PDA

View Full Version : Which line do you prefer


imofe
04-14-2014, 01:49 AM
You have two horses. Both raced at the same class and both wired the field.

Horse A 29 59 128 155
Horse B 27 57 126 155

Just curious how people would rate the two different efforts and which they would prefer.

Stillriledup
04-14-2014, 04:54 AM
I prefer the horse who came home slower.

People always give benefits to horses who come home fast, but all decent harness horse can come home flying with a big last quarter if the internal pace is slow enough...so, really, a fast last quarter is just a product of the internal pace, it doesn't necessarily indicate how good the horse is.

The slower finisher will have "done more" in the middle stages of the race, got more "tightened" and forced to "Race hard" and that horse will have more "bottom" the following week if he has to go to the well to win.

Not to mention that you'll get higher price on the "slow" last quarter.

Those quarters are just a product of internal pace, any decent horse can sit thru a slow 3/4s and then blow home fast....doesnt mean a heck of a lot, but handicappers fall in love with that fast LQ, so they usually take more money than the horse who got used in faster pace and had to work harder coming home.

Ray2000
04-14-2014, 05:37 AM
Horse A 29 59 128 155......29 30 29 27
Horse B 27 57 126 155......27 30 29 29

I'd go with B if the call at Q1 was 1°
I'm looking for the brush with a fight

JMO

Sea Biscuit
04-14-2014, 08:42 AM
You have two horses. Both raced at the same class and both wired the field.

Horse A 29 59 128 155
Horse B 27 57 126 155

Just curious how people would rate the two different efforts and which they would prefer.

If horse A had come from off the pace to win the race, I would definitely have picked horse A.

Since both wired the field, my pick would be horse B.

traynor
04-14-2014, 09:21 AM
It is an interesting question, but the answer (in the race analysis and race analysis applications I use) would be that it depends on what the other horses in the same races were doing--not just the two horses in question.

"Wiring the field" only considers leading--not how much pressure or contesting went on to get and maintain that lead, for how long, and how seriously, during how much of the race.

I think that one-dimensional race analysis is more often misleading than illuminating. Considering an entry's performance as if it were in isolation can create a distorted view that is less than useful when comparing that performance to the performance of other entries in subsequent races.

So my choice would be, "It depends."

Charlie
04-14-2014, 09:34 AM
Although Horse A did not display much pre- stretch energy, its 27.0 come home time should not be ignored. Horse B did display very good pre-stretch energy with the 27 opening quarter and its 29 come home time cannot be faulted for that reason. If competing in their next start and both had good post positions, I would have to choose Horse B. The reason being is that pre-stretch energy is so very important and that 27 opening 1/4 was very fast. An if that 27 was earned while dueling to the first turn, all the better. That's my take...

traynor
04-14-2014, 10:03 AM
This is an important issue. I think it is so important, in fact, that I coded the apps I use to evaluate each entry's performance in relation to the other entries in the same race, rather than in isolation. One of the first issues I dealt with was setting a minimal set of criteria to qualify "contenders," and then ignoring (for comparative purposes) pace and speed ratings earned in races with less than four "contenders."

I ran a dual analysis of races for close to a year--with the multi-entry analysis clearly superior for predictive purposes--before abandoning the isolated analysis perspective completely. I think comparisons of pace and speed based on single "pace lines" extracted from the contexts of the races from which they are derived is a major reason for the (apparent) failure of much pace analysis to accurately predict the outcome of future race scenarios.

imofe
04-14-2014, 12:40 PM
I will give some more info for those that would like it. Both races were on big tracks.

Horse A gets the lead easily in his own fractions. The half is still single file. In Q3 the horse 4th on the rail takes a shot first over and pulls even with the lead horse at the 3Q call. Second over is gapped cover and not a threat. About half way down the lane Horse A puts away the first over horse and wins by a length with the horses second and third on the rail finishing behind him. These horses behind Horse A on the rail have plenty of room but are out closed.

Horse B is a fast horse from the gate. He gets the lead without being parked but has to speed up the quarter a bit to allow an outside leaver room to drop in the hole behind him. In the second quarter the cover flow begins from way back. The 1st 5 sit rail. The 1st over horse gets to within a half length a the 3Q call and the second and third over horses begin to go three wide. The 2hole horse that left initially is starting to gap and destroy the rail horses. The horse second over runs up to lose by a length with the horse third over running third.

thaskalos
04-14-2014, 12:52 PM
Standardbreds are much more flexible in running style than their thoroughbred counterparts...so these two horses could very easily switch fractions the next time out. I would be unable to spot a difference between these two horses from these two races alone...and would need to see the rest of their past performances in order to render a handicapping opinion.

senortout
04-14-2014, 02:00 PM
Re: standardbred racing. Can someone tell me why the splits are posted so the drivers can see them? Also, is there a rule stating you can't create a false pace in an attempt to back up a field behind? In thoroughbred racing, as often stated, the better jocks have a 'clock in their head'.

imofe
04-14-2014, 02:43 PM
The good drivers have a very good idea as to how fast they are going.

