"The Hat" - Next Practice Race

[VoodooFan]

Thanks Richie, you're right. I wasnt sure about that last line, looked too good and did'nt know if he could run near that again, looking at his other lines. That was my next question to Mr. Bradshaw. If we are going to pick THE HORSEfirst then find lines, I think we need the ability to pick out abberant lines, genuine trouble lines, how the horse runs normally, default lines; like when The Hat has you cross out certain lines. THEN, we can really and truely see THE HORSE, then pick pacelines. Thanks Rich. VoodooFan

[Turbulator]

Initially, I thought this was a hard race, and I think it is harder than the last race, but after some thought I approached it this way:
It is "kind of" a paceless race. In which case out go the sustained type runners, and sustained pressers.

(It's helpful for me to know how many horses are in each race, but unfortunately that information is hidden. I use this to help with determining where a horse is sitting at the first two calls in relation to the number of entries. Sixth by 2 at the first call in a six horse race is different than sixth by two in a twelve horse race.)

There aren't really any dominant wire to wire runners in this field.

When projecting the pace I always look for a horse(s) who actually had the lead. So I project the pace from the first two calls of the 8 horse. 23.6 47.4 (I convert everything to tenths out of habit.) I then look for a horse who has won (or run the best) against the projected pace of the first two calls. The one horse won his last race in 23.4 47.4 143.6 Almost a perfect fit. So the projected pace is 23.6 47.4 143.6

I now look for other horses who can also run to this projected pace.
No others fit except the 7. There is a tandem with the 4 and the 7, but the 4 lost by 12 3/4 lengths, so I eliminate him. That "tandem" races transposes to a 23.4 46.6 142.4 (I added 4 tenths to the final time for deceleration.) Adjusted for beaten lengths it would read 23.4 46.7 142.8

The one horse is a sharp animal, but he isn't quite as fast as the 7. His second call time is a little slower as well.
The one is also too far back at the first call. Not lengths wise, but position wise.

In fact, most of these horses (except the 7) are too far back at the first call. Since it is a paceless race the 7 can run a little slower and possibly wire the field. He may or may not head the 8. I suspect he'll closely press and pass him at the second call. He is the only horse that shows a propensity to run up close, fight, and try to take the lead. He could very well have the lead alone at the second call, and if he does I think he'll win.

Even though I think the 1 is a good fit, I'm going with the 7 for all of the aforementioned reasons.

However, I am not as confident in my decision as I was in the last practice race.

Steve

[RichieP]

Originally Posted by VoodooFan

If we are going to pickTHE HORSEfirst then find lines, I think we need the ability to pick out abberant lines

NO.

After identifying running styles and projecting pace we determine whether the race runs

1) Early
2) Other than Early

Once we do that we throw ALL the horses out from the " wrong style" immediately and FOCUS on the " right style" group. Ok once we isolate the running style group we are looking to for the win ALL the past performance lines are USABLE. There is NO such thing as abberant lines. Match horses using FAST lines.

1) Match the contenders using FAST lines. Jim's saying " Fast horses win races" is our guide here.

2)From your final contenders pick the horse who is closest to the lead horse as your bet. Once again Jim's instructions. I have seen him do HUNDREDS of races both before and after the fact Voodoo. THIS is what he does man.

You are RIGHT THERE with your work and contender mix Voodoo!
Keep it going strong.

Hope this helps
Richie

[VoodooFan]

Thanks Richie, I will give it a go. VoodooFan

[Bill Lyster]

Richie:

In my original analysis I considered the 1a because of lines from Monmouth. I thought that it was a two turn mile track. Is this correct? In any event I will definitely get a list of 2 and 1 turn tracks for future use.

My question: Early Sartin cautioned the comparison of 1 and 2 turn mile times because of the longer straight run before the 6f time. If I remember correctly the 1 turn miles had 6f times about 5 ticks faster and final times about 8 ticks faster.

Does Jim factor any of this into the comparative process and if so, how?

Great write-ups Richie, keep up the good work.

