Extreme Pace Handicapping: If You Doodle They Will Come

[jfb]

Extreme Pace Handicapping: If You Doodle They Will Come

The title is intriguing. Does anyone have an opinion about this book or the author, Randy Giles?



amazon url: http://www.amazon.com/Extreme-Pace-Handicapping-Doodle-They/dp/1438222742/ref=pd_ys_nr_all_17?pf_rd_p=258372101&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_t=1501&pf_rd_i=list&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=02JQSYBRP80TCAC7MMT5

[ddog]

he's ok.

This probably the same stuff he had on a website awhile back.

It wasn't earth shaking to me anyway, but he had some interesting ways to look at race/pace types.

You would get your money out of it I would guess.

[RichieP]

Extremely good book from an author who is a winning player and also a class act.

:ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[JBmadera]

I just finished reading it. Thought it was pretty good and worth the $14.95.


JB

[Fingal]

I just finished reading it. Thought it was pretty good and worth the $14.95.


JB

I've been wondering about buying this book as it looks interesting. But $14.95 ? Where? Amazon has it for $19.95, & I can't find it elsewhere. :confused:

[JBmadera]

just looked at the back cover and you're right it is $19.95......:bang:

[xtb]

Does anyone know if the printed book is any different than the e-book which sold for $24.95?

[Tom]

My guess is it is the same basic book updated, based on the brief cover descsription. Probably updated the list of multipliers.

I see Finley's Synthetic book still not released, but you buy new and used copies! :lol: One guy is selling it for $87!!!!!

[headhawg]

This probably the same stuff he had on a website awhile back.Anyone who has read it care to comment on this? I'd like to know.

[JBmadera]

Anyone who has read it care to comment on this? I'd like to know.

imo there is more detail in the book plus for me it was easier to use the book as a guide rather than trying to flip thru the materials on the website.

[cnollfan]

I think it's a good book, though the concepts in the first couple of chapters could have been stated more clearly. It took me a while to comprehend the "pace pressure gauge" even though it is quite simple, once I figured out what he was trying to say.

[andicap]

Buy it. You can't go wrong reading anything Randy Giles has to say. Not that I agree with ALL of his opinions (he's a little over the top in denying the existance of day-to-day track biases IMHO) but his methods have greatly influenced me.

Extreme Pace Handicapping: If You Doodle They Will Come

The title is intriguing. Does anyone have an opinion about this book or the author, Randy Giles?



amazon url: http://www.amazon.com/Extreme-Pace-Handicapping-Doodle-They/dp/1438222742/ref=pd_ys_nr_all_17?pf_rd_p=258372101&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_t=1501&pf_rd_i=list&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=02JQSYBRP80TCAC7MMT5

[jonnielu]

Buy it. You can't go wrong reading anything Randy Giles has to say. Not that I agree with ALL of his opinions (he's a little over the top in denying the existance of day-to-day track biases IMHO) but his methods have greatly influenced me.

Why is that idea over the top?

jdl

[njcurveball]

I think it's a good book, though the concepts in the first couple of chapters could have been stated more clearly. .


I totally agree. I had high hopes for this book, but it reads like an old Sartin manual or looking at his notes on his method.

Some of the concepts are very simple once your grasp what he is talking about. The biggest problem I see is defining the running style of the horse consistently. That is a very important concept and if you cannot do that, the rest of the material really cannot be applied very well.

Jim

[Tom]

I'm sill trying to figure out what he is talking about where he describes how he modifies the speed ratings with the pace rating....seems to be a circular reference with undefined variables???????? I do like the product, but I couldn't make it at home.

I did order the hard copy to go with my e-book. It comes Wendesday.

BTW, HTR users can easily construct pace multipliers from the profile downloads. (or anyone with a lot of race times data)
What I did was calculate the percentage of second call times, then sort by that percentage. Find the average ( this is your multiplier) and then +/- 1 standard deviation is "normal" and beyond that is a fast pace or slow pace.
Works pretty well at Aqu, Bel, and FL.

[andicap]

Its similar to what CJ does, (IMHO) but using the pace of the race and not the horse's pace.
Of course Randy's adjustment is more simplistic than CJ's is -- it's pretty straightfoward. The faster the pace the higher the horse's adjusted final figure.



I'm sill trying to figure out what he is talking about where he describes how he modifies the speed ratings with the pace rating....seems to be a circular reference with undefined variables???????? I do like the product, but I couldn't make it at home.