As far as your second question, horses have been taken down for not going at a reasonable pace. But this does not happen often, and is very subjective.

Ray2000
04-14-2014, 02:55 PM
When I was a regular track goer back in the 70-80-90s, the "33" second rule was used for fining a driver who slowed the pace down excessively. I think most tracks used it.

It doesn't appear in the USTA rule book now (at least I can't find it),

http://www.ustrotting.com/pdf/USTARuleBook.pdf

But
Driving a Horse in an Unsatisfactory Manner.—...18.05 section (b)
could apply.

harness2008
04-14-2014, 05:23 PM
For me it would also depend on the typical pace percentages that a track generally throws off. Its only after knowing what these figures are that I can determine whether a pace was fast, normal or slow. Ray was so kind enough to post a list of tracks and their corresponding pace percentages at each 1/4 mile interval a while back.

Scenario 1 - If these 2 horses ran on a racetrack with pace %s of 25%, 25%, 25% and 25%, then they would have to be considered equal since each deviated from par the same amount within the individual fractions while recording the same final time.

Scenario 2 - If these 2 horses ran on a racetrack that has pace percentages of 24%, 24%, 26%, 26%, I would favor Horse A

Scenario 3 - If these 2 horses ran on a racetrack that has pace percentages of 26%,26% 24%, 24%, I would favor Horse B

Both horses recorded the same final time but each horse chosen in scenario 2 and scenario 3, ran against the grain so to speak and in my opinion performed better.

I reccommend even taking this further by recording what the 1/4 mile pace percentages on a given night are since these figures can deviate from the typical track pace percentage norm due to factors such as track maintanance, wind etc.

Just a Fan
04-14-2014, 06:07 PM
Drivers can get DQ'ed if the judges feel that the driver "took up abruptly" in front of a field, causing a dangerous accordion-like affect. John Campbell was somewhat famously DQ'ed for this at the Red Mile a couple of years ago, and I have seen Jim Marohn Jr get DQ'ed twice for this (I think both were at Tioga).

The less severe infraction is for a more gradual slowing of the pace to an unreasonable level for the class, and the driver can get fined for that. I would like to think that the owner would be willing to pick up the fine when that happens.

I could argue either way on horse A vs horse B. Horse B's fractions are obviously more in line with a typical race, and that 1:55 mile might be just about as fast as he can go. Horse A very well might be able to go faster than 1:55 with more reasonable fractions, but when you set such slow fractions, your class doesn't really get tested. Horse B's display of tactical early speed, and the fact that he showed some gameness (to win) after being tested/pushed during the mile, has value.

LottaKash
04-15-2014, 12:26 PM
Horse A 29 59 128 155......29 30 29 27
Horse B 27 57 126 155......27 30 29 29

I'd go with B if the call at Q1 was 1°
I'm looking for the brush with a fight

JMO

The OP asks how one would rate each of these two races....That is a tough one, because, as Traynor stated it really depends on the "class" of the race and how well qualified the "contenders" may have been in each of those two-scenarios....

This is really insignificant to this thread, but saying just for fun, I find it odd or at a minimum very co-incidental that, both of these races aren't sporting any additional "5ths of a second" in any of the the 8-quarter mile splits that are shown....(not important I know, but odds are very against it, imo, heehee)

On the surface, for a 1-mile track, I would, just off the top of my head, say that these two races are either cheap stock races or mid-level Trotting races...Because neither one of them is very impressive for a 1-mile track (split wise at least) imo...

The half mile pace-patterns are A: 59.0 59.0 56.0... B: 57.0 59.0 58.0 ...

