%E Discussion -- "par" range

[andicap]

In looking over some older races it became apparent to me why people have such troubles with %E. Often they compain that winners come from outside the targeted range from recent races as outlined in Brohamer's book.

Many of us know that a horse with an especially high %E will relax and run a lower %E inside the "par" range when he is lone speed and can set slower early fractions.

But in handicapping a highly-pressured race from Saratoga, I saw a horse win with a %E of 51.78 at 6f at Saratoga, one of the lowest in the race. The average is 52.62...and my average %E for the contenders and "E" horses was 52.74.

But the low figure makes sense considering the races was a 28:3 in the Randy Giles pace pressure gauge (total number of QP of horses with 5 or more/ number of "E" need to lead horses. Aything over 21 on the dirt could become highly pressured esp. with more "E" types.)

There is, however, a floor on the %E at Saratoga. A deep closer with a %E of %50.80 could not win unless the pace meltdown was especially dramatic and the closer had an exceptionally high late fraction.

Wouldn't it make sense to create several (at least 2) %E ranges for a track, one for races won by closers. (This horse was 4 1/2 legths back at the pace call). the other for normal paced races?

You can also selectively not count slow paced races won by E types who went the half in 46.2 for 6f and came home in 110.2. The horse is liable to have a 53.0%E coming into the race and then throw a 51.50%E with the slow fractions, leading people to throw up their hands and say, 'see %E doesn't work.'

I would also ignore slow paced races when evaluating a horse's %E in the PPs unless you think the pace will be similar today.

[cj]

I think you've kind of hit the main reason I don't use %E. It is a function of pace. I am better off just analyzing what I think the pace set up will be than trying to assign a number to what the horse expended last time. If a frontrunner battle s up front, his %E will be high. If he relaxes alone on the lead, it will be low. A pace figure-speed figure race shape tells me the same thing in reality that a %E number does.

[chickenhead]

I posted this in another thread....probably no help to you, but I think this is basically what you are talking about.... seperating out the pace shape of the particular races, by looking at the average %E of the contenders for instance, and grouping the like pace shapes together to see how the winner runs...giving you some more granularity with your numbers....




<<<I always had a bit of a problem with the way that %E was done as a profile for a track, I didn't know what it was, but it kind of clicked today.

If it's just an average of winners at that distance/class, it's hard to seperate whether it's telling you much about the track specifically or really just giving you the average pace scenario for races at that track.

If the avg. race %E is a good measurement of pace scenario, I was thinking you could profile a track in the following way:

Using charts, classified by distance/class whatever, take race avg. %E and winner %E. Group them by avg. %E, and then avg. the winners %E for that group, so for instance your profile would look like:

Race Avg. %E Winner %E Ratio Winner/Avg.
48-49 XX.x 1.xxx
49-50 XX.X 1.xxx
50-51 XX.x 0.99xxx
etc.

So you'd have kind of a lookup table based on todays race avg. Use that ratio to adjust todays avg. to get winners avg.

And the nice thing to boot, is the difference between ratios for given %E (like 48-49) from track to track would give you a nice look at how the tracks stack up to each other when they have like pace scenarios.>>>>

[andicap]

CH,

I've tried looking at the average %E to see what it tells me about the pace of the race but I haven't noticed much of a corrolation between a highly pressured race and a higher than average %E.

I'll look more closely using just my main 4-5 contenders...

In terms of your idea, my hard-head is finding it difficult to grasp your idea.....Can you give me an example of how it might work?

i'm intrigued

[keilan]

Andy wrote ---Wouldn't it make sense to create several (at least 2) %E ranges for a track, one for races won by closers. (This horse was 4 1/2 legths back at the pace call). the other for normal paced races?

I never handicap a race without considering %E – I‘ve stated on occasion that it’s the most important variable for me. Do track models work? Yes and no one could argue but I’d say forget about models and begin learning how to use the variable within each given race. I will tell you from experience that creating 1-2-3 models is only going to generate a lot of extra work without much benefit. Why --because there are literally hundreds of situations depending on the characteristics of each horse in each field at each class with an ever changing racing surface. I really don’t know if that comment makes sense to anyone reading this but if you don’t understand that then %E will always be a partial enigma to you.

CJ stated “I think you've kind of hit the main reason I don't use %E. It is a function of pace”.

%E and pace are highly correlated and no discussion should take place about %E without discussing how pace implicates the number.

CJ states “A pace figure-speed figure race shape tells me the same thing in reality that a %E number does”.

Yeah I wouldn’t necessary disagree with that statement cause everyone sees and interprets information differently but for me that would slow down my handicapping process to almost a halt trying to accurately assess the computation from the pace and speed figure.

Chickenhead wrote “If it's just an average of winners at that distance/class, it's hard to seperate whether it's telling you much about the track specifically or really just giving you the average pace scenario for races at that track”.

I think it would tell you a few different things once you had enough samples.
1) it will begin to tell you which type of variables are more important when handicapping different class levels and age of the field. (good players do not handicap all races in the same fashion) example – young/cheap horses will win far more often with a high pace or speed number and extremely high %E than in the classer fields.
2) If you construct a chart please include the daily variant for the day. This information will provide valuable insight into how track weight and %E are a delicate balance.
3) Looking at averages is valuable information but I’d also encourage you to be looking at the outliers in your population and decipher why they were able to win – that’s where the money is in the pools.

I give you an example (please don’t construe this as red-boarding) yesterday at Keeneland in the 6th race I liked a horse named Myfavoritepassion (11) I thought this horse would be missed by the public so I built w4 tickets, x’s, tri’s and W/P. Cheap field going 7f -- The 11 horse had excuses in the last couple of races but he had one of the top pace and speed figures. He also had higher %E numbers but like I’ve said before that number is less significant with cheap fields.

The p4 paid $10,691 in the US pools but only paid $3070 here – big disappointment as I hoped to take down the whole pool here in Canada, unfortunately I didn’t and I that pool amount was exceptional low for whatever reason.