I did order the hard copy to go with my e-book. It comes Wendesday.

BTW, HTR users can easily construct pace multipliers from the profile downloads. (or anyone with a lot of race times data)
What I did was calculate the percentage of second call times, then sort by that percentage. Find the average ( this is your multiplier) and then +/- 1 standard deviation is "normal" and beyond that is a fast pace or slow pace.
Works pretty well at Aqu, Bel, and FL.

[andicap]

Why is that idea over the top?

jdl

well, "over the top" was the wrong terminology. Let me rephrase.
One of his few handicapping assertions that I disagree with. But I recognize track bias is sooooooo subjective and that I could be wrong.

[Tom]

Got my copy yesterday. I think Randy does a really nice job of showing how he sets up a race for analysis using his pace tools - running style, pace pictures, pace pressure gage, and pace comfort zones. I think it would be a great help to someone trying to grasp pace handicapping, and it provides a nice, orderly method for looking at a race. Lots of examples, which help make his points.

[cj]

I think it is very good. I like especially like the Optimum Pace Models.

[Tom Barrister]

I just got the book yesterday from Amazon. It's very interesting, and I would recommend it to anybody who is serious about handicapping. It's a different look on pace handicapping, and in my opinion, it's well-worth the $20.

[Capper Al]

I think it's a good book, though the concepts in the first couple of chapters could have been stated more clearly. It took me a while to comprehend the "pace pressure gauge" even though it is quite simple, once I figured out what he was trying to say.

I agree. This is my second or third attempt at getting through the book. Now I have an understanding of the book, I find it one of the best match-up books that I have read.

[Trotman]

I think it's a very good book with ample examples to understand. If you're into pace handicapping it is a book you should have. :ThmbUp:

[GaryG]

Mine just came today. If Richie P says it is valuable, that is good enough for me. Looking forward to reading and studying it.

[Partsnut]

Extremely good book from an author who is a winning player and also a class act.
:ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

Richie said it all in just a few short words.:ThmbUp:
---------------------------------------

I can tell you that from my own personal experience with the book and the method, that you can win with it. I've won some contest money with it and
have shown a profit with it over an extended time frame.

I'm looking forward to the release of Randy's new pace software which will analyze 30 different pace scenarios. This software is free to subscribers.

[Robert Goren]

As you may know, I think almost all handicapping books are a waste of a tree. Giles's book is the first book I have found something I could use in it since Beyer's books back in the 1970's. The way he comes with running styles has been most useful and I have incorporated into my handicapping along with the drawing picture of the pace. I don't like Quirrin points and I use Bris's E1 numbers instead. You can take the rest of the book with a grain of salt, but the running styles and the picture of the pace is well worth taking a long look at to see if they can fit into your methods.

[raybo]

Randy Giles's work has been the largest influence on my pace analysis in the last few years. His PPG works well with Brisnet's running styles and early speed points, not so well with JCapper data as Jeff uses only a horse's "good" races in determining running styles (I prefer to use a running style that a horse "normally" exhibits, not just when it has it's best finishes, as I want to know how the race will most likely be run early, and I don't assume that each horse will run the way it does when it has a good finish).

I personally have modified the likely winning style and early points to include 20 categories of PPGs. Rather than just early or late I actually project the win contenders' running styles and early speed point ranges. Then I use that data for eliminations for win contention, along with possible pace match ups calculated from fractional velocities ranges.

Randy is very knowledgeable and a fine person, as I have communicated with him by email several times. If you are into reading horse racing books I think his book would be a "must read" for any pace conscious handicapper.

[thaskalos]

Randy Giles's work has been the largest influence on my pace analysis in the last few years. His PPG works well with Brisnet's running styles and early speed points, not so well with JCapper data as Jeff uses only a horse's "good" races in determining running styles (I prefer to use a running style that a horse "normally" exhibits, not just when it has it's best finishes, as I want to know how the race will most likely be run early, and I don't assume that each horse will run the way it does when it has a good finish).

I personally have modified the likely winning style and early points to include 20 categories of PPGs. Rather than just early or late I actually project the win contenders' running styles and early speed point ranges. Then I use that data for eliminations for win contention, along with possible pace match ups calculated from fractional velocities ranges.

Randy is very knowledgeable and a fine person, as I have communicated with him by email several times. If you are into reading horse racing books I think his book would be a "must read" for any pace conscious handicapper.

