Beginners and Refresher Course

[Mitch44]

FU # 53 Projecting the Pace of a Race

pg.17 "... there ain't no way that's ever been proven completely accurate despite all claims to the contrary. The same goes for alleged "Pace Pars" For projecting the Pace of the Race.

"Final Time Pars, Yes. When kept current they have at least a relative degree of accuracy because they are dealing with only ONE unit of time.When properly made, by actual use of TRUE winning times... they CAN be accurate enough to be of some use, especially when dealing with different surfaces and distances."

What Sartin is saying here is that final time does has some validity as a Par because it only deals with one unit of time, whereas pace handicapping deals with 3 different units of pace or time. Final time is used to make pars for Speed Ratings such as the Beyer SR. He also is saying that they have a built in fault because they use Pace of the Race rather than using Pace of the Horse times.

Although Beyer did this by hand, a computer program is really necessary, especially for multiple tracks. Plus you have the problem of tracks changing and being resurfaced, even in mid-season such as SA this year because of so many horses breaking down. Any Par when purchased is already out of date.

Another fault with Beyer numbers is they are made by several different individuals around the country. Far too many fingers in the pie here or in other words no unity of effort. I much prefer the Bris SR which is done completely by computer, therefore it performs in a consistent manner and is more reliable.

pg. 18 " We must all face the fact that the pace of any race is determined NOT by some magical formula but BY THE INTER REACTION OF THE CONTENDERS THEMSELVES. In simple terms we have always referred to this as The Match-Up. In chaos Physics it's called Strange Attractors.Once again here we see the importance of the Match-Up and the dream race.

"Thoroughbreds do have individual personally traits and genetic tendencies that are altered, even if only slightly at times, by the other entrants in a race." This is why when we peruse(look at) a horses chart we see different running styles by the computer generated ESP or % Med. A horses may have different designations such as E, EP or P depending on the Match-Up of a particular race. Basically it is an E type. It's important when choosing a pace line to choose one within or according to its style. The exception here is if a horse changed its running style in its last race and greatly improved, beware as perhaps the trainer and jockey has actually been running it against its true style.

"The second and most reliable means, without the need for judgement is: Create a DREAM race using the best 1st Fr.,2nd Call and Final Times from the pace lines of the horses you have chosen to enter." Note: within the present day RDSS this is all done automatically for the user. From this you can see the importance of contender selection and adding or deleting horses. Some members think its macho to scratch down to 3 horses or get down to one horse, I strongly advise against this as it may scratch a horse that part of the dream race and alter readings. Another reason why I do hide horses and don't believe in it, even through I cough scratch a horse or two who don't own part of the dream race. A huge reason is that a horse could be ranked 2nd in a particular FR. and be so close it could also be ranked #1. The difference between any ranking is only one and that ranking does not indicate how much difference there is between rankings. Forget about it!

pg. 20 " Predicting The Pace And Final Time Of A Race Precisely is an exercise in futility."

" I have tried over the past few Follow Up's to explain WHY extensive Track Profiles made from Result Charts are meaningless in trying to predict the outcome of a race TODAY." In other words the Match Up is going to be different today, causing the horse to act different. Forget about track profiles etc., this is why I get away with not using a track profile. I do keep up with how a track is running today to get that extra few percentages in my favor. I play so many different tracks I ignore the track, generally I only pay attention when I'm only going to play one track all day, such as when I go to Saratoga this year.

pg. 25 Disregard the Early & Late difference graph on this page as this was done in the old % Early. The present day one in RDSS is done more in Beaten Lengths gained or lost similar to what was done in the book PMTR. To show deceleration for E types or acceleration for S type horses from its TPR.

I don't know why anyone would worry about or try to predict or project the Pace of The Race. " … the bottom line is to PREDICT winners . . . "

All this is why Sartin and Bradshaw never believed in the Fulcrum, its just a complete waste of time to predict winners. One would be better off to just pick a pace line for every horse in the race and let the match up take care of the rest. Much faster and also for getting true contenders if that's a problem. Sartin always said that Total Energy is class and to eliminate by that to get true contenders or down to 5.( unless you have a way of getting the winner in you're top 5 84% or higher) He never said to pick contenders by The Second Call(so called Fulcrum), Total Energy trumps who has the lead at the 2nd call. If your only dealing with the 2nd call you are only a speed handicapper not a pace handicapper. Its a total fallacy to think Sartin or Bradshaw believed in it just because it was in PMTR. Sartin allowed for a wide range of topics within Follow Up's etc., it does not mean just because its in there that he condoned or believed in it. Get it from the horses mouth, and that horse is named SARTIN.


