software pace line selection

[traynor]

I would appreciate input from current users regarding the pace line selection methods used in their favorite applications. There seems to be a lot of "automatic" pace line selection, and I am curious how the various applications deal with the issue. How much option do you have in which lines are used for comparison, and if the selection process is automated, do you feel that it is more or less accurate than you would be selecting pace lines on your own?

Last question; does any application have (or does anyone still use) the option to select and average multiple pace lines?
Good Luck

[sjk]

For what it's worth my opinion is that you are far better off to calculate a pace line using all available information rather than to select one.

[Hank]

I've been useing AIO v6 for a few months so I'm not exactly a power user.But I'm getting there. The program auto selects pacelines based on four user slected settings 1. last race 2.best of similar3.auto[program uses results to refine paceline selections]4.custom, user sets cumtomized guidelines for paceline selection.I've tested mostly in the auto and best of similar mode,and the program does a decent job of paceline selection MOST of the time. However I select my own contenders and pacelines most of the time.I'm still very much learning to make best use of the program But I feel it has great potential,with regard to paceline secection I'm thinking runing TWO lines one to determine the horses best case senerio type race and one to TRY and project how it will perform TODAY might be the way to go.I dont think a program will ever select pacelines on a par with a good capper. Many lines are easy and jump off the page, the program will nail these type, but the tricky head scratchers the program has no chance on these type.

[Tom]

HTR has 6 paceline modes:
Last race
Best of last three
Best 2 of last three
Best AP last six months, within a half furlong of today's distance
Automatic
Manual

I can select automatic, let the proigram pcik tha lines, then go in and change any one of them I want.

I can also select multiple lines and the program will average them. I do this a lot in turf routes.

[Bala]

"HTR has 6 paceline modes....."

http://snipurl.com/p7x2 (http://snipurl.com/p7x2)



__________________________________________________
If evolution is true then any monkey can pick the '06 derby.

[46zilzal]

II'm thinking runing TWO lines one to determine the horses best case senerio type race and one to TRY and project how it will perform TODAY might be the way to go.
BINGO

[Dave Schwartz]

HSH has a totally programmable paceline selection system manager that allows you to build many different systems.

If, instead, you click the "suggest" button it uses a very unique approach.

First, it searches for any close finishes (i.e. less than 1 length) in recent races at a similar distance. (When I say "close" I do not mean that winning by 4 lengths is close.)

The theory is that when a horse wins or loses by a neck or so, that defines how good the horse really is. If he lost by a neck, he would have won if he was any better. If he won, he couldn;t have been much better or he'd have won by more.

So, it takes those close races and picks the one most recent. (The goal is to find one tight finish race.)

If there is no such race, then it tries again, going farther back. If there still aren't any, it now looks for the two best finishes at a similar distance, breaking ties on recency. ("Best" is now defined as within 2 lengths.)

If it still has not found two races, it widens the search adjusting recency and distance/surface requirements.

If you are a paceline selection player, I assure you that the key to profit is using older pacelines.

A lot of people miss the fact that when you religiously use the last line or even best of last two you are not really doing pace handicapping. You are doping form handicapping. After all, the horse that just ran a big last race will almost always look good while the horse that didn't run so great will look bad.

This results in an inability to cash many tickets except on somewhat obvious low-priced horses.


Hope this helps you in your quest for improvement.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[traynor]

Dave Schwartz wrote: <Hope this helps you in your quest for improvement.>

Yes it does, thanks. How do you quantify the relationship between performance and appropriate class level? Aside from the obvious of selecting a pace line at which the entry has been competitive.

