Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > Pace Makes the Race / TPR
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

Pace Makes the Race / TPR Discussion, Examples, Lessons from Total Pace Ratings (TPR) aka 'Phase I' from the book 'Pace Makes the Race'

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-10-2017, 07:57 PM   #11
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
Thanks Bill and no need to be sorry about the delay, glad you were
able to pick up some extra cash.
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 05:30 AM   #12
For The Lead
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
an alternate look

I just thought I would offer an alternate look at the winner.

Before you begin to handicap any race, and therefore any horse, the first thing you must do is read the conditions of the race. It’s not me saying that, “DOC” said it. That’s right, it’s in the manual. I was doing that 20 years before I read that in his manual, but that doesn’t really matter, I was just glad to see “Doc” giving important and accurate information even though he didn’t go into any great detail on the subject. In this race those conditions are “$5,000 claiming for non winners of two races in six months”.

Ok, moving along, let’s take a closer look at today’s track. Today’s race is at CT (Charles Town) a “bull ring”. Why is it called a bull ring? Because the track has a 6 furlong circumference as compared to most tracks that are 1 mile in circumference. Let’s take “Lrl” for an example, a seven furlong race there is around one turn, while a 7 furlong race at “CT” is around 2 turns. This makes trying to compare times ridiculous. There is no comparison. At “Lrl” the horses run almost ½ mile before encountering a turn. At “CT”, however, the horses encounter a turn before running ¼ of a mile. At “CT” the turns are tighter and the straightaways are shorter. These differences have an influence on not just times, but how the horse(s) actually run their race. Getting position going into a sharp turn can be crucial because the shorter straightaway doesn’t give as much time for overcoming a mistake.
Also, CT is one of the cheapest thoroughbred tracks in the country. Horses don’t start their careers there, but many of them end it there. Not sure about that? How many MSW (maiden special weight) races for two year olds do you see there? For that matter, how many of those type races do you see there for 3 year olds? Now, see how many races there have horses than are 6,7,8 and older. Why am I mentioning all this?
The eventual winner shows 10 races, 4 of those races are at tracks of better quality and larger circumference, “Lrl”and “PIM”. I would eliminate all 4 of those races. That leaves 6 races, all at CT. It is interesting to note that the eventual winner won 3 of those 6 races. That’s 50%. Not bad!

And now the hard part.
It was asked in this thread where would the eventual winner get the necessary LPR and/or TPR in order to make it a contender? Let me offer an explanation.
“DOC” said, and it is in the manual, that a horse that just ran on the lead or fought for the lead in the first two fractions of its’ last race, regardless of distance, is sitting on a “big effort” regardless of how it finishes. Well, that assumes the horse is placed in a race where it can deliver that “big effort”. Obviously a $5,000 claimer that just ran on the lead the first two fractions of its’ last race and then runs in a GRADE I race is not going to deliver that “big effort”. But how about its’ next race if it returns to the $5,000 claiming level? It makes sense that it is still sitting on that potential “big effort”. But how do you quantify that potential “big effort”? Numerically, you don’t!
With computer programs being what they are today, the majority of people are handicapping “by the numbers”. Here’s the problem. Horses are not machines. They don’t have settings where you can just dial up a number you want them to run. Here’s the good news though. Horses can and will deliver the numbers you are looking for based on their competition. Let’s take a look at the eventual winner’s last couple of races AND today’s race.
In the race 2 back the horse had the lead for the first two calls. (REMEMBER WHAT “DOC” SAID!) In the last race the horse ran at PIM, that’s a step or two above the level of horse running at CT, not to mention a complete change in track configuration. I’m not surprised, based on the horse’s past performances, that it did not run well. Now let’s look at today’s race.
For today’s race we are back to CT, a plus for the horse. Today’s race is at the lowest class level it has run at in months, another plus for the horse. And now one of the biggest pluses. For the first time, the horse is in a race with a condition. (REMEMBER, “DOC” SAID YOU SHOULD ALWAYS READ THE CONDITIONS OF THE RACE BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING!) Today, the horse is running against “non winners of two races in the last 6 months”, a big drop from “open” (no condition) company, not to mention the drop in class level that comes with it. When you take all this into consideration you can expect this horse to run that “big effort” “DOC” talked about, just one race later.
For me, personally, line 2 is the line. I think it was already pointed out that using that line shows the horse to be a couple of points higher on EPR than any other horse. (for me personally, I would have an “FFR” (first fraction rating)) Anyway, if line 2 shows this horse to be a couple of points higher on EPR than any other horse, then how much better will it be today with all the various factors mentioned in its’ favor? Sorry. There is no formula for developing a number. The handicapper has to decide this for themselves. The better handicappers will “get it”. The other ones won’t.
Recall that Jim Bradshaw talked about “VOODOO”. Has anybody figured that one out yet? I didn’t think so. But many people still adhere to it. Funny. Perhaps “voodoo” isn’t some mysterious, black magic “BS”, but rather, an understanding of horse racing.