Bill

[admin]

Sorry I.m late

Running styles

1A Pres
2. SUS
3.EP
4.Sus
5.S/P
6.Sus
7.EP
8.Pres

This one has me .
the 7 looks like the pacesetter
but not really much else is up there
except some company with the 1a and the 3

I would take a ahot with the 6 and the 2
I'm looking forward to the lessons for this race
Thanks Jim and Rich

GS
Bill

I would bet the 2 and the 6

[RichieP]

Originally Posted by Bill Lyster

Richie:

In my original analysis I considered the 1a because of lines from Monmouth. I thought that it was a two turn mile track. Is this correct? In any event I will definitely get a list of 2 and 1 turn tracks for future use.

My question: Early Sartin cautioned the comparison of 1 and 2 turn mile times because of the longer straight run before the 6f time. If I remember correctly the 1 turn miles had 6f times about 5 ticks faster and final times about 8 ticks faster.

Does Jim factor any of this into the comparative process and if so, how?

Great write-ups Richie, keep up the good work.

Bill

Hi Bill
what Jim teaches is to look in the form for horses that have raced at both 1 and 2 turn routes. From that he makes a comparison on the times. So YES he definitely does do some comparing.

Richie

[Bill Lyster]

Richie:

Sorry to be a pest. I was looking for a little quantification on the topic of 1 and 2 turn mile times. In this week's lesson the 1a's races were 2 turn races and application of any significant part of the 5 tick/8 tick adjustment would or could change the comparison of the fastest times and ultimately the projected winner because the 1a being an invader from outside the Bel/AQu/SAR circuit in this race.

I understand that we have not addressed track class or recent track records into the discussion either (and may not), so if this subject is too tangential for current consideration, so be it. I was just trying to integrate the old with the new.

Thanks,

[RichieP]

Originally Posted by Bill Lyster

Richie:

Sorry to be a pest. I was looking for a little quantification on the topic of 1 and 2 turn mile times. In this week's lesson the 1a's races were 2 turn races and application of any significant part of the 5 tick/8 tick adjustment would or could change the comparison of the fastest times and ultimately the projected winner because the 1a being an invader from outside the Bel/AQu/SAR circuit in this race.

I understand that we have not addressed track class or recent track records into the discussion either (and may not), so if this subject is too tangential for current consideration, so be it. I was just trying to integrate the old with the new.

Thanks,

Hi Bill
Ok Jim told me to speak frankly and honestly what I do so here goes.

When I FIRST started 6 months ago learning the matchup Jim sent me a track to track adjustment chart.

I asked him if HE used it and he said " Rich I rely on my mind to recognize differences in track speeds. patterns repeat and then become firmly part of our mind when we work races going forward. NO I never look at anything written."

Bill I promised myself from day ONE that if this man was gonna teach me I HAD to do ONLY what he does ok?

So I deleted the chart without ever referencing it.

What I do is look at shippers and trust what comes into my mind. Sometimes I am wrong but with experience I am " making calls" on horses better and better. It is totally a FEEL thing Bill. I honestly do NOT quantify anything

One thing I DID "see" in this race when Jim had me work it was the 1a shows a Belmont 8f line in his pp's - when I matched that with the # 7 last line it was no contest i favor of the 7 horse. PLUS the running styles in BOTH races was the same - Early Presser so I felt doubly confident in the 7 and QUICKLY threw out the 1a.

THAT is one of the BIG advantages of matching " The Hat" way. We use the WHOLE past performances on the horses to help us compare and matchup. It did seem strange at FIRST but with practice it is so POWERFUL and natural NOW it's crazy.

Hope I am not coming across like some kind of expert or whatever cause thats not how it is. I DO know what Jim does and follow ONLY what he tells me to do. NOTHING extra is added.

He works EVERY race the SAME exact way Bill. From a 4.5f race at Charlestown to a 9f Turf race at Santa Anita.

From this comes REPEATING PATTERNS and that is what is starting to happen with me. Jim tells me part of intuition is recognizing patterns that REPEAT.

Hope this helps and sorry if I rambled on a bit

Richie

[VoodooFan]

Rich, you are giving GOOD answers. You are really giving us the "inner workings" of The MatchUp "Bradshaw" style. Now that I think about it, going over all your MatchUp post, together, they could be called ....hmmm......"The Tao of THE HAT"(the Way of the Hat). Great stuff.