Article on pace by Doug Salvatore

[cj]

http://www.horseracingnation.com/blogs/TimeformUS/How_Pace_Has_Played_A_Roll_In_Breeders_Cup_Preps_1 23

[Exotic1]

Good stuff. Thx.

[RaceBookJoe]

Appreciate the link

[Stillriledup]

"getting out of bed before noon on a consistent basis proved to be impossible for him."

I love this guy already! :D

[classhandicapper]

The toughest pace related question for me to answer is how to evaluate a horse that got a favorable pace scenario when it's not clear how good he was going into the race.

If Dr Fager shook loose on an easy lead and wired a Grade 1 field, IMO it would be a mistake to downgrade him and bet against him next out just because he had an easy trip. He's still Dr Fager even if he got an easy trip and his race didn't come up spectacularly fast.

If Secretariat sat off a very fast pace and closed strongly past tired horses to beat a Grade 1 field, IMO it would be a mistake to downgrade him and bet against him next out just because he had an easy trip. He's still Secretariat even if he got an easy trip and his race didn't come up spectacularly fast.

But with lightly raced horses and in many other situations it's not always clear if you are dealing with a good horse that got a favorable trip or a bad horse that got a favorable trip.

Honor Code may be a good example.

Lots of people recognized that his debut was probably better than it looked because he showed such brilliant acceleration and won going away with what looked like plenty in reserve.

But now you could easily argue that he got a perfect pace setup in the Champagne closing off the fast fractions.

So did he suddenly become an overrated deep closer you should be looking to bet against because he just happened to draw into a field with a lot of speed or is he still the horse that showed amazing acceleration in his debut with a pedigree to suggest he's going to get better as distances stretch out.

In his case, I think the latter is way more likely. I'm not expecting him to run way slower in the Remsen just because he got an easy pace setup to close off in the Champagne. I thought he was a very good 2yo going into the Champagne and he gave me no reason to change my mind. Time will tell whether he develops or not, but I don't think the pace setup he got there is particularly relevant.

What I think you want to do is bet against the "BAD" horses that only ran well because of the pace setup. It's the mediocre and bad horses that only won and ran fast because of favorable setups that you want to try to beat next out.

Unfortunately, it's not always so easy to figure that out beforehand.

[Robert Fischer]

Nice article.

TimeformUS is assembling an all-star team.

Doug Salvatore is a good handicapper, who I have respect for.

[garyscpa]

Now I have a cheat sheet for the Breeders' Cup. :jump:

[letswastemoney]

Doug is the best handicapper I've ever read anywhere. A lot of my picks are based off of stuff he's written on derbytrail.com in the past. He would be successful no matter what PPs he used.

[Segwin]

Thanks for that. :ThmbUp:


The toughest pace related question for me to answer is how to evaluate a horse that got a favorable pace scenario when it's not clear how good he was going into the race.

If Dr Fager shook loose on an easy lead and wired a Grade 1 field, IMO it would be a mistake to downgrade him and bet against him next out just because he had an easy trip. He's still Dr Fager even if he got an easy trip and his race didn't come up spectacularly fast.

If Secretariat sat off a very fast pace and closed strongly past tired horses to beat a Grade 1 field, IMO it would be a mistake to downgrade him and bet against him next out just because he had an easy trip. He's still Secretariat even if he got an easy trip and his race didn't come up spectacularly fast.

But with lightly raced horses and in many other situations it's not always clear if you are dealing with a good horse that got a favorable trip or a bad horse that got a favorable trip.

Honor Code may be a good example.

Lots of people recognized that his debut was probably better than it looked because he showed such brilliant acceleration and won going away with what looked like plenty in reserve.

But now you could easily argue that he got a perfect pace setup in the Champagne closing off the fast fractions.

So did he suddenly become an overrated deep closer you should be looking to bet against because he just happened to draw into a field with a lot of speed or is he still the horse that showed amazing acceleration in his debut with a pedigree to suggest he's going to get better as distances stretch out.

In his case, I think the latter is way more likely. I'm not expecting him to run way slower in the Remsen just because he got an easy pace setup to close off in the Champagne. I thought he was a very good 2yo going into the Champagne and he gave me no reason to change my mind. Time will tell whether he develops or not, but I don't think the pace setup he got there is particularly relevant.

What I think you want to do is bet against the "BAD" horses that only ran well because of the pace setup. It's the mediocre and bad horses that only won and ran fast because of favorable setups that you want to try to beat next out.

Unfortunately, it's not always so easy to figure that out beforehand.