Here is the horse with the races at “Lrl” and “PIM” lined out, leaving only relevant races at “CT” remaining.
Then see the review of each race after the horse's PP's.

Name:  ct 6th 7.7.JPG
Views: 375
Size:  199.5 KB

Let's look at the winner line by line starting from the bottom.

line 10 - a win vs. NW2L for $5,000
line 9 - a win vs. NW3L for $5,000 (winning these two conditions back to back is uncommon)
line 8 - a more or less even race vs. "OPEN" company for $6,250
line 7 - a race at "Lrl" that should be ignored
line 6 - a win while moving right back to the same condition and claiming level as line 8
line 5 - a race at "Lrl" for $7,500 vs. "OPEN" company that should be ignored
line 4 - a race at "Lrl" for $7,500 vs. "OPEN" company that should be ignored
line 3 - a race vs. "OPEN" company for $10,000 (way over its' head)
line 2 - a race vs. "OPEN" company for $6,250 (it leads at the first two calls)
line 1 - a race at "PIM" vs. "OPEN" company for $7,500 that should be ignored
TODAY'S RACE - NW26M (non winners of 2 races in the last 6 months) vs. $5,000

Best of luck to everyone.
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own
For The Lead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 11:55 AM   #13
Bill V.
The egg man
 
Bill V.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
Discussion

Hi FTL

Thanks for the workup of the winner

I have a couple of questions for you.

1. You show line by line the 3 horses class history
but did you also do that for the other 7 horses in the race?
Perhaps the 1 5 7 and 6 also had class advantages from their lines.

Next question

Here are horse three's LPR's from all it CT races

LPR from races at CT
Line 10 82.5
Line 9 81.5
Line 8 77.2
Line 6 82.0
Line 3 74.4
Line 2 64.7



It is my opinion based on our work over the years you are heavily biased against the Sartin programs because you feel the 3rd fractions are overly weighted.

However, with Phase 1 the LPR is a point system based on the horse's velocity with beaten lengths and track to track and daily varient adjustments, It truly is a good measure of
the horse's velocity ability, Basic Match Up principles says, The more energy a horse uses in the EPR the less it will have in the LPR

Looking at these numbers What LPR do you project the 3 running
today?

In 6 races its best ever LPR was only 82.5
In My, Mitch Shoeless and Tims conversations, the question is where is the 3 going to improve?

I do not see it and I bet against the 3

Name:  CT ex.JPG
Views: 892
Size:  96.1 KB
Bill V. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2017, 05:30 PM   #14
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
FTL

Nice job explaining things, I always enjoy your posts and wish you
would do so more often.

Jeff
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2017, 01:54 AM   #15
For The Lead
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
further discussion

A further discussion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill V. View Post
Hi FTL

Thanks for the workup of the winner

I have a couple of questions for you.

1. You show line by line the 3 horses class history
but did you also do that for the other 7 horses in the race?
Perhaps the 1 5 7 and 6 also had class advantages from their lines.

I think you have it all wrong. I was not attempting to handicap the race. I stopped by P&C and browsed though the recent posts. I found a couple that I thought were worthwhile commenting on. This was one of them. The only horse shown was the winner #3, so that is what I commented on. It is all together possible that other horses in this race had redeeming features, but they were not shown. I was handicapping “a horse” not “a race”.
The line by line on the #3 horse was not an exercise in showing class history, but rather an illustration of how to evaluate every horse in the race.
First, always start with the bottom race and read up to today’s race.
Second, you are not just reading the class level of each race, but taking note of how the horse performed at that class level, distance, surface, etc.
There is much more to be garnered from an evaluation of each horse in this fashion, but the bottom line is, it’s called handicapping.


