How do you handicap Pressers?

[cutchemist42]

Just kinda wondering how you approach handicapping presser horses? Do you find pace figures (EP and LP from Bris, Timeform, etc) and speed ratings are important? What kind of pace scenario do you look for them? Visually for trip handicapping, what do you like to see?

[thaskalos]

IMO...there is no real "substance" to these different running-style designations that today's neo-pace handicappers have invented. All these labels do is lend more confusion to a topic that is confused enough already. There supposedly are "pressers", who are within a length or two of the early pace...and then there are "stalkers", who are three or four lengths off the lead in the race's early going. In reality...there is no real difference between these two types of animals; their apparent "difference" is strictly a function of pace. If the early pace is faster, then the "presser" will become a "stalker". And if the pace is slower...then the "stalker" will assume the "presser's" role.

Why look for different handicapping techniques when there is no real difference between the horses in question?

[CincyHorseplayer]

I can basic it. Presser style with high pace figs do damage. Especially with younger horses.

[Tom]

Using BRIS, I have a "Presser Rating" I use - a combination of 2nd call and second fraction.

The logic is that is that it takes into account the turn time move associate with a presser and penalizes the turn time back up of cheap speed.

E1 = 85
E2 = 91

TT = +6, so Presser rating is 97

E1 = 92
E2 = 97

TT = -5, so PR = 92

When I use time, I just average the TT and 2nc Call ( ie, TFUS adjusted times, HTR velocity screen)

This rating came from Sartin's old program Contender Scan as Factor S. I found it to be one of the best ideas he ever had. I thing Mitchell used it also, as maybe ability time?

I agree somewhat with GUS, though - sometimes you see horse that defy being classified P, or EP or WTH? I just let the rating s decide for me.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Using BRIS, I have a "Presser Rating" I use - a combination of 2nd call and second fraction.

The logic is that is that it takes into account the turn time move associate with a presser and penalizes the turn time back up of cheap speed.

E1 = 85
E2 = 91

TT = +6, so Presser rating is 97

E1 = 92
E2 = 97

TT = -5, so PR = 92

When I use time, I just average the TT and 2nc Call ( ie, TFUS adjusted times, HTR velocity screen)

This rating came from Sartin's old program Contender Scan as Factor S. I found it to be one of the best ideas he ever had. I thing Mitchell used it also, as maybe ability time?

I agree somewhat with GUS, though - sometimes you see horse that defy being classified P, or EP or WTH? I just let the rating s decide for me.

Good stuff Tom. I was influenced by Dick Mitchell's Ability Time also. One thing I always did from way back is add the E1 and E2. Even on just fractions. It works amazingly well with maiden race or frontrunner matchups. When you have a 68.6 vs a 69.6 the decision making is easy. Anyway I still play with these ides all the time. LOve living in this universe!

[jay68802]

Got to say, i like Tom's method. One thing to say is you have to make sure that the running style designation is correct. A lot if times with older horses, you can use the Briss running styles and be safe. With younger horses though, check and make sure that they are correct. Gulfstream Race #2 today is a example. 6 horses are in and i would only trust the running style of 1 of then. The 5 is the only one labeled correctly. The other, your guess is as good as mine. This race is like Thaskalos says, They are just adding noise.

[Tom]

Good stuff Tom. I was influenced by Dick Mitchell's Ability Time also. One thing I always did from way back is add the E1 and E2. Even on just fractions. It works amazingly well with maiden race or frontrunner matchups. When you have a 68.6 vs a 69.6 the decision making is easy. Anyway I still play with these ides all the time. LOve living in this universe!

I used to add E1+E2 and E2+Lp and have an early and a late rating for each horse. Then I would model which rating were winning and play to that.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I used to add E1+E2 and E2+Lp and have an early and a late rating for each horse. Then I would model which rating were winning and play to that.

2nd call plus 2nd half. Opened my eyes during the Beulah days I was killing it around 2001! We are definitely kin!

[GMB@BP]

While I like the concept of turn time its never led me anywhere. I think this is because the relationship of overall race shape and turn time never factored into my play.

I have been messing around with a "genaric" system using the color coding from Timeform and turn time.

I never use horse running style designations, I dont see how that changes an evaluation of their turn time performance, though I recognize this thread was started about Pressers.

[FakeNameChanged]

Using BRIS, I have a "Presser Rating" I use - a combination of 2nd call and second fraction.

The logic is that is that it takes into account the turn time move associate with a presser and penalizes the turn time back up of cheap speed.

E1 = 85
E2 = 91

TT = +6, so Presser rating is 97

E1 = 92
E2 = 97

TT = -5, so PR = 92

When I use time, I just average the TT and 2nc Call ( ie, TFUS adjusted times, HTR velocity screen)

This rating came from Sartin's old program Contender Scan as Factor S. I found it to be one of the best ideas he ever had. I thing Mitchell used it also, as maybe ability time?

I agree somewhat with GUS, though - sometimes you see horse that defy being classified P, or EP or WTH? I just let the rating s decide for me.
Tom, help me to understand your figs. in the first example, E2-E1 = 91-85= +6 TT. and then it gets added to E2 , or 91+6TT for a 97 rating.

Then in 2nd example, E1-E2= 92-97 = -5 TT? then E2 + (-5) TT or 92 presser rating. I'm missing something. Why isn't the 2nd example a +5 TT like the first example?