Mitch44

[Mitch44]

FU # 54 Trainers and Jockeys

In this Follow Up its obvious Sartin thought little of both trainers and jockeys. At seminars he would block out all information in the PP's except for distances, fractional times,the running line positions and beaten lengths, the group solved the race proving that none of the other information was really necessary. In the majority of races I seriously doubt this could hold up to close scrutiny. Far too many races are won due to changes such as; trainer, equipment, medications, surface, distances etc.
There are those that give considerable weight to both trainers and jockeys. Pg. 11 "Top jockeys get the best horses. The best horses pay lower mutual." I have seen even the best jockeys make mistakes, such as Jose Ortiz,even in a small field of 6.By the time he got the horse off the rail and being boxed in, the best he could do is get the place position. It definitely otherwise would have won. BTY nothing to get upset over as the connections lost many thousands compared to my puny bet.

However the best jockeys become the best by making fewer mistakes. Lt1 and I pay absolutely no attention to who is riding a horse we bet. Any jock can win with a horse if the horse has the ability. Even if ranked 20th in the standing or an apprentice for that matter. There are jocks that can move a horse up because they are so attuned to the horse and sensing its every need, however they are rare.

Trainers are another story. They are responsible not only to properly place a horse at the correct conditions such as distance, surface and class but for every other aspect of a horse's life. Just as in every field of endeavor all trainers are not created equal just because they have a trainers license. Ditto for cops, lawyers, quarterbacks etc. They have strong points and weak points and have a tenancy to repeat what was successful in the past.

Nowadays with computers there is a lot of data on trainers. In many cases it no longer gives a player an edge. Like anything in racing once its in the public domain its there for everyone. There are still nuggets to be mined from doing your own research and data collection.

When it comes to racing its primarily all about the horse. The best trainer and jockey can't carry a horse across the finish line.The horse must have some ability while an incompetent trainer can ruin a potential champion. The horses PP's are a window to look through as to how proficient a trainer is and the ability of the horse. Far too many avoid even looking at the PP's and use most computer programs as a black box.

Trainers stats can help you to make decisions as to who your final selections will be. They help to solve frequent situations that a handicapper is confronted with, such as 90 day layoff horses and place the percentages in your favor. Or big dropdowns which for one trainer means damaged goods and for another they do it all the time and with a high % of success.

I would say that 85% is contributable to the horse's ability, 12 % to the trainer and 3% to a jockey. And that's probably being overly generous to the jock.

pg. 12 "They tell me that we, as astute handicappers know more about their horse's abilities in a given race than they. Why? Because we look at ALL contenders from an OBJECTIVE view and, even more important, we can do something a trainer can not: effectively scratch a horse at the last second simply by NOT betting on it."

I tend to think that if Sartin were alive today he may take a different view of Trainers while holding sway about jockeys. Also the form on pg. 15 would probably be revised. A form really isn't necessary, just evaluate the horses PP's based on todays conditions and the trainers capabilities and limitations. I prefer the Bris PP's for this as they give much more data and I get them for free.

Mitch44

[elocutionist]

I start my handicapping by looking at the conditions of the race. Then, I go through each horses pp's. Using the preceptor value, I look to see under what conditions the horse runs his best races and determine if he belongs in this particular race. I've handicapped races where it looked liked nobody belonged. Of course that race is a pass. I can't read a trainers mind as to why a horse is entered in a particular race, but as you say Mitch, I sure can scratch his horse
Phil

[Mitch44]

Phil:
Your off to a great start. By readings the conditions of a race first you'll then know what lines are a possible selection for a pace line, then use the best Preceptor to distinguish between those lines.

Yes you can always scratch a horse or pass on a race. Pass on a race when there are two unknowns in the race. I.e. a foreign horse with no data, trying something for the first time like a new surface or distance.