Next question

You said “next question”, but there was no question, just a list of LPR’s at CT.


Here are horse three's LPR's from all it CT races

LPR from races at CT
Line 10 82.5
Line 9 81.5
Line 8 77.2
Line 6 82.0
Line 3 74.4
Line 2 64.7



It is my opinion based on our work over the years you are heavily biased against the Sartin programs because you feel the 3rd fractions are overly weighted.

As far as any bias I may have is concerned, I would be biased against “ANY” software that leans heavily in one direction or another. “SARTIN” has nothing to do with it. And as far as “SARTIN” is concerned, I was always a fan of ENERGY and I don’t believe that was biased in any way.
For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased. It double weights 3rd fraction and that is what I am opposed to. This can be seen on the segments screen where the third segment is TS+F3 which is True Speed + 3rd fraction averaged. True speed being speed from start to finish already includes the 3rd fraction. This approach rewards horses with good 3rd fractions (OTE horses) and penalizes early horses that fade through the stretch in the line being used.
On the segments screen the first segment is “first fraction”.
On the segments screen the second segment is “2nd fraction”.
On the segments screen why isn’t the 3rd segment simply “3rd fraction” to keep in line with the first two segments?
So much for that issue.


However, with Phase 1 the LPR is a point system based on the horse's velocity with beaten lengths and track to track and daily varient adjustments, It truly is a good measure of
the horse's velocity ability, Basic Match Up principles says, The more energy a horse uses in the EPR the less it will have in the LPR

Looking at these numbers What LPR do you project the 3 running
today?

I don’t project any LPR number for the horse. As I said in my previous post, there is no conversion number. It is an understanding of how class determines outcome. This horse is set up for success not failure. An effort that could find the horse in the winners circle. I simply project a good effort for the horse based on handicapping. That makes this horse a contender. As I said in my previous post, my line for this horse would be line 2. As “DOC” said, a horse leading at the first two calls (REGARDLESS OF ITS’ FINSH) is a horse sitting on a big effort. Should that line show me the horse is better than the rest of the field on first fraction and/or EPR, I can only conclude it will improve on that effort today. Evidently “DOC” felt that way as well.
In any event, in order to evaluate the horse, line 1 is definitely not the line to use. It’s the wrong track, wrong surface and wrong class level and will never show the horse as a contender in any way.


In 6 races its best ever LPR was only 82.5
In My, Mitch Shoeless and Tims conversations, the question is where is the 3 going to improve?

I think my two posts illustrate where he horse is going to improve.

I do not see it and I bet against the 3

Attachment 43763
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own
For The Lead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2017, 07:03 AM   #16
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
"On the segments screen why isn’t the 3rd segment simply “3rd fraction” to keep in line with the first two segments?
So much for that issue."

To answer that question: simply because its on the FPS screen if one cares to look, exactly the way you would like to see it..

"For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased." TS + 3rd Fr is there because it has proven to be an effective factor in routes and especially route grass races.

TPR and 3r FR of TPR has also proven to be a very effective factor for those that understand it. My analysis always start with TPR. However I also use several other factors from RDSS but not any one screen or all the factors within RDSS. If one wants to believe Fractals are important their free to use it, BTW personally I don't.

Bottom line is its up to the individual to determine what's important and to that situation. 3 rd FR is important and vital to success and one reason why its on several screens. I could make the same argument on EP or SC which on some read outs is also double weighted because it has proven to be effective.

Hindsight is always perfect. I admire Bill for putting up this example and is honesty. I could have been dishonest and said it was a play but I didn't because I wouldn't have had it. What really counts is when the shoe leather hits the road by putting up your picks before the race goes off rather than a contrarian opinion based only on Monday morning quarter backing. Ditto with trashing RDSS,"For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased." Your free to use Energy just remember its part of RDSS! Factors by Sartin and staff within RDSS have stood the test of time, some are better than others which is up to the user to determine.
MItch44

Last edited by Mitch44; 07-26-2017 at 07:14 AM.
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2017, 06:14 PM   #17
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
FTL

Thanks again for posting

Jeff
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2017, 07:39 PM   #18
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
FTL

Why do you say when looking at PP'S start from bottom up?


Jeff
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2017, 04:21 AM   #19
For The Lead
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoeless View Post
FTL

Why do you say when looking at PP'S start from bottom up?