If both of these races were of the same class, generally I would give the B: horse the nod if they were to team up in the next race....Still, so much depends on the quality of the race, and the condition of the horses, so I would definitely demand and need to know more....Conversely, If horse A: were to invert his 56-second last half and use it early (alluding to a Harness-Truth that Thaskalos stated), then it could be cakewalk for A: over B:..(again, depends on the profiles of each horse)

In the A: race, it may have been won by a Classy horse making his debut in a cheap event, and the field is well aware that this guy probably cannot be beaten, and then just follow around, and sprint on home just trying to get a good kash...And, in this case it would be a very good tune up for the classy debuter (the last halves count for a lot in these situations for debuters)....Or perhaps this race was one that was loaded with a bunch of out of shapers, with the leader being one of the same, so while the rest of the field figured that they could catch him anytime they wanted to in the last part of the race, and they being out of shape, just followed along, without any serious challenges or contention, when only to find out that they were outfoxed...(Ron Pierce & John Campbell are expert at this, imo)..

In the case of Race B: Probably won by the only horse in shape enough to win a race, and maybe on a biased wire night at that...He got away cheap through the middle, and that may have been all she wrote from thereon...This is how it is in many races full of cheap out of shape stock....

Or, these races may have occurred on an off track or an Off Fast Track...

Further info is sorely needed in any case...Handicapping just ain't comparing two sets of numbers, is all, imo...

It is still "Fun" to guess tho...:jump:

imofe
04-15-2014, 02:20 PM
Just want to let it be known that this is not a right /wrong discussion. These horses raced at the same class that night but did not meet each other later.

I was very curious how others would rate these lines. The first thing I do is rate the last race and then adjust for class or post changes. When I rated these horses I had them dead even. This was a while back but recently a similar situation came up and many different cappers who I respect had different opinions concerning these two lines. The lines were not exactly the same , but similar.

Many of you brought up the point that more info was needed, and of course we can not look at these horses just based on their last running line.

So fire away if you have any thoughts. Just opinions, no right or wrong answers.

imofe
04-15-2014, 03:18 PM
Here is the one I mentioned people had different opinions about.

Horse A 8 - 3(2)- 1* (1) - 1 (1) - 2 (1) - 4 (H)

28.3 56.2 126 155.2 29.2 last Q



Horse B 4 - 1(1) 2(1) 4(4) 3(3) 1 (1)

29.1 58.2 125.4 155.2 28.3 last Q


So Horse A started from post 8 and was 3rd by 2 lengths at the 1st Q . Fractions are beneath ( 28.3 1st Q). * means parked


Also, Horse A raced in a straight 4K claimer while Horse B raced in NW 6 to be claimed for 8K.

Stick
04-15-2014, 10:02 PM
Here is the one I mentioned people had different opinions about.

Horse A 8 - 3(2)- 1* (1) - 1 (1) - 2 (1) - 4 (H)

28.3 56.2 126 155.2 29.2 last Q



Horse B 4 - 1(1) 2(1) 4(4) 3(3) 1 (1)

29.1 58.2 125.4 155.2 28.3 last Q


So Horse A started from post 8 and was 3rd by 2 lengths at the 1st Q . Fractions are beneath ( 28.3 1st Q). * means parked


Also, Horse A raced in a straight 4K claimer while Horse B raced in NW 6 to be claimed for 8K.


I really like Horse B in the example. I am a big fan of horses that make two moves in cheap races. I know the first half is slow, but once the horse is covered up I would not count that against it.

Sinner369
04-15-2014, 10:35 PM
Horse A last half was..................56 seconds.........!!!

Horse B last half was...................58 seconds........!!!

I realize the B's fractions were much faster for the first half so he should be tired for the last half.

But there are other racing factors to consider before you can render a decision who is better. If those factors are the same than I would take the horse with the faster last half......which is "A''.

Stick
04-15-2014, 10:55 PM
Maybe I am reading it wrong but I calculate Horse A with a 59 back half and Horse B with a 56.4 back half.

Sinner369
04-15-2014, 11:08 PM
Maybe I am reading it wrong but I calculate Horse A with a 59 back half and Horse B with a 56.4 back half.


It depends on which post you are reading..........I took the example from the first post...........!!!

Stick
04-15-2014, 11:17 PM
Yes. I thought you were on the second example. I see your reasoning now.

Sinner369
04-16-2014, 01:52 AM
Yes. I thought you were on the second example. I see your reasoning now.

One other consideration.........even though "A' had slower fractions, the horse still ran a half mile first and still finished with a faster last half.

This speaks well for the overall 'shape' of the horse. But one must caution, this is only one factor and as you all know..........in horse racing there are many other factors and they are never the same for all horses.

traynor
04-16-2014, 11:04 AM
One of the things that skews a lot (most?) "pace analysis" is the simile of a horse's energy as equivalent to fuel in the tank of a car--every action requires the use of fuel, and fuel used at one point is "gone" and therefore unavailable at other points. The simile is spurious.

