PDA

View Full Version : Is it Possible SIMMSTOWN turned a .23 final quarter


NorCalGreg
02-09-2016, 07:33 AM
I'm just casually looking at charts this morning..and SIMMSTOWN leapt off the page. I'm not a student of internal fractions, but I'm thinking, even though the actual pace was near par...this final quarter-mile seems outstanding. The early pace was hot--this one maintained his running postion--then seemed to explode in the final qtr.

To those who DO STUDY fractional times--do you find this often with low level claimers?? --the rest of the field seems rather ho-hum...

6th race penn national Thursday 2/11
6 Furlongs. Clm 15000n1y Purse $19,000 (PLUS UP TO 40% PABF) FOR FOUR YEAR OLDS AND UPWARD WHICH HAVE NOT WON A RACE SINCE AUGUST 11.

EMD4ME
02-09-2016, 08:27 AM
Hand timed it myself once informally. All Q's seem right.

Was about 7 1/2 back after 1/2, made up 6 in last Q. Was the only mover in the last 1/4 & was finishing well.


DRF has the final Q in 23.81 which makes sense as the winner came home (1st over, 1 back trip) in 24.65.

After checking the charts, it was the fastest come home (individual horse) of the night and visually it supports it.

To answer your question, I believe he came home in 23.81

hopbet
02-09-2016, 09:07 AM
NCG,
I just watched the REPLAY. To combine this , with your LAST post "horses to watch". The BOTTOM LINE, you are putting in the time(work). I read your post (mostly all of them ) and form my opinion prior to wagering.

HOPBET " STILL CHASING MY LOSSES"

cj
02-09-2016, 09:36 AM
We have the last 1/4 at 24.04

NorCalGreg
02-09-2016, 11:06 AM
We have the last 1/4 at 24.04


pfffft....lawdy-da.....We have the last 1/4 at 24.04

If people nowadays still did things the old-fashioned way--the same way my pappy taught me how to handicap--based on sound mathematical principles--you would calculate it thusly:

The final qtr--for the race--was run in 25 seconds--my horse gained 6.5 lengths during that 25 seconds. There are, and always has been--5 fiths in a second's elapsed time--always been that way.
Deduct 6.5 fiths from 25 seconds, and you will see it comes to comes to 23 & 4/5ths----or, a final qtr-mile in exactly 23.8 seconds.

So my initial calculation was faulty, I was too low-- but I see EMD and his tried and true methods came up with EXACTLY the same time.

Seriously (yes, that old-timey calculation thing was tongue-in-cheek) had hoped to get a conversation going about fractional times, final quarters under 24 seconds, and the grandaddy of them all...ROUTES with a final 8th under .12...and final 1/16th under 6 seconds.

Seems technology has rendered alot of the thinking-for-yourself---obsolete.

ultracapper
02-09-2016, 12:58 PM
Seriously (yes, that old-timey calculation thing was tongue-in-cheek) had hoped to get a conversation going about fractional times, final quarters under 24 seconds, and the grandaddy of them all...ROUTES with a final 8th under .12...and final 1/16th under 6 seconds.

Seems technology has rendered alot of the thinking-for-yourself---obsolete.[/QUOTE]

Even though, with technology today proving it's irrefutable that a thoroughbred runs closer to 6 lengths per second than 5, the old standards that your grandaddy followed still can carry the water. If you use the old 5 lengths per second and a horse breaks those benchmarks that I extracted from your post, you have a runner to be taken very seriously.

The ability of the number makers to be as concise as they are today just makes it possible to split hairs in relation to timing races and individual trips. However, a 10th of a second here or there rarely gives a horseplayer an advantage. You see a horse like your subject horse here blowing up down the stretch, and calculating it using G-Pa's method, it tells you enough to know he made a real impact in that race, and it makes him real dangerous in his next race. The real key is the fact the subject horse was the only horse in that field making that move. He did something unique to the field, and that's what's really important. It gives you a great idea that it wasn't a product of a very fast stretch or a wind aided charge. If it would have been something of that nature, one or more of the other horses in the race would have made some kind of move in the stretch that would have made the subject horse's move not look as visually impressive as it did.

In this case, 23.82, 24.04, is academic, and frankly, I find it to be academic in most cases. Anyhow, I wouldn't disregard the significance of that move just because he may have, in reality, stopped the clock a smidge over 24, therefore not conforming to the benchmark. It's obvious he put in an exceptional stretch run.