11 Myfavoritepassion 61.00 12.40 5.20
1 Private Opinion 3.00 2.40
3 Solid Platinum 2.60

[chickenhead]

I'm just trying to understand how you suggest keeping track of %E, if I understand you right you have a range for a track...and based on experience you have a feel for how the different factors influence where within that range todays race will fall?

Things that effect the expected %E are combinations of...

pace...
class...
age....
track weight (short term).....
track characteristics(long term)..

etc. etc..

I think all i was really suggesting was isolating those sorts of things as best you can to look at how they effect the %E outcome individually....maybe not a great idea for long term pars but good as a kind of study guide...for instance if you seperate the classes into 3 (or more) ranked groups....all of the other characteristics should even out if the sample is large enough, so you're left with a look at how different the %E averages and ranges are for the different classes....or paces...or ages....or variants.......I think it's maybe just a more formal way of gaining the kind of experience that you have using these numbers? Or am I still missing something?

[keilan]

I'm just trying to understand how you suggest keeping track of %E, if I understand you right you have a range for a track...and based on experience you have a feel for how the different factors influence where within that range todays race will fall?

I no longer chart %E for any track -- and yes, I have a feel for how the different factors will affect each runner in each race at an estimated pace number. For me pace makes the race and from that I make judgement of each runner of how they will fair based on all pertinent variables.

Things that effect the expected %E are combinations of...pace...class...age....track weight (short term).....track characteristics(long term)..

The obvious one missing from this list is distance other variables are sex, form, turf/dirt surface. I also adjust for each animal that changes barns.

I think you have a basic understanding of energy and when compliling a chart filtering winners based on class/distance/age etc this will provide you with information that should impress you ---- it's like having a light-switch being turned-on.

If there were a particular race/s that would help demonstrate how I interpet %E I'd agree to do it here on line or privately.

[hurrikane]

Keilan, et al

%E has always been a mystery to me. I understand the concept but have never been able to apply it in a meaningful (ie: profitable) way.

If you and everyone else could analyse a race both after and before they run I would really really appreciate it.

Thanks

:D

[Tom]

"---- it's like having a light-switch being turned-on."

Or turned off!
I, too am lost on tis toopic. Keilan has tutored me on boards all across the internet, but noting seems to stick. As clear as it seems today, tommorw, I will be clueless again. Not sure why this damn thing is so elusive, but I cannot make any long term use of %E.
andicap has tutorted me on using the right pacelines so as not to distort the percentage, but then I keep leaving the winners out.
I fear my brain is full and can absorb no more. :rolleyes:

(I will NOT say that in OFF Topics...they'd eat me alive:D )

[keilan]

Kane -- Any preference of track?

[hurrikane]

Keilan,

not unless the interpretation changes from track to track. Maybe that is a good place to start....you build it on the track or the race.

[keilan]

Kane, at al

I need to be quick this morning but I will try and be clear in my explanation.

Kane asked - not unless the interpretation changes from track to track

Keilan – the methodology is always the same regardless of which track you’re playing. However you need to have a general idea of which tracks are generally weighted fast – avg – heavy. Almost all “A” tracks are weighted average to heavy and this provides for a fair playing field for the horses and players. But there still is a considerable range amongst those tracks. So one’s mindset when playing anywhere is to have a basic understanding of the tracks weight. The heavier the track the more it favours horses who disperse their energy more gradually but still have competitive speed numbers. The estimated pace also needs to be brisk enough that the front running horses will be compromised late. This is especially true of higher-class level horses – as I’ve said early with cheaper fields %E is less of a consideration.

I know for some this is as clear as mud – there are many filters/ exceptions that apply to all different circumstances and that’s where it is difficult to write about without giving the wrong impression.

I think this is a good place to leave off and I’ll post a race analysis in a couple days that will hopefully explain %E more clearly – and yes the analysis will be before they run, no creditability if I was to post something afterwards -- haha

[andicap]

Keilan

would using par times -- such as those Dave Schwartz puts out -- be useful in comparing each track's "heaviness." Could you compute the %E for each track as various classes and go from there?

[keilan]

Honestly I don't know the answer to that, I have never tried to gauge track-weight that way -- and I've also never seen Dave's pars. Somehow I don't think it would be effective :)

[andicap]

Yeah, that's what I figured. Seems too facile....

[hurrikane]

looking forward to it, thanks

[Dave Schwartz]

Using pars to create %E target ranges would be a poor idea. They would generally show about the same % I would think since it represents the leaders time. This means it could come from different horses.

[keilan]

Weather: more showers this evening and mostly cloudy Thursday. Handicapping the track to be a little sticky by the 8th race. In other-words I’ll play for a track that’s playing a couple ticks slow. I’ve handicapped the race with pace and energy in mind on a heavier track.


7 furlong sprint – pace will be quick

1) Wimplestiltskin 30-1 ML has been going the wrong way in his last two starts after returning Aug 8th. If this horse scratched I wouldn’t be surprised. %E is way over the top and I give this guy no shot.

2) Eurosliver 5-1 ML faces the toughest field of his career, hasn’t started in 7 months - energy numbers as a two and three old old are higher than I’d like. Would need huge effort be in the top two spots.

3) Two Down Automatic 10-1 ML has been on the bench since June and could easily be shuffled back from the gate, decent enough energy numbers for the most part but probably not good enough to lite the board.

4) Colonel Day 30-1ML not good enough, energy numbers are good but the horse is slow early-middle-and late in this group.

5) Commentator 9/2 ML another Distorted Humor colt that is now 3 for 3. Has been convincing in all his starts and I’m assuming he has been under wraps late thus driving up his energy numbers.Toughest test to date, if this guy doesn’t rate today I’m not sure I want him high on any of my tickets. I don’t see him as a gate to wire horse here.

6) Mass Media 5-1ML is extremely dangerous in this spot – here’s a horse that should break from the gate sharply and secure a good tracking position. He’ll be full of run when they turn for home and I fully expect him to run 1st or 2nd. Hard to believe this horse was let go at almost 13-1 last start.

