Saratoga 2010 - Workbook for the Seminar

[Ted Craven]

Howdy Folks,

We held a seminar Friday evening August 20 at the Saratoga Hilton Garden Inn which was attended by 13 people. Following is the contents of the Seminar Workbook I handed out.

Besides the topics discussed in the Workbook itself, we did a live review of RDSS 2.0 (in its current state), held a free ranging discussion of various Methodology topics, did a review in RDSS of a few past Saratoga races from this meet (thanks Charlie B - great presentation!), and worked the Alabama Stakes for the next day (handing out the winner - Blind Luck and the $28.80 exacta).

[Ted Craven]

Some Fundamentals of the Sartin Methodology

1. The horse runs the race. Humans 'hang on for the ride' (i.e. jockey, trainer, connections – are either supplementary, redundant or unnecessary extra information).

2. You must make it 'your own'. The Methodology consists of a tried and true collection of race analysis tools and wager decision guidelines. You must discover the components and approaches suited to your own style and temperament – not blindly adopt someone else’s. These rewards require time, personal effort and self-honesty - there is no substitute, short-cut or black box.

3. Mental skills are more important than handicapping skills. Any method or software tools will work in the hands of a mentally and emotionally prepared individual. You get what you expect to get – you filter information through your expectations and beliefs.

4. Consistent approach is everything. Horse race wagering is a game of risk where the short-term results are often unpredictable, but the long-term results of a consistently applied approach are predictable. If you make the best decisions in each race, you may win or you may lose your individual wager (because literally anything can happen in a single race). But if you determine (by ongoing review of your decisions – a feedback loop) that your approach has an 'edge', then long-term you will win more than you lose.

If you vary your handicapping analysis and wager approach race-by-race or day-by-day, winning or losing a given race, you won’t know whether your result was because of the success of your current approach or because of the short-term random nature of racing. By being consistent (e.g. consistent paceline selection to represent horses, consistent reference to pertinent readouts, consistent wagering pools, bet sizing and decisions) over a series of races (the long-term) you will know if your approach is succeeding and what to do to incrementally improve it. Unless you employ consistency, you will produce erratic results and will become discouraged, blame the tools and ultimately believe that the source of any failure lies outside yourself.

You cannot control external events, but you do control your response to those events. Losing races is guaranteed – suffering is optional.

.

[Ted Craven]

The Mind For Consistent Results

[Full Disclosure] This article is based on a video presentation given by Mark Douglas and titled, "Mind over the Market." A Pace and Cap member has rewritten the article and given it a new title, so that it directly addresses the handicapper.

-----------------------

One of the main issues that I see all the time is that people do not utilize their method to its full potential. There is a big disparity between what they get and what they could have had if they had just followed their methodology. There is a big disconnect which causes a profit gap.

What we want is consistent results. We want to produce an income that we can rely on from our handicapping. However, developing a steady income is not such an easy task.

There is a big difference between winning and being a consistent winner. The relationship between the two is at odds with itself. This is a difficult mental barrier to break through.

Winning requires very little skill at all. Play low priced favorites and sooner than later you will land on a winner. You don't need any logical reason or theory to go to the YouBet, site open the wager pad and click on the favorite. And you can find yourself cashing in on the favorite. Or you could be "lucky" that day and cash in on a monster longshot. If it is that easy to win, how much harder can it be to make a steady, consistent income?

Surprise! Consistency is a challenge. A big challenge.

Meeting the challenge requires learning the type of skills that people are not used to learning. Mental skills.

People assume that if their technical method gives them a signal to get into a race and if the method produces a high percentage of winners then they will have a consistent income. They don't realize that the proper execution of the method requires mental skills.


