Make Money With Early

[Bill V.]

Without the lesson from FTL on the importance of the first fraction
I would not have bet this race.

My top 3 BLBL has the winner of race 9 today at parx ranked 1st
The problem is the top 3 were 6, 1, and 11. Both the 1 and 11 were under
2/1 at bet time.and I needed a second win bet.

When I went through the PP's I became aware of a few other Early horses

I checked the lifetime records and the RDSS generated running styles
and saw a good mix of early and OTE runners amonst the top APV horses

Here are my lines in the notes on each runners PP's
Here are the entries and condition

[Bill V.]

H1-4

[Bill V.]

Horse 6 - 8
5 is scratched

[Bill V.]

9 -11

[Bill V.]

So I have a few Early runners. Who will get the break in F1?
Horse 11

But look who is up close, the 8 and 1 SUS runners and the 7 who is early

Who wins the race on the segs screen ?# 6



here is the BLBL the 6 11 and 1 are all close on the line score



I beleive in the segments screen. I saw the early pressure the 11 faced
I saw the 8 would be involved and if the pace was very fast
with some of the other No line Earlies The race would go OTE

I had no clear choice for a second win bet so I bet an exacta

I took the two best OTE horses 6 and 1 over the best Early horse # 11
and added the 8 who was a good odds closer who I saw would be involved

The exacta came in 6-8

[Bill V.]

Results

[DaveEdwards]

Nice work Bill,

Was FTL's earlies lesson posted on P&C?

[Bill V.]

Its from reading FTL's work over the years. He consistantly stresses the importance of the break and the first fraction. If you use a consistent pace line method from viable contenders it will lead to a proper Pace analysis

If you go back and read his work you will learn to look at the race
in a more complete picture. he said it best in this post

And you better pay attention to the first call..
Although the second call has long been considered the "early" call, the race (at any distance) is mostly over at that point. For example, in a 6 furlong race, the race is 67% complete at the second call. In an 8 furlong race at the second call, the race is 75% complete. So what would you call the FIRST CALL? The first call IS THE EARLY CALL. It is the first call that sets the tone for the rest of the race.
Again, I will call on the "Hat". He often said "the race starts when the gates open". The gates don't open at the second call

GS
Bill

[shoeless]

Bill,

Good job with segment screen

Jeff

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by DaveEdwards

Nice work Bill,

Was FTL's earlies lesson posted on P&C?

No, it wasn't.
As a matter of fact, just last night Bill and I had a discussion by email about the 8th race at PEN last night. For you or anyone else who has the race, you can look at it and follow along.

I wrote to Bill and asked him to look at the race. I asked him to NOT do the race in RDSS or any other program.
I asked him to just look at the field and see if he could make a case for the winner, #5.
He wrote back and said "yes" it was the lone "E" horse in the race.
Keep in mind, this was solely from a "visual" look.

Then I asked Bill to do the race in RDSS, which he did. Naturally, Bill selected two horses, one of which was the winner.

At the bottom of this post I am posting his "race segments" screen, where I marked a couple of areas and we discussed that,

As you can see, Bill selected line 1 for the winner. I agree with that line. Here's why.
It should be clear to anyone looking at this race, that the #5 horse IS the lone early horse in the race. By "early" I mean the leader at the first call. Upon further inspection of the #5 horse, you can see from line 3 and 5 that "getting the distance" is NOT an issue for this horse. Therefore, using the last line a (+) line, the only thing we need to know is, will this horse be able to lead the field, based on the selected lines for the "contenders". We want to know if the horse is "currently" capable of making the lead. It was.

Now, a couple of points in the segments screen from Bill.
1 - Under the heading of "computed beaten lengths" and "F1", you can see that the #5 horse shows "0.0", so it is the leader at the first call.
2 - right next to "F1" is "SC", which is the second call and again, it shows the #5 horse with "0.0", so it is also the leader at the second call. However, if you look to the right under the heading "incremental match up" and under "F2", you will see the #2 horse first, the #7 horse second and the #5 horse 3rd.
Why the conflict?
Well, it really ISN'T a conflict. When you look at the incremental match up screen, the segment F1 shows the fastest horse to the first call.
When you look at F2, the horse that shows as being "first" there is not necessarily the horse that will have the lead at the second call. So in this case, the #2 horse runs the fastest "second fraction", the #7 is the second fastest second fraction horse and the #5 is the third fastest second fraction horse. But the #5 will still be on the lead at the second call. The #2 and #7 are running a slightly faster second fraction, but all three horses are fairly close.
Now look under the computed beaten lengths at the first call. The #7 shows 6.3 at the first call and the #2 shows 2.4, so even though those two horses are running a slight faster second fraction, they still have ground to make up on the #5.

What you have to anticipate is this. A lone early horse out on the lead doesn't have to run as fast as it does when being "pressured" on the lead.
This is no different than "anticipating" a late horse making up ground if an early pace battle materializes.

One final note. When looking at the segment screen, where the little horses are, the horse that shows as being first in the F2 segment IS NOT necessarily the leader at the second call. It could be a deep closer that is still 5 lengths behind at the second call. It just ran the fastest between the first call and the second call.

By the way, the #5 paid a very generous $24.00!