7) Weigelia 3-1 ML Here’s another horse that should be sitting just off the pace with something left in the lane. Has the right energy to be a very good sprinter, carry’s his speed a long way.

8) Level Playingfield 20-1 ML this guy has been running on the weeds the past 5 starts but comes into this race in excellent form. A good horse to use in the exotics – he could be 7 wide heading for home but should out-run is odds today. Include in tri’s and super’s.

9) Caiman 30-1 ML Field filler – would be surprised if this guy finishes in the top 5.

10) Fire Slam 5/2 ML a good horse to play against. If he tries to run early he will be gasping for oxygen late, if he runs off the pace (which I think will be the plan) he will leave himself too much to do. Very conceivable that he could not light the board.

“A” horses --– 6-7
“B” horses --- 2-5-8
“C” horses --- 10

[cj]

Keith,

Would you like me to post the output file you are using with %E numbers?

[keilan]

Hey Craig – probably a good idea –thanx

[cj]

Originally posted by keilan
Hey Craig – probably a good idea –thanx

I just arrived home, had some stuff come up at work, I'll get them up early tomorrow.

[cj]

%E is the number immediately following the |


1 WIMPLESTILTSKIN 3yo Ky 30-1 EP

Distance 2:0-1-0 Track 0:0-0-0

J Castanon J L ( 10- 1- 2- 0-0.10) ( 884-116-0.13)
T Coletti Edward J Jr ( 0- 0- 0- 0-0.00) ( 219- 25-0.11)

Pha 09/06/2004 9.0 11/12 fst PaDerby G2 Lb Steadied, tired 98 109 89 78|53.03 81
Previously trained by Polanco Marcelo
Mth 08/08/2004 9.0 6/ 8 fst HsklInvH G1 Lb Outside, gave way 108 107 104 67|54.42 76
Hol 06/19/2004 8.5 6/ 9 fst AffirmdH G3 Lb Stalked pace held 3rd 99 103 95 100|51.45 101
Hol 05/29/2004 7.0 4/ 8 fst LBrreraM G2 Lb Dueled btwn held 2nd 101 96 100 91|52.99 96
Hol 04/21/2004 5.5 2/ 5 fm HHenson78k Lb Closed gamely missed 102 91 94 91|51.60 96t
SA 03/27/2004 6.5 5/ 6 fst SanPedro83k Lb Bid 3wd, led, collared 95 89 94 87|53.14 94


2 EUROSILVER 3yo Ky 5-1 P

Distance 3:1-2-0 Track 1:1-0-0

J Castellano J J ( 6- 0- 0- 1-0.00) (1066-179-0.17)
T Nafzger Carl A ( 8- 1- 1- 2-0.12) ( 274- 38-0.14)

Previously trained by Zito Nicholas P
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GP 03/13/2004 7.0 5/ 5 fst Swale G3 L Off rail, just missed 102 96 96 96|52.67 100
GP 02/04/2004 7.0 4/ 5 fst Alw 36000N2X L 3 wide, driving 94 90 92 90|52.78 95*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kee 10/04/2003 8.5 10/11 fst BrdrsFut G2 L Quick move, driving 114 97 104 97|52.27 108*
Sar 09/01/2003 6.5 6/ 8 gd Md Sp Wt 45k L Drew clear under drive 93 94 90 94|52.25 101*
Sar 08/08/2003 7.0 5/10 fst Md Sp Wt 45k L Pace, second best 74 79 74 66|52.86 78


3 TWO DOWN AUTOMATIC 3yo Ky 10-1 P

Distance 0:0-0-0 Track 0:0-0-0

J Guidry M ( 16- 2- 1- 1-0.12) ( 679-108-0.16)
T Asmussen Steven M ( 11- 3- 1- 0-0.27) (1734-426-0.25)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CD 06/12/2004 8.5 9/12 sly NrthDncr G3 Lb 4 5w empty late 107 103 105 93|52.10 99
CD 05/22/2004 8.0 1/ 6 fst Alw 70600NC Lb Lack room 3/16s 6w 89 90 87 90|51.52 93
Aqu 05/01/2004 8.0 1/ 5 fst Withers G3 Lb Rail trip, no rally 122 108 115 101|53.15 108
OP 04/10/2004 8.0 6/ 6 sly NrthnSprBC73k Lb Strongly took over 97 100 97 100|51.69 102*
OP 02/28/2004 8.0 2/ 9 fst Southwest100k Lb Willingly between 93 94 88 93|51.49 94
FG 01/24/2004 8.0 7/ 7 fst Lecomte G3 Lb Headed, faded 78 90 78 85|50.78 87


4 COLONEL DAY 3yo Ky 30-1 PS

Distance 1:1-0-0 Track 0:0-0-0

J Borel C H ( 9- 0- 1- 0-0.00) ( 938-101-0.11)
T Breen Kelly J ( 0- 0- 0- 0-0.00) ( 165- 18-0.11)

Pha 09/05/2004 8.0 6/ 8 fst Alw 24046N2X L Inched away 89 87 86 87|52.11 87*
Previously trained by Carroll David
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FG 01/26/2004 8.5 3/ 5 fst Alw 30000N1X L Kept to task 61 71 61 71|50.46 72*
FG 01/02/2004 8.5 7/11 fst Alw 30000N1X L Not enough late 104 88 94 83|52.17 94
CD 11/26/2003 7.0 10/12 fst Md 50000 L 4 5w hand urging 87 82 84 82|52.33 92*


5 COMMENTATOR 3yo NY 9-2 E

Distance 2:2-0-0 Track 0:0-0-0

J Bejarano R ( 29- 5- 4- 7-0.17) (1574-390-0.25)
T Zito Nicholas P ( 6- 3- 0- 1-0.50) ( 367- 65-0.18)