Basketball Player Example

Take for example a High School basketball player. He will go to the gym and practice his free throws for two to three hours a day. It wouldn't be unusual for him to hit 50 in a row. The problem is that he could not even hit two in a row if the circumstances were that he was in the final game of the NCAA Championship, his team is down one point, there is only a few seconds left on the clock and he was just fouled. Under those circumstances, without the appropriate mental skills, him hitting either one of those free throws is very unlikely. No matter how well the guy can do it in practice, most people will choke. They will focus on "not blowing it" and blow it.


Mental Skills

We have technical handicapping methods telling us what to do, and with the potential to produce consistent results. But like the basketball player, without developing the appropriate mental skills, it is unlikely that we will be able to do what our method is indicating, without making a number of execution errors. In other words, to stay positively focused on the process of handicapping, by doing exactly what is required, when it is required, without hesitation, reservation or fear.

No matter how good a technical method is at selecting probable winners, turning those winners into a consistent income requires the ability to do or not do some things that the method itself can't help you with.


Limitations of a Technical Method

A method can't force you to predefine the risk before making a bet. Also it can't make us hold back from playing too many races. Or make us avoid even money when we should be looking for 10-1 and above. Or stop us from betting longshots from the bottom of our odds line. No program can give us consistent results if we are susceptible to these kinds of mental errors.


Psychological Implications

These kinds of mental errors are the result of thinking, believing or assuming that our technical method is telling us what's going to happen next on a race by race basis. And not understanding that handicapping programs are not designed to do that. Technical methods, patterns, handicapping programs are designed to put the odds of success in our favor over a series of races. It may not seem like it on the surface but there is a profound psychological implication here.

What this means is that the outcome of the signals generated by any technical method on a race by race basis are unique and random. There is no way to know in advance what the outcome to any particular signal will be over the sequence of wins or loses.


Random Outcome to Produce Consistent Results

By accepting the randomness of these outcomes a person can produce consistent results. It is somewhat a paradox to think that events that have a random outcome can produce a consistent result.

Technical methods will give the person the same kind of advantage that the Casino has over the individual player, if the person can think of it from the proper perspective.


Player Frustration

The player's frustration comes from expecting something from a technical method that it just cannot do. Technical methods define and identify patterns of collective behavior. The patterns definitely exist. They repeat themselves over and over again. The problem is that the outcomes do not always correspond with the patterns on a race by race basis. Yes we have patterns, yes they repeat themselves, and our mind just naturally thinks that we will have a pattern that is consistent, therefore I should have an outcome that is as consistent as the pattern.

This is not true.

There does not have to be a relationship between the outcome and the pattern. A pattern such as a Lone Early for example, may pay big in one race and not at all in the next race. Even though the specific criteria being used to identify the pattern is the same, the individual outcomes have nothing to do with each other. There is a random distribution between wins and losses over any sequence of races. If a player is expecting a winner and gets a loser the player is going to be frustrated. If the player is expecting a loser and gets a winner, again he will be frustrated. You take the same set of criteria and end up with random results. Yes, patterns repeat but on a random basis.

There is no point in analyzing, there is no point in judging and trying to figure things out.


Special Quarter Example

Think of it this way. You have a special quarter to flip. It is special because it is weighted so that 70% of the time it will land on heads. Just because you know that mathematically and statistically that this pattern will come up heads 70% of the time, is there any way to know the actual sequence of heads or tails? In other words do you know when the quarter will land on heads?

I am going to flip the coin 100 times and statistically it is going to come up heads 70 times. I still don't know which flip it is going to come up heads. It’s not the times I need to know now, it is which flip that I need to know. Flip the coin once it comes up heads. Flip the coin twice it comes up tails. Flip again it is tails, flip again its tails, flip again its tails. So there can also be streaks of heads or tails. There can be streaks but the point is that there is no way to know the actual sequence.

So how do you use a technical method effectively and maximize your profit based on the pattern that it identifies?

We have to do it in a very disciplined way. Our mind has to be free to be able to execute these bets without making mental skills errors. The mental skills errors come from believing that because the pattern is present it is going to give me a profit on this bet. This current bet is going to be a winner. You cannot think that way.

