Pace Makes the Race and BRIS

[grahors]

Greetings,
In PMR, TPR=2nd call pace of the horse+Final speed of the horse. Lengths behind are calculated the same at the 2 call and finish.
I wish to use BRIS numbers to get an effective TPR. Bris uses 2l per point at the 2 call and either 1.5 or 1 (depending on route or sprint) l per point for the speed number. What can I do to get the 2 call and speed into harmonious bliss as to use some of the PMR number comparisons? Or is just adding EP2 and LP as effective for comparisons and contender selections?
Grahors
PS. Does anyone use the E1 fig for anything other than positional analysis?

[turfspec]

If you are refering to Tom Hambleton et al, " Pace Makes The Race", TPR is calculated - Early Pace Rating + Final Fraction = TPR. So with BRIS adding the SC rating to LP rating will work just fine but of course the result isn't a velocity rating. No beaten lengths adjustment is necessary in this case.

Adding SC to Final Speed is, I believe, a Quirin/Quinn construct. Someone will surely correct me if I'm wrong.

Rob

[levinmpa]

I like the way Michael Pizzolla described the TPR rating in his seminar.

"2nd call + Final Fraction = Final Time".

[headhawg]

I like the way Michael Pizzolla described the TPR rating in his seminar.

"2nd call + Final Fraction = Final Time".

He also mentioned this in his Master Magician tapes -- in as nice a way as possible -- that TPR was a final time rating and did not really have anything to do with pace.

grahors, I would tell you to use cj's numbers instead, but the word is out and prices seem to be coming down already. :D

[socantra]

I've never found the BRIS pace numbers to give you anything resmbling the Hambleton TPR numbers, but turfspec is right. You would just add E2 and LP to get the same style of numbers. The problem is that the scale is totally different, and I've never been able to get a particularly good read on energy distribution, which to me was always one of the best features of the TPR's.

If you really want to do the full numbers from the book, BRIS data files include the DRF SR and TV, and if you use the BRIS past performance software, you can print out a past performance that has the horse's individual fractions in fifths of a second complete with SR+TV. Add an updated class track chart and you've got all the information available to them in the book.

I still use them for contender selection sometimes, but usually just run the raw numbers in my head, making allowances rather than adjustments. They are still a useful tool once you go through the pain of learning to use them, but I suppose the same could be said for a number of other things, including the BRIS pace ratings.

socantra...

[raybo]

"PS. Does anyone use the E1 fig for anything other than positional analysis?"

Bris' E2 (start to 2nd call) includes E1 so in creating a "Bris" TPR there would be no need to use E1. E2 + LP = TPR. As far as whether or not E1 can be used for anything other than positional analysis, it is ,of course, the pace rating from start to 1st call. So, yes it can be used for something other than positional analysis, if one is interested in how the start of the race was run. As with any of the other call figures, an E1 that was faster or slower than what a particular horse prefers or can adjust to can have an adverse affect on how he performs in the latter stages of the race. In my opinion, however, this figure is not normally as important as the E2 and LP figures.

[grahors]

Thanks Raybo..I agree 100%. I seem to always use E2 for establishing a fulcrum pace and try to gauge the horses on that. I think I may do a pencil and paper run on using E1 as a fulcrum and see what shakes down. Do you think this may be a waste of time?
Grahors

[raybo]

"I seem to always use E2 for establishing a fulcrum pace and try to gauge the horses on that. I think I may do a pencil and paper run on using E1 as a fulcrum and see what shakes down. Do you think this may be a waste of time?"

Grahors, I don't necessarily think an analysis of any of the various racing data is a waste of time. One might not want to get too excited about using any single piece of data as a "fulcrum" with regard to all horses in a particular race. You might be able to apply that method to certain animals according to their preferred running styles, but I would be very careful in trying to apply that tactic arbitrarily, especially concerning E1. Many horses can handle differing paces in the first 1/4 mile of a race. Much of what happens in that portion of races is a result of post position and gate performance, not necessarily a factor of early speed ability. Many times the 1st 1/4 fraction is set by a non-contender while the true contenders simply ignore that fraction setter and run what they can, under the circumstances. I believe that the way a horse performs in the first turn is a more legitimate forecaster of what he might be able to do at crunch time than his E1 figure, because of the traffic he must negotiate and how much energy he must use to get in a position that will enable him to finish strongly. In summary, trying to use any single "angle" across the board is suspect and has taken a lot of cash out of players' pockets. I know trying to figure a magic formula is something that many handicappers spend the majority of their time searching for, but in my opinion, it's just a pipe dream. If this game was easy the game would cease to exist. It's personally the most difficult thing I've ever attempted, golf is a close 2nd. All factual data must be examined and then you must try to apply that analysis to each entry in the race in a way that will produce a logical race scenario for each horse. Just putting that idea into words is difficult enough. Our computer programs are great tools for much of that stuff, but to be sure, that program must be able to apply itself differently to each participant depending on how each is likely to react to the myriad of happenings in a race.

Kinda sounds like a politician, huh? Hard to get a straight answer out of them. Sorry, but it's the nature of the game.

[grahors]

Raybo,
Again, I agree 100% except for the part about golf.(nothing comes close to the difficulty of the race track) I do look at many factors and try to determine a race scenario. I guess I try to single out some easily obtained factors to utilize as "toss out" factors. The E2 fulcrum seems to work OK in some scenarios and I thought E1 might enhance it, but, I do agree that many other factors enter into the E1 fig and I generally dismiss it.
Grahors.