I only wish that the book was a little longer, so the topic could be covered in a little more detail. The book looked to be rushed a little...IMO. The topic of pace is complicated enough to deserve a more thorough treatment.

I told the same to the author when he was interviewed here...and he said that he was working on a longer version of the book...where he would expand more on his pace-related thoughts.

I am looking forward to its completion.

[raybo]

I only wish that the book was a little longer, so the topic could be covered in a little more detail. The book looked to be rushed a little...IMO. The topic of pace is complicated enough to deserve a more thorough treatment.

I told the same to the author when he was interviewed here...and he said that he was working on a longer version of the book...where he would expand more on his pace-related thoughts.

I am looking forward to its completion.

There is more info on his website but you have to look to find it. That's where I got all the info that I now use. I've not read the book.

[fmolf]

There is more info on his website but you have to look to find it. That's where I got all the info that I now use. I've not read the book.
I found the book very helpful as i like looking at the pace picture he advocates drawing.He also advocates only using a horses in the money or within 2 lengths of the winner finishes to determine running styles.This makes sense to me because it automatically eliminates bad starts where horse maybe is not pushed or races where horse is out for a tightener before the real trying effort.

[raybo]

I found the book very helpful as i like looking at the pace picture he advocates drawing.He also advocates only using a horses in the money or within 2 lengths of the winner finishes to determine running styles.This makes sense to me because it automatically eliminates bad starts where horse maybe is not pushed or races where horse is out for a tightener before the real trying effort.

While I agree that looking at only a horse's better races would be beneficial if you're assuming that the whole field is ready to run a good race. However, when you're handicapping "the field" like I do, then you need to know how each horse "normally" runs, not only when they have a good finish, because they may not all be ready to run in this race. Also, using only the horses' good races does not work with Randy's PPG well. Believe me, I have tried replacing raw running styles with running styles based on only good finishes, using many different "good race" criteria, and none of them work as well as Brisnet's running styles, which are based on all races not just the good ones.

As I said I only use them for eliminations anyway, not for anything else.

[fmolf]

i agree to a certain extent.While bris styles(and i use Bris ultimate pp's)are very close to using Giles criteria sometimes thru careful analysis a lone speed and or a lone closer will appear in the pace picture.This is why ilike to use the good race only method and compare it with the bris styles and sometimes come up with a lone speed based on their ep2 fig

[CincyHorseplayer]

The good races are merely to determine running style and PCZ.The speed point numbers need to definitely be based on recency and often are a reflection of form,ie an E7 that's really an E3.Plus horses changing hands or younger horses back from layoffs change styles abruptly.Randy made it simple enough that these subtleties can be taken into account quickly.I think he's great.I look forward eagerly to his 2nd publication also.

[fmolf]

The good races are merely to determine running style and PCZ.The speed point numbers need to definitely be based on recency and often are a reflection of form,ie an E7 that's really an E3.Plus horses changing hands or younger horses back from layoffs change styles abruptly.Randy made it simple enough that these subtleties can be taken into account quickly.I think he's great.I look forward eagerly to his 2nd publication also.
i also look atthe pace comfort zone in relation to the winners average beaten lengths at the 2nd call....taken from the bris race summary page!This is a good way to pare non contenders!

[cutchemist42]

Read through it two weeks ago. Has got me horses and prices I would not have looked for before.

[Tom]

He has a lot of good reading at his website, too.

[Tom]

What do label this guy for RS?

Aqu, Race 2 today - the 2 horse.
BRIS has him as an S horse.

[CincyHorseplayer]

What do label this guy for RS?

Aqu, Race 2 today - the 2 horse.
BRIS has him as an S horse.

I would ignore the 5.5 and turf races and label him an E/P4.

[raybo]

What do label this guy for RS?

Aqu, Race 2 today - the 2 horse.
BRIS has him as an S horse.

I'd call him an S, but Jeff would say he's an E/P or P probably. His only win was on an off track so you'd probably want to ignore that race, because it was out of character for him due to the off track or trainer instructions.

[Cheap Speed]

Bi Polar :D

S4 = 4 is sign to take a closer look as it isnt normal for a true closer.

If I'm remembering Randy G's book he might call it E/P/C and doesnt like these type of horses which some would call versatile.

[plainolebill]

He looks like he wants the front end, the horse hasn't gained an inch of ground in the stretch except the time he did get the lead.

What he needs is a class drop. :lol:

[CincyHorseplayer]

I will usually downgrade offtrack wins also,but it cannot be dismissed summarily if that is the only way a horse has won or was in a photo.At the exact distance the horse presses or goes to the lead.

[Robert Goren]

I think he is an E these days and slow one to boot. If you want to call him an EP, I would not argue to much. 5 1/2 F race are often filled with E8s and E7s and horses like this guy can't keep up. When they all stop, he looks like a closer. I don't think he can win unless he is on the lead or very close to it (1/2 LB).

[RaceBookJoe]

He would have gotten a P with a ? next to it in my Neanderthal approach :)

[Robert Goren]

Does anybody use one of Giles's program?

[Tom]

I agree, Bobby - I called him an E and ignored the 5-1/2 race. At major tracks, I don't use 5-1/2 for anything. In his 6F dirt races, he looks like and E, and he ran early and faded yesterday.

But I will not pay attention to BRIS RS designations :rolleyes:

[Clocker]

I agree, Bobby - I called him an E and ignored the 5-1/2 race. At major tracks, I don't use 5-1/2 for anything. In his 6F dirt races, he looks like and E, and he ran early and faded yesterday.

But I will not pay attention to BRIS RS designations :rolleyes:

Was that race on the dirt? He looks like an E/P on the dirt and an S on the turf. I don't know if Bris takes a surface mix like that into consideration. I'd guess if you used Bris you would have to eyeball each horse for those with an equal mix of turf and dirt, and see if it mattered.

[Robert Goren]

Was that race on the dirt? He looks like an E/P on the dirt and an S on the turf. I don't know if Bris takes a surface mix like that into consideration. I'd guess if you used Bris you would have to eyeball each horse for those with an equal mix of turf and dirt, and see if it mattered.Aqu inner. Dirt

[CincyHorseplayer]

I agree, Bobby - I called him an E and ignored the 5-1/2 race. At major tracks, I don't use 5-1/2 for anything. In his 6F dirt races, he looks like and E, and he ran early and faded yesterday.

But I will not pay attention to BRIS RS designations :rolleyes:

I still think it's worthy to sit down with the form and pen multitude and do a form.Then add in the rest.

[Clocker]

A couple of questions for those that use Bris PPs.

Randy says in the book that Bris running styles don't work for his method, but I don't remember seeing anything about using the Bris speed points. Any one use them, or have found a reason not to use them?

Also, the Bris race shapes are supposed to show how much faster or slower than normal the pace was. The Bris c2 (2nd call) race shape looks like what Randy is doing with his pace of the race multiplier. Anyone use the Bris c2?

[Racey]

The bris E1 & E2 plus the pace shapes + and - tell the story

[Pensacola Pete]

The bris E1 & E2 plus the pace shapes + and - tell the story

Now if the horses would just follow the script.

[raybo]

The bris E1 & E2 plus the pace shapes + and - tell the story

Basically, but the "story" can be interpreted several ways, and the facts of the story are often fraught with error. If it was that cut and dried, everyone would be using Brisnet PPs/data, and everyone would end up with the same projected rankings, for today's race, and everyone who bet the top ranked horse would still lose money long term.

[cutchemist42]

A couple of questions for those that use Bris PPs.

Randy says in the book that Bris running styles don't work for his method, but I don't remember seeing anything about using the Bris speed points. Any one use them, or have found a reason not to use them?

Also, the Bris race shapes are supposed to show how much faster or slower than normal the pace was. The Bris c2 (2nd call) race shape looks like what Randy is doing with his pace of the race multiplier. Anyone use the Bris c2?

Is that what the 2nd call race shape is supposed to show though? I thought it was merely how fast the race was run from 1st to 2nd call?

I do wish that Bris had a race shape for 2nd-to-Finish.

[Clocker]

Is that what the 2nd call race shape is supposed to show though? I thought it was merely how fast the race was run from 1st to 2nd call?

As I read the Bris description, it is independent of the 1st call time.

The BRIS Race Shapes measure how fast the leader ran relative to the average leader time for the race's final time.


The BRIS Race Shapes correspond to the first and second calls of a race. The first BRIS Race Shape value corresponds to the first call (2f call for most sprints; and 4f call for most routes). The second BRIS Race Shape value corresponds to the second call (4f call for most sprints; and 6f call for most routes).

The way I read that is that the race in the PP had a final time of X. The average 2nd call time for a race run in that final time is Y. The Bris c2 figure shows how many points the actual 2nd call time of this race varies from "Y" (2 points = 1/5 sec.).