Bel 09/24/2004 7.5 3/ 7 fst S-Alw 45000N2X L In charge from start 103 102 103 102|51.53 103*
Sar 08/29/2004 7.0 4/ 8 my S-Alw 43000N1X L With plenty left 89 84 89 84|52.67 88*
Sar 08/09/2004 7.0 2/13 fst S-Md Sp Wt 41k L Bumped start, drew off 100 88 100 88|53.05 95*


6 MASS MEDIA 3yo Ky 5-1 EP

Distance 0:0-0-0 Track 1:0-0-0

J Prado E S ( 19- 3- 3- 1-0.16) (1277-247-0.19)
T Frankel Robert ( 3- 1- 1- 0-0.33) ( 396-111-0.28)

Bel 09/12/2004 6.0 5/ 5 fst FlySoFree59k Lb Bumped start, widest 114 108 107 108|51.70 108*
Sar 08/07/2004 6.0 3/ 7 fst Amstrdam G2 Lb Steadied turn, tired 101 105 94 82|53.39 85
Bel 06/23/2004 6.0 2/ 7 fst Alw 47000N2X Lb Vied inside, prevailed 112 95 111 95|52.95 103*
Previously trained by Norman Cole
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kee 10/04/2003 8.5 8/11 fst BrdrsFut G2 Lb Steadied early 114 97 105 37|56.77 57
LaD 09/07/2003 6.0 8/ 8 fst Alw 25000N1X Lb Quckly clear riddn out 91 99 91 99|51.58 105*
LaD 08/01/2003 6.0 6/11 fst Md Sp Wt 23k Lb Ridden out, sharp 71 83 71 83|51.37 87*


7 WEIGELIA 3yo Fla 3-1 EP

Distance 4:1-2-0 Track 0:0-0-0

J Albarado R J ( 26- 2- 5- 5-0.08) (1054-165-0.16)
T Azpurua Manuel J ( 0- 0- 0- 0-0.00) ( 239- 31-0.13)

Sar 08/28/2004 7.0 5/ 8 fst KngsBshp G1 L Carried out, gamely 104 108 102 106|52.21 105
Sar 08/07/2004 6.0 2/ 7 fst Amstrdam G2 L Stumbled start, inside 101 105 99 100|52.40 102
Crc 07/10/2004 6.0 4/11 fst CarryBck G3 L All out, prevailed 107 110 105 110|52.94 108*
Crc 05/29/2004 6.0 4/ 5 fst PoncheH75k L Vied, no match 100 108 100 100|53.28 100
Crc 05/09/2004 6.0 4/ 6 fst WstrnBrdrs40k L Wore down rival late 107 109 104 109|52.93 111*
Tam 04/04/2004 7.0 4/10 fst Sophomore83k L Dueled brushd all out 103 84 103 84|53.18 93*


8 LEVEL PLAYINGFIELD 3yo Ky 20-1 PS

Distance 3:1-1-1 Track 1:0-1-0

J McKee J ( 16- 2- 2- 1-0.12) (1191-177-0.15)
T Holthus Robert E ( 1- 0- 0- 0-0.00) ( 306- 59-0.19)

TP 09/18/2004 6.0 2/ 5 fst KyCpSpnt G3 Lb 3 wide move, driving 104 98 82 98|51.51 94*
ElP 08/29/2004 5.5 3/ 5 fm Hcp 38000 Lb Bmp start 5w lane 93 91 76 88|50.08 85t
ElP 08/07/2004 5.5 4/ 6 fm Hcp 38000 Lb 6w lane minor gain 95 100 73 86|50.04 83t
AP 07/17/2004 5.0 2/10 fm Hcp 38000 Lb Second best 97 90 75 87|49.59 84t
CD 06/20/2004 5.0 8/ 8 gd OC 62k/N$Y N Lb 5w bid loom missed 85 93 79 93|49.68 86t
CD 04/30/2004 8.5 1/ 9 gd AmerTurf G3 Lb 7w lane no late gain 86 94 67 83|48.91 83t


9 CAIMAN 3yo Ky 30-1 S

Distance 3:0-2-0 Track 0:0-0-0

J Martinez W ( 9- 0- 1- 1-0.00) ( 884-129-0.15)
T Medina Angel M ( 2- 0- 0- 0-0.00) ( 132- 5-0.04)

Haw 10/02/2004 10.0 3/ 7 fst HawGldCp G2 L No speed, no factor 114 100 106 92|52.19 93
AP 09/11/2004 8.5 3/ 9 fm PardisCrek44k L No factor 94 93 84 81|50.43 82t
AP 08/14/2004 7.0 5/ 6 fst ForwrdPass52k L Off rail, missed 108 84 57 84|50.88 84
AP 07/24/2004 9.5 4/ 8 fm AmercnDb G2 L Crowded bit start 109 101 105 75|51.14 83t
AP 07/03/2004 8.5 6/ 8 sf ArlClsc G2 L Outrun 100 98 91 83|50.88 88t
AP 06/20/2004 8.5 4/ 7 gd OC 80k/N4X N L Gave way 92 94 82 79|50.51 83t


10 FIRE SLAM 3yo Ky 5-2 S

Distance 3:2-0-0 Track 2:1-1-0

J Day P ( 23- 6- 1- 5-0.26) ( 630-134-0.21)
T Carroll David ( 1- 0- 0- 0-0.00) ( 126- 29-0.23)

Sar 08/28/2004 7.0 8/ 8 fst KngsBshp G1 L Stumbled badly start 104 108 89 89|52.38 90
ElP 07/24/2004 6.5 1/ 4 fst DBernhardt97k L 4w hand urging 99 98 88 98|51.93 95*
Bel 06/05/2004 7.0 2/ 7 fst RvaRdgBC G2 L Found room on rail 99 106 95 106|51.24 107*
CD 05/08/2004 6.0 4/ 4 fst MattWinn103k L 5w late hand urging 113 93 105 93|53.28 98*
Kee 04/17/2004 8.5 6/14 fst Lexingtn G2 L 5w bid 2ndbest 100 100 93 97|51.45 97
FG 03/07/2004 8.5 10/11 fst LaDerby G2 L Headed, faltered 114 103 114 91|53.13 106

[hurrikane]

Ok, so I'm stupid or something.

