First time asker

[wiretowire1968]

I do not have the software but have read Tom Brohamer's book and have incorporated the basis of fps into my pace analysis handicapping. I have a huge question that I continue to struggle with when making adjustments to the fractions on runners who do not or have not gone the distance of the race handicappped. I have this problem when it comes to reorganizing or trying to adjust the fractions that affect AP SP EP.

A couple of examples from somebody that is simple would be great. Race today at Parx..going 1 1/8 dirt, # 1 has never been the distance cutting back from 1 3/16. (Help) Horses 5 horses going from 1 1/16 to 1/8. How do adjust the fractions to get the paceline to compare the the horses going from the 1 1/6. I have this issue with sprinters as well in terms of fractions?

[ranchwest]

In Charles Carroll's book, Speed Handicapping, he set up a table of multipliers to adjust for each different distance. I don't agree with the adjustment values in the book, but I have found that the general principle works reasonably well. If you want to take a deeper dive, you could have tables for each track.

But keep in mind that this methodology is just a means of comparing various distances. It is not predictive of a particular horse's ability to change to a new distance.

[Ted Craven]

Welcome to the site!

Probably Ranchwest's conceptual advice is good enough for you to pursue some kind of home-made distance adjustment process (along with his caveats, from my ancient reading of that book).

Sartin used (RDSS uses) a method he named 'Par Gaps'. Each running North American distance has a par time in a table (Call1, 2nd Call, Final Time). Each past running line leader times creates a differential (or 'gap') to that past race distance/segmental par. These differentials are then applied to Today's distance to get an adjusted set of leader times for each past race projected to today's distance.

Different adjustments apply to surface changes, sprint to route and route to sprint adjustments, also Daily-Track variant and Inter-Track variant adjustments. The result of all these adjustments is a race being run today on what we affectionately call 'Sartin Downs'.

It's imperfect, except for most alternatives Also, as Ranchwest wisely notes - also not an indicator of whether a horse can DO that distance, though near distances are likely easier than big distance changes.

(Don't you already use ValueCapper? Aren't these distance adjustment issues taken care of for you already?)

Ted

[tom]

Two ideas, Follow Up #1 the article on the Meridian Adjustment, and the Paceline Manual, for adjsting the third fractions.

Good luck.

[tlinetrader]

New to the forum. I too am getting my introduction to handicapping through Modern Pace Handicapping. I'm confused as to why adjustments are not discussed when calculating FPS values for horses coming off races at different distances, such as 6f vs 6.5f or even 7f. It seems that the longer race would have slower velocities, all else being equal, which need adjustment for a fair comparison, especially in the third fraction. Perhaps I'm missing something.

[Ted Craven]

tlinetrader - welcome!

Again, I believe the best answer is 'Par Gaps', per my post above. Relative 3rd fraction deceleration ratios from different distances appear to be a accurate as they can be (since about the days of Synthesis in the late 1990s).

However, I think it's also axiomatic that the longer distance you are trying to equalize to day's distance (and related segmental running times and velocities) the more error you introduce. If you have the luxury to rate a horse today off a distance close to today's (half or even whole furlong difference) go for it IF it represents a good effort for a horse. But beware, for example, a slower pace near-distance race and accepting that's the best a horse can do when fit and well matched, when perhaps a good effort against a faster pace at a longer distance (not excessively longer) shows the horse at its best comparative ability.

Comparative velocities and resulting ratings are all a matrix of possibilities/probabilities, best viewed with an eye to current form and dis/advantages in energy disbursement or running style compared to others in the field.

Also what Ranchwest wisely mentions - just because we CAN adjust horse's efforts from different distances doesn't imply the horse can run that distance - until it does.

If interested, there are several articles in Follow Ups from the later 1990's about the concept of Par Gaps (Dan Boals? - any recent recollections on issue #s). I also think I have discussed that idea on several occasions (can search using the site Google Search tool). The Par Table in RDSS is visible in the Configure screen and is editable (at user risk ). However, the concept is also one of the few still in the 'not-so-public/secret-sauce' list of RDSS' Sartin Methodology tools.

Ted

[CEW]

Wire to Wire and Tlinetrader:

Another approach in equating distances not mentioned here so far: use the difference from the 10K pars. This is explained starting on page 220 in Tom Brohamer's book (Modern Pace Handicapping). He then applies the concept in the race examples at the end of the book. When using pace figures, nobody is better than Brohamer in explaining the concepts. In fact, if you pick through the audio tapes here on Pace and Cap, particularly the Brohamer Lecture Series, he will walk you through the reasons why the 10k par difference is more accurate than the meridian variant, and then go through many examples.

You need the pars to do this. You can buy them from Dave Schwartz or make your own as explained in Tom's book.

An example:

Belmont 6F par:

22 3/5, 46 flat, 110 4/5

Belmont 6.5F par:

23 flat, 46 2/5, 117 2/5

If you want to rate a horse with a Belmont 6.5 furlong paceline running today in a 6 furlong race at Belmont, subtract 2/5ths off the first call (speeding up the first fraction), and subtract 2/5ths from the 2nd call (also speeding up). On the final time, for every fifth slower than 117 2/5ths, add that number of fifths to 110.4. Reverse (subtract) if the final was faster than 117 4/5.

I used Synergism for a long time, but after listening to Tom over and over, I decided to make my figures the way he does. Synergism will make the distance adjustment via a meridian variant. But the only readout that will be exact is Factor W. The rest of the readouts will not be as accurate due to the way the meridian formula is written. What convinced me was in handicapping 7 furlong pacelines into shorter sprints. The 10 k par differences give the longer distances' third fraction (along with the rest of the readouts) their due.

You can do this from any track and distance to any track and distance once you have the pars.

Let me know what questions come up!

Best,

Chuck