Lots of upgrading entries run as well at the higher grade as at the lower--or better (if improving)--while others seem outclassed. Regression can pick up what has already happened (competitive class level) and add an inclusory figure ("within 25% of good race class level" or whatever) that still leaves a lot to be desired. COnversely, some drop in class and run well, others just seem confused. It seems a key issue in selecting profitably.
Good Luck

[traynor]

Tom wrote: <I can also select multiple lines and the program will average them. I do this a lot in turf routes.>

That is what I needed to know, thanks. What kind of success are you having with HTR on turf routes? Dirt sprints seem to attract the most money, and be the most predictable, but turf routes seem to offer the most opportunity. (That may be a totally skewed personal opinion; I avoided turf routes for years).
Good Luck

[traynor]

Hank wrote: <I'm thinking runing TWO lines one to determine the horses best case senerio type race and one to TRY and project how it will perform TODAY might be the way to go.>

Is the projection based on selection of another line, or is it constructed?
Good Luck

[traynor]

sjk wrote: <For what it's worth my opinion is that you are far better off to calculate a pace line using all available information rather than to select one.>

I really dislike asking stupid questions, but I am clueless about what you mean. Are you referring to constructed pace lines (something like combining the best first fraction with the best second fraction, or whatever)? I don't understand what you mean by "calculate a pace line" if it refers to something else. I would appreciate any further insight you might be able to provide.
Good Luck

[traynor]

Dave Schwartz wrote: <After all, the horse that just ran a big last race will almost always look good while the horse that didn't run so great will look bad.>

I am a big fan of Bill Quirin's observation that, "If the horse ran its best in its last race, that is when you should have bet it." I agree about older pace lines, to a point; if recent performances are not considered representative of decent form, it seems pointless to dig back three or four months for a good race in the hope it will be repeated or surpassed today. That is, why would a horse suddenly run back to an old performance level today when it has failed to do just that in its last two, three, or four races? I think there has to be some significant sign of life in recent performances to warrant looking further back.
Good Luck

[sjk]

sjk wrote: <For what it's worth my opinion is that you are far better off to calculate a pace line using all available information rather than to select one.>

I really dislike asking stupid questions, but I am clueless about what you mean. Are you referring to constructed pace lines (something like combining the best first fraction with the best second fraction, or whatever)? I don't understand what you mean by "calculate a pace line" if it refers to something else. I would appreciate any further insight you might be able to provide.
Good Luck

Perhaps it is my ignorance of what is meant by a pace line since I have never used anyone else's software. My assumption is that this would be equivalent to projecting the horses position at the early calls in the race.

My recommendation to do a calculation would involve making the best adjusted pace figures you can for each of the horses past races (say within the last year) and making an average or weighted average out of those values at each call.

[andicap]

Here's what I do with HTR and sometimes CJ's stuff.Harder with CJ's because it takes much longer so I'll use CJ's (B)LAAAST method, a modified Pizzolla paceline election

I might run the races a few times and with the program's ease it takes me about 3 minutes to do so..I can save each version of the race to file and print them out to compare. What a great program.

1. Average. never thought it would work but it does well. But what I do is throw out the worst one. I take last 3 or 4 races from today's distance structure, surface, etc. For horses who need to I will even go back a year. This has led to some big prices, at least at the small tracks.
I try to end up with 2-3 lines.
BUT I have variations on the theme:


2. Variation 1a --
Always include the last line unless there an excuse. Then do the same thing.

3. Variation 1b -- Only use pacelines that are within a few ticks of today's estimated pace. I will ue a wide range for the expected pace, somethig very general, like, it should be in the high 90s. Then I'll want races where the pace was in the 95-101 or so range. BUT I will include front runners and pace pressers if the pace was SLOW because I will punish a horse who runs a poor race after a slow pace.

4. Not averaging -- I take the best paceline from the horses last 3 at today's distance/surface going back no more than 6 months. I then check for
-- pace. If a horse has a huge figure based on the pace I might throw it out. E.g. E horse set a slow pace and today wont.
-- Totally out of line figure. If a horse, especially an older one, ran a figure he has never done before or is just out of whack with what he's done recently I'll throw it out.
-- Two bad races in a row. Unless there are legit excues, out he goes. But if a horse is a longshot and has a good back number take a very close look to find ANY reason to use the figure. Here's one from this week when on Wed., Draw Play won at 39-1 wit some lousy recent lines. BUT if you went back to his last race at the main AQU track he went straight to the top!! Talk about a horse for course!!

