PDA

View Full Version : Knocking pace figures


DrugSalvastore
08-29-2005, 04:18 AM
I'll admit it, I almost always look at pace figures when handicapping a race, but they are pretty far down my list of things of importance.

If you are going to get rich with horse racing, I think you are going to do it by turning a valid handicapping method into a number. And I'm not talking getting rich by making a profit through the windows, I'm talking getting rich because some publication or group of people are willing to pay money for your product.

I think Beyer, Ragozin, and Brown have profited nicely from turning final time into a single number. I think Lee Tomlinson has profited nicely from turning pedigree information into a single number. I'm sure there have been a lot of people who have made decent money by turning pace into a number.

If you are going to make money betting on horse racing, you don't have a snowballs chance in hell of doing it without being able to master virtually every single legit handicapping method---and you still have to have good money management skills, a healthy bankroll, and most importantly, you have to deal with losing streaks (they are inevitable) that can drive you bananas. Even than, you probably aren't going to win any worthwhile money, unless you invest an ungodly amount of time each day into this....and strongly compromise the quality of your life.

Imagine if the next guy with a book to come out says 'Buy my book!, it will help you lose less money.' or 'If you invest 14 hours a day, 7 days a week, for all but six weeks a year, I can assure you, that you will make at least $8,000 this year!" I wonder how well that stuff would sell!

What some people don't seem to get through there thick skull, is that the takeout in horse racing is barbaricly high, and the people you are betting against aren't all hopelessly stupid, like you would need them to be in order to assure yourself of annual six figure profits betting the races.

Using one single handicapping method to try and beat the races is like a pitcher trying to make it to the Major Leauges by throwing only one single pitch. I know Mariano Rivera throws that same cut-fastball over and over, but he's only one guy. I guess it's possible that there is one guy on earth who can beat the races with a single method, but that's about it.

This post is supposed to be about pace figures though---I most like to look at pace figures of horses who are changing in distances. If a horse closed nicely from mid-pack, and won going away in a sprint race, I would like the horses chances of stretching out if his Quirin style figure was 65-75. But, If his figure was 80-75 he would be a bad bet on the stretch out. Basically, the first horse closed nicely into a slow pace and the latter horse was involved in a fast paced race that collapsed late.

Lets say you have a race at five furlongs, in which two horses are exiting a six furlong race with front running wins---the first horse has a 90-75 and the second horse has a 68-78. Basically, the first horse set a pretty ruthless early pace for the level, and held off his rivals to win anyway. He's very capable of effectivley taking to a cut-back in distance off that race. The horse who won with a 68-78 pretty much made a cozy lead through moderate fractions, and took advantage of the circumstances. That horse is very poorly suited to a cut-back in distance off that last race.

That is my entire use of pace figures right there---I think they are a very underrated tool to determine how horses might do on the distance change, but other than that, I don't have much use for them. When I do my trip notes, I ALWAYS make an opinion of how fast/slow/or honest I thought the pace was in each race. I think a good analytical opinion is ALWAYS better than some number that is very sensative to a lot of things---shifts in wind most of all. One wind-shift can badly screw-up an entire day of pace figures.

I find it impossible that someone can win money over the long-haul with just pace figures alone. I heard someone say that the raw pace figures loved a horse named Dr. Rockett at Saratoga the other day. Anyone who knows Dr. Rockett---and if you play in New York you HAD BETTER KNOW WHO HE IS---knows that it takes an act of God for that horse to win a race. In fact, in his previous start, where he supposedly got that big pace figure, he bided his time in last while the other horses in that race went tooth-and-nail in a bitter pace battle through VERY swift fractions. The 2-for-40 something plodder Dr. Rockett took advantage of the HIGHLY favorable pace scenerio, and closed from last to win at 17-to-1 odds. That horse earned that supposedly great pace figure by winning a race that collapsed! He's the last horse you would want to bet out of that race!

I think it is more valuable for a player to know stuff like...

*On July 14th at Belmont, every single horse won wire-to-wire on the main track.

* On June 24th at Belmont, every single dirt race except for one was won from last-to-first on the dirt.

* On June 9th at Belmont, there were five races on the dirt. The far outside post won four of them and was second in the other. The winners paid 33-to-1, 7-to-5, 14-to-1, and 5-to-2. And the only one to lose was 2nd at 10-to-1 odds.

And to my amazement, every time I tell people about biases and trends like that, they act like they didn't even know about them. This is a game of information---and you can win money in the long haul if you CONSTANTLY know stuff that other people don't know. Your best shot to win at this game is by taping every race, and combing through them with the result chart and looking for horses who ran better races than people think, and horses who wasted perfect trips/setups---or horses who won with favorable circumstances. The above info from my Belmont Trip Notes is all fact---it's nice to know that every dirt race was won in wire-to-wire fashion, but you are going to make your money in this game with good opinions you uncover while studying the film and anayzing trips. I'd rather have one good, strong opinion from a trip than a hundred fancy stats that people aren't aware of.