I play the maidens and N2Ls in Socal, and the granddaddy of all internal fractions in those sprint races is the 1/4 pole to the 1/8 pole in sub 12 for the race, and any horse making up ground into that is a potential rent payer next out. If that horse is brought back in a timely manner at the same trip, LOOK OUT. One caveat, because the LosAl 1/4 pole is in the home stretch, I look for sub 11.4 for the 1/4 pole to 1/8 pole. They are running that entire furlong straight, and if the horse changes leads properly, is entering that furlong at a full run. You always have to be a bit tougher on the stretch run times at LosAl because of that long straight away.

Cratos
02-10-2016, 12:22 AM
Seriously (yes, that old-timey calculation thing was tongue-in-cheek) had hoped to get a conversation going about fractional times, final quarters under 24 seconds, and the grandaddy of them all...ROUTES with a final 8th under .12...and final 1/16th under 6 seconds.

Seems technology has rendered alot of the thinking-for-yourself---obsolete.

Even though, with technology today proving it's irrefutable that a thoroughbred runs closer to 6 lengths per second than 5, the old standards that your grandaddy followed still can carry the water. If you use the old 5 lengths per second and a horse breaks those benchmarks that I extracted from your post, you have a runner to be taken very seriously.

The ability of the number makers to be as concise as they are today just makes it possible to split hairs in relation to timing races and individual trips. However, a 10th of a second here or there rarely gives a horseplayer an advantage. You see a horse like your subject horse here blowing up down the stretch, and calculating it using G-Pa's method, it tells you enough to know he made a real impact in that race, and it makes him real dangerous in his next race. The real key is the fact the subject horse was the only horse in that field making that move. He did something unique to the field, and that's what's really important. It gives you a great idea that it wasn't a product of a very fast stretch or a wind aided charge. If it would have been something of that nature, one or more of the other horses in the race would have made some kind of move in the stretch that would have made the subject horse's move not look as visually impressive as it did.

In this case, 23.82, 24.04, is academic, and frankly, I find it to be academic in most cases. Anyhow, I wouldn't disregard the significance of that move just because he may have, in reality, stopped the clock a smidge over 24, therefore not conforming to the benchmark. It's obvious he put in an exceptional stretch run.

I play the maidens and N2Ls in Socal, and the granddaddy of all internal fractions in those sprint races is the 1/4 pole to the 1/8 pole in sub 12 for the race, and any horse making up ground into that is a potential rent payer next out. If that horse is brought back in a timely manner at the same trip, LOOK OUT. One caveat, because the LosAl 1/4 pole is in the home stretch, I look for sub 11.4 for the 1/4 pole to 1/8 pole. They are running that entire furlong straight, and if the horse changes leads properly, is entering that furlong at a full run. You always have to be a bit tougher on the stretch run times at LosAl because of that long straight away.[/QUOTE]

You are correct technology have moved the needle forward in measuring the distance of
the lengths between racehorses during a race.

However the real movement is understanding that in a horserace time is constant and distance is variable.

Therefore the time value of a length becomes 1/6 seconds or ,17 decimal seconds.

What this does is get away from a fixed distance value for a length (which I formerly used) to a variable distance for a length.

NorCalGreg
02-10-2016, 12:45 AM
Now Cratos, even you, yourself can see that--figuring pace fractions using old-style "1length = 1/5th"...my figure of 23.8 final qtr-- was remarkably similar to EMD's figure, (23.81) which he arrived @ with DRF info, and his own hand-timing of the race.

I'm almost positive CJ will come back, and explain how his Timeform figs are indusputable---that's fine. But obviously someone is wrong--why is it necessarily "human error" DRF makes use of electronic readings of running positions, and lengths behind/ahead.

The question of whether a length =1/5th seconds or 1/6th, wouldn't accout for the discrepancy between 23.8-- & the 24.04 reading Timeform came up with.

cj
02-10-2016, 10:01 AM
Now Cratos, even you, yourself can see that--figuring pace fractions using old-style "1length = 1/5th"...my figure of 23.8 final qtr-- was remarkably similar to EMD's figure, (23.81) which he arrived @ with DRF info, and his own hand-timing of the race.

I'm almost positive CJ will come back, and explain how his Timeform figs are indusputable---that's fine. But obviously someone is wrong--why is it necessarily "human error" DRF makes use of electronic readings of running positions, and lengths behind/ahead.

The question of whether a length =1/5th seconds or 1/6th, wouldn't accout for the discrepancy between 23.8-- & the 24.04 reading Timeform came up with.

I don't think it makes much difference, was never trying to imply that. I would never rely on last 1/4 mile times alone anyway. That measure doesn't have much value by itself, particularly in dirt sprints. But sometimes it does---such is horse racing

thaskalos
02-10-2016, 11:12 AM
If you base your sprint wagers on the last fractions of the horse's...not only won't you be able to "pay the rent"...but you stand a great chance of getting EVICTED.

Speed Figure
02-10-2016, 11:18 AM
I have it as 23.6

ultracapper
02-10-2016, 11:24 AM
If you base your sprint wagers on the last fractions of the horse's...not only won't you be able to "pay the rent"...but you stand a great chance of getting EVICTED.

And therefore "potential" rent payer, is the proper viewpoint.

NorCalGreg
02-10-2016, 11:37 AM
If you base your sprint wagers on the last fractions of the horse's...not only won't you be able to "pay the rent"...but you stand a great chance of getting EVICTED.

Well thask...this is like the umpteenth time you've found a post/statement etc of mine--sifted through it...and apparently concluded that I really don't have a clue. I really just started this thread to get a discussion going on internal fractions....this horse happened to stand out.

Thanks for your feedback, either way.

NorCalGreg
02-10-2016, 11:41 AM
I have it as 23.6

That middle 1/8th---11.5, is pretty impressive SF. Ultracapper, as he mentioned maiden 'capping.. would probably run to the windows if he caught that split in a SOCAL MD...and we're talking 12.5K claimers in this race.

NorCalGreg
02-10-2016, 11:45 AM
And therefore "potential" rent payer, is the proper viewpoint.

Potential living in a big cardboard box down by the library is more like it :D

thaskalos
02-10-2016, 11:47 AM
Well thask...this is like the umpteenth time you've found a post/statement etc of mine--sifted through it...and apparently conclusion that I really don't have a clue. I really just started this thread to get a discussion going on internal fractions....this horse happened to stand out.

Thanks for your feedback, either way.
For the umpteenth time, you are wrong, friend. I wasn't responding to you particularly. I was just making a general comment.

Whether you "have a clue", or not, is YOUR business...not mine. For what it's worth, I analyze internal fractions too. And I find that the last fraction is the most unreliable of them all.

NorCalGreg
02-10-2016, 12:00 PM
For the umpteenth time, you are wrong, friend. I wasn't responding to you particularly. I was just making a general comment.

Whether you "have a clue", or not, is YOUR business...not mine. For what it's worth, I analyze internal fractions too. And I find that the last fraction is the most unreliable of them all.

This is the way I look at it---in a sprint such as this one @ Penn--the FIRST quarter is one horse's fraction--the rest of the field has to adjust to that. Obviously the reason early speed is so vital--after that--especially the FINAL QUARTER--is all on each individual horse. He's already run 1/2 mile--to me, what he can do in that last quarter can be very telling.
I look for longshots with this method, mainly because the avg horse bettor either doesn't know--or cares little about fractions.

We all have developed our own methods--this happens to be one of mine.

ultracapper
02-10-2016, 12:05 PM
That middle 1/8th---11.5, is pretty impressive SF. Ultracapper, as he mentioned maiden 'capping.. would probably run to the windows if he caught that split in a SOCAL MD...and we're talking 12.5K claimers in this race.

It would definitely catch my attention, and would probably be the starting point of my post replay viewing handicapping. It would be very important to know where the key horses in the upcoming race are going to be positioned entering the stretch. If this horse is 18 lengths back at the 1/4 pole, repeating this fraction isn't going to help him much.

thaskalos
02-10-2016, 12:17 PM
This is the way I look at it---in a sprint such as this one @ Penn--the FIRST quarter is one horse's fraction--the rest of the field has to adjust to that. Obviously the reason early speed is so vital--after that--especially the FINAL QUARTER--is all on each individual horse. He's already run 1/2 mile--to me, what he can do in that last quarter can be very telling.
I look for longshots with this method, mainly because the avg horse bettor either doesn't know--or cares little about fractions.

We all have developed our own methods--this happens to be one of mine.
I agree...what the horse does in that last quarter can be very telling. But it can also be very unreliable...because late speed isn't NEARLY as consistent as early speed is. The front runner can run approximately the same half-mile time after time...while the closer's final fractions fluctuate wildly. A fast last fraction may indeed be impressive...but it is seldom REPEATABLE. In MY opinion, at least.

ultracapper
02-10-2016, 12:30 PM
I agree...what the horse does in that last quarter can be very telling. But it can also be very unreliable...because late speed isn't NEARLY as consistent as early speed is. The front runner can run approximately the same half-mile time after time...while the closer's final fractions fluctuate wildly. A fast last fraction may indeed be impressive...but it is seldom REPEATABLE. In MY opinion, at least.