[GMB@BP]

Tom, help me to understand your figs. in the first example, E2-E1 = 91-85= +6 TT. and then it gets added to E2 , or 91+6TT for a 97 rating.

Then in 2nd example, E1-E2= 92-97 = -5 TT? then E2 + (-5) TT or 92 presser rating. I'm missing something. Why isn't the 2nd example a +5 TT like the first example?

I think he reversed the numbers in example 2, forgot to mention that earlier when I saw the post.

[Tom]

I think he reversed the numbers in example 2, forgot to mention that earlier when I saw the post.

Yes - they were two different examples.
Sorry if I made that confusing.

[CincyHorseplayer]

The big thing is getting to the point where you think about the relationships of these numbers. It has led to some of my greatest handicapping discoveries.

[cutchemist42]

Using BRIS, I have a "Presser Rating" I use - a combination of 2nd call and second fraction.

The logic is that is that it takes into account the turn time move associate with a presser and penalizes the turn time back up of cheap speed.

E1 = 85
E2 = 91

TT = +6, so Presser rating is 97

E1 = 92
E2 = 97

TT = -5, so PR = 92

When I use time, I just average the TT and 2nc Call ( ie, TFUS adjusted times, HTR velocity screen)

This rating came from Sartin's old program Contender Scan as Factor S. I found it to be one of the best ideas he ever had. I thing Mitchell used it also, as maybe ability time?

I agree somewhat with GUS, though - sometimes you see horse that defy being classified P, or EP or WTH? I just let the rating s decide for me.

Not sure I followed your example right. Why doesnt the 2nd example have a PR of 97+5=102?

EDIT-Nevermind, I replied before reading an answer before this post.

[Tom]

Not sure I followed your example right. Why doesnt the 2nd example have a PR of 97+5=102?
You are right - I reversed the E1 and E2 - should be 97-92 for a -5 TT

Tomorrow, LARGE coffee! :blush:

[cutchemist42]

So in terms of pace, does a "Presser" need the leads to soften up?

When you look at Bris ratings for Pressers, do Quirin points even apply to them? I understand Quirin points to measure a desire or will to be placed where they want. Should a Presser even have Quirin points?

[jay68802]

Yes, the presser needs speed points, otherwise he is not pressing the pace, he is chasing the pace.

[hracingplyr]

Good stuff Tom. My question is if your using Timeform would the presser be a midpack horse or tracker?

Bob

[cj]

Good stuff Tom. My question is if your using Timeform would the presser be a midpack horse or tracker?

Bob

I think I can answer that one...tracker IMO. That was the intent of the label.

[Tom]

Yes, that is how I handle the trackers.

[classhandicapper]

I mostly look at running styles.

IMO, horses only run as fast as they have to in order to secure the desired running position (horses and riders). So you can't necessarily tell how fast a "need the lead", "front runner", "near front runner" etc.. is capable of running based on how fast it ran early in recent races. Their prior fractions would depend on the kind of fields they drew into.

Once I know how the horse typically likes to run (including being versatile) it's only then that I try to determine if one of them can dominate some of the others on the lead or a couple are clearly inferior to a couple of others.

I will look at pace figures, but I tend to look at the quality and consistency of the horses each has been battling with or outrunning in other races. If one is clearly superior in quality, I'd expect it to either outrun or put away the cheaper ones and continue on (assuming form is constant). I'd expect the cheaper ones to fold (often badly) and finish worse than they would in a more neutrally run race.

When they are of similar quality, they tend to all run up close and it's kind of random as to which gets the lead (post position, start, rider aggressiveness etc..). In those races they will all mostly continue on unless the riders get overly aggressive.

There are also examples of horses that do their best running up close, but they draw into a race with so many front running and close up types that some of them wind up mid pack or worse (in slower fractions than they normally run). Those horses typically do not fire their best race. The exceptions are lightly raced horses that haven't really established what they are capable of doing.

We've all seen the speed horse that gets left to last and rallies to win, but we've also all seen the speed horse that gets left, is rushed up or outrun, and drops dead more often.

[cj]

I like to look at running styles, but I've learned that most horses are more versatile than any labels we give them. Horses I identify as "Leader" or "Plodder" are pretty set provided they've run several times. The others can vary in reality, usually by one label in either direction.

[classhandicapper]

I like to look at running styles, but I've learned that most horses are more versatile than any labels we give them. Horses I identify as "Leader" or "Plodder" are pretty set provided they've run several times. The others can vary in reality, usually by one label in either direction.

I agree.

I try to look for extremes in the race setup before I project too much. I also like for what I am projecting to be consistent with the profile for that track, surface, and distance.

What good is getting the setup right if the track/surface/distance is playing the opposite way?

[Tom]

:pout:I like to look at running styles, but I've learned that most horses are more versatile than any labels we give them. Horses I identify as "Leader" or "Plodder" are pretty set provided they've run several times. The others can vary in reality, usually by one label in either direction.

Sartin's Energy program showed horses rating ranked Early, Early presser, pressers, sustained presser, sustained and late.
The program had a prediction of what would win the race, ie, Presser figures to win.

The idea was to look at horses within 1 of the prediction, so Presser would include EP,P,SP horses in your preferences.

[classhandicapper]

"Within 1" is probably a pretty good way of looking at it.

It gives you some margin of safety in case your analysis and label based on the past is wrong and also gives you some margin of safety if your analysis of the past is right but the horse is simply more versatile than it has shown to date.

[Tom]

Sartin was ahead of the game - he was dealing with "about" back in the 90s! :pound: