pace handicapping question

[railman305]

Hey all,

A question on pace,
1.)In a race that is full of early speed front runners does this mean the pace will favor the closers in the end because the early speed horses will all burn each other out, but on the flip side won't it be harder for the closer to keep up if the race is run at a faster pace and time.
2.) On the flip side if a race only has 1 or 2 lone speed front running horses wouldn't this be against the advantage of the closer's because these pacesetters will have something left for the finish, even if the slower pace allows the closers to keep up better?

thanks guys these forums are great

[Overlay]

My take on that would be that, in the case of multiple early-speed types, the scenario would be more favorable for the closer because, even though all the horses will be slowing down in the stretch, the early-speed types will have exerted a greater comparative effort in competing against one another and will be slowing down more, creating the possibility of being caught before the wire by a horse that still has energy left, even if that horse may have trailed in the early going.

I'd say that a lone early-speed type is a greater threat to a closer than any scenario where two or more horses figure to duel for the early lead, based on the same considerations of energy expenditure.

[boomman]

My take on that would be that, in the case of multiple early-speed types, the scenario would be more favorable for the closer because, even though all the horses will be slowing down in the stretch, the early-speed types will have exerted a greater comparative effort in competing against one another and will be slowing down more, creating the possibility of being caught before the wire by a horse that still has energy left, even if that horse may have trailed in the early going.

I'd say that a lone early-speed type is a greater threat to a closer than any scenario where two or more horses figure to duel for the early lead, based on the same considerations of energy expenditure.

Agree with Overlay in that what you're looking for to determine the outcome is how much energy was expended by the front runners? If you determine in your handicapping that indeed multiple horses will be vying for the lead, then it is usually pretty safe to assume that the closers will be passing these types in the lane. The exception to that theory is a front runner who may have a huge class edge on the field or be in excellent form where they can withstand such a speed duel to a degree. They will then draw off from the other tiring front runners in the stretch and the closers are now "shooting" for the lone surviving front speed runner ..........;)

Boomer

[Tom]

A lot of times, in a race with multiple front runers, one horse will be the speed of the speed and "pop" the field, putting the other earlies out of their comfort zones by being behind. Watchout for the superior early speed.

[bobphilo]

Hey all,

A question on pace,
1.)In a race that is full of early speed front runners does this mean the pace will favor the closers in the end because the early speed horses will all burn each other out, but on the flip side won't it be harder for the closer to keep up if the race is run at a faster pace and time.
2.) On the flip side if a race only has 1 or 2 lone speed front running horses wouldn't this be against the advantage of the closer's because these pacesetters will have something left for the finish, even if the slower pace allows the closers to keep up better?

thanks guys these forums are great

In case 1 the closer will have the advantage because it won't matter how far ahead the front runners get. In fact the more ahead they get the more they'll use up energy inefficiently by running so fast and the more they'll tire. They'll come back to the closer.
In case 2 the opposite is the case and the frontrunners will have more left to hold off the closer. it's all about efficient distribution of energy.
Of course this asumes roughly equal ability. If a horse has a big advantage over his opponents and energy to spare, he might still beat them despite ineficiant distribution of energy, though the result willl be closer.

Bob

Bob

[bobphilo]

In case 1 the closer will have the advantage because it won't matter how far ahead the front runners get. In fact the more ahead they get the more they'll use up energy inefficiently by running so fast and the more they'll tire. They'll come back to the closer.
In case 2 the opposite is the case and the frontrunners will have more left to hold off the closer. it's all about efficient distribution of energy.
Of course this asumes roughly equal ability. If a horse has a big advantage over his opponents and energy to spare, he might still beat them despite ineficiant distribution of energy, though the result willl be closer.

Bob



Furthermore even if the "speed of the speed" will have the advantage over the other speed types, if there is a good closer in the field, the speedballs early efforts will set him up for the closers late kick.

Bob

[JustRalph]

Railman..........this thread could go on for days. There are tons of opinions on this. I suggest you read some of the books on Pace Capping etc. Btw, I can tell you that I think this subject, race shape etc............is the most beneficial subject you can study early on as a capper.

If you can predict the pace, you can predict the race.

[Murph]

Railman..........this thread could go on for days. There are tons of opinions on this. I suggest you read some of the books on Pace Capping etc. Btw, I can tell you that I think this subject, race shape etc............is the most beneficial subject you can study early on as a capper.

If you can predict the pace, you can predict the race.It's nice when you can predict pace players on form, for sure. I can usually tell how things will unfold - as soon as the first 1/4 time is posted on the toteboard. Good advice, Ralph.

[Semipro]

What Tom said:ThmbUp:

[46zilzal]

EACH race is distinct and one cannot make general conclusions based upon qualitative rather than quantitative evaluations. Some speed duels, at some courses end in the closers getting there: most don't. Track surfaces (Aqueduct vs. let's say Arlington) strongly play into the mix as well. I have always followed Dr. Quirin: speed in the universal track variant.

TOO general a statement to define those ideas one way or the other.

[Semipro]

EACH race is distinct and one cannot make general conclusions based upon qualitative rather than quantitative evaluations. Some speed duels, at some courses end in the closers getting there: most don't. Track surfaces (Aqueduct vs. let's say Arlington) strongly play into the mix as well. I have always followed Dr. Quirin: speed in the universal track variant.

TOO general a statement to define those ideas one way or the other.I think the statement was ALOT of times. Alot of times umpteen dozen different pace
scenerios happen and each race is different. Duh!

[ny0707ny]

1) Horses just off the pace have the best chance. It is hard for any closer who runs near last in the country to win races since most tracks favor speed. On turf though it is different. Closers have a better chance on turf running last. Like my favorite turf horse Rutherienne who runs last. The closer would have to be very quick if he runs dead last. The race would also have to be a longer distance for him to catch up. Closers usually don't win 5f races.