In short if a horse is a longshot I want to look for reasons to include the figure. If he's a favorite I want to find reasons to discount a strong figure.

[andicap]

Dave Schwartz wrote: <After all, the horse that just ran a big last race will almost always look good while the horse that didn't run so great will look bad.>

I am a big fan of Bill Quirin's observation that, "If the horse ran its best in its last race, that is when you should have bet it."

The gambler's saying for that is, "you missed the wedding, why show up for the funeral?"

[Tom]

Tom wrote: <I can also select multiple lines and the program will average them. I do this a lot in turf routes.>

That is what I needed to know, thanks. What kind of success are you having with HTR on turf routes?
Good Luck


Turf routes? $$$$$$$$$$$ ;)

[46zilzal]

one is selecting a PERFOMRER (the horse), not a performance (a single race with it's pace responsive information) and each line must be considered in that context. Sample error is one of the biggest mistakes the use of a single line can impart to ANY software package.

[Hank]

Traynor,the second paceline would NOT be a construct,just another selected line that hopefully reflects the horses performance vs TODAYS likely pace demands.

[Bala]

I wonder if all this complex analysis of potential perfect pace line selection can be simplified.

In most cases just using the Beyer, Cramer, etc... fig of whatever pace line you choose will draw you to the same conclusion.

To Dave Schwartz: no doubt your pace line methodology is sound. However I submit - that using nothing else but the Cramer number of that race will simplify the handicapping process and get the same results. Considering that most handicapper are in fact recreational player.

In order to address such a formidable problem in a scientific way, some lessons from Information Theory are extremely helpful. In the words of Albert Einstein "everything should be made as simple as possible - but no simpler." In practice, this means that any useful theory should simplify our view of the world in some way, by adding structure to what otherwise are merely lists of meaningless fact.

So called "theories" suffer from many special cases. For example, while the Sartin methodology {pace handicapping} may have begun as a simple principle for analysing Pace {the way in which horses velocities vary within a race} with a few simple rules. As it evolved, it soon degenerated into a confusing jumble of special cases. Soon becoming virtually indistingusihable from the lists of facts it is intended to describe.

Is it any wonder at the major tracks - sheet {fig} player account for over half of the total handle and are by far the biggest betters?

_________________________________________________
If evolution is true then any monkey can pick the '06 derby.

[Tom]

one is selecting a PERFOMRER (the horse), not a performance (a single race with it's pace responsive information) and each line must be considered in that context. Sample error is one of the biggest mistakes the use of a single line can impart to ANY software package.

So a smapleof two is better?
If the two lines show different things, then what do you do? Take a third, a fourth, until you get two to match? Or just choose one of the two, hoping to pick the right one?

I do just fine with HTR and one line on dirt races.

[sjk]

I would disagree with the concept that simple is better as relates to computerized calculations.

If a relatively lengthy calculation generates better results than a simpler one a computer will faithfully make the calculation without complaint or paralysis.

[traynor]

sjk wrote: <Perhaps it is my ignorance of what is meant by a pace line since I have never used anyone else's software. My assumption is that this would be equivalent to projecting the horses position at the early calls in the race.>

Projecting is the goal, but not always what happens. "Pace line" normally is a synonym for "most predictive running line" from the PPs. Specifically, the performance that the handicapper believes is most likely to be replicated today. If that seems highly subjective, semi-intuitive, and about as certain as wet tissue paper, then you have a good idea of what a pace line is.

While projected positions at various calls is part of it, the trick is in the decision making process involved in selecting the pace lines that are predictive. Dave Schwartz mentioned that bigger prices go with older pace lines; a horse "running back" to a form displayed months ago pays better than a horse that duplicates its last race performance. The problem in picking what those involved with Sartin or Brohamer called "Pizzola pace lines" or "Ultra Scan pace lines" or "seminar pace lines" is that they are much easier to select after the race than before. Why a horse would suddenly revert to the form from months ago, today, rather than last week, or next week, is largely a fishing expedition. When it works, it can be spectacular, but it usually fails.

