Tuesday Parx 3/3 Race 1

[Jeebs]

Interesting matchup here.

1) E
2) S
3) S
4) P
5) E/P
6) P
7) S/P
8) P

Let's project the pace off the #1... 23.3/47.2/112.0

2-4-7-8 are too slow and are out. Let's match the rest, 1-3-5-6.

#1 has the early edge, but isn't a dominant E by any means. Against the fast sprinting #5 horse, the two of them figure to get into an early fight, which should set the table for OTE to pick up the pieces.

#3's 7th line back (9/6 at PRX) was against today's pace of race. Hasn't been sharp lately, but shows the ability to pass horses. With the faster pace, he can reverse the tandem over the #6 today, who seems to run best when the fractions are softer. Sharp horse as of late, but has also had those said advantageous fractions.

Picking the #3 Reflected Way to boss these in today's matchup.

[Bill V.]

Hi Jeebs

Good luck with Parx The hard winter continues ..

Here is my look
Using phase 1
I set the pace from horse 6. 48.8 113.2
because I don't know what the 5 can do around two turns

48.8 113.2 is a little faster than par . The early 5 should make the early pace faster than par.

I see a EP of about 83

Horse 1 EP Line 2 82
Horse 2 S Line 2 78
Horse 3 P Line 1 82
Horse 4 P Line 1 80
Horse 5 E Sprinter Line 1 85
Horse 6 P Line 1 85
Horse 7 P Line 1 75 out
Horse 8 P Line 1 78 out

With these numbers I have taken out the 2 3 7 and 8
The top 3 TPR are 6 4 and 1
I wll go OTE and take the 1 and 4
The 6 may or may not win 3 in a row so I will go easy/lightly
with win bets on 1 and 4

[Bill V.]

My 1 scratched

Nice call on the 3 Jeebs. I thought Reflective who has been good to me
in the past was done.
We ran second and third to the sprinter #5
Its weird with these lone sprinters in routes.
I may add these to my pass race reasons list

oh well its a nice day to play Parx..

[Jeebs]

Thanks, Bill. I was playing the Derby Wars qualifier contest before work and submitted my plays without knowledge of scratches. Had I known that the #1 had scratched, it would have likely changed my matchup, but the place price on the #3 was great. Lost my qualifier on the 7th and last race when the chalk got passed in the final 70 yards. Get'em next time.

[Bill V.]

Yes , as it turned out inside speed and the rail was the place to be today.
I wonder what would have been if the 1 was in there

Bill

[Bill Lyster]

Bill V

If I understood you correctly, you want to add 'sprinters in a route' to your list of races to pass, is that correct?

If so, I would urge you to KEEP it in. If you have the PPs that show races at this distance you would see that the 5 raced once and placed 2nd. so no failure at two turns.

With the 1 out of the race I don't see any legitimate early horses to contend with. Plus the 5 has fought twice in the last four races through the early calls and is the lone sprinter in a route (Fighting, lone sprinter in route, both points stressed by The Hat.)

I use Brohamer contender guidelines to qualify contenders and I understand that you may not, but here is my assessment of the field:

The 2, 3 and 7 are non contenders having not been close up at the stretch call in their last. The 8 is dropping in class and was not competitive at 2C. this leaves 4, 5 and 6

the 4 could be early, but could not get to lead off 23.4 in last and has a history of slow starts recently. Can't say too much bad about the 6. Wins off a 48.4 2C and previous off a 47.4.

2 fifths added to any recent 4 furlong time of the 5 puts him in a comfortable lead, that he could fight for, but won't have to in this race. Horse is still dropping in class and is only horse dropping that was competitive in previous race. If odds are good enuf probably a bet, especially if the 6 ends up being too low to bet.

Look I know this is a bit of a red board but it was my first impression of the PPs. Some times when you find the lone sprinter in a route the "Up Close" guidelines can be relaxed a little. If you see a sprinter that held gained vs 45 2C even though the positions were 8-7-6 or 9-5-4 (and the lengths back were 5 or 6) but the routers ran against 49 1C you have to look at a horse gaining against a much faster pace for one of your final considerations, other aspects of the matchup not contradicting your analysis.

Hope this helps,

[Bill V.]

Thank you for your help

Yes I will reconsider the lone sprinter in a route

Thank you,


BTW When Jeeps and I posted our selections
We did not know the 1 was scratched
Posting races before the fact.
Before scratches and track conditions are known is all well and good but
who knows what the match up would be with the 1 horse in the race

I only see the 1 route in #5 Normals PP's
but I believe you .

[Bill V.]

Hey Bill

also, doesn't Hat say to look for lone sprinters in routes that DO NOt fade.
Normal looks like its "normally" :0 fades in its sprints .

GS
Bill

[Bill Lyster]

Understood about posting prior to scratches.

The PP info i mentioned is shown here somewhere:

You could argue the 1 as a presser or an early because it won both ways. But in its last if he is a presser he could not lead against a 23.3 and 47.1 and the notes say he wilted from early duel. If you see that last race as a presser, then he faded badly against that pace. He was, however, up close at 2C at a higher class level and that opens up the rest of the PPs. Then comparing the 1 and 5 would be really interesting. No use guessing about that outcome except that fast sprinters usually negate early routers setting up the OTE scenario.


Re: fading sprinters:
Yes he did, but I think you have to ask, "against what did he fade and will he face that pace or anywhere near that again today." He fought last out and should have more units of energy today, that being the case. If he is alone and brave.... who knows.

[Bill V.]

Hi Bill

Here are some more lines for # 5 Normal


It did place on Sept 22 2012
but it then went on a 533 layoff.

In its most recent route try on August 18 2014 it was in a race with much more early speed

and it finished last