I'm not sure I see how you are applying %E here.
I have the par for this type race/class as 51.63%

so in theory contenders should +- 0.5. Correct?
is this +- 0.5 of their avg, what you project they will run, last race?

are you using it for form? just for energy?

[andicap]

Can't speak for Keilan because we use %E in different ways,

but I do not use the %E pars that Brohamer wrote about in my handicapping except sometimes as a very rough guide on a race.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't either.

I look at the average %E in a particular race and compare my contenders (and only my contenders) to that benchmark. If it looks like the pace will be really fast I'll prefer horses BELOW that benchmark, although I'll check for the speed of the speed. By keeping records, you can understand which %E levels are too low even in contentious races.
In more paceless races, I'll do the converse and kick out horses BELOW my line.



The problem there -- and why I like to hear how Keilan uses %E -- is that is reliant on picking accurate pacelines, which is a bit too "arty" for me sometimes. And I agree that one paceline does not necessarily represent what a horse will do TODAY.

The race in the PP had a different pace scenario than today's. The horse is in a different part of his form cycle, etc. Lots of things are different although I do believe pacelines can give you an idea as to the EXTENT and LIMITS of a horse's abilities especially if you are adept at judging form cycles.

If you do look at the PPs to judge %E you have to be careful to pick the right line. You can't use a race with a slow-pace relative to the final time because the %E of all the horses will be uniformly too low.

I prefer to only use races where horses put in a good performance (the LIVE HTR asterisk is what I use -- I'll only draw %E lines from those races unless there are none in which case I'll look for the best race possible.)
I'll also make sure that I don't use an aberrational %E PL. I want a line that fits in with the horse's overall record.

For example, on Sunday in the 1st race at Belmont,
what line do you use on the winner, Strong? Tough call. Kick out the bad races or ones at the wrong distance structure or the "SA" -- slow/average -- scenario and I'm left with a sloppy track line two races back. It doesn't seem out of whack so I use it.

The ML chalk, Cozy presents a big problem All his recent races are all slow-paced. His %E would be distorted, too low.I choose the best one I can and move on but I know by looking at his %E that they will be way too low to compete today.

[andicap]

continuing -- pushed "submit" by mistake....


This is why I am curious to hear how Keilan uses his %E -- i don't believe it's paceline-based.

Back to Sunday, I gave Cozy Man the %50.99 %E PL from a while back because all the others were in slow paced races (you could tell from his pace times he was a clear bet-against. An EP horse who's pace numbers were way way too low to compete inthe field.)

You wouldnt use Jump forJoyeax's June 4 paceline and the low %E because the pace was so slow. That's not what the horse would do TODAY. If I expect the pace to be hot -- back to the 97s he was facing in the spring I'd use that CD April line of 52.70, but if it looks like it will be over 100, I'll use the more recent races -- the %55.10 from two races back.

If it will be in middle, I'll split the difference in my head.
Again, I want to hear how Keilan uses the info.

Importantly, I don't use %E to choose contenders. I only use horses who have legit chances to win. To choose the race pars, I am now leaning toward kicking out non-contenders who will not figure in the pace. They're irrelevant, just noise.

So I keep in five hoses ad get an average of %52.66 for the race.

This is just for the win remember!! Extreme %E horses finish 2nd and 3rd all the time. In fact, great exotic fillers are horses with out of balance %Es who are otherwise well qualified (or very in-balance %Es who fall a bit short on speed, etc., especially closers in a heavily pressured race where the E's with the big Beyers kill each other out and some plodder with a low %E and a medicoe Beyer gets 2nd or 3rd.)

Cozy man, Jump for Joyeax and Hit Now all have %E's that are too high.
That leaves me with Strong and Henaresa.

Does that mean I bet those two -- not necessarily. You still have to look over form cycles and other factors you consider of course.

Strong won at 5-1, not bad odds in a six-horse race.

I don't mean this to brag, but in way of illustration.

[andicap]

I meant to add Cozy Man, the 9-5 horse gets the boot for a %50.99...too low for the race. Note that if the average had been about 51%...a very slowed paced race, Cozy Man would have a better shot.

If Cozy Man returns next time in a race with a %E at that level he might be good odds since the public might dismiss him off this race.

Again, not redboarding -- I DID NOT bet the race -- just trying to show you I use %E in a race.

[keilan]

Boy was that the wrong race to post. 3 horses scratch from the race and the track condition for the card favoured front running horses on a sloppy surface. Kinda changes the complexion of the race doesn’t it. The perils of posting 16-18 hours in advance. Fractions were 22.98, 45.49, 1:09.66, 1:25.19. The raw fractions show a very quick middle fraction but the beginning and especially the last fraction were extremely slow.

Okay lets see if we can make some sense out of this thread.

Horse “A” runs fractions (zero adjusted track) at 6f of 22.0 – 45.0– 1:09.0----- energy = 51.61%

Horse “B” runs fractions (zero adjusted track) at 6f of 24.0 – 46.3 –1:11.0------energy = 51.62%

What do we do if the race average (which I don’t use) for %E is 51.50%. And the expected pace is around the 45.0 second mark do both these horses qualify? Heck no—they’re not even close in ability. What would happen to the “B” horse if he ran to the 2nd call in 45 seconds -- his energy rating would become very large. Extreme example but I wanted to show that selecting horses because they fit into a modelled range has its pitfalls. I realize these two horses wouldn’t be racing against each other.

Kane %E does speak to form of an animal, energy is actually one of the best ways to estimate which way a horse is going form-wise. Some may argue that the pace numbers are good indicators about a horse’s current form as well. Pace is a function of %E and they are heavily correlated.

In most races the contenders are very evenly matched in most categories and %E is the variable that separates them for me. Example how does one choose between 3 or 4 contenders that are all stretching out for the 1st time? Are you going to base your decision on some statistical information about each horses linage/breeding. If that’s the only information a player has I guess he will have to fly with it. I want to make my wagering decisions based upon horse A-B- and C’s current form and estimated abilities.

I can see you reading this saying – okay keilan all well-and-good “now tell me how to use it” To tell you the truth I’m no longer convinced that I can. There are literally hundreds of different situations—no two fields are exactly the same – the horses themselves will never be exactly the same – the track will be different etc. – But somehow I should be able to describe %E in a paragraph or two and miraculously we’re all on the same page. It’s not an absolute variable. Chart it – go back and look at why a horse won, we all do that after we lose a wager anyways –study it. But I do know for a fact that if you sat with me for a week-end playing the horses you would walk away scratching your head muttering “ how the hell does he know how they’re going to run”. hehe

FWIW – Commentator (5 horse) %E was 54.07% based on yesterdays raw fractions

[keilan]

Hey Andy,

>The problem there -- and why I like to hear how Keilan uses %E -- is that is reliant on picking accurate pacelines, which is a bit too "arty" for me sometimes.

Keilan – anyone picking one previous paceline then trying to determine which horse to play is in for many long days. This is an impossible task. No-where in there have we adjusted for maturity or form, unless your program calculates for maturity and gives an indicator for form I really don’t see how a player can effectively analyze a group of numbers and expect to be a winning player – Some things that I want to know about a horse before I lay down my money – when did the horse top/ where is he in his form cycle/ what is his potential/ which distance and surface will he be advantaged/is he good enough to win today against whatever pace scenario/will the addition of blinkers improve him. Personally I like to gauge a horse from looking at his past 8-10 races, using one paceline is too narrow of scope for me.

>I prefer to only use races where horses put in a good performance (the LIVE HTR asterisk is what I use -- I'll only draw %E lines from those races unless there are none in which case I'll look for the best race possible.) I'll also make sure that I don't use an aberrational %E PL. I want a line that fits in with the horse's overall record.

Keilan --I believe HTR uses distance equalization which skews all the numbers – most notably %E. If I was customizing a program I might get Ken to never adjust the %E number to today’s distance. What distance equalization does for example is take an adjusted (track variant) 6f race and convert that to whatever distance is being run today, lets say it’s a 8f race. I don’t think that works very effectively firstly and compounded with track to track adjustment further distorts all numbers – That is why the %E number/calculation seems to be all over the place for each horse. Horses are remarkably consistent animals and will run pretty much as expected when in capable hands.

>This is why I am curious to hear how Keilan uses his %E -- i don't believe it's paceline-based.

Keilan --Nah I pretty much choose a pace number range and estimate how each horse will run against that number. If the pace number puts any horse near its stress point we have found a horse that is a good wager against. The race shape that I have run in my mind allows me to view the race before hand and if I have measured each animal correctly I have a opportunity at cashing a ticket.


>If it will be in middle, I'll split the difference in my head. Again, I want to hear how Keilan uses the info.

Keilan – yeah I make mental calculations/decisions constantly when measuring each horse, I write notes on many of the horses. It helps with the wagering because I’m mostly involved in the exotic pools -- it’s the unremarkable/hidden horses that make those tickets pay.

>Importantly, I don't use %E to choose contenders. I only use horses who have legit chances to win. To choose the race pars, I am now leaning toward kicking out non-contenders who will not figure in the pace. They're irrelevant, just noise.

Keilan – consideration for you, I always look at the lower %E horses especially when horses are travelling 8.5 furlongs and greater. Energy numbers will cash you as many tickets as almost anything else. This applies to both dirt and turf.

It’s nice to see someone else using %E with some degree of success. – Congrats Andy. I think you have mentioned that some of your program is customized – you might want to have the track adjusted %E numbers shown instead of the track adjusted and distance equalization %E numbers shown – you already are making the adjustments for %E in your mind after you have chosen a pace number they will should run to. I think if the HTR track variant calculation is correct you will see an instant improvement in your overall application of %E. :)

[cj]

As someone who doesn't really use %E, the first thing that I noticed was how the 5 seemed to be able to ration his speed a little better each time he ran (lower %E each race), and looks like a horse VERY capable of stretching out successfully. Am I barking up the wrong tree here? Wouldn't a lower %E indicate a fitter animal as well.

[andicap]

Keilan
I gotta run, but one comment.

I agree with you on the HTR %E comment,

but I do not compare %E across distance structures, sprint to route, which cuts down somewhat on the problem you discussed. I will be very careful going more than 1 furlong from today's distance. Still not optimal, but the figures do work for me. I can compare the %E of 6f to 7f horses in the program very effectively.

The horses run the same way -- all out so I believe the pace relationship within the race is similar. Yes, you definitely have to account for the extra furlong. That is, a horse who runs well at 6f may have a higher %E at 7f due to tiring in the extra furlong.

6f to 8f? absolutely not.

[keilan]

Craig – You are right on all accounts. Commentator numbers are very good all around, not many horses get bumped in their first start and post a 100 pace rating as you know. The race comments lead me to believe that that he was under wraps in all start thus elevating his energy number slightly. Until a horse like this gets looked in the eye and feels that internal pressure it’s difficult for me to know his full potential. On the other hand if the race comments were “all-out at the wire” etc we would have a better idea.

[keilan]

Andy – having a distance equalization energy number provides you with little or no good information. However horses that have one or two sprint races before they stretch-out and you have their energy numbers for the actual distance raced is valuable information. The brain now has something to work with, this situation happens every single day at almost every track. Why restrict yourself to ½ the information, each race is relative to how that horse may perform today.

I promise I wouldn't rag you again about this. :D :D

[andicap]

I get you.

My sprint %E figs don't work well for routes because they are distace equalized (I get this.)

But yours do tell you good stuff about his ability to rate, and stretch his energy across a longer race (keep the gallon of gas in the tank running longer is how Gordon Pine puts it).