2) One or two front runners does not mean they will both lose. It depends on the horse and the times. War Pass was in a pace battle just his last race at Aqueduct and still almost won. But that is because War Pass is a great horse. The other horse he was in a battle with finished so far back I couldn't even see him.

[Tom]

That's another good angle, ny...."won the duel, lost the race."
Two horses battle it out on the front end and one quits, the other gets beat by a closer. The one who won the duel is worht looking at next time, if he is not going to be challenged as hard early.
This used to be a visual angle, but I have adapted it to more of a paceline selection tool - I use the line ( heavy pressure, light pressure) that best fits what I think today's pace will be like.

[ny0707ny]

I forgot the name of the horse that beat out WP at Aqueduct. I don't follow him for Derby maybe that is why. He only won I think by 1/2. It does not really say much for him.
That is why I say WP still won that race. The way he fought on was just great. Also he did it off of a last race where he didn't even run really. He got a 53 beyer only at Tampa. It says even more about this horse and how good he is.
You have to figure if he can avoid that pace battle he would have a much better chance next out. He should also improve off of that race and be even more tougher for Derby.

[Niko]

EACH race is distinct and one cannot make general conclusions based upon qualitative rather than quantitative evaluations. Some speed duels, at some courses end in the closers getting there: most don't. Track surfaces (Aqueduct vs. let's say Arlington) strongly play into the mix as well. I have always followed Dr. Quirin: speed in the universal track variant.

TOO general a statement to define those ideas one way or the other.

most don't....totally agree. My one caveat of course is 3 or more E speed that run to or above par etc..

Seems like sometimes it just brings out the best in them...

[toetoe]

railman,

If you are a beginner, congratulations on an insight that took years for me to get --- a quick pace can leave a laggard with much too much to do, regardless of how many speedsters are entered. :ThmbUp:
For many years, I persisted in analyzing pace very cursorily.
"Ooh, two speedballs ! :jump: They'll kill each other off, and my closer will win every time, like a machine."

Uh, no. :blush:

[delayjf]

The theory that the speed horse will hook up and burn each other out is generally true. Especially in the cheaper races - horses seem to be more one dimensional. However, sometimes (usually in stakes races) trainers, jockey's can over handicap the race, see the race is stacked with speed, and not wanting to get involved ins a suicidal speed duel, rate their horse.

Case in point, the 2000 Kentucky Derby won by War Emblem. All week leading up to the race, there was a lot of talk about how much speed there was in this field and how fast the pace would be. What happened? Everybody but War Emblem rated, leaving him alone on an easy lead resulting in a wire to wire Derby victory. Like all other handicapping strategies, **it happens.

[thelyingthief]

If I recall my Quirin correctly, he published numbers that indicate two horses, even those closely matched, are not, because of a speed duel, any less likely to win a race than a lone front-runner. I examined this statement for accuracy using Santa Anita pp's several years ago, and found this to be a generally sound datum.

Newer surfaces may alter this statistic, but it is not evident thus far.


tlt.

[Overlay]

If I recall my Quirin correctly, he published numbers that indicate two horses, even those closely matched, are not, because of a speed duel, any less likely to win a race than a lone front-runner. I examined this statement for accuracy using Santa Anita pp's several years ago, and found this to be a generally sound datum.

Newer surfaces may alter this statistic, but it is not evident thus far.

Quirin's exact figure on races where a two-horse speed duel developed had one of those two horses winning at an overall rate of 40.2%. Not surprisingly, that percentage figure decreased as race distance increased. For races of 5 to 6 furlongs, it was 47%. At 6-1/2 to 7 furlongs, it was 34.9%. And at 1 to 1-1/4 miles, it was 31.4%.

[Valupix]

On the surface these races full of speed would logically favor the closers. My own research has proven it to be very true.

However, these excessive speed situations are so obvious to so many bettors that these closers tend to attract far too much attention and will often get bet to the point that they become quite risky for a profit seeking player.

There is one interesting thing I learned about these kind of races from extensive research. The speed horses often win a very large percentage of these races. Much more often than conventional thinking would expect. It surprised me, but it continues to hold up with on-going research. My theory is that jockey’s tend to place horses more with the thinking of distance from the leader instead of pacing their own horse by good time management. Thus meaning in many cases the closer too is running faster early fractions than it is accustomed. Despite the fact it is in it’s customary spot at or near the back of the field, they often have burned too much early energy for a good finishing stretch effort.

One other interesting trend, these races very often tend to end up being what I call “fall apart races.” That being races were in the stretch all the horses look dead tired and the winner ends of being the least-weak. Horses that tend to run near the pace that has shown a tendency to finish up races evenly in the late stages of races tend to be the beneficiary of these “fall apart races.” These are sometimes even won by a pace player who shows the same even finish tendency. Many times a look at these horses lifetime record shows that the horse hit’s the board frequently but does win a lot of races. My guess is if one were to go back and check, he might find that nearly all of this types of horses wins came in what could be termed a “fall apart race.”

In other words winning not necessarily because they were best, but often by pure default.

So who do these races not favor? The least likely from my research are those mid-range closers/distant stalkers. Those not on or near the lead and also not exactly at the back of the pack. Not that they don’t win races with excessively fast paces, but they tend to win them less frequently.

So how do you play them?

Value!

If one of the speedsters offers big value, play it. It it’s one of the closers, play that one. Or...if one of those hang around types has a big juicy price above what you think is worthy, maybe that is your play. You’ll often find that there are more than one good value choice. Either play all the overlays, or you’ll just have to pluck one out and make it your hoss.

That's my opinion anyway.