Quite often the closer's come home time is affected by the momentum built up in the far turn and entering the stretch. If the front runner fires into that 1/4 to 1/8 furlong, delaying as long as possible the closer's ground gain, the leader very well, by his actions, may take the starch out of the closer's finish. Now our subject horse has gone from 23 and 4 to 25 flat.

The forward speed controls the race, ALWAYS.

thaskalos
02-10-2016, 12:40 PM
Quite often the closer's come home time is affected by the momentum built up in the far turn and entering the stretch. If the front runner fires into that 1/4 to 1/8 furlong, delaying as long as possible the closer's ground gain, the leader very well, by his actions, may take the starch out of the closer's finish. Now our subject horse has gone from 23 and 4 to 25 flat.

The forward speed controls the race, ALWAYS.
I, personally, don't like using the word "ALWAYS" when talking about this game. I find that there are several exceptions to every rule. That's why I emphasize "experience" as often as I do...even though some posters here criticize me when I do that.

IMO...most of the handicappers out there already KNOW the "rules" which most often govern this game. But the profits most often come when these rules need to be BROKEN. And I think only diligent EXPERIENCE equips us to be able to do that.

ultracapper
02-10-2016, 02:30 PM
I, personally, don't like using the word "ALWAYS" when talking about this game. I find that there are several exceptions to every rule. That's why I emphasize "experience" as often as I do...even though some posters here criticize me when I do that.

IMO...most of the handicappers out there already KNOW the "rules" which most often govern this game. But the profits most often come when these rules need to be BROKEN. And I think only diligent EXPERIENCE equips us to be able to do that.

I think that's wise advise.

classhandicapper
02-10-2016, 02:34 PM
I just created some new "late" ratings for turf racing that I expected would outperform either fractional closing times or comparative late performance (race flow), but so far all I'm finding is that late speed is wildly overrated on turf too. I tested my ratings as a stand alone factor and in combination with class ratings that perform very well on turf. They pick some winners at nice prices, but overall I'd be better off just ignoring them.

Granted, my ratings may need some tweaking because I just developed them. I'll keep trying to improve them. But I'm starting to think that this may be another one of those handicapping factors where it makes intuitive sense, some guy wrote about it in a book, everyone believed him and repeated it, and then it became common misinformation that gets confirmed by occasional winners, without due long term study.

A this point my feeling is that in extreme circumstances, the late fractions will signal a race was run in a way that impacted the final time, but most figure makers adjust those figures anyway. You can also look at the race flow to see if one style or another was advantaged by that course or pace, but I am beginning to question the late speed paradigm for turf racing.

whodoyoulike
02-10-2016, 04:47 PM
NorCalGreg,

My fractional times differs from everyone which is as expected.

Since these are low level claimers at Penn, how consistent do they perform in general?

Did you note the improvement from 12/5/15 and the 1/6/16 races which were both at 6f but the 12/5 race was cl8 vs cl12.5 with the field sizes pretty similar?

I think that was a big improvement for every fractional call. The next race is a cl15.

Do you think he will repeat, improve or regress next out?

Watch the paddock and post parade. I'm curious what you think. I'll probably forget to watch.

How come your pp's only show the past 3 races instead of the usual 10?

Hard2Like
02-10-2016, 05:19 PM
A fast last fraction may indeed be impressive...but it is seldom REPEATABLE. In MY opinion, at least.[/QUOTE]

Pattern recognition of LP bouncers leads me to play against many low priced favorites with confidence. It also points out other horses to consider whose last race was adversely affected by its previous big late effort.

NorCalGreg
02-10-2016, 06:10 PM
NorCalGreg,

My fractional times differs from everyone which is as expected.

Since these are low level claimers at Penn, how consistent do they perform in general?

Did you note the improvement from 12/5/15 and the 1/6/16 races which were both at 6f but the 12/5 race was cl8 vs cl12.5 with the field sizes pretty similar?

I think that was a big improvement for every fractional call. The next race is a cl15.

Do you think he will repeat, improve or regress next out?

Watch the paddock and post parade. I'm curious what you think. I'll probably forget to watch.

How come your pp's only show the past 3 races instead of the usual 10?


I actually posted this yesterday, whodo---the race isn't until tomorrow, so all I had was a Bris Quickplay pp's--that's why there's so little info. When it comes to low-level claimers--how much more info does one need?
As far as Simmstown goes--he sure looks to be improving--he's 6-1 ML, but all the notoriety he's getting here--he may get bet down LOL.

I really posted this to stimulate discussion on internal fractions,
but yeah, I'll put a couple dollars down on him, if he's anywhere near the ML.
Seems the consensus is--big late pace figs can be unreliable as a stand-alone method, especially in sprints--but I've found huge longshots that have a similar last running line--not many bettors really want to put forth the effort to find these.