I'll buy that -- So with HTR I'm only getting half the information I need about the race since I'm not gettig energy info on major distance switches.Hmmm.

Probably way too much programming work for Ken Massa to give me a specialized %E number. But it seems clear -cut. Compute the number BEFORE adjusting for distance, rather than afterward.

HTR does have a pace figure that is NOT distance equalized (not the Quirin figure, but not sure if its velocity based so it may not work.
I've toying a bit with using it as a first call %E measure to see how that goes.

Sartin used to have a 1st call %E I recall....

I wonder how bored everyone else is by this thread?????

[hurrikane]

I am loving it folks. Just keep it coming. I think I'm starting to get it the idea.

want to do a different race tomorrow?

[Tom]

Where does Total energy come in to play?
If two horses have %E of 52.44 and both are front runners, then the one with the higehr %E should win the matchup becase he has more gas to use late. Actually, if the Total Energy difference is great enough, it should make the other early horse run a higher %E than he can to keep up. Horses other than early shold not be affected and their probability to win increases as the early horses' late engery diminishes.
So as far as picking a paceline for a horse, is it better to use wins, when the horse is peaking for paceline, and other lines as form idicators?

[keilan]

>Where does Total energy come in to play?

Keilan – think of total energy as the size of the gas tank, greater total energy = classer animal

>If two horses have %E of 52.44 and both are front-runners, then the one with the higehr %E should win the matchup becase he has more gas to use late.

Keilan – the horse with the higher pace number is the superior animal. He obviously has the larger gas tank and is able to keep is %E at 52.44%. Look at it another way Tom, if both horses ran exactly the same speed to the 2nd call and both dispersed their energy at a rate of 52.44% they would then have to hit the wire at the same time to have the same %E number. So if both animals have the same %E classier one is the horse with the higher pace number. Sorry to say it so many different ways but I wanted you to be clear on this point.

Keilan -- Tom if one horse has the larger gas tank he will run the race very comfortabably while the other horse will be extended.

>Horses other than early shold not be affected and their probability to win increases as the early horses' late engery diminishes.

Keilan – If a sustained runner can’t run a competitive speed number/power number then the energy number doesn’t really come into play --- these horses are tosses as they are slow, early-middle and late. But when their speed number/power number are competitive then we’re looking to beat the E and EP horses, will the early horses run too fast early, compromising their chances late. Is the track playing heavy- this further decreases the front-runners chances – Is the track playing to the speed horses, if so then they are advantaged in todays match-up.

Side bar – how can we accurately tell how the track is playing during the early part of the card. – We have handicapped today’s card and race one is over –did the race unfold as we thought it would. Did a horse/s win or run large that we thought would be over the top late (fade in the stretch) ummm maybe the track is playing fast today, I always monitor the track for at least the 1st few races. – what we are trying to detect is what type of runner is advantaged by today’s track – fairly important question, the players that can detect this early are now re-structuring their wagers and are taking advantage of conditions immediately. Anyone out there starting to think maybe %E is a valuable tool.

>So as far as picking a paceline for a horse, is it better to use wins, when the horse is peaking for paceline, and other lines as form indicators?

Keilan – great question, here’s something to think about though. Most horses win one dimensionally they either win gate-to-wire or running from off the pace or the sustained runner who wins when the pace horses collapse. The better horse’s win on the pace or are able to take back and run late to the wire.

So if the above is true -- how do you see your horse winning today’s race. Is the race shape and estimated pace number conducive for him , then maybe he has a shot? Example we have a horse that wins only on the front but in the past few races this horse has been extended early and finishes up the track. Today the internal pressure isn’t there and he should control the pace - - That’s the paceline I’d be choosing for him today. Of course we would look at his present form cycle amongst other things to determine if this was a good wager. If the horse is developing we must adjust historical numbers upwards also beware of lasix and blinker changes – these two things along with barn changes can be most dramatic IMO.

[keilan]

Kane – I tried to give examples before they ran so as not to be accused of red-boarding or a smart-ass after the fact. The problem with that is I passed some excellent examples because I didn’t have time to post before they ran. I may try to throw another example up after they have raced if I think it would be helpful to those reading this thread. If I get any flak I’ll be sending our Canadian Military to deal with that individual. Ohhh and they can be surly :D :D

[JimL]

keilan, I hope you give more examples. I dont care if it is before or after the race. This thread has been a learning experience. I want to thank you. JimL

[keilan]

Jiml -- 10-4 brother --- but my buddy cj just hit another $58 dollar horse and I'm heading into the WR before I miss all the fun

[Tom]

Thanks, Keilan.

[fast4522]

Very interesting comments Tom, I have been working these things with my own program for some time. Total Energy is often the key to the race, with % E only a target for runners that are stuck in a range that only lets them win when the track favors the front runners. I have seen runners stuck in the 53's who do not win until they adjust or catch a day that favors them and is sometimes wet. Is it possible to screen capture a portion of your HTR pace section screen and send it to me at : fast4522@yahoo.com ? I have been doing sartin for some time with my own Excel sheet as well as Validator and may find your output screen interesting. I could send you a sample output in excel from my own charts lets say Del Mar this summer for your review and comments of % E and Total Energy which I have been tracking. I know there is alot to HTR besides the pace portion, but am interested in just the pace portion
Steve

[Tom]

Bump


Someone was asking about using energy distribution and Andicap recommended a search for old thread - this is a good one, and there are others.

Use advanced search, poster Keilan, General Handicapping threads, and topic = Energy. I found several tonight.