[MJC922]

The toughest pace related question for me to answer is how to evaluate a horse that got a favorable pace scenario when it's not clear how good he was going into the race.

If Dr Fager shook loose on an easy lead and wired a Grade 1 field, IMO it would be a mistake to downgrade him and bet against him next out just because he had an easy trip. He's still Dr Fager even if he got an easy trip and his race didn't come up spectacularly fast.

If Secretariat sat off a very fast pace and closed strongly past tired horses to beat a Grade 1 field, IMO it would be a mistake to downgrade him and bet against him next out just because he had an easy trip. He's still Secretariat even if he got an easy trip and his race didn't come up spectacularly fast.

But with lightly raced horses and in many other situations it's not always clear if you are dealing with a good horse that got a favorable trip or a bad horse that got a favorable trip.

Honor Code may be a good example.

Lots of people recognized that his debut was probably better than it looked because he showed such brilliant acceleration and won going away with what looked like plenty in reserve.

But now you could easily argue that he got a perfect pace setup in the Champagne closing off the fast fractions.

So did he suddenly become an overrated deep closer you should be looking to bet against because he just happened to draw into a field with a lot of speed or is he still the horse that showed amazing acceleration in his debut with a pedigree to suggest he's going to get better as distances stretch out.

In his case, I think the latter is way more likely. I'm not expecting him to run way slower in the Remsen just because he got an easy pace setup to close off in the Champagne. I thought he was a very good 2yo going into the Champagne and he gave me no reason to change my mind. Time will tell whether he develops or not, but I don't think the pace setup he got there is particularly relevant.

What I think you want to do is bet against the "BAD" horses that only ran well because of the pace setup. It's the mediocre and bad horses that only won and ran fast because of favorable setups that you want to try to beat next out.

Unfortunately, it's not always so easy to figure that out beforehand.

As it applies to final time I've always believed in the notion that pacing can't make anyone run faster, it can only make them run slower. If you're capable of 6f in 70 seconds ideally paced any variance away from the ideal is a penalty that will be paid. Win or lose the penalty is paid more often than not because most of the time pace is contested as horses are being used to burn up other horses at different intervals. Even an abnormally slow pace doesn't help speed run any faster, it's a tactical advantage, a head start without any exertion, very hard to run down anyone of comparable class when you give them 5 or 6 lengths for nothing. The final time guys will change the variant for this scenario habitually so everyone exiting a 40k claimer doesn't show up next time out with 4k figs.

[ronsmac]

A decent article, even though he never mentioned wind speed and direction, which is one of the most critical components of pace analysis. Anyone who's ever ran track would know that's elementary. Of course it's impossible to be 100 % accurate with wind speed and direction , and takes yrs to master, but it can point out some pace stand outs if you're diligent .

[classhandicapper]

As it applies to final time I've always believed in the notion that pacing can't make anyone run faster, it can only make them run slower. If you're capable of 6f in 70 seconds ideally paced any variance away from the ideal is a penalty that will be paid. Win or lose the penalty is paid more often than not because most of the time pace is contested as horses are being used to burn up other horses at different intervals. Even an abnormally slow pace doesn't help speed run any faster, it's a tactical advantage, a head start without any exertion, very hard to run down anyone of comparable class when you give them 5 or 6 lengths for nothing. The final time guys will change the variant for this scenario habitually so everyone exiting a 40k claimer doesn't show up next time out with 4k figs.

I pretty much agree with you.

The trick is figuring out what the optimal pace is for each horse, how close to optimal they were last time (and measuring it correctly), and how close to optimal each will get to run today.

My point was that I don't automatically downgrade horses that got a favorable pace scenario last time because sometimes one or more of the best horses gets a favorable pace scenario. So they come right back to run well again.

[MJC922]

A decent article, even though he never mentioned wind speed and direction, which is one of the most critical components of pace analysis. Anyone who's ever ran track would know that's elementary. Of course it's impossible to be 100 % accurate with wind speed and direction , and takes yrs to master, but it can point out some pace stand outs if you're diligent .

Definitely. Years ago I once scoffed on another racing board when someone suggested that the wind one year in the derby moved the half mile split a full second, I just about called him nutty. My bad. It can happen -- and a few fifths is routine, yet a few fifths at the half covers the entire class spectrum at a track and that's what made me go off on him. When I researched it, sat back and realized final time was several straight segments highly impacted by wind speed and direction and then a turn split or two all stitched together into one error prone mess it put things into perspective during a time when I thought a few fifths at the finish was a huge edge. And even with wind data at your disposal it's not easy to adjust. In days when I made my own Beyers I took readings of the wind trackside, those readings vary wildly within the pace segments. You would need avg wind speed per segment to get anything of much use and I could find no device on the market during that time (maybe 15 years ago) with that functionality. Final time figs are useful to the extent that the figure maker is willing to split variants maybe a third or more of the time (would be far less if you're able to adjust for wind first), otherwise what you have are just a whole lot of numbers coming back that make no sense at all.