Speed Figure
02-10-2016, 09:10 PM
This horse doesn't look to bad. Looks like he needs a good pace up front. Ran his best number on my figs in his last race and has the best last out figure. If his odds are at 5/1 or higher he wouldn't be a bad bet, but seeing that he got a 44.5 half and still couldn't get up is a bit concerning.

whodoyoulike
02-10-2016, 09:51 PM
That's kind of what I was getting at, he improved quite a bit the last race.

He may be on the improve (or maybe not). Btw, I don't recall betting Penn so I don't have an opinion on their racing consistency. His 10/7 race @ 6f looks okay based on the pp's. Again, without comparing the competition other than the OP's opinion that they're rather ho-hum.

Can he put in two good races in a row given his recent form since he seems to be racing once a month?

NorCalGreg
02-11-2016, 12:36 AM
This horse doesn't look to bad. Looks like he needs a good pace up front. Ran his best number on my figs in his last race and has the best last out figure. If his odds are at 5/1 or higher he wouldn't be a bad bet, but seeing that he got a 44.5 half and still couldn't get up is a bit concerning.

True, SF.....tell you honestly, I havent had time to look at tomorrow's races--was busy with TODAY'S. On the other hand, show me a cheap-ish claimer that DOESN'T have concerns somewhere.
Thanks for your input :)

NorCalGreg
02-11-2016, 12:49 AM
That's kind of what I was getting at, he improved quite a bit the last race.

He may be on the improve (or maybe not). Btw, I don't recall betting Penn so I don't have an opinion on their racing consistency. His 10/7 race @ 6f looks okay based on the pp's. Again, without comparing the competition other than the OP's opinion that they're rather ho-hum.
Can he put in two good races in a row given his recent form since he seems to be racing once a month?

The question of putting two good races in a row is a question that's plagued horseplayers from day one.
Trainer games, maneuvers, etc have rendered most claiming races @ Penn, an excersise in "who's trying today..and who's just out for a gallop". Alot of horse bettors like their races "at face value"---I prefer the art of detective work.

cj
02-11-2016, 06:03 PM
All this and Penn canx...geez.

NorCalGreg
02-16-2016, 11:36 PM
All this and Penn canx...geez.

After the highly anticipated race--SIMMSTOWN vs the speedballs--in which I was sorta taken to task for proclaiming Simms' sub 24 second final qtr--a good indicator of an upcoming winning performance---Penn was shut down due to weather.
So the same 6F, 15k-nw1 race has been re-carded.....with some different faces--but I still contend SIMMSTOWN is the horse to beat.
I hearby DEFY anyone to pick a different horse----WITH EXPLANATION. This is one of the toughest Sprint Claimers to handicap in recent memory---the best trainers on the grounds have entries (Ness, Salvaggio, Kreisler, Serey, Albright)...with some of the fastest speedballs tearing up the claiming ranks.
The reason I like Simms' in this spot: This race shape is so top-heavy with speed--it's crying out for a closer--such as SIMMSTOWN. I mentioned his lightning closing run last out--he shows a work since, Top trainer, also a hidden CLASS-DROP from open 12K, to today's 15k-nw1. And to add even more shine...he's 15-1 ML.
A huge closer in a race full of speed--all on the inside of Simms.

All in all...this adds up to a solid wager, IMO.
I like Simms to win, with an exacta key box, OBSESS keyed with BEAR'S COWBOY & SIMMSTOWN

Anyone have a better pick?

-NCG

Speed Figure
02-17-2016, 12:05 AM
I just ran this race and it comes up pretty crazy. The race has gone from a 10 horse field to 12 with more speed added. I'll wait for scratches before posting.

thaskalos
02-17-2016, 01:59 AM
This race appears top-heavy with speed at first glance, but a closer look reveals that there are a couple of competent PRESSERS in this race as well...and they figure to benefit by the contested pace even MORE than the :10: will. It's a mistake to automatically lean to the closer in a race such as this, when there are capable stalkers present in the same race.

Here are my thoughts on some of the "speed" of this race:

The :1: looks incapable of taking the early lead in a swift pace. The only time he faced a legitimate pace was in his second-back race...where he stalked without managing to close ground in the stretch. I foresee a repeat performance tomorrow.

The :2: also shows questionable credentials when it comes to setting a quick pace at anywhere near tomorrow's class level. His second-last race looks impressive...but open-length leads in the slop OFTEN look impressive...especially when the pace isn't very fast. Notice that this horse's other fast figure (August 20th) was also earned in the slop. The December 4th race fails to impress, because of the class drop to the basement level. This horse won't see the lead tomorrow, IMO...and he is a non-contender unless it rains overnight.