Most players won't bet unless they think it is going to be a winning bet. And they mix that in with their expectations. They see a pattern and feel that they have an edge and they know how much they’re going to risk to make a profit.


Yes a player needs to have some strong patterns in mind to look for. And when a pattern is showing, the player needs to know when it has a high probability of winning. He has to learn to think in probabilities. But he also has to get his expectations in line with how the outcomes are independent of each other and random.

He needs to learn these mental skills and be able to execute his bet without fear or hesitation or analyzing or even thinking.

What does a professional bettor think about when there is an edge present? Does he think about whether the edge is going to work or not? No, because he has learned that there is no point in analyzing or judging or building a case for or against whether that bet is going to work. That's the human component.

What he does think about is the risk. How much does he have to risk for a profit. Also how far is he going to go? When is he going to take a profit and stop betting. The typical bettor is constantly asking, "Is this going to be a winner?" And if he wins he just goes on betting as if the wins will go on forever.

The professional sees the pattern, not thinking am I going to win or lose, he puts his strategy in place, knows how much he wants to win and knows his risk reward ratio.

What people need to understand is: how believing in a random result affects our expectations. We don't want to get into a bet, knowing that there is a possibility of being disappointed or dissatisfied. The problem is that when that potential exists it can have a detrimental effect on how we perceive our information.

If I go into a bet thinking I must be right because I did all the research, I will then have a tendency to use the information to justify my thinking when I lose. I won't be able to identify a trend if I am putting in an inordinate amount of significance on the information that is telling me that I am right and ignoring the information that is telling me I am wrong.

Over all if we want to be consistent, we have to ‘cut our losses and let our profits run’. Or, we have to ‘make more on our wins than we lose on our losses’. And the problem is that if I am susceptible to being disappointed on a bet, I may get into a race expecting to do what I think it is going to do and have a tendency to distort the pattern information that causes me to hang on to my losers.


Slot Machine Example

Understand what you’re getting into. For instance, you put a quarter in a slot machine. You put your money in the machine and the pattern indicating a payoff doesn't show up. How do you feel? Betrayed? No. Why do you not feel betrayed by the machine? Because you went into it with the belief that you know that you are participating in an event that has a random outcome. And as a result, your expectation of the outcome was in perfect alignment with the event itself.

The difference between playing the slot machine and betting is that we can't play the slot machine until we have accepted the risk. We have to put the money in the machine first or otherwise we can't play. We have accepted the risk first. Then we find out if it’s going to work. We wait for a pattern to show up.

Here’s the difference with betting - and this is where people’s mental ideal of what this is all about gets messed up: the pattern shows up in the race first, then we have to put up our money. Meaning how much am I willing to risk to find out if the bet is going to be a winner. But because handicappers will evaluate and judge and analyze, they then think that they have a case for the pattern being right and they actually talk themselves out of believing that any risk even exists. And they over bet and play too many races. Many handicappers don't accept the risk because they don't want to be wrong.

You have to understand that this is not a right or wrong game. Betting and using a technical method have nothing to do with being right or wrong. It is just an odds game. That's all it is. You get an edge that says the odds are in your favor for a series of bets. And you have to take every single race with that pattern because you don't know the sequence of wins and losses. You have to be able to identify what your risk is. Know how much you are willing to spend to find out. You have to have a consistent money management plan.

You have to change how you think about this. Think. You know that there is a random outcome to these patterns. You know that it is not right or wrong. So what potential do you have to be disappointed? No more potential than you had when you put the quarter in the slot machine. You have to be able to change to that way of thinking.

You have to eliminate the potential to think that a bet is going to lead to a disappointment. And you do that by understanding that handicapping is not about being right or wrong. It is a probability game.


There are stages of development.