For beginners to save time and work after checking the condition of a race quickly check to see if each horse has 3 races at this distance or surface.(distance within 1 furlong) before proceeding. I can handle stretch outs, cutbacks etc. but till you can and have confidence in doing that consider them an unknown factor. Take every edge you can get. With todays simulcasting why get into iffy situations when there are better spots

Mitch44

[elocutionist]

Good advice Mitch. Certainly, paceline selection is crucial since the readouts are based on that information. A horse can drop or raise on BL/BL simply by choosing a different paceline. The problem with the pick 4's, 5's and 6's is that they invariably contain one or more races with multiple unknowns. I've won some of them, but lost a lot more. I think for now, I'll concentrate on win betting.

[Bill V.]

Greetings Mitch

A pleasure as always, Mitch I just about play exclusively at Socal.
I use trainer and Jockey combination material from my spreadsheet.

It does help to know some information

Doc writes about getting prices, I suggest to never throw out a horse based only on the jockey or trainer unless you can honestly eliminate based on your own data and record keeping,

The best prices at SoCal usually come from the less popular trainers
or jockeys with poor win percentages,
In maiden races, I get some really big winners with horses who get ridden
by jockeys who work the horse in the AM, This information is harder to gather. then just win percentages the public can see. Also, look for horses with the GW and GW! notations

It's a different game to be only 1 circuit. When I bet other tracks I ignore
the jockey and trainers completely I pick my pacelines and let RDSS
sort out things, either way, the horse runs the race.

[Mitch44]

Hello Bill,

I agree one can still find trainer stats that remain hidden to this day. I can think of a couple right off the top of my head.

There are many trainers with tremendous records but train only a small number of horses and don't get the notoriety of the Baffert's etc. Trainers do have specific patterns that they repeat. They fly under the radar and can get some nice payoffs.

I really got into collecting trainer stats after reading Steven Davidowitz book Betting Throughbreds around 1983. BTY an excellent book. I made some big money with it. The more data I collected the more confusing it became as I found out a race can have several trainers going in it with their best moves. Confusion set in and I abandoned it.

Bob Scetta was my favorite, now passed away. His move was to bring a horse back in 5 days, lesser know jock on it and they always paid $20 & up. I was at Keystone (Parx) one day and liked one of his horses, in the pre-race warmup the jock took off as fast as the horse would go for about 6F.I thought no way was he going to have the energy to run having left his race on the track. WHOA!! 5 days later he was entered and won,nailed him for just over $1,500.

Many years later I was working a race with LT1 and saw a Perkins horse that shipped from Philly to NY that they let get off at decent odds, won for I believe around $15. They tend to make the same moves and what has brought them success before.

It goes back to what I said earlier in that its all about the horse. To make that work now you have to have information the public doesn't, and it can still be obtained but some serious record keeping is needed etc.

Hope your well Bill and looking forward to our meet up at Sar.

Mitch44

[Mitch44]

FU # 55 Modeling Simplified

First thing is don't let the Title of this Follow Up fool you as the material within it is not simplified. In fact in checking the recommended reading list of FU # 70 through 88 there are several Early / Late charts which are different from today. In fact much of the material there is no longer of value due to the present day RDSS, just as with these earlier versions of the FU.

The Early / Late screen that appears within RDSS today on the TPR screen is a throwback of what Sartin expounded on in the book PMTR under "Advance Concepts", Sartin had said that the only thing of value within the book was the chapter of Advance Concepts copyrighted in 1991. Even some of what's in that chapter has been replaced by refinements and advancements, the dream race is in that chapter and still a key ingredient to the present day recipe.

To show the deceleration factor the difference between EPR and FFR was shown I.e. -5 would be 5 less in the FFR than its EPR rating, +5 would mean it was 5 lg.'s stronger in the FFR than its EPR. This also is how todays RDSS shows it.

A red line on the early side of the graph shows the -5 and a blue line for the + 5. Sartin was big on graphs and many people understand them better than numbers. "The EPR and FFR differences are a comparison of horses based on the chosen pace line."

When they went to using 3 Fractions they also went from using % Early to using % Median. A more accurate way of determining the correct running style (ESP) than relying on the inaccurate visual or beaten lengths method and also a more accurate version than the early version of % Early, which just used SC and FFR. Also to reduce confusion on the early / Late graph's all the E, Ep & P are on the Early side and all the SP,S and L are on the Late side.

Track models were kept using the % Med, ESP designation of winners etc. and the amount of deceleration by distance and surface. Problems evolved because most sought a specific number or % Med. instead of using parameters or a range of % Med. Early as an example isn't just 70.10 % Med., Early has a range for early and each other designation,69.50 would also be early as an example. Most failed with these models because they did not follow instructions.