The :3: is another "counterfeit" speedster...who figures to have trouble with tomorrow's class level. 22.2 - 45.4 doesn't impress, when the race is contested over 5 furlongs...especially when it is a $6K claimer. His last race might be considered an improvement...but the pace was slow, and the distance was short. Without a class drop...this horse figures to disappoint...while remaining several lengths off the early lead.

The :5: is a declining sort, who can no longer contest the early lead as he once did in California. He figures to be at least 4 lengths off the early lead tomorrow.

The :9: equaled the track record last out, in a sharp tracking performance...where he took the lead at the half, in apparently fast time. But the track was lightening-fast...and the class level more than doubles in this race. I expect a race where this horse trails by at least 4 lengths during the early going tomorrow.

The :11: is a horse who relinquishes large early leads even when the pace of the race is on the slowish side. Longer than normal layoff, undistinguished connections, and other speed in this race all mean that this horse is in a very tough spot tomorrow.

My conclusion:

If it weren't for the "Jamie Ness Factor"...I would love the :4: in this race. Great race while battling a hot pace second-back...and the horse took the prerequisite "breather" last out. 5-wide in a slow-paced race...while the jockey "misjudged the finish" and ended up in a dead-heat. Trainer Richard Vega can't be too mad at that incident...because jockey Castillo returns for tomorrow's race. Jamie Ness's :7: scares me more than the :10: tomorrow...but my handicapping for this race is still incomplete.

My main point here is to emphasize that the closer isn't necessarily the preferred choice in an early speed-contested race. These apparent "speed duels" often don't materialize...because not all the speedsters pass muster when they are put under the microscope. And even when the speed duel DOES materialize...the pressers of the race get first crack at the tiring speedsters. And there are a few very capable stalkers in this race.

NorCalGreg
02-17-2016, 05:34 AM
That's all good and well, thask--can tell you're a careful, sharp handicapper.

Now here's where I'm at in this race: Everyone can see the Vega horse :4: is most likely to be a major player here, ...the ML Maker, you, me, every blue-haired senior in the grandstand can spot that--where's the value?

The Ness horse has two very good races out of his last four--will today's bettors happen to notice BOTH were run in the slop? Will they even care? This horse has done nothing on a fast track lately. That one should tumble from his 8-1 ML. No value at all when you are, in a sense, paying a premium for a trainer's rep...with a horse with bright red flags.

I agree with your assertion on pace-pressers having a better go at it, than the pace-setting :1: (IMO)...or whichever of the speedsters feels it tonight.
I'm looking at the pace figs for this race--and the figures tell me the pace is gonna be hot. This scenario shows all the early speed is out of the 1-2-3 hole.
The faster the pace...the more energy the pace-pressers must also exert. Once the pace is too fast for comfort--be they setters or pressers--the only beneficiaries are the CLOSERS.

That leaves :10: SIMMSTOWN and :12: BEAR'S COWBOY with a much better chance than they would have with a smaller field and slower pace.

I see a ton of VALUE in the :10: --cetainly better chance of winning than the 15-1+ odds would dictate.

I will gladly make this bet everytime. If I thought the :4: or the :7: were VERY LIKELY to win--I would simply pass.

This is why I brought up this race well in advance --so we could weigh in--in exactly this manner. Hope the others join in with both barrels :ThmbUp:

-NCG

thaskalos
02-17-2016, 05:53 AM
That's all good and well, thask--can tell you're a careful, sharp handicapper.

Now here's where I'm at in this race: Everyone can see the Vega horse :4: is most likely to be a major player here, ...the ML Maker, you, me, every blue-haired senior in the grandstand can spot that--where's the value?

The Ness horse has two very good races out of his last four--will today's bettors happen to notice BOTH were run in the slop? Will they even care? This horse has done nothing on a fast track lately. That one should tumble from his 8-1 ML. No value at all when you are, in a sense, paying a premium for a trainer's rep...with a horse with bright red flags.

I agree with your assertion on pace-pressers having a better go at it, than the pace-setting :1: (IMO)...or whichever of the speedsters feels it tonight.
I'm looking at the pace figs for this race--and the figures tell me the pace is gonna be hot. This scenario shows all the early speed is out of the 1-2-3 hole.
The faster the pace...the more energy the pace-pressers must also exert. Once the pace is too fast for comfort--be they setters or pressers--the only beneficiaries are the CLOSERS.