[cj]

A decent article, even though he never mentioned wind speed and direction, which is one of the most critical components of pace analysis. Anyone who's ever ran track would know that's elementary. Of course it's impossible to be 100 % accurate with wind speed and direction , and takes yrs to master, but it can point out some pace stand outs if you're diligent .

Why would he mention something that is already built into the figures? Of course wind is a big factor, and we certainly factor it in.

[MJC922]

I pretty much agree with you.

The trick is figuring out what the optimal pace is for each horse, how close to optimal they were last time (and measuring it correctly), and how close to optimal each will get to run today.

My point was that I don't automatically downgrade horses that got a favorable pace scenario last time because sometimes one or more of the best horses gets a favorable pace scenario. So they come right back to run well again.

Knowing you're a keen observer of the trip I imagine we're going to agree an awful lot when it comes to pace stuff. Looking at the horse coming off a good trip it's easy to mark them down for it, but I agree that's dangerously simplistic thinking... value-wise it might be a knock on the horse, but a race can condition a horse i.e. the pacing depending upon how it shakes out can sometimes leave a whole lot left in the tank for next time. So I think we have to be very careful with effort as it relates to this. In the Ragozin world, a fast time for a horse relative to its other times is 'effort' and a slow time isn't, however there are plenty of slow final time races where the pacesetters post soft early fractions but some runners are coming home all-out, this can be taxing as well, not an area spotlighted in the article (good article BTW, I'm not knocking it just expanding) There are some horses too where a slow early pace just doesn't work, they can't finish quite fast enough against a certain bunch no matter how much they slow it down early. Backing it way down can be counter productive with certain horses.

[Big Sal]

Thanks for reading. Appreciate it.

Regarding how extreme pace scenarios impact the outcome of horse races...

Obviously, I'd like to think I could write a Shakespearean tome on the subject, covering all the type of situations, angles, and nuances in painstaking detail.

The purpose of the HRN blog post was more about just emphasizing the impact extreme paces can have on the outcome of races, and citing specific example of 2013 Breeders Cup prep races that were run at an extreme pace based upon TimeformUS figures.

[Big Sal]

The toughest pace related question for me to answer is how to evaluate a horse that got a favorable pace scenario when it's not clear how good he was going into the race.

If Dr Fager shook loose on an easy lead and wired a Grade 1 field, IMO it would be a mistake to downgrade him and bet against him next out just because he had an easy trip. He's still Dr Fager even if he got an easy trip and his race didn't come up spectacularly fast.

Dr. Fager was one of the greatest racehorses I've ever studied.

He was certainly not immune to pace dynamics, however. No horse is.

Dr. Fager had four meetings with another genuinely great horse, Damascus. He won both of the two meetings in which the connections of Damascus didn't enter a rabbit.

However, the rabbit Hedevar was entered in the other two meetings, and in both instances, Dr. Fager was unable to rate well behind Hedevar. Damascus dominated both of those two meetings.

[thaskalos]

Thanks for reading. Appreciate it.

Regarding how extreme pace scenarios impact the outcome of horse races...

Obviously, I'd like to think I could write a Shakespearean tome on the subject, covering all the type of situations, angles, and nuances in painstaking detail.

The purpose of the HRN blog post was more about just emphasizing the impact extreme paces can have on the outcome of races, and citing specific example of 2013 Breeders Cup prep races that were run at an extreme pace based upon TimeformUS figures.
Sal...I enjoyed your article, and I'd like to ask for your opinion about an aspect of pace handicapping which has been on my mind lately.

You say that when a horse goes out winging and sets a very fast pace...then the fast pace will often kill off all the horses who get near it. Where, in your opinion, should we draw the line between the stalkers who are killed off by the suicidal pace...and the stalkers who are laying off the fast pace, and should have plenty of energy left for the rest of the journey?

I see some marquee races at a mile and an eighth or a mile and a quarter, where a horse sets a very fast pace...and some well known journalists use that fast pace as an excuse for the bad performances of horses who are five or more lengths behind at the half mile.

Can laying five or six lengths behind at the half mile of a suicidal pace still be considered being dangerously close...and should a race of this type provide a ready-made excuse for the stalkers of this scenario??