Horse races do not take place from a state of complete rest, to a race, to a state of complete exhaustion one stride past the finish line. If the "finite amount of energy available" scenario were true (and with all due respect to the many self-proclaimed "pace experts") any horse "warmed up vigorously" prior to the race would use up so much of that "available energy" that it could be expected to perform poorly in the race. "Picking winners" would be no more difficult than watching the warmups to see which entries were "depleting their available energy" before the race starts.

The automatic (and generally unwarranted) assumption is that a (relatively) fast early fraction invariably is coupled with a (relatively) slow later fraction or finish. To use one of Katherine Jung's favorite comments, "That belief is based on a conceptually impoverished knowledge base."

Pace analysis is a primary component of a number of very sophisticated, professional race analysis applications. Not, however, in the same simplistic, one-dimensional perspectives on "pace analysis" that seem so readily accepted outside those applications.

LottaKash
04-16-2014, 11:20 AM
Pace analysis is a primary component of a number of very sophisticated, professional race analysis applications. Not, however, in the same simplistic, one-dimensional perspectives on "pace analysis" that seem so readily accepted outside those applications.

And, ???

Ray2000
04-16-2014, 11:39 AM
It's not the fuel, it's the depletion of oxygen level in the arteries and lactic acid build up..

now if they could only find a way to use a supercharger. :D

Sea Biscuit
04-16-2014, 12:27 PM
One of the things that skews a lot (most?) "pace analysis" is the simile of a horse's energy as equivalent to fuel in the tank of a car--every action requires the use of fuel, and fuel used at one point is "gone" and therefore unavailable at other points. The simile is spurious.

Horse races do not take place from a state of complete rest, to a race, to a state of complete exhaustion one stride past the finish line. If the "finite amount of energy available" scenario were true (and with all due respect to the many self-proclaimed "pace experts") any horse "warmed up vigorously" prior to the race would use up so much of that "available energy" that it could be expected to perform poorly in the race. "Picking winners" would be no more difficult than watching the warmups to see which entries were "depleting their available energy" before the race starts.

The automatic (and generally unwarranted) assumption is that a (relatively) fast early fraction invariably is coupled with a (relatively) slow later fraction or finish. To use one of Katherine Jung's favorite comments, "That belief is based on a conceptually impoverished knowledge base."

Pace analysis is a primary component of a number of very sophisticated, professional race analysis applications. Not, however, in the same simplistic, one-dimensional perspectives on "pace analysis" that seem so readily accepted outside those applications.

If the "finite amount of energy available" scenario were true (and with all due respect to the many self-proclaimed "pace experts") any horse "warmed up vigorously" prior to the race would use up so much of that "available energy" that it could be expected to perform poorly in the race. "Picking winners" would be no more difficult than watching the warmups to see which entries were "depleting their available energy" before the race starts.

Al Stanley would disagree with your assessment and so do I.

If faster warmups would be 'depleting the energies of a horse' why would many trainers practice this?

Traynor did you ever clock harness horse warmups?

thespaah
04-17-2014, 12:55 AM
You have two horses. Both raced at the same class and both wired the field.

Horse A 29 59 128 155
Horse B 27 57 126 155

Just curious how people would rate the two different efforts and which they would prefer.
Horse B was not used at all. Home in :58. I picture that as a hand drive. No urging.
Horse B will have more in the tank for his next effort.

imofe
04-17-2014, 01:55 AM
This is very interesting. The replies on the forum are almost the same as the ones at the track that got me thinking I should post this in the first place. Some people liked the back half advantage of Horse A while others liked the early pace and ability to hold on after that by Horse B. The way these things can be seen differently ( with both being valid ) is one of the things I love about this game.

thespaah
04-17-2014, 09:15 AM
Al Stanley would disagree with your assessment and so do I.

If faster warmups would be 'depleting the energies of a horse' why would many trainers practice this?

Traynor did you ever clock harness horse warmups?
When I was in the business for that short period of time, my boss would warm up early with a nice even 'score'. Something in the area of a 2:15-2:20 mile. This was 1979. The mile score was tuned to the type of style the horse went. Either speed horse, quick first quarter or closer, fast last quarter.
Then after the post parade a nice easy jog.
Funny but almost disastrous story.
We had one at Meadowlands. He had turned the horse to go his warm up mile and when the horse got by the paddock gate he hit the brakes all by himself and tried to make a right hand turn into the paddock. He almost flipped the bike onto the track and my boss into the Trackside Park.
We did not win that night.

traynor
04-17-2014, 03:25 PM
Al Stanley would disagree with your assessment and so do I.