We start out learning these fundamental skills and learn how to think in probabilities so losing doesn't cause us emotional pain. We have to learn to take our losses and then move on, walk away. How good can a person be at predicting a horse's behavior? The methodology that we have attempts to predict that. The mathematical formulas written into in the propriety software do that for us. But it can't predict the sequence of outcomes. And finally, you have to determine what the cost of finding out is.


Paper Bets

Paper bets can be beneficial because they show the person if their mental skills are lacking or not. Winning on paper is a no pressure situation and requires very little mental skill. Real betting requires that your mental skills be intact. Therefore, paper betting is a graphic representation of the mental skills that a person needs to acquire.

Once you graduate from paper betting you can go on to betting in small amounts with no fear.

You have to learn to think about handicapping in a way that doesn't cause you to have the potential for you to think that you’re going to be disappointed or that you’re going to be betrayed. Or put you in the state of emotional pain. You need a care free state of mind. Once you shift your perspective everything changes. It’s not about being right or wrong. When you really understand that, then you go through the process of the risk of losing and then everything about your handicapping will change.

The patterns present themselves, you don't think, you bet. When the pattern presents itself there is absolutely nothing to think about. And there is no way you can know what the outcome will be.


References

Mark Douglas has written:
"Trading In The Zone"
"The Successful Trader"

An Edge means that there is a higher probability of one thing happening over another.

Both a software generated odds line and real, tote board odds are based on people's belief of the future.


Editor’s Notes:

Rewriting the article at first to me seemed like plagiarizing. However I was driven to tailor Mark Douglas's words to handicapping because I have never seen this topic addressed in depth before. Also the examples that he uses make the points that he presents self evident.

Mark Douglas also touched on a topic that I still have not unraveled. He said that a losing bet taps into other losses in our life and results in emotional pain. Loss of a loved one, a house, a pet, a job etc. All are losses that can be re-stimulated by a losing bet.

.

[Ted Craven]

Zen Handicapping (courtesy of www.HandicappingGold.com)

www.SartinMethodology.com/pubs/ZenHandicapping.pdf



.

[Ted Craven]

APV and Class for Modern Times - by Bob Cochran

Note: Following is a discussion by Bob Cochran on the creation and usage of Average Purse Values and Class Rating figures, updated from work done by him and others in the early phases of the Sartin Methodology. APV and CR can be used as a starting point to identify the real contenders in a race. The updated formulas he refers to will be used in RDSS 2.0

APV = Average Purse Value (the average purse for which the horse has recently been competitive, adjusted for various influences)

Class = the highest level at which a horse is proficient (e.g. an in-the-money finish)

When combined, the numbers indicate the earnings ability of a horse, and the level at which it competed for purses. The highest purse money is generally paid for the highest class of race.

This begins with Grade 1, Grade 2, Grade 3, non-graded Stakes and Handicap races, Allowance races , MSW races, down to claimers in descending order.

In recent years, the purses at many tracks are inflated via casinos and slot machines, and on-track games. The higher purses at the lower class tracks do not raise the class level of the track, it merely induces more shipping between lower class circuits.

I separate race tracks in the following manner. High, Average and Low.

You can find helpful info regarding Track Class Levels at the American Turf Monthly web site, or you can use my generic listing.

High class tracks are: Hollywood Park, Santa Anita, Woodbine, Keenland, Aqueduct, Belmont Park, Gulfstream, Saratoga, Del Mar. Churchill is listed as a high class, but I am of the opinion that it is Average class, that’s how I use it.

Average class tracks are: Arlington, Churchill, Hawthorne, Laurel, Fairgrounds, Ellis Park, Calder, Delaware, Fairplex, Golden Gate, Monmouth, Meadowlands, Oaklawn, Pimlico, Turfway, Presque Isle.

Low class tracks: any track not listed under High or Average.

Tracks listed as High class also contain (I) inner tracks which are usually one level lower, especially during other than main track meet times. I don’t like splitting hairs, so I don’t make a distinction between the (I) inner and main track performances in APV-Class calculations.