That leaves :10: SIMMSTOWN and :12: BEAR'S COWBOY with a much better chance than they would have with a smaller field and slower pace.

I see a ton of VALUE in the :10: --cetainly better chance of winning than the 15-1+ odds would dictate.

I will gladly make this bet everytime. If I thought the :4: or the :7: were VERY LIKELY to win--I would simply pass.

This is why I brought up this race well in advance --so we could weigh in--in exactly this manner. Hope the others join in with both barrels :ThmbUp:

-NCG

I seriously doubt that the :10: will be anywhere near 15-1. 6-1 is my guess. And I also give the :6: a decent chance in this race. There are certain things about this horse that I find appealing.

I don't know what price the :4: will go off at...but he is obviously the best horse in the race...IMO. He took way the worst of it in his second-back race...and still held the :10: off at the wire. His seemingly lackluster last effort is readily forgivable, IMO. Given the apparent abundance of early speed in this race...it is quite possible that the :4: will go off at a square price.

We'll see what the tote board says tomorrow.

Rise Over Run
02-17-2016, 12:45 PM
The Feb 17 card at Penn has been cancelled.

cj
02-17-2016, 12:50 PM
The Feb 17 card at Penn has been cancelled.

It is a conspiracy.

NorCalGreg
02-17-2016, 04:36 PM
It is a conspiracy.


I'm gonna forget I ever heard of SIMMSTOWN--this thread will NOT be resurrected again :D

whodoyoulike
02-17-2016, 04:44 PM
Are replays provided for Penn?

I went to their website and didn't see a link. But, I don't think I'll be betting Penn races since I think it's a "C- " or "D" level track but this thread has intrigued me to do some follow-up of NorCalGreg's quest of Simmstown. And, I don't want to discourage it.

Tom
02-17-2016, 10:09 PM
I'm gonna forget I ever heard of SIMMSTOWN--this thread will NOT be resurrected again :D

SRU will bring it back in 10 years!

NorCalGreg
02-21-2016, 05:26 AM
I'm gonna forget I ever heard of SIMMSTOWN--this thread will NOT be resurrected again :D

Well......one last comment:

Penn National 02/20
6 Furlongs | Open | 4 Year Olds And Up | CLAIMING : $13,000 | PURSE: $19,000

1 -SIMMSTOWN 22.80 10.20 5.40
5 -MEGALITH 6.20 3.80
6 -OBSESS 4.80

c (Pa).
SIMMSTOWN simmered off the pace but had no running room until the stretch, gotthrough and took control with a rush to win driving.

by the way.........YOU'RE WELCOME

hopbet
02-21-2016, 06:17 AM
NCG,
Well done.

HOPBET

ultracapper
02-21-2016, 09:31 AM
Well......one last comment:

Penn National 02/20
6 Furlongs | Open | 4 Year Olds And Up | CLAIMING : $13,000 | PURSE: $19,000

1 -SIMMSTOWN 22.80 10.20 5.40
5 -MEGALITH 6.20 3.80
6 -OBSESS 4.80

c (Pa).
SIMMSTOWN simmered off the pace but had no running room until the stretch, gotthrough and took control with a rush to win driving.

by the way.........YOU'RE WELCOME

Hell of a call Greg. As for the angle, absolutely make note of it when you see it, and take it very seriously. But, as you are as well aware as I, one single attribute isolated in a vacuum is seldom the way to choose a horse.

I was actually hoping to just through a few bucks on this horse because of this discussion, but didn't notice him going yesterday.

slimbo
02-21-2016, 12:35 PM
NorCalGreg the legend continues!

Speed Figure
02-21-2016, 01:13 PM
The golden rule is to "find horses you like that the public doesn't like!" you found one and it paid off!:ThmbUp: I wanted to post about this race, but didn't know it was running yesterday.

Robert Fischer
02-21-2016, 01:21 PM
Well......one last comment:

Penn National 02/20
6 Furlongs | Open | 4 Year Olds And Up | CLAIMING : $13,000 | PURSE: $19,000

1 -SIMMSTOWN 22.80 10.20 5.40
5 -MEGALITH 6.20 3.80
6 -OBSESS 4.80

c (Pa).
SIMMSTOWN simmered off the pace but had no running room until the stretch, gotthrough and took control with a rush to win driving.

by the way.........YOU'RE WELCOME

Great call

thaskalos
02-21-2016, 02:04 PM
I hope you made a killing RaiderGreg. You deserved it. :ThmbUp:

NorCalGreg
02-21-2016, 03:00 PM
Thank you all for the kudos....if real friends can be found in cyberspace--I've

found them here @ P.A. :)


good luck all

-NCG

pandy
02-21-2016, 10:34 PM
Nice job.

thespaah
02-22-2016, 11:44 AM
Here are the weather records for the Grantville, PA area
High 36
Low 7
No precip....Light winds.
maybe the track was frozen?..
There has to be an explanation other than "fast horse"....