If faster warmups would be 'depleting the energies of a horse' why would many trainers practice this?

Traynor did you ever clock harness horse warmups?

Good question. Why would they?

I spent a lot of time clocking warmups way back. Long enough to understand clearly that the times in isolation were almost irrelevant, and the only useful information gained was a change in the warmup patterns--not the actual times. Great for someone focusing on a specific track long-term, because it involves as much recognition of trainer habits as timing. I gave it up as "interesting, but not especially useful" when I started changing circuits.

I think I would pay much more attention to it if I stayed in one place all year, and that place had year-round racing.

Sinner369
04-18-2014, 11:10 AM
Horse B was not used at all. Home in :58. I picture that as a hand drive. No urging.
Horse B will have more in the tank for his next effort.

That's why handicapping race horses is a "ART" and not a "Science".
Their is no concrete evidence either way..........I've seen horses win their next start off a fast first half qualifier and a slower second half and vice versa.

mrroyboy
04-18-2014, 01:31 PM
Very well said.

RaceTrackDaddy
04-20-2014, 11:04 PM
Don't know where exactly to begin but let us say it was a match race between these two front runners. I would have to add into this discussion post position. Apparently they both can race in 1:55 and I am a believer in that any horse can leave. It just might be dependent upon the horse. Which one of these is able to rate in the hole without expending energy fighting the driver to sit in the hole.

I would probably take the one that has shown the ability to rate and explode in the lane. If they both are the same in that manner, I would probably take the one with the inside post position of the other. Unless it is the Meadows and one is at the (# 1) and the other is at (# 5). I am a man that loves stats and the middle post has been the best spot for the Meadows statistically since they went to the staggered starting gate. It is true for pacers and trotters alike. Seems the horse in the middle of the track has the most speed entering the backside while the horse on the inside is going slower, yes slower.

We can add the staggered starting gate to this problem. Size of the track has a bearing too. Male versus female might enter to this discussion too.

How about adding the different gaits to this problem. What if the race was for both gaits (T & P) who would you take? I would then look to the track's condition and amount of cushion and whether it is wet or not...

That is what makes this game so much fun (and at times a headache) there are so many variables to it.

When it is all said and done, it is the first time attendee to the track that plays two bucks on the pretty horse that has their favorite colors that win or play their house number and cash the trifecta.

You gotta love this game!

Poindexter
04-21-2014, 01:43 PM
I actually rate the efforts identical. Both horses did identical work in 1 quarter. One horse did it in the first quarter(horse B) the other horse(horse A) in the last 1/4. I would also estimate that these horses both could go about 1:54.1 if evenly paced with 28.2 and 28.3 1/4s. That being said the horse who went the .27 first quarter(horse A) was likely all out(otherwise he would have came a faster last 1/4 assuming he wasn't completely under wraps). The other horse was basically cruising the first 3/4's and his final time was limited by that fact. He may actually be capable of going even faster than 1:54 when going faster earlier. So conclusion, I rate the races equal, but I think there is a chance that horse A could be a faster horse overall.

Been many years since I played the harness races, but that is the way I looked at it 25 years ago when I did.

RaceTrackDaddy
04-21-2014, 02:27 PM
Good question. Why would they?

I spent a lot of time clocking warmups way back. Long enough to understand clearly that the times in isolation were almost irrelevant, and the only useful information gained was a change in the warmup patterns--not the actual times. Great for someone focusing on a specific track long-term, because it involves as much recognition of trainer habits as timing. I gave it up as "interesting, but not especially useful" when I started changing circuits.

I think I would pay much more attention to it if I stayed in one place all year, and that place had year-round racing.
I have been known to clock a horse or two in my day. Yes, it does make more sense to be at a track that races year round but even when I went on the road to places like Northfield, Scioto Downs, Big M or Delaware Co fair I took my stop watch with me.

At my home track, Meadows, I had a feel on all the trends on the local trainers and horses. I found out that when stake season rolled around, it too was very lucrative to watch the warmups if not clocking them. At the Meadows the turns are a little tight for any horse that has never raced on any track other than large ovals.

More times or not, a huge favorite that shipped in from the Big M for stake action could not grab the track or handle the turns. We found many favorites that could not even remain on gait.

The best thing I can advise people is to get to the track early on stake days, watch the warmups. You can see which horses will be having trouble in the turns. After a while, you won't even need a stopwatch, you might still have a problem in selecting a winner but your chances are enhanced as you will not be on a favorite that will be off stride.