The differences between Purse Values will sort themselves at some High class tracks. The Average and Low class tracks should be handled a bit differently when calculating APV.

Under certain situations, (state-bred)-(restricted races) are penalized in the calculation of APV. There are tracks which are exempt from any penalties, and in some instances will receive a bonus added to their APV numbers. The tracks which are -

Exempt from APV penalties are: Hollywood, Woodbine, Gulfstream, Calder, Churchill, Ellis, Turfway, Santa Anita, Del Mar, Keenland, Saratoga, Tampa Bay.

The penalty is a 35% reduction in APV. The bonus is a 35% addition to the APV.

For example, let’s say a horse who was bred in Kentucky, but was foaled in Illinois, and is entered in a race restricted to horses bred, owned, or foaled in Illinois. Normally, only Illinois owned or bred horses fill this race. The horse who was bred in Kentucky, foaled in Illinois also qualifies. In my way of thinking, the horse deserves the bonus adjustment during APV calculations.

There is no bonus involved when state-bred or restricted races are carded at the exempt tracks. Neither is there a penalty or bonus adjustment in open company races at the exempt tracks, unless the race contains a shipper whose PP’s show any in-the-money finish (IMF) earnings at a track not listed on the exempt tracks listing. If such a horse has won at today’s level or higher from a lower class track, give it the 35% bonus for APV calculation.

The tracks not listed on the exempt list are handled in this manner. When I speak of state-bred earnings, I mean any IMF earnings in a state-bred or restricted type race where bonus money is added to the purse.

Open company races which contain horses whose earnings box numbers are used to calculate APV or show any IMF in state-bred races receive the 35% reduction penalty in the APV calculation. All horses whose final calculated APV is less than 70% are considered non-contenders, unless half or more of the field are less than 70% of today’s race Purse Value.

A horse may receive a plus bonus of 35% if it goes up 1 track class level: Average to High, or Low to Average, if it has Won at the same race class level at a different track.

The APV calculations for foreign horses use the following multipliers. Total earnings X multiplier for the country before APV calculation.

France = X 4.5
England = X 4.0
Ireland = X 3.5
Germany = X 3.0
all other countries = X 2.5

Race class is divided into 3 levels or groups: High, Average, and Low. There are a few ways to set up a class hierarchy at most tracks. I have found for my purposes, to either secure the condition books from the racing secretary’s office, or save a week of result charts. Starting with the highest claiming price race available, count down 3 levels. If the highest claim price is say $65,000, 3 levels down would probably be about $35,000 which would be Average class and equal to MSW. $10,000 up to $30,000 is the Low class level.

The same procedure will work at an Average or Low class track.

Find the highest claiming price available, reduce it by 1/3rd

Example: $45,000 reduced by 1/3 = $30,000. This would be the bottom of the High class race group. Reduce the $30,000 by 1/3 = $20,000. MSW and $20,000 would be the top of the Average class race group.

Further reducing to the lowest class race top, reduce the $20,000 by 1/3rd or about $7000 ~= $13,000. This and every claiming price lower is considered Low class. ALL maiden claiming races are considered Low class, no matter the claiming price.

An example would be a win at Alw nw1X at a Average track and today the horse is entered in a Alw nw2x or nw3rL at a High track. Technically could be considered equal, condition-wise. It may qualify for the bonus adjustment.

A MSW Win at a Low class track is the equivalent class at an Average class track. This is the up one track class level I referred to earlier. The plus 35% is applied in this instance.

The horse does not qualify for the bonus going from a Low class track to a Hi class track. Each individual must create the divisions of class at their track. My dollar amounts are for example only. It should give you an idea for setup.

Using this method of race class, I am able to determine the class levels at which a horse can compete effectively and which races qualify for a bonus, or a penalty.


We now have Track Class levels and Race Class levels.