That sounds to me like what Randy Giles is doing with his pace of the race calculation. He takes the final time of the race and multiplies it by a multiplier for that distance at that track, and the result is the par pace fraction for the second call. Comparing that to the actual 2nd call time for the race shows if the actual time was faster or slower than the average time.

I do wish that Bris had a race shape for 2nd-to-Finish.

Can you use the Bris LP (http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=pace) rating for that? It is a speed rating for the final fraction.

Late Pace Rating - rates how fast the horse ran from the
2nd call (pre-stretch call) to the finish.

[Pensacola Pete]

I do wish that Bris had a race shape for 2nd-to-Finish.

The "race shape" of the second call to finish should be the inverse of the race shape up to the second call.

[cutchemist42]

The "race shape" of the second call to finish should be the inverse of the race shape up to the second call.

Couldn't you possibly have a race that was simply faster then par throughout the whole race though?

[Clocker]

Couldn't you possibly have a race that was simply faster then par throughout the whole race though?

Yes. Even if you have a typical race with all horses running their usual race, you could have a race shape of fast-slow, slow-fast, or average-average. If you get a field of cheap claimers, none of which seem to care about winning (the kind I usually bet on) the pace could be slow-slow.

Randy Giles explains his approach to pace shapes HERE (http://www.paceappraiser.com/news/2010/02/16/a-simple-pace-shape/). As usual, he is a man of few words. His pace figure is based on his pace velocity calculation, using the kind of track-specific numbers talked about in his book. I still think that the Bris c2 figure does the same thing as his "pv", but can't find a 2nd opinion on that.

[cutchemist42]

So when it comes to Quirin points and horse types, how should say a low P horse be handled its running with E7s/EP7s? Is a horse a low P horse taken out of its element with that much early speed? What about an EP3/4 with high speed E/EP horses?

Also, when your looking for other horses to win races that collapse from early pace, can a low P horse be considered as a horse that can come off-the-pace to win or should you only look at S horses?

[CincyHorseplayer]

Hey brother,I've noticed you keep bringing this thread up,cool man.All I want to say is utilize the concept.Don't worry about the intricacies.It puts you on winners.

Rod

[raybo]

So when it comes to Quirin points and horse types, how should say a low P horse be handled its running with E7s/EP7s? Is a horse a low P horse taken out of its element with that much early speed? What about an EP3/4 with high speed E/EP horses?

Also, when your looking for other horses to win races that collapse from early pace, can a low P horse be considered as a horse that can come off-the-pace to win or should you only look at S horses?

A low Quirin P horse can come from off the pace just like an S horse, when the pace collapses. Even a low Quirin E/P can do that. That's why I use fractional velocities in addition to running styles and early speed points to see if horses can truly run their preferred style against today's field and PPG scenario. I think CJ does that too. Running styles and Quirin points, by themselves, doesn't tell the whole pace story, IMO.

[Racey]

Obviously no magic bullet but I have had a banner 14 months plus using Bris will never use anything else. My point was their is much to be gleaned from using & understanding pace shapes and flow patterns.

[hracingplyr]

Could you post an example race?

[cutchemist42]

Hey brother,I've noticed you keep bringing this thread up,cool man.All I want to say is utilize the concept.Don't worry about the intricacies.It puts you on winners.

Rod

Yeah sorry for doing so if its bugging anyone. I just recently read the book and have been loving the results I've been getting from it. Just a few things I'm looking to better understand.

[cutchemist42]

Could you post an example race?

How about this one.

http://www.brisnet.com/php/bw_pdf_viewer.php?track=AQU&race=2&param1=261820&param2=162&param3=2187

A EP horse, a medium EP horse, a low EP horse, and a low E horse. The E horse to me will be disadvantaged, but would a low EP horse like Sus Annmaries be disadvantaged when it looks like it belongs there on class?

[Clocker]

A EP horse, a medium EP horse, a low EP horse, and a low E horse. The E horse to me will be disadvantaged, but would a low EP horse like Sus Annmaries be disadvantaged when it looks like it belongs there on class?

The :6: looks more like an EP than an E to me. There is no clear early speed in the race. Looks like what Giles calls a mush race. The :1: is a front runner that dies in the stretch. The :2: is showing improved early speed, and with the turn back to a route, should be close in the stretch. But I don't see anything there I would bet on.