Where do we draw the line?

[Big Sal]

Where do we draw the line?

You ask a very good question.

IMO, a mid-pack or deep closing type of horse, who in theory is supposed to benefit from a hot pace, can be very much harmed by it if he is aggressively ridden or moved pre-maturely into the hot pace.

A recent, sort of unsolved, example of a high profile horse would be Normandy Invasion in the 2013 Kentucky Derby.

I believe he ran a race similar type of race that Point Given ran in the 2001 Derby and Afleet Alex ran in the 2005 Derby. That is, he made a pre-mature move into an unbelievably fast pace, or was simply aggressively ridden and positioned to close to it.

If you want to get into this business of naming famous horses, with mid-pack and closing running styles, who performed well below their par after moving pre-maturely into a hot pace...I'd be up all night naming races where that happened.

There's plenty of examples of great horses overcoming it as well...past or recent, and over all types of surfaces.

Using famous recent horses, with that type of style, over all surfaces for example:

* Invasor made an extremely pre-mature move into a hot pace in the Whitney and desperately held on as Sun King came surging at him late.

* Zenyatta made an extremely pre-mature move into a hot pace in the 2008 Vanity and almost got ran down a re-rallying Tough Tiz's Sis, who was ridden by Mr. Low ROI Aaron Gryder that day. Here's a replay of that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOz9PnVGsP0

* Frankel got an extremely stupid ride and almost blew a race at Royal Ascot against much weaker competition after making a bizarre pre-mature move after his own pace maker. Here is that replay: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLmu_pHF0sA

Generally, mid-pack and closing types benefit from hot paces. Even stalkers who are efficient at rating and ridden with patience can sometimes revert to a deep closing role with success. However, anytime these horses are moved pre-maturely into the teeth of a hot pace, they simply don't run up to par...and usually run well below their par.

[MJC922]

Nice post. In the Zenyatta case, perfect ride IMO. The early move I suspect hurt her a couple of fifths on final time but I would argue that it hurt the horses she was blowing past even more so -- sitting back and not passing the runner-up at that point would've meant stronger opposition to deal with in the stretch, granted this can be a gamble if anyone can run at you from way way out of it because you'll be running on empty in the final yards.

Critically in this case though it allowed for the chance to 'race-ride' that horse right into traffic behind a speed horse who was weakening, which could be argued decided the outcome.

These are good examples of what a 'race' is all about, that is, it's not about getting to the line in the fastest final time, but more often it's about preventing your opponent from running their best and in so doing once in awhile the stragglers can get up in time for the spoils.

Getting to the finish line in front given the unique dynamics of each race often results in (I believe) a somewhat steadier pecking order over a series of races but with wild variations in final time.

The Ascot race is a good one to watch also, it's a tag team effort that worked but granted almost backfired. I find it interesting to watch the eventual third place finisher who (due to Frankel's early move) probably emptied out a bit earlier than he wanted to, and you can see just how empty he was late as he was weaving and switching leads back and forth desperately trying to hold together, easy for me to flip the 2nd and third finishers on trip because of these unique dynamics.

[classhandicapper]

Nice post. In the Zenyatta case, perfect ride IMO. The early move I suspect hurt her a couple of fifths on final time but I would argue that it hurt the horses she was blowing past even more so --


IMO, a premature move by closer into a hot pace can certainly hurt, but I agree with you. I don't think it's anywhere near as damaging as being part of a hot early pace itself. I lost quite a few bets years ago betting on closers that made premature moves into hot paces before I understood that. I kept over rating the impact.

That's why that one single Zenyatta race perlexed me for a couple of years.

Z was a horse that was ridden to position NOT to pace. By that I mean, no matter what the pace, she had the sheer brilliance to get into same position turning for home regardless of whether the pace was extremely slow and the front runners were picking it up in the middle or if the the pace was fast and leaders were tiring. That's why she overcame so many slow paces but some very good horses that were back there with her on occasion got outrun. She was brilliantly fast when she got rolling and they were more even paced. It's also why her speed figures fluctuated so much. Smith wasn't trying to earn the fastest speed figure he could. He simply moved her into position with a first move and then she outran the others horses to the wire with a second move. The pace dictated the final time.

But in that Vanity she did NOT finish very well. Yea, maybe the premature move hurt a bit (especially on synth), but IMO she did not run very well that day and I never understood why.