The next step is the Horse Class calculation and thus the final CR Class Rating for the horse today. After calculating the horse’s APV, applying either a plus bonus, or minus penalty (or none) if applicable, it’s time to calculate the true proficiency of the horse (class).

Editor’s Note: Bob’s approach to an updated horse Class Rating starts with the same method as used currently by RDSS (described in Version 0.9.7 Release Notes document http://www.sartinmethodology.com/pub...Notes_0970.pdf), which in turn refers to early work described in Follow Up #5). From that point, the following alternate adjustments are made:

-use 8 starts if available in the current year, otherwise if less than 8 starts, use the most recent 2 year starts
-only use 3rd place finishes within 3.5 beaten lengths
-Class rating uses ¼ of APV calculation, as adjusted by the previous discussion using bonuses and penalties for class of races involved.

As with the existing or traditional Class Rating (CR), this updated CR comprises Average Purse Value competitiveness, Earnings per Start and In-the-Money consistency – adjusted for today’s purse funding realities and class of race where the earnings were accumulated.

I hope this information is received in the same spirit as it is given. I did it MY way.

I use APV and Class to:

• Allow myself to go deeper into the horse’s PP’s for lines.
• Compare each of the horses earnings and consistency.
• Check the class level of today’s race.
• To find overlooked horses for inclusion in exotics.
• To eliminate non-contenders for Win.

I don't calculate APV and Class for 2yr olds, nor for 3yr olds until the end of July. There are too few pieces of info on lightly raced horses. These type horses are handicapped using race to race improvement, and sometimes breeding and workouts.

The 3 year APV and Class study I compiled in 1987 produced the win and place horse in the top 5 (plus ties) APV and Class rankings about 90% of the time. I’m not sure this holds true today. Some of the reasons may be the different surfaces, the increased number of infirm animals, new veterinarian medicines, etc, etc - who knows?

This is why i created the new APV and Class numbers. When the racing game changes, you have to adapt, or lose!

Robert Cochran

Note: Bob was expected to be here at Saratoga this weekend, but alas could not make it at the last moment. Any questions about this material can be addressed to him online at Pace and Cap (User name: Bob Cochran).

.

[Ted Craven]

Median Energy Profile Your Track and Model the Win, Place or Show Horses - by Bob Cochran

A track profile can be compiled using the median energy numbers generated by the win horse at a given distance.

To create a track profile for any racetrack, the first thing I do, is to find out the complement of horses stabled at the track I wish to profile. The racing office or even a few condition books will show you which type or group of horses are in the highest quantity stabled at the track. The most common, and maybe the most plentiful group are sprinters at 6 or, 6.5 furlongs.

Routes at 8 furlongs and 8.5 furlongs are the most common. The reason for determining which group is most plentiful, is most of the tandems appear in these distances. Odd ball distances fill with fewer horses and are unusable due to the wild swing in the median energy numbers. The median energy numbers from the larger groups have less variance, because the same horses are running over and over against each other.

Ok, now you know which distances are available, separate the males from the females, and maidens from winners . I don’t separate the classes in my median energy track profiles, because it is common knowledge that the better class horses usually run more sustained in the late portion of the race. I usually allow a range of 20 to 25% plus or minus in the median numbers.

Remember, median energy profiles are not to be used in isolation, but in
conjunction with the MatchUp process.

I keep a profile of all distances at the tracks I wager, but you don't have to, as you may have a preference of certain distances. It's harder to trust a profile for a distance with limited stats. I find the median energy numbers for 3 year olds and up (after July) to be the most productive in terms of accuracy. For each distance you create a profile, wait until you accumulate at least 30 of the same type distance and surface. I have never trusted median energy profiles for Turf races because of their volatility, but all types can be recorded for your own validation.

From the 30 same type races, remove the very highest and lowest and all like them. Now add the median numbers of the remaining races and average. Try to have a 20 race sample. This is not an exact science. You have ball park information. I usually like horses to be within .15% to .20% of the average median for the distance.