[raybo]

How about this one.

http://www.brisnet.com/php/bw_pdf_viewer.php?track=AQU&race=2&param1=261820&param2=162&param3=2187

A EP horse, a medium EP horse, a low EP horse, and a low E horse. The E horse to me will be disadvantaged, but would a low EP horse like Sus Annmaries be disadvantaged when it looks like it belongs there on class?

The E 3 horse, the 6, doesn't run like an E horse, and if she does try to take the lead early she will not finish strong. She does not have the velocities to gain the lead unless the other horses don't run their early capabilities. I think she will lay off the lead, more like an E/P or P and run an even race.

The E/P 8 horse, the 1, looks more like an E horse to me, and should be on or near the lead by the 2nd call. If the pace isn't too hot I think she wins.

The 5, an S 0, looks like it will be closing strong if the pace is fast and contended.

The 2, an E/P 1, looks like a miler and will also be coming off the lead. Class or not, in this 6f sprint the only way she wins is if she somehow stays close, and the pace is quick, but not a horse I would expect to do well in this field, and at this distance.

So, I would think the 1 and 5 are the probable win contenders here, with the 2 a possibility.

[cj]

The :6: looks more like an EP than an E to me. There is no clear early speed in the race. Looks like what Giles calls a mush race. The :1: is a front runner that dies in the stretch. The :2: is showing improved early speed, and with the turn back to a route, should be close in the stretch. But I don't see anything there I would bet on.

This is where PPs and pace figures help. Forgetting that he actually won, the :1: was very clearly the speed of the race. Nobody figured close early to him.

[Clocker]

This is where PPs and pace figures help. Forgetting that he actually won, the :1: was very clearly the speed of the race. Nobody figured close early to him.

Based on the running lines, the :1: was the only front runner. But based on 1st call times, about half the field looked like they could keep up with her early. I just figured, incorrectly, that she couldn't improve after two good efforts in this, her third race this month. And that's why I am a lowly horse player and David Jacobson is the top trainer at the meet.

[cutchemist42]

This is where PPs and pace figures help. Forgetting that he actually won, the :1: was very clearly the speed of the race. Nobody figured close early to him.

I came to this conclusion too, unfortunately I could not get the bet through on betfair because of internet glitches. (Which inspired me to start a thread about missed bets because of the internet) :bang:

I think it could be interesting to post a PP in here once in awhile to see everyone's thoughts concerning these methods.

[cj]

Based on the running lines, the :1: was the only front runner. But based on 1st call times, about half the field looked like they could keep up with her early. I just figured, incorrectly, that she couldn't improve after two good efforts in this, her third race this month. And that's why I am a lowly horse player and David Jacobson is the top trainer at the meet.

I think figures would have painted a different picture. Raw times, whether fractional or final, are really tough to compare directly.

[raybo]

Based on the running lines, the :1: was the only front runner. But based on 1st call times, about half the field looked like they could keep up with her early. I just figured, incorrectly, that she couldn't improve after two good efforts in this, her third race this month. And that's why I am a lowly horse player and David Jacobson is the top trainer at the meet.

Times mean very little unless they are fully adjusted. As CJ said, pace figures (if they are good ones) or adjusted fractional times or velocities will tell you if a horse can compete early for the lead. The 1 had the best combination of FR1 and FR2 adjusted velocities, in my program, by about 2 lengths by the 2nd call. It actually ran better than that thanks to the rather slow 1st fraction. The 5 figured to come off the pace with strong late velocities and it ran 2nd. Had the early pace been faster the 5 would have been close at the wire, IMO. My program's top 3 "PFV" ranked horses were 5,1,6 but the 1 had a distinct advantage early in this 6f sprint race. It was also a good value horse!

[cutchemist42]

i also look atthe pace comfort zone in relation to the winners average beaten lengths at the 2nd call....taken from the bris race summary page!This is a good way to pare non contenders!

Just wondering personally how you view it? You look for PCZs that fall inside or close to the average beaten lengths?

[cutchemist42]

Something I've been wondering, but how do you guys feel about the races where there might be a high amount of quirin points, but no 1 dimensional E horses? Say a 22+ X 0 for a route?

[raybo]

Something I've been wondering, but how do you guys feel about the races where there might be a high amount of quirin points, but no 1 dimensional E horses? Say a 22+ X 0 for a route?