My understanding of what you are doing is that you construct pace lines, generating values that do not exist in the running lines, but are composed of values exhibited in those running lines. Is that close?
Good Luck

[traynor]

Bala wrote: <To Dave Schwartz: no doubt your pace line methodology is sound. However I submit - that using nothing else but the Cramer number of that race will simplify the handicapping process and get the same results.>

When I started with pace handicapping twenty-some years ago, I used the Sartin Phase III program favored by Brohamer. In nearly every race, I could get the same selection by combining the DRF speed rating and track variant--despite the fact that both were highly flawed and "inaccurate." As I learned more, I found I could get the same information from looking at a pace line as converting it to fps "velocities." As in, "Oh, look, the horse that did 6f in 110:2 has a higher AP than the horse that ran 6f in 111 flat."

A large number of ratings can often introduce a layer of complexity in handicapping that should not exist, making simple situations seem inscrutable and incapable of analysis by other than computerized means.
Good Luck

[sjk]

Yes. I use the historical data to predict how far back each horse is most likely to be at the 1st and 2nd calls. These predictions are then used in subsequent calculations on the way to making an odds line.

As the other posters have mentioned the more recent past races are somewhat more important than the ones further back and you must take pains to ensure that the unusually slow ones (due to trouble or tactics) do not have a dominating effect on the result.

Those reasons and the fact that it takes considerable care to make an accurate pace figure makes it a calculation I would not attempt to do in my head.

[traynor]

Hank wrote: <Traynor,the second paceline would NOT be a construct,just another selected line that hopefully reflects the horses performance vs TODAYS likely pace demands.>

I agree. Especially with averaging. The whole mystique of "picking the proper pace line" ignores the issue of inconsistency, especially when resticting to recent lines. Any horse worth betting should at least show signs of life in another running line. If there are not two lines worth using, it is questionable whether the race should be bet at all. Specifically, if the running lines are usually bleak, with occasional high points, how do you know that it will duplicate the high points, rather than the more prevalent bleak pattern?
Good Luck

[traynor]

Tom wrote: <I do just fine with HTR and one line on dirt races.>

I think the issue may be more looking for an excuse why a pace line can be used by associating it with another running line than it is mandating that lines be averaged. If same distance and class, finishes 7 - 7 - 8 - 2, I would be really hesitant to accept the 2 race as predictive. With finishes of 7 - 8 - 4 - 2, it would be much easier to consider it improving form. Or an even running line with good fractions at a higher grade preceding the 2 race. Almost anything except poor - poor -poor - good, with no indication of why the wakeup happened.
Good Luck

[traynor]

sjk wrote: <If a relatively lengthy calculation generates better results than a simpler one a computer will faithfully make the calculation without complaint or paralysis.>

Agreed, as long as the results are better, the calculations are justified. When the complex calculations only generate the same selections that can be derived with "non-computer" methods, they are not.
Good Luck

[46zilzal]

So a smapleof two is better?
If the two lines show different things, then what do you do? Take a third, a fourth, until you get two to match? Or just choose one of the two, hoping to pick the right one?



often do just that

it is the HORSE, not the performance and without looking at multiple lines you do not get that.

Down to 5 let's say (ABCDE) Go back and find representative lines and compare to the field as A1, A3, A4 to B C D E, then do the same with all the others sequentially to see how this PERFORMER matches up. SAMPLE error minimized

[Tom]

Tom wrote: <I do just fine with HTR and one line on dirt races.>

I think the issue may be more looking for an excuse why a pace line can be used by associating it with another running line than it is mandating that lines be averaged. If same distance and class, finishes 7 - 7 - 8 - 2, I would be really hesitant to accept the 2 race as predictive. With finishes of 7 - 8 - 4 - 2, it would be much easier to consider it improving form. Or an even running line with good fractions at a higher grade preceding the 2 race. Almost anything except poor - poor -poor - good, with no indication of why the wakeup happened.
Good Luck


That is the thing - HTR provide other -than-pace things that tell you when to expect a wake up, explain a decline. Poor-poor-poor -Work out rating 85, #1, Good. Fully expected.