Hard2Like
02-22-2016, 12:10 PM
Good job. Nice prices,too

pandy
02-22-2016, 02:50 PM
Late speed is a potent, misunderstood, misused, and underused, part of pace handicapping.

Cratos
02-22-2016, 06:49 PM
And therefore "potential" rent payer, is the proper viewpoint.
At one time you had inquired about Aqueduct dimensions.

I hope the following layout help.

NorCalGreg
02-22-2016, 08:53 PM
At one time you had inquired about Aqueduct dimensions.

I hope the following layout help.


I'm not an AQ player, except for the MADDENING pick-4 contest, but one question to the board---

Since the inner track turns are tighter, isn't the run up, or gate placement-- to the turn, set farther back? What explanation is there for the abysmally slow first quarter splits in 6F's? Seems they would be faster, with the longer opening straightaway. Researched this a little on google--nada.

Anyone?

reckless
02-22-2016, 09:37 PM
I'm not an AQ player, except for the MADDENING pick-4 contest, but one question to the board---

Since the inner track turns are tighter, isn't the run up, or gate placement-- to the turn, set farther back? What explanation is there for the abysmally slow first quarter splits in 6F's? Seems they would be faster, with the longer opening straightaway. Researched this a little on google--nada.

Anyone?

The sometimes vicious headwinds from Jamaica Bay that the horses run into through the backstretch.

Cratos
02-22-2016, 10:13 PM
The sometimes vicious headwinds from Jamaica Bay that the horses run into through the backstretch.
I find that difficult to understand because the wind force that affect racehorses is from surface wind force which is very different from aerial wind force.

Yes, the winds originate from the bay, but there is much land surface area around the Aqueduct racetrack and the surface friction changes the wind force dramatically.

ultracapper
02-22-2016, 10:50 PM
I find that difficult to understand because the wind force that affect racehorses is from surface wind force which is very different from aerial wind force.

Yes, the winds originate from the bay, but there is much land surface area around the Aqueduct racetrack and the surface friction changes the wind force dramatically.

What do you feel are the cause of the slow early fractions there? Not a challenge, an honest question. I play Socal and the early fractions can be quite crisp for the cheapest of horses. When I watch NY races, I'm stunned at times how slow they can be. I know the jockey's actions are to be considered, but they seem unusually slow at times for even the better horses.

pandy
02-22-2016, 10:58 PM
What do you feel are the cause of the slow early fractions there? Not a challenge, an honest question. I play Socal and the early fractions can be quite crisp for the cheapest of horses. When I watch NY races, I'm stunned at times how slow they can be. I know the jockey's actions are to be considered, but they seem unusually slow at times for even the better horses.


The Aqueduct inner track can be misleading. It's slow and sometimes a :23.2 and :47 is actually fast, especially if it's a windy day. But generally speaking, NYRA keeps all of their tracks tiring. They are "sustained" tracks that favor horses that have class and can finish. So, the jockeys don't get into too many wicked speed duels because they know that you have to save something for the stretch. So. Cal is the exact opposite.

ultracapper
02-23-2016, 12:24 AM
At one time you had inquired about Aqueduct dimensions.

I hope the following layout help.

Yes I did. Thank you very much.

NorCalGreg
02-23-2016, 12:36 AM
The Aqueduct inner track can be misleading. It's slow and sometimes a :23.2 and :47 is actually fast, especially if it's a windy day. But generally speaking, NYRA keeps all of their tracks tiring. They are "sustained" tracks that favor horses that have class and can finish. So, the jockeys don't get into too many wicked speed duels because they know that you have to save something for the stretch. So. Cal is the exact opposite.

Here's the 5th race from Sunday @ AQ--the BROADWAY. This is a real puzzler...incredibly slow first qtr, but the charting "reads" like a high-pressure 3-horse speed duel took place....with the winner COURT DANCER--barely hanging on for the win.
WILLET ran a very strong 23&change final qtr....but can you really credit Willet--since the opener was so slow?
There's another horse--MAKE THE MOMENT --that is sort of "hidden" in her very good closing run, since she didn't hit the board.
All in all--Pandy HAS to be correct---there's no other explanation.

That's why I prefer low claimers---who run an honest pace :D

NorCalGreg
02-23-2016, 01:16 AM
AQ discussion has it's own thread now, if interested.