To all people who use pace figures, and only pace figures---If you are looking for a way to constantly win big money betting the races, I would suggest giving up the pace figures and looking for a way to illegaly make bets on the far-turn of the race. That's the only chance you have of beating this game without putting in the manual work!

PIC6SIX
08-29-2005, 07:11 AM
I do not know who you are buddy but you make sense to me. This is a grueling game that can build you up and tear you down. From your post it appears you are very knowledgeable and put in mounds of effort in your handicapping. You mentioned the huge takeout which obviously makes it impossible for one to make money at this game by betting favorites. You also touched on the money management issue which along with betting (deciding which pool to sink your money into) is just as huge as handicapping, probably more critical in my book.

The other issue I would like to note is how we have to fight the stewards (Larry, Curly and Moe) who make all the wrong decisions ESPECIALLY in New York. Whether they make the wrong decisions for personal gain or just ineptitude is beyond me.

1st Case in point: 8/13/05 Saratoga 5th race Rich Migliore is on the #5 horse in a stretch duel to the wire with the #4 on the rail with Mr Coe riding. Coe sensing that he is going to get swallowed up by the #5 on the outside steadies his horse to appear he was interfered with. The Mig kept his horse in a straight line in close quarters and Coe pulled a snow job. The stewards
bought the snow job and took the #5 down (who won by open lengths, much the best horse) and put the #4 up for win.

2nd Case in point: 8/14/05 Saratoga 8th race same senario as 1st Case above. In race it is a stretch duel to the wire between #3 on the outside with JR riding and #2 on the rail. Well JR ititiates the bumping, comes in on the #2 bumping reapeatedly and comes down the stretch like he is driving on Lombard Street in San Francisco. Through all this the #2 loses momentum but comes back on the #3 to lose by a nose. What do the steward do, they flash the inquiry sign immediately. Which to me should mean the #3 is coming down. But no, that is not what happens. They leave Johnny V. and the #3 up for the win. Since you take trip notes you probably remember these races well. What irritates me is you have two similar race incidents with 2 opposite rulings. I don't know if this again was a case of personal gain by the stewards, professional ineptitude or favoritism towards New Yorks leading rider. Why is it stuff like this happens repeatedy with the stewards in NY? My favorite was some years ago I was at Saratoga watching a turf race and Julie Krone got knocked into the bushes coming down the stretch.

nobeyerspls
08-29-2005, 07:43 AM
I don't know what pace figures are. Do you compute them from data in the Form? I seem to be doing OK without them so I'll leave them to others.
I do like betting horses coming out of races that are a tad faster than they should be for the conditions of the race. Maybe I'm betting the same horses as pace figure handicappers. and don't know it.

Suff
08-29-2005, 08:34 AM
takeout should be 5 %. we all know that. its a crime what they do to us. but i have some very bad news for you. they write the rules and no one can explain it to them.



nick kling trys. i will tell you right now how bad things are. CH who runs NY racing said yesterday....."oh he's a good guy because he ran goldman sachs for 10 years".

:lol: . run from these guys....don't hug them. they never worked a day in thier lives. are you asking me to bet money on the guy who ran goldman sachs?

charlie. Mr hayward... my alarm clock goes off,,, i get up and go to work. THAT is the money i am betting.


plus... the whole place sucks right now anyway.

sealord
08-29-2005, 03:43 PM
I compute my own pace figs with the Sartin-Brohamer method. There are certain inherent flaws with that method, however, using a little common sense, one can determine relative speed or pace throughout the race. These numbers allowed me to see what many of you already know: often times a Beyer speed fig is way off, and in these times, we might find an edge, or overlay. My favorite example is Bellamy Road's 120 BSF in the Wood. According to my figs, that number was way off, and needless to say, I didn't drop a dime on him in the Derby.
The flip side is when a horse pulls great numbers, a la Whilly in the Arl. Million, but his running style doesn't fit the track, conditions, or relative class of his opponents. I heard from a few fellow PA posters that agreed Whilly looked good, figure wise, yet he bombed in the Million, finishing dead last.
I'm now trying to balance pace figs vs. whats winning at the track this week (or today) vs. race/pace shapes. It's still quite esoteric to me, but it's fun to think about nevertheless.
This handicapping thing seems so complicated when you factor in pace, speed, form/condition, trainer intent, angles, and race luck. Enough to make my head spin. I just read in one of Dick Mitchell's book something like this: "If you can effectively figure out how to make money on the horses, you'd be smart enough and better off using your time investing in the stock market." Ouch!

skate
08-29-2005, 04:36 PM
without doubt, if i play a race, the number one (not the only factor) factor is pace, no question.

sure sure sure, we find days where every early horse won, or every late horse wins, but what good would that do, if you don't know who the early horse or who the late horse should be?

in vegas one time , this guy says the number one horse won every race, the next race the number one was a scr., so he went to the 1 0. and the ten won.
so have a good time , but i aint betting the 1 0. without caps on that race, unless i had too much chinese beer.

skate
08-29-2005, 04:42 PM
no. calif. (bay meadows ?) bout 10 years back, if you knew the horse to be first out of the gate, YOU won!

this went on for about 2 weeks, no kidding.
but unless you find the first horse out, you'd lose. and to find the first horse out, you need a pace figure. you can call it whatever, but you need that figure.

kev
08-29-2005, 07:23 PM
What do you mean BR wood fig. was way off?? You might say one thing about it and another might say something else, I might say he bounced off of it and you have to wait and see if the fig. was right or that fig. cooked his azz and he might not ever be the same. It all depends on what your using and how your looking at it. I didn't drop a dime on him either and it wasn't because the wood fig. was off, cause he might be backing up off that race. Also the derby was a very fast pace that didn't help him either.

Tom
08-29-2005, 10:13 PM
no. calif. (bay meadows ?) bout 10 years back, if you knew the horse to be first out of the gate, YOU won!

this went on for about 2 weeks, no kidding.
but unless you find the first horse out, you'd lose. and to find the first horse out, you need a pace figure. you can call it whatever, but you need that figure.

Finger Lakes used to be that way. Closers came from 2nd place. Deep closers from 3rd.
It ran that way from 1962 - 1993 or so.

sealord
08-29-2005, 10:25 PM
OK, Kev, I'm no expert.....heck, I don't even do this thing for anything other than recreation (yet). The fact that I think his 120 BSF was way off is just my opinion. I came up with that after computing pace figs for BR and the other Derby competitors. His Beyer seemed high to me after some linear comparisons to the pace figs I had. And yes, the Derby pace was too fast, but CD had been favoring closers, and he wasn't going to be uncontested on the pace either. Like I said, I'm no expert, but that 120 seemed real iffy.....

ezpace
08-29-2005, 10:27 PM
Anyone here ever compared the DRF speed fig with the Beyer ,Bris, or CJ"s((sped fig of horse not the performance #)) or your own speed fig in all classes of races.? the nominal difference of that speed fig and the SR, and their cycles/then look for a improving pace call fraction(genrality) for a pace fig for each.

rrbauer
08-30-2005, 10:03 AM
DrugSalvastore wrote:
"If you are going to make money betting on horse racing, you don't have a snowballs chance in hell of doing it without being able to master virtually every single legit handicapping method---and you still have to have good money management skills, a healthy bankroll, and most importantly, you have to deal with losing streaks (they are inevitable) that can drive you bananas. Even than, you probably aren't going to win any worthwhile money, unless you invest an ungodly amount of time each day into this....and strongly compromise the quality of your life."

Comment:
I know guys who regularly turn a profit at the track who know next to nothing about handicapping. One guy uses the consensus picks from his local newspaper and bets certain picks based upon the "strength" of the pick and the win odds. Another, has developed a betting model that derives its data from one of the internet data providers and uses "rules" to determine whether to bet or not. He bets to place and shows a small flat-bet profit that gets enhanced by rebates. Neither of these guys is making big bucks but both are earning returns large enough to cover expenses and have some left over.

The name of the game is to make money not to be a handicapping genius. It's my personal take that many of the folks who are grinding out profits (not a "living") in this game are using some unique or contrarian approach. As you suggest, the takeout from the pools puts most players too far behind to ever catch up.

cato
08-30-2005, 10:25 AM
It is written (by DrugSalvastore):

"I think it is more valuable for a player to know stuff like...

*On July 14th at Belmont, every single horse won wire-to-wire on the main track."

This does seem like vital information and the question I've always had is how do you best convert this into money? That is how quickly do you jump on a bias? Let's look at the charts for the 14th

The first race was a 5 furlong race and won Wire to Wire (WW) at 6.40 odds. Interesting but nothing to bet on yet (?) at least for me. I expect a 5 F race to be won early

2d race was a 7F race won WW at 8.70 odds. Maybe you have something. I am normally surprised when a 7 f race is won WW by a higher odds horse.

3rd race was a 6 F race won WW at 3.55 odds.

Okay, I am a believer and load up on any medium or higher priced horse who looks like they can get the lead in the 4th race (a 5F race). Although the winner ran WW, sadly it was a favorite at .85 odds

5th and 6th races are turf.

SO now I am wild to find an early horse in the 7th. Again a horse wins wire to wire and pays at 1.10 odds.

8th and 9th races are turf races

Personally, unless I would have caught the 3rd race I would have probably lost this day because I doubt I would have bet the favorites in the 4th and th 7th, unless they were the only speed of the race (or as one of those notorious "saver" bets).

SO now I am ready and loaded for bear on the next day, the 15th, ready for an early track bias; but, sadly it does not continue on the 15th as all of the races on the main track were won by pressers or sustained pressers.

SO while I think this is great information the question is still how do you convert it to money? If you identify an early speed track bias after one race that seems a bit premature, but if you waited 3 races then you pretty much lose out.

What are people's opinions on this?

Thanks, Cato

chickenhead
08-30-2005, 11:12 AM
I think the value is that they will likely be overbet next time , while you know that they won over a biased strip, and so perhaps have reason to not run so well today. That is how I have always looked at this sort of info.

JackS
08-30-2005, 02:34 PM
Perhaps a way to simplify cappin' would be to think less (which leads to imaginary thoughts of finding the evential winner) using complicated sp/pace numbers when certain tracks are going to play to ONE SINGLE FACTOR.
Someone above mentioned BM and speed being dominant during a specified length of time. I may have been playing this BM speed factor during the same period but can't be sure. I am sure of one thing, this period was the best two weeks of my betting life.
This is not to say that I simply had to find the speed, sit back, then when the race was over, cash my tickets. The fact was even though most tickets where thrown away as losers, the few winners always made up.
Many bettors might be aware that the track they are playing is playing to a "single factor" but due to human nature, are quick to abandon this factor after seeing two or three or five races back to back come from behind the pace and then assume that the track has proven it's self to no longer favor speed.
Some tracks or distances play to a single factor year after year. Find these tracks and distances and be less willing to adopt a flexable attitude as to how the track appears to be playing now. Stay convinced that the track will always return to normal.
The guys who can successfully switch from speed to off-pace and then back to speed again are probably few and far between and are within a class by themselves. Us average bettors might find it much easier and more profitable to accept the "single factor" as the only factor.

kev
08-30-2005, 06:16 PM
This whole thing about speed bias or closing bias, how does a track play to just horses that run on the lead. For ex. you have two horses A and B, A is a speed ball and B the closer and their both to look to run their best races and their equal. Horse A runs in the 2path and B runs in the 2path but from out of it, tell me how does the track help the front runner?? I just don't get it. Please help. I didn't check into, but on BEL. day I heard someone on TV talking about being a speed favoring track and sure enough the BEL was ran and the closers came out of it. I think if a horse is ready to run he will run, now he might get in some trouble or go very wide that might hold back his run to the eye.

skate
08-31-2005, 04:58 PM
kev;


if im correct in understanding your question.

not much time separates the first from the second or third places finishers in most cases. so it wont take much to create a bias.

only so much energy is in the horse and if that energy is not preserved to the stretch, that horse will hit the wall, from exertion.
the horse that has the lead is running harder and if the turf is too tiring, this will cause the horse to hit the wall. true, the other horse may run on the exact same surface(may not), but more relaxed, if that is the nature of the horses disposition.
if the horse on the lead is not pushed and the surface is not a problem, he will relax and be able to finish in form.

so the horse using the softer, slower, turf more than the other horses, will meet exertion sooner. other points being equal.
keeping in mind, we are talking split, split, fractions of time.

sparkywowo
08-31-2005, 06:16 PM
Biases are often thought of in two ways:
Path on the Track
Style of Runner

The Path on the Track is easy to understand, for example the rail is deep and tiring or the rail is hard and the outside is deep and tiring.

Style of Runner is a bit harder to understand, but it is a relative concept. Imagine the track one day is Flat, a perfectly Flat road. Then, Imagine the next day the track is sloped down just a bit, it's not a Flat road anymore, but a downhill jaunt. Who is going to win on the downhill? The Speed horses, they have a swifter turn of foot and won't tire on the downhill. Then, imagine the day after that the track is sloped up a bit, it's an uphill run. Who is going to win? Probably not the speed because they will tire running up hill and the plodder's will grind along and overtake them. Get out your bicycle and try it for yourself. Ride fast on the flat, then ride fast going downhill, then ride fast going uphill. Try to sprint uphill. You aren't going to sprint very far going uphill. Riding downhill you will notice you can back off on the effort a bit and maintain your speed. If you back off on the effort a bit riding uphill you will stop. The "frictional" resistance has a effect on whether the horse is utilizing the aerobic system efficiently to keep going or must apply a lot of muscle power. If the resistance is low, the horse can keep it's momentum up without terrific strain on the muscles, if the resistance is high, the horse will have to repeatedly push hard with the legs to keep going. Pushing hard is easier to maintain if the horse's natural cadence is a bit lower. The effects of wind, temperature, humidity, and track moisture and depth can make the race analagous to uphill, flat and downhill.