[LARRY GEORGE]

if you keep a model of what % is winning try throwing out the high and the
low and then make the average. if you have a extremly high early and use it
it could throw % E off :confused:

[thelyingthief]

i add that many seemingly chaotic energy readings are reconciled by examining the energy of all the contenders. many times i find the winner's energy figure, although too high/low per my model, nonetheless the LOWEST (or HIGHEST) among the contenders. to make myself clear: if a 70+ median is hard to reconcile with a 68.57 mean for 7f, it often happens that all the real contenders are equally high; and this situation can be addressed by preferring the lowest median among them. FX also can help distinguish between these seemingly high candidates.

every year i find several distances that sustain extraordinarily tight energy groupings, and it is always these distances that are my meat, potatoes, and cherry pie. contrariwise, some distances defy energy figures altogether, but are not for this reason exempt from continued monitoring, since they may stabilize at any time.

in sum, my experience has been, when energy figures are important, they supersede any other rating. i remember a conversation with Quinn in which he mused upon energy figures as the most significant contribution of the Sartin school of handicapping.

tlt

[keilan]

in sum, my experience has been, when energy figures are important, they supersede any other rating. i remember a conversation with Quinn in which he mused upon energy figures as the most significant contribution of the Sartin school of handicapping.

tlt


Energy numbers are the most IMPORTANT variable for a host of different reason. For example if the energy numbers are flawed then I can assure you that the rest of your ratings are sub-standard, I would consider that significant.

Energy numbers eliminate as many horses from winning as any method I know of -- understanding false and legit favorites is also something I'd consider significant.

Guys that wanna data test this variable good luck, you'll be right enough times to think that you're actually ahead of the competition but the truth is you'll never consistently wager with any amount of true confidence and then at some point blame the variable, jockey or trainer etc.

Yes this goes for modeling as well, another almost useless waste of time.

Big Brown on paper was so much the best horse in the Derby that he'd have to fall down twice to get beat, anyone that understands %E and pace should have been wagering with both hands.

[andicap]

Keilan's right -- tho I disagree with him on modeling. In all the years I have HTR PPs for the Derby no horse has won with a %E above something like 51.30 or so.

I generally take the horse's 9f race -- best one or one that most approximates today's likely pace -- or if I have to an 8.5f race if the pace is honest.

A few "contenders" this year has %E above what it always takes to win the Derby and were easy throwouts. For eample, Gayego had a 52.06%E in his last race, at 9f. Automatic throwout.

In most years the winner's %E has been above 51.00 as well but not always -- but that's a whole other thread related to pace.

[delayjf]

Andicap,

What was BB %E in the GP Derby and what was it in the KY Derby?


My analysis of BB was that he has a huge pace advantage, but if he ran the same pace figure in KY that he did in GP, he would not last at the 11/4 distance. But if he does rate and drops in Pace figure ( and I assume his %E) he could run an even bigger final number than he did in GP. Obviously he did rate and ran a slightly better Speed figure. I'm shooting in the dark here because I've not seen the pace figures for the KYD and I believe his speed figure increase by a point.

If the above is correct, I can't help but think that the fact that he did not improve his final number by much despite the easier pace, might indicate that 1 1/4 is not his best game. Which could be problematic in the Belmont.

[cj]

Andicap,

What was BB %E in the GP Derby and what was it in the KY Derby?


My analysis of BB was that he has a huge pace advantage, but if he ran the same pace figure in KY that he did in GP, he would not last at the 11/4 distance. But if he does rate and drops in Pace figure ( and I assume his %E) he could run an even bigger final number than he did in GP. Obviously he did rate and ran a slightly better Speed figure. I'm shooting in the dark here because I've not seen the pace figures for the KYD and I believe his speed figure increase by a point.

If the above is correct, I can't help but think that the fact that he did not improve his final number by much despite the easier pace, might indicate that 1 1/4 is not his best game. Which could be problematic in the Belmont.

Well, to be fair, her ran about a mile and five sixteenths. :)

[delayjf]

That bad huh? OK noted?

[46zilzal]

Energy numbers are the most IMPORTANT variable for a host of different reason. For example if the energy numbers are flawed then I can assure you that the rest of your ratings are sub-standard, I would consider that significant.


NOT always in sprints as a horse coming to form, with improving early, will tail off before delivering the goods, and due to a poor third fraction, won't always have the top total energy numbers since one PROJECTS in the form cycle to today's start.

[keilan]

NOT always in sprints as a horse coming to form, with improving early, will tail off before delivering the goods, and due to a poor third fraction, won't always have the top total energy numbers since one PROJECTS in the form cycle to today's start.


Zilly please read before responding okay.

I only stated that when the energy numbers are flawed that it's assured that other ratings are also flawed (sub-standard). I didn't state if the energy numbers were hi - low or somewhere in between, if they're flawed, every other rating probably is also.

I've only stated that not all software programs are created equally and if players out there have littke or no confidence in the %E number then they shouldn't have any confidence in any other rating.

Zilly don't make me draw you another picture, now where's that "planters punch recipe".

[46zilzal]

Zilly don't make me draw you another picture, now where's that "planters punch recipe".
Don't need pictures. Energy is part of the DNA.

[PaceAdvantage]

I really believe that 46 is some sort of AI experiment that is being beta tested here at PA. More often than not, it's like he's carrying on the dialogue HE WANTS to read, and not necessarily the dialogue that is/was taking place.

Frustrating to say the least.

[classhandicapper]

I think you've kind of hit the main reason I don't use %E. It is a function of pace. I am better off just analyzing what I think the pace set up will be than trying to assign a number to what the horse expended last time. If a frontrunner battle s up front, his %E will be high. If he relaxes alone on the lead, it will be low. A pace figure-speed figure race shape tells me the same thing in reality that a %E number does.

I am with you on this.

I am a total novice on E% and other related ratings. It just seems to me they may be better as a tool for modeling some things than for measuring ability. I see so many ratings that are so obviously flawed, it's hard for me to make a play based on any of them. I think a lot of the time they pick price horses they are picking mediocre/bad horses that just happened to win but without any real value attached to them.

Even though I find the concept of %E etc... intriguing and potentially the "way, light and truth", I am not convinced any of the formulas used currently accurately measure either energy expended or ability as well as pace figures used in combination with speed figures in the hands of someone that understands the relationships well.

Someday the formulas used may improve enough to change my mind, but not yet.