When the races are "balanced" with a variety of running styles, for example 2E, 1EP, 2 or 3 P horses and an S horse or two, the median energy profile can be very useful. Races with "unbalanced" running styles or intruding Early horses may be won by "lone early or lone late" horses - i.e. The MatchUp.


There is an instance where median energy might produce where the MatchUp fails. This is when you are matching up, and the race is found to be a "paceless" race. Median energy numbers may be the answer to the issue.

Now that you know what the median energy requirements are at a chosen distance for your track, where does the winner have to be in terms of placement in the race at a preferred call ? You now need a "profile" for the win horse at this distance.

Any distance Win model can be created by observing a winning horse's beaten lengths at the 4 furlong point in sprints, and the 6 furlong point in routes (i.e. the 2nd Call point, according to distance). Use the Result Charts for the races you used for the median energy profile. Where was the winner at the 2nd call point in the race? Count the beaten lengths if the horse was behind the leader. If the horse was the leader give it 0 beaten lengths. If it was 3, 4 or 5 lengths use this number when averaging the total amount of races divided by total number of beaten lengths for all the races. If you wish, you may also profile the win horses beaten lengths at the Stretch Call. Validate this data for yourself.

Remember: Result Charts show both the traditional lengths behind the horse ahead, AND the alternate lengths behind the leader, i.e. the same format as the line will appear in the Past performances. Use only this latter version of data for determining 2nd Call beaten lengths.

Throw out all beaten lengths which are the result of a lop-sided win by a "lone S or lone E" horse. Try to avoid atypical situations. Prefer races for 3 year olds and up.

Remember, the Race model and Track profile are useful tools for making wager decisions at the tracks of your choice. Unless there are changes in the track surface, the models can be used into the next season.

good luck!

Bob Cochran

.

[Ted Craven]

Median Energy Track Profile - Saratoga August 2010 (through August 19)


?? = less than 10 balanced races.
All beaten length values less than 2.0 are listed as 2.0

3 &up 6 furlongs Dirt = 68.50% avg. btn. len. = 2.0
3 &up 6.5 furlongs Dirt = 67.90% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 7.0 furlongs Dirt = 68.35% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 9.0 furlongs (??) Dirt = 68.05% avg. btn. len = 2.0
Mdn 6 furlongs Dirt = 68.10% avg. btn. len = 2.0

3 &up 5.5 furlongs Turf = 67.02% avg . btn. len = 2.75
3 &up 8 furlongs Turf = 66.50% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 8.5 furlongs Turf = 67.70% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 9 furlongs Turf (??) = 66.08% avg. btn. len = 2.5

.

[Bill V.]

Thank you Ted and Bob C.

This is great reading one of the best I have seen

Your hard work and dedication to the Methodology
is a treasure

GS
Bill V.

[Bill V.]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

Median Energy Track Profile - Saratoga August 2010 (through August 19)


?? = less than 10 balanced races.
All beaten length values less than 2.0 are listed as 2.0

3 &up 6 furlongs Dirt = 68.50% avg. btn. len. = 2.0
3 &up 6.5 furlongs Dirt = 67.90% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 7.0 furlongs Dirt = 68.35% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 9.0 furlongs (??) Dirt = 68.05% avg. btn. len = 2.0
Mdn 6 furlongs Dirt = 68.10% avg. btn. len = 2.0

3 &up 5.5 furlongs Turf = 67.02% avg . btn. len = 2.75
3 &up 8 furlongs Turf = 66.50% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 8.5 furlongs Turf = 67.70% avg. btn. len = 2.0
3 &up 9 furlongs Turf (??) = 66.08% avg. btn. len = 2.5

.

Ted and Bob How do you arrive at these % Medium numbers
are the raw from the results chart or are they from the winners
pace line
GS
Bill

[Ted Craven]

Result Charts. I'll let Bob reply as to other mechanics of his process.

Ted