but my info only goes back about 8 months.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Appy

"As a group, horses off more than 90 days win 1 out of 20 races or 5%."

Great stat. I love that stuff. Is there an accessible source for more "off the beaten trail" statistics like that? I have been able to produce some conclusions from my database, but my info only goes back about 8 months.

No place that I know of.

[dirty moose]

Quick question that I've sort of asked before. If the last line is the horses best race, is it ok to use? What if the last 2 or 3 are the horses best races on the PP?

Does it depend on how much better the best line is? If so what would be acceptable in RDSS? Example; A horses last line is his best total energy (TE) @ 170 BUT his next best TE is 165 then 164.... What would be the gap that would make it OK to use the horses best line.

Hope that wasn't to confusing.

Moose.

[Appy]

I'd go with most recent line @ same dist/surface/track if that is a choice.