'High pressure/no 1D E' horse races shift the early pace analysis to E/P and P horses, both of which can, and will, take the lead if they have higher Quirin points. The Quirin calculations, if done properly, give you an idea of how prone each horse is to try to get the lead, regardless of running style. So, if you have no E horses in a race, an E/P or P, or even an S horse, with higher Quirin numbers, relative to the field, can set the pace. Almost any running style can set the pace and win the race. In these cases I use more "standard" handicapping methods, using actual fractional velocities, by themselves, to determine which horse or horses are likely to battle for the early lead.

A lot also depends on how the running styles are calculated, when combining them with the PPG. If you're assigning running styles according to only a horse's "good" races, then you will struggle with combining them with the PPG successfully. A horse's "good" races do not necessarily tell you how the horse "prefers" to run early. One must look at all races, good and poor, to get a good idea of how the horse prefers to run, and is most comfortable running. So, for instance, if you use JCapper running styles, you cannot combine them with Giles' PPG successfully, because JCapper only uses races where the horse ran "good". Brisnet's running styles work much better than any style using only "good" races for running style assignments, IMO, and my experience with running styles and the Giles pace pressure gauge. If you have Giles' actual calculations for running style assignments, then you probably have the best ones for use with the his PPG.

[Robert Goren]

An EP will generally take the lead. It is up to the jockey assuming the horse is fast enough to get the lead. One the worst bets out there is an E or an EP horse with a high Q number who early fraction times are quite a bit slower than another EP or P horse with a lower Q number.

[Robert Goren]

I can not say enough how useful this book was to me. It takes a bit of time to weed through it, but it is well worth it.

[raybo]

An EP will generally take the lead. It is up to the jockey assuming the horse is fast enough to get the lead. One the worst bets out there is an E or an EP horse with a high Q number who early fraction times are quite a bit slower than another EP or P horse with a lower Q number.

I agree, in addition to running styles and early speed points, I also use fractional velocities to eliminate horses, regardless of their run styles or speed points, that just don't have the velocities necessary to run at the front, or can cause an "unexpected" early pace battle that a more "traditional" early pressure analysis method would not normally predict. I don't care if a horse is an E8, if he doesn't have the necessary early speed/velocity to run up front without over-expending itself early, relative to the rest of the field, I will eliminate that horse from having an early speed advantage. Likewise, if there is an E/P or P (or even an S occasionally) that, relative to the field, has very good early speed/velocities, I will expect that horse to run closer to the front, or even at the front, even if it does not normally do that. So, it is "field dependent", not 'running style/early speed point' dependent.

Remember, there are trainers and jockeys involved in how horses run their races, and if either or both see the opportunity to run away from the field early, without over-expending the horse's energy reserves, they can, and do, force, or allow, the horse to do that. This is the reason we see horses take the lead or tightly press the lead that are considered by the public to be closers. The 'speed makeup of the field' allows them to change their normal running style and run like a front runner rather than a mid or later runner.

[cutchemist42]

'High pressure/no 1D E' horse races shift the early pace analysis to E/P and P horses, both of which can, and will, take the lead if they have higher Quirin points. The Quirin calculations, if done properly, give you an idea of how prone each horse is to try to get the lead, regardless of running style. So, if you have no E horses in a race, an E/P or P, or even an S horse, with higher Quirin numbers, relative to the field, can set the pace. Almost any running style can set the pace and win the race. In these cases I use more "standard" handicapping methods, using actual fractional velocities, by themselves, to determine which horse or horses are likely to battle for the early lead.

A lot also depends on how the running styles are calculated, when combining them with the PPG. If you're assigning running styles according to only a horse's "good" races, then you will struggle with combining them with the PPG successfully. A horse's "good" races do not necessarily tell you how the horse "prefers" to run early. One must look at all races, good and poor, to get a good idea of how the horse prefers to run, and is most comfortable running. So, for instance, if you use JCapper running styles, you cannot combine them with Giles' PPG successfully, because JCapper only uses races where the horse ran "good". Brisnet's running styles work much better than any style using only "good" races for running style assignments, IMO, and my experience with running styles and the Giles pace pressure gauge. If you have Giles' actual calculations for running style assignments, then you probably have the best ones for use with the his PPG.

Maybe I forget, but I thought Giles too mentioned using only good races in the book?

Great reply though Raybo, thanks.

[raybo]

Maybe I forget, but I thought Giles too mentioned using only good races in the book?

Great reply though Raybo, thanks.

Might well be true. I have not read the book, but rather read publicly available information on his website to get the basics of his approach. I did the same for the Sartin stuff. The information I use in my personal approach began with only basic information from both of those methods, which I then modified for my own use.

