Form indicators

[grahors]

Looking for some discussion on using pace numbers (Bris, Magician PPF, etc) to ferret out improving or declining horses. W.Scott has some guidlines regarding lengths closer or further back at the pace and final but I would think some current pace indicators may do a better job.
I have noticed that horses with bris numbers of E1>E2 don't generally fare to well (poor turn times). I do need to study incr. E1 or E2 from next to last to last race under similar class conditions...how about incr or decr PPF??? :cool:

[andicap]

Read Cary Fotias' book on this subject...
Blinkers Off. equiform.com

[grahors]

Thanks Andi,
I will add that one to my library. I have been meaning to pick it up.
Have you ever used Scott's factors..particularly the stretch loss of a length or mroe at the same class and distance and not after a layoff...it seems to run in streaks for me(or maybe I don't pay attention and miss a criteria). In other words, if you have a 4-1 shot you like and it adds up on most of your figures, then you notice the "str loss". Would degrade him or let it slide.
What constitutes bad form to you even though the figs may be superior?
I like to look at declining turn time and combined pace...If the last race with no excuses is less than 3 lengths of his "norm" I tend to lower his chances. My problem is that when I see a superior fig horse, I get excited and can't see the forest for the trees...I need to be braver and pay more attention.
Grahors

[JimL]

Grahors, Brohamer and Quinn, both praised the Scott, form defects and form advantages. They both advocate using them. They did down play the stretch loss as a form indicator. JimL

[andicap]

Thanks Andi,
I will add that one to my library. I have been meaning to pick it up.
Have you ever used Scott's factors..particularly the stretch loss of a length or mroe at the same class and distance and not after a layoff...it seems to run in streaks for me(or maybe I don't pay attention and miss a criteria). In other words, if you have a 4-1 shot you like and it adds up on most of your figures, then you notice the "str loss". Would degrade him or let it slide.
What constitutes bad form to you even though the figs may be superior?
I like to look at declining turn time and combined pace...If the last race with no excuses is less than 3 lengths of his "norm" I tend to lower his chances. My problem is that when I see a superior fig horse, I get excited and can't see the forest for the trees...I need to be braver and pay more attention.
Grahors

I don't usually look at form factors per se -- I try to use form cycle analysis to gauge a horse's fitness. I find that using those type of criteria steer me away from the good longshots -- these horses rarely look good in their last race. The public looks at stretch gain and stretch loss a lot -- reason enough for me not to do so, except as part of handicapping the public. (If a horse looks in the PPs like the public should like him and it's not being bet I'm suspicious. Could be a false overlay.)

To tell you the truth I don't even look at stretch loss or gain in gauging fitness or form except as to how it related to pace and final time.
I do like to see "moves" in a horse's recent past -- something that showed me he did more than just ran around the track with the pack.

[headhawg]

grahors,

A good book to read that combines ideas about race moves and stretch run fractions (plus ground lost/gained) is Jim Lehane's Calibration Handicapping.

Re: Scott's form factors

In the past, I have used the Fast Fred Pro software that included the calculations for both Scott's form factors and his PCR. While I liked what the software did from a time saving point-of-view, it seemed to me that horses that wound up being ITM frequently had poor form based on Scott's rating system. So much so that I tended to disregard those ratings.

HH