Jeff
That’s a good question, especially when asked of someone like me. Why? I am a strong advocate of picking lines from the top down. The exact opposite of my suggestion to read PP’s from the bottom up. So here is your answer.

If I wanted to know the life story of “Shoeless” I would probably go back to the day you were born. Who were your parents? How many brothers and sisters did you have? Where did you go to school? Were you a good student? Did you play sports? What sports were they? And so on and so on. The idea being to learn how “Shoeless” got to the point in life where he is today. I am sure that as your life unfolded we could see high points and low points. We could see where you made good decisions and bad decisions. We have all made them.

In horse racing we only get to go back 10 races, but in most cases that is enough. By starting from the bottom and reading up we get to learn a lot about the horse, as it happened, but at all times we must read the conditions of today’s race first. That way we know where the horse is headed (today’s race), so in the back of our mind we are comparing each of its’ efforts to where it is going today. We try to determine if today’s race will be better or worse for the horse. What we are doing is reading each line paying attention to not just the claiming price, but to the condition of the race. We pay attention to the track the horse ran at and does that have any bearing on the horses performance? We look at the type of track (dirt, poly, turf). How did the horse react to each type of track it ran on and did it run good or bad on “off” tracks. If the horse had a bad performance was it because of the type of track or perhaps the horse was place at a class level where it could not compete. When you come across a race where the horse won or ran very well, was there anything in its’ races just before it that indicated a coming good race? Look at the time between races. Does that information tell us anything? A very lengthy layoff could indicate the possibility of an injury. At all times we are paying attention to “how” the horse ran in each of its’ races. Was it early, presser or sustained? Did the distance of the race have a bearing on how the horse ran? As an example, I have seen many horses that run early at 6 furlongs, but consistently run as a presser at 5.5 furlongs. Take note of claims. Horses don’t always take to new surroundings and regiments. They may need a race with a new trainer before reverting back to form. Owners/trainers claim horses because they think they can improve the horse. That doesn’t always pan out. Many times they end up with buyers remorse. Just be aware of it. In short, you have to be aware of every piece of information you can see. It all matters, good or bad. In some cases, but not all cases, following the horses life (so to speak) leads us to the conclusion that the horse is a legitimate contender in today’s race. Other times our journey shows us the horse is not prepared to compete today. It is not easy and is not something you learn overnight, but you have to start sometime if you are interested in improving your handicapping skills.

I take a lot of heat for analyzing a horse after it won or a race after it is over. Most recently, that was the case with the horse that won the CT race. It was the only horse shown so I looked it and offered and alternate look at it to allow people to see the horse in a different light. (my alternate look was based on what I just laid our for you) When I think about it, I can’t recall any teaching race in any follow up that was shown before that race was run. Funny how that works. When trying to teach you use examples. Examples naturally come from past experience. I can’t think of any author who writes a book illustrating how to lose races. I doubt that that would be a very big seller. Authors always show old races, races that are long since over, as examples of how to get a winner. I wonder if they get heat too? Nahhh. They just get money from the sale of their book that “red boards” on every other page! But, hey, who cares? People hand over their money and are happy to so if it means learning how to pick more winners. As far as they are concerned..."red boarding" be damned. Just show us how to get more winners!
You have been around here a long time. I think you understand that my interest has always been in trying to help people to get more winners. And what the hell, it doesn't even cost anything!
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own
For The Lead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2017, 07:52 AM   #20
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
FTL

I know that you post here to help people out and I appreciate it and
thanks for the insight about reading PP'S bottom up

I used to look at race conditions all the time but in recent years have
gotten away from it, the first person to really write about it was Steve
Davidowitz in Betting Thoroughbreds had a great chapter devoted to it.


Jeff
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Personality test Bill V. Classic Sartin Programs - Support, Discussion 25 05-29-2018 06:14 PM
RDSS 2.1 Test Results Lt1 RDSS 2.2 (and previous versions) 5 01-12-2017 07:50 AM
Right or Left Brain Test Bill V. General Discussion 27 01-04-2014 10:06 AM
I' m Running A Test on TUP Race -3, Need Help partsnut General Discussion 19 12-23-2012 05:24 AM
For test / Philly VDC Bill V. Races of Interest 43 12-14-2009 04:03 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:51 PM.