I have done extensive testing using both approaches, and I do know for a fact that since switching from Brisnet data files, Randy's PPG does not perform nearly as well using only "good" races for running style assignments. What Randy uses it for (and he has made many upgrades since I got my original information regarding the PPG), and what is recommended, evidently in this book, may indeed work. It just doesn't work well for my modified approach, while Brisnet styles and points do work and they look at all races instead of only "good" races, for running style calculations. That is stated in the articles available from the Brisnet site.

[Clocker]

Maybe I forget, but I thought Giles too mentioned using only good races in the book?



Yes, because you want to know how the horse runs when it runs well. He says that if you have any doubts about a horse's running style, look only at wins and places.

This brings up an issue that I have not thought about before. If a horse is a strong "E" when it wins, for example, and if its last couple of races are not good races and are not "E"s (say they look like typical "P"s) is that a good indication that the horse is on the down side of its form cycle?

In other words, should the last couple of races be used to project a running style for this next race, and discount its chances if it is likely to be other than the horse's best style?

[Clocker]

I can not say enough how useful this book was to me. It takes a bit of time to weed through it, but it is well worth it.

I agree, and it takes time not because the method is all that tough, but because the book is not written clearly. He jumps around, and doesn't explain some things in enough details.

The OPM in the last chapter is a very powerful tool, but took a while to figure out. I was helped a lot on that and the rest of the book by posts on this forum and by articles on Randy's web site.

[raybo]

Yes, because you want to know how the horse runs when it runs well. He says that if you have any doubts about a horse's running style, look only at wins and places.

This brings up an issue that I have not thought about before. If a horse is a strong "E" when it wins, for example, and if its last couple of races are not good races and are not "E"s (say they look like typical "P"s) is that a good indication that the horse is on the down side of its form cycle?

In other words, should the last couple of races be used to project a running style for this next race, and discount its chances if it is likely to be other than the horse's best style?

I understand that many people assume that a horse will be ready to run it's best race today. However, we all know, or should know, that they often do not. So, without getting too far off the subject, if you only use races where the horse ran a "good" race, meaning having a "good" finish, then you are assuming the horse will run that way today, even though that horse may run most of it's races in a different style, which means to me that the horse prefers to run a different way. That is why I believe that one must look at all of a horse's races, in order to determine the way that horse "likes" to run, which may not be the way it ran a race or 2 where the horse won or had a close finish.

Two schools of thought on running styles, for sure, how it runs in it's better races and how it runs normally. I prefer to know how it runs normally, and my testing bears that out, regarding the way the original PPG was to be used, that being to determine how much pace pressure is in the race and how many "early" horses might battle for the early lead.

In summary, I want to know the most probable way each horse will run today, not how each horse ran in their best races. I'm not going to assume that each will run the best race today, meaning they are in this race to win or finish in the top 3 or 4, or that they are in peak form today. That seems most logical to me. Look at how the horses run "most of the time", and then do your trainer intent/form analysis work to refine how they may run today, against this field.

I might also mention that Randy passes many more races than I do, because of the "characters" he is looking for, and where he places most of his betting emphasis on. I work from a "long term" point of view, and want to play, to win, as many races as I can logically play. The more money I bet, and have a positive long term ROI on, the more money I make, to say nothing of the added profit from rebates from a higher betting volume without betting the farm on a couple of races per track, and possibly negatively affecting the odds on my bets.

[Clocker]

I might also mention that Randy passes many more races than I do, because of the "characters" he is looking for, and where he places most of his betting emphasis on.

I can't speak for others, but I do not use the method as a bet or pass decision. If it points to a horse, I usually bet that horse or pass the race. If it doesn't point to a horse, what Randy calls a mush race, I proceed to further handicapping using other methods. If it does point to a horse, I use those other methods to confirm that the horse is a bet.

[raybo]

I can't speak for others, but I do not use the method as a bet or pass decision. If it points to a horse, I usually bet that horse or pass the race. If it doesn't point to a horse, what Randy calls a mush race, I proceed to further handicapping using other methods. If it does point to a horse, I use those other methods to confirm that the horse is a bet.

Understand. As I stated earlier, I use running styles and early points, as well as the PPG and fractional velocity matchups, for eliminations from win contention, only. I do not use them to point to bet-able horses. So, while Randy is looking for horses to bet that look good in his method, I am looking for horses to eliminate from win contention. I have other methods that determine which horses I actually bet.