Now the big questions, do I need to keep a track profile or model of all this to win? Absolutely not!! Earlier I recommended you read F U # 80, starting on pg. 12 FACTORS ALTERED BY TIME. pg.14 " In reality a horse's perceived running style is secondary to the running patterns of all the other viable contenders in a race. The competitive match up." The Probability Convergence takes care of all this and its all within the V/DC rating.

From my experience there is still some validly to knowing 3rd FR deceleration by distance and track. It allows you to discount horses that decelerate too rapidly. But not necessary.

The president day version of RDSS includes all the best refinements and necessary factors to win that Sartin had developed at the time of his passing. Bottom line is you don't need no stinking track profile to win. Don't make it more complicated than it really is.

Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Hello Mitch

I would not advise beginners not to use a track model.
You and I and other longtime Sartin winners did not start out
with the same skill and ability to "feel" and drill into the pace lines and factors
that we have after years of PRACTICE.

Even Doc grew after years of trials and testing - Don't forget he had many testers working for him over many years
This is evident in what he taught in the Yellow manual, The Red Match Up manual, The paceline manual,
and Pace Makes The Race as well as the most important book Modern Pace Handicapping, By Tom Brohamer, Which has been lovingly called the yellow manual translated to English,

Doc in either the One on One video sets or the recommended Follow UPs
#70-88 says he models the previous day's result chart. He only records the 3rd fraction.
By distance and surface. He did this every morning if his health allowed it even up to when I spoke to him just before his passing
Doc said he can do the whole card in the time it takes for him to have his first cup of coffee
He only kept records in 20-21 group ranges.

I do something similar Rather than tracking the 3rd fraction
I track the Phase 1 readout EPR LPR TPR and the Early Late Difference
Graph.

I do not get this information from the result chart. I get it from
horses PP's in each day's new card on RDSS

I go through each horse in the day's card from Santa Anita
I look for horses who have won at the exact same distance and surface
I then record the EPR LPR TPR and E/L
from winning horses who ran at Santa Anita, at the same distance and Surface

Here is an example, On closing day, Sunday, June 23rd. The third race was a 5-furlong turf sprint



As I went through the horses from Sundays PP's I came upon Eddie Haskel.
Since the race was at 5 furlongs on the Santa Anita Turf course, I simply
look for any pace line from these exact same criteria.

Eddie Haskel shows 2 such wins. In line 1 and line 3. He also shows 3 wins at Del Mar at 5.0 on the Del Mar turf, but I don't record those wins on my Santa Anita model. I have a seperate Del Mar model and when Eddie runs again at Del Mar I will record only his Del Mar wins

I record the winning pacelines like so.
The Name, The Distance The Track Condition, the Type, the Age/Sex, The DTV and the Phase 1 factors EPR, LPR,TPR and E/L as well as the date of the paceline.




In the case of Eddie Haskel, I would record the paceline information and the Phase 1 readouts as follows into my model.

EPR 93 LPR 88.5 TPR 181.5 and E/L + 4.5

Since line 3 also fits these race criteria
I record the line 3's data and

EPR LPR TPR and E/L

A days card takes me a little longer than 1 cup of coffee but not by much.
I would say about a half hour. But by entering the data into excel
I can sort and see at a glace different criteria.

Here is a 22 race sample of 8.0 turf races from Santa Anita

Overall my model shows me horses win with an average of 83 EPR 94 LPR
177 TPR and -10 Early Late Diff

I track groups of 22 I then take out the extream high and extream low
E/L. I do this to even out the averages.

In my example model of 22 randomly selected races I will take out
the -21.7 and the 0 rankings

The new averages are now

EPR 83.4 LPR 94.3 TPR 177.7 and Early Late 10.88

Not much of a difference, But its indicative of what is needed to win
at Santa Anita at 8 furlongs on the turf

I suggest as Mitch does to track the 3rd fraction. If you want to track either
Phase 1 or %Med by distance and surface. If you keep a running average
as your model you are on your way to success.

K.I.S.S Keep it simple Sally but modeling is a road to success

[tom]

Bill, thanks for a really good lesson in modeling!
I always admire your thoroughness and professionalism in your handicapping.

Doc would be proud of you!

This has been a very good thread - always nice to revisit the FUs and look at the materiall from a newer perspective. Thanks to Mitch as well.