It's not the prcess that matters - it is the results.

[ezpace]

Your all usidng the best Drf SR line of today distance. I know it

[46zilzal]

Your all usidng the best Drf SR line of today distance. I know it
OTHER than for the Breeder's Cup and Derby, I never buy a Racing Form

[ezpace]

LOL was joking anyway .... your using CJ's top 2 then 46 we know ......LOL or your using POSITION runnig style ala Brohammer as he says more important than his and your velocity numberz ... I'm Running for cover now......!!!!!!!!!! rofllmao !!!

[46zilzal]

I have NO idea what you just said and I have NEVER, although I understand that they are good, used CJ's numbers

ALSO have had to modify to a MIDrange position between velcoity and position as they are BOTH factors

You need to visit the Merriam Webster site, regularly

[traynor]

Tom wrote: <It's not the prcess that matters - it is the results.>

Totalmente de acuerdo. Based primarily on your advice, I have spent most of the day studying the material on HTR. Amazingly, I even understand what you said about the workouts. It is an impressive piece of work that I look forward to using. As soon as I have time. I really appreciate yur insights and observations. Good Luck

[ezpace]

lol.. I'm messing with ya ..and i just downloaded the new DICKshunary ... :)

[mmarkon]

Hi


I'm a newbie here.
I remember Doc Sartin saying that the best paceline to use was the best of the last 3, assuming the distance and class were appropriate.
Opinions?

[HTRFGuy]

Sure, it is appropriate for all cases except those where it is not! What I am trying to say is that this is a generalization which simply will not hold up in practice. What will happen is 40% of the time you are right, 40% you are wrong and the other 20% is indeterminate.

Choosing a single pace line is the road to disaster! Decision making is best achieved when you use all the information available to you.


Hi


I'm a newbie here.
I remember Doc Sartin saying that the best paceline to use was the best of the last 3, assuming the distance and class were appropriate.
Opinions?

[Tom]

Hi


I'm a newbie here.
I remember Doc Sartin saying that the best paceline to use was the best of the last 3, assuming the distance and class were appropriate.
Opinions?

Welcome. I agree in theory with it, and used that method for many years. You have to be careful, though, say three back the horses runs for $10,000 and finishes second and earns a Beyer of 97, then two back, Runs for $8,500, finished 5th and earns a 63, then last out finishes 5th are $5,000 and earns a Beyer of 54....don't use that 97!
An upside is a lot of form questions are taken care of for you - as long as there is nothing drastic there, horses run good, run bad, and you can grab some you would not otherwise. Capitalize on the 40% you hit, shoot for half the 20% gray area ones, and live with the 40% you will miss.


Do you still use any Sartin programs? We have some users here.

[HTRFGuy]

Welcome. I agree in theory with it, and used that method for many years. You have to be careful, though, say three back the horses runs for $10,000 and finishes second and earns a Beyer of 97, then two back, Runs for $8,500, finished 5th and earns a 63, then last out finishes 5th are $5,000 and earns a Beyer of 54....don't use that 97!
An upside is a lot of form questions are taken care of for you - as long as there is nothing drastic there, horses run good, run bad, and you can grab some you would not otherwise. Capitalize on the 40% you hit, shoot for half the 20% gray area ones, and live with the 40% you will miss.


Do you still use any Sartin programs? We have some users here.

Don't use any Sartin programs per se. My home grown stuff is based, however, on the principles of Sartin and Brohammer except that I don't usually use only 'one' past performance. I do some averaging but at the same time look at the rank/sort of individual past performances to ascertain trends and tendencies.

[mmarkon]

Tom

Do you still use any Sartin programs? We have some users here.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I'm still using a combo of Aodds Gold and Thoromation.I'd like to hear how some of the others are doing.

mmarkon