Then a couple of years later I read an article by Bruno De Julio. He was very familiar with her training at the time. I can't remember all the details, but the gist of it was that she was having some "issues" at the time and was a short horse going into the race. So she actually DID run a subpar race, but won it on "courage" as they say.

If I can find that article I'll post, but it was at Grade One Racing, that site is closed, and Bruno wasn't working there for awhile. So the article is gone. I trust his view on that though because he's good at what he does and saw her training regularly. I'll see if I can contact him via twitter.

[classhandicapper]

Knowing you're a keen observer of the trip I imagine we're going to agree an awful lot when it comes to pace stuff. Looking at the horse coming off a good trip it's easy to mark them down for it, but I agree that's dangerously simplistic thinking... value-wise it might be a knock on the horse, but a race can condition a horse i.e. the pacing depending upon how it shakes out can sometimes leave a whole lot left in the tank for next time. So I think we have to be very careful with effort as it relates to this. In the Ragozin world, a fast time for a horse relative to its other times is 'effort' and a slow time isn't, however there are plenty of slow final time races where the pacesetters post soft early fractions but some runners are coming home all-out, this can be taxing as well, not an area spotlighted in the article (good article BTW, I'm not knocking it just expanding) There are some horses too where a slow early pace just doesn't work, they can't finish quite fast enough against a certain bunch no matter how much they slow it down early. Backing it way down can be counter productive with certain horses.

Yes, I agree on both counts.

The article was excellent. Unfortunately for me, it looks a lot like the list of horses I am interested in betting on or against. :lol: In fact, I used Ride on Curlin in the Champagne because of his trip in that prior race.

I also agree about backing it down being counter productive sometimes. That's what makes this topic so much fun to discuss and potentially lucrative for finding value. It's hard to reduce it all to simplistic formulas that apply to all horses equally. Even among horses of similar ability, they have different degrees of natural speed, stamina, and other preferences. That makes it tough to interpret some trips and know how the horses are going to run back next time with a different pace setup.

[cj]

Can laying five or six lengths behind at the half mile of a suicidal pace still be considered being dangerously close...and should a race of this type provide a ready-made excuse for the stalkers of this scenario??

Where do we draw the line?

My opinion, can't speak for Doug...

It depends on what you are looking for an excuse for in my opinion. If it is for a slower than expected final time, then yes, horses five or six lengths off the lead have an excuse. If you are looking at finish position, it kind of depends on where the horse finished and which horses beat them. If they were beaten by deep closers, definitely the pace can be an excuse. If they were beaten by horses near them early or in front of them, certainly not.

For example, Palace Malice was on the lead early in the Derby, and those chasing him had an excuse. But several of those couldn't even beat him to the wire. I wanted no part of those horses going forward.

[horses4courses]

Thanks for article, cj :ThmbUp:
Several useful pointers there leading up to BC.
I've followed the author on twitter for some time, and he always talks sense.

[classhandicapper]

My opinion, can't speak for Doug...

It depends on what you are looking for an excuse for in my opinion. If it is for a slower than expected final time, then yes, horses five or six lengths off the lead have an excuse. If you are looking at finish position, it kind of depends on where the horse finished and which horses beat them. If they were beaten by deep closers, definitely the pace can be an excuse. If they were beaten by horses near them early or in front of them, certainly not.



I agree with this.

You have to make a distinction between "time" and "finish position" in evaluating impact.

[cj]

I agree with this.

You have to make a distinction between "time" and "finish position" in evaluating impact.

Palace Malice in the Derby was a good example. Despite his crazy fast pace, there were plenty of horses that finished behind him that were within striking distance. So while horses like Verrazzano and Goldencents have done ok going forward, it was pretty clear to me he was better.

[PhantomOnTour]

Sweet Cassiopeia seemed to move too soon into a fast pace today in the featured 9th race at Keeneland...she hit the lead and promptly "hung" for 3rd place.

[classhandicapper]

Palace Malice in the Derby was a good example. Despite his crazy fast pace, there were plenty of horses that finished behind him that were within striking distance. So while horses like Verrazzano and Goldencents have done ok going forward, it was pretty clear to me he was better.

Exactly.

Sometimes those extreme paces are so extreme you can get a better line on the horses by comparing the trips within the race and who did better.

I consider that a form of class handicapping. ;)

[Irish Boy]

The biggest mistake I made in handicapping this year was not paying attention to the differences in finish position for the various pace setters in the Derby. My attitude was that distanced was distanced, and that the difference between 20 lengths or 50 lengths didn't tell you much. Between Oxbow in the Preakness and Palace Malice in the Belmont and Jim Dandy, I was clearly wrong. Lesson learned.