pace or avg pace

[BIG HIT]

Hi guys really like to know which is better average pace.Or one pace line seems each has it place.But which is more acurate figure.Does it depend on circumstance.Ranndy giles I think said the winner using pace of one of the top three lines will get you the winner about 80% of the time







5

[andicap]

I think what you are asking is if you should average pacelines or use just one. Good question. I've always wondered about that myself.
I don't do either and Tom Brohamer for all of his using one paceline in his "models" also advises against it if you read his text carefully. He suggests looking at the "totality" of a horse's record and I think Dick Schmidt will back me up on that.
I look at several pacelines in their totality for form cycles, etc. I want to see if one good line is an aberration. Some people suggest using the 2nd best line for that reason but there are times when a horse might run back to his best (a "forging" older horse or a 2 and 3 yr old on the way up.)
My problem with most of these paceline-picking programs is they leave absolutely no room for form cycles. They generally pick a horse's most recent race at today's distance/surface and maybe class. But what if the horse ran the race of his life and will bounce to the moon. What if he had a 3-length lead coming out of the gate and no way that will happen today. What if he was a closer in a paceless race and today there are 4 "E" horses? What if he wasn't himself that day and the poor race was an aberration. What if the trainer was just working him out in preperation for today's race. What is the race was off a layoff?
That's my big bone to pick with all of these HTR database players who rely on automatic paceline selections. Sure they are consistent, but remember "consistency is the hobglob of little minds."
(No, I'm not accusing HTR db users of having little minds, just trying to make a point using a little hyperbole -- so don't write back saying I'm making personal attacks.)

So if you must pick a line for a computer program, there are no rules. Use your head and look for something that represents a horse's running style, today's likely pace and can predict his form cycle. This, in my opinion, is why most people still lose using computer programs.

I'm not crazy about averaging although I won't swear that it doesn't work. Some might have used it successfully.
Also, you are mistaken about Randy Giles. His comments relate to use of speed figures and picking contenders. I'm not crazy about his contender selection using speed figures because while you get 80% winners, you can easily get 6 or 7 contenders.

[GR1@HTR]

Me thinks averages of certain pacelines similar to today conditions (ie pace, class, form...) is the best. After all, what are the odds that a horse will run exactly as it did in the selected pace line? I say just about zero...

[BIG HIT]

Iam inclined to agree avg pace maybe best.But herd or read or whatever that no horse in a race run faster than the fastest front runner.So what i did was check after the race to see if that was true and it seemed to be.I found that I could throw out horse that could not close on that pace or run with that pace.A the pace in most cases was close to pace of race with in 3/5th seemed to work better then par times any bodyelse try this ? how did it work for you

[andicap]

How did you figure out what the pace of the race might be that day? I know that's what Bradshaw's stuff is all about. Good concept.

[BIG HIT]

Andy I took the fasts front runner at the half usally a lead horse and if none the one closest to the pace.say the lead horse had a 46 half his last race.That was my projected pace for that race. and that is the way i would look at the race.Oh yes sorry about my quote of randy meant well.

[andicap]

Has that method worked out well for you? I've never been very good in projecting a pace of the race for the pressers to shoot at. Big hole in my game.

[BIG HIT]

Hi yes it I thought it did.My think was trainer had to have some idea how fast a race would be run.And the fast leader last race or closest to the pace last race.Would have to be the key.Also if the fast had a 3/5 advantage he had great shot at the win.IT not exact but usually pretty close.

[Aussieplayer]

For interest re: past line selection:

Don Scott (though the numbers were class/weight rather than pace or speed) advised the following method (well this is the basic part):

Have the ratings for the last 3 starts. Generally take the best of those 3. However, if the ratings are going "down" in those consecutive 3 starts you take the second best. Though he never called it form cycle, I guess this is what he was on about. There were a few different things you'd do re: layoffs.
One thing I think (some) of you might find different is that he used an "expected peak" rating, plus the rating from those last 3 and did a correction. Interesting stuff anyway. Won't bore you with details.

Hope you don't mind me sharing some Aussie insights.

Cheers
Aussieplayer

[andicap]

always wondered how you played with the sparse info you get over there in the PPs.
I don't necessarily downgrade a horse for declining races. (Dave Schwartz probably has some data on this one.) I'm more likely to punish a horse for three straight improving races especially if the last race was his best race in a while or close to this best race and he hasn't had much rest in between.
A horse which throws in a bad race and comes right back is much more interesting to me if he has good lines 2 or 3 back and its been 4-6 weeks since his good race.

[andicap]

P.S. My condolences about Rafter today. Hate to say this but I was rooting for Golan I. Just such a great story.

[hurrikane]

I agree with you andicap with one caveat....as the 'class' of the horse increases the importance of 'form' decreases. Been my finding anyway

[andicap]

I respectfully disagree.
Look at all the horses who ran great Derby preps, then bounced. Or bounced in the Preakness, etc. These horses tend to "pair up" more often than say cheap claimers and in recent years fewer horses are bouncing than in previous years (drugs?) so that has put some damper on form cycles.

[hurrikane]

Ok....I will agree to disagree. You are talking about 3yo when you are talking triple crown races. With many of these horses as with all 3yo, thier class level can't be determined until later in the year. I'm not so sure what you are seeing is a bounce or 3yo finding the level they can compete in. As they mature the higher class animal will not run as many races, maybe one a month, and so the form cycle I believe becomes moot. With claimers and lower allowance horses running week in and week out form is of the utmost importance. IMHO

[andicap]

Yes, I agree. Since higher class horses run further apart they are not quite as subject to the vageries of the form cycle.

[Rick Ransom]

I recall a study from a couple of years back that showed that lightly raced horses did better, in routes anyway (that was all they tested). I took it to mean that higher class horses don't need to run as often to pay their way. You see some cheap claimers that are run so frequently they never have workouts, and I don't think it improves their performance.

[hurrikane]

Also, for higher class animals there just aren't as many races to run. It's not like claimers that run every day.
This is why I believe a claimer running a good race then sitting down for 30 days or more is a sure sign something is wrong. Otherwise there is no reason for a claimer to be sitting down when he could be earning his keep. Not the same for the higher class animal. It may take a month just to find a race to run him in without shipping him all over the country.

[Rick Ransom]

hurrikane,

The last recency studies I saw showed that 20-30 days was best overall. You're probably right about claimers coming back more quickly but I don't think these guys that run every 10 days are a bargain now.

[hurrikane]

Agreed Rick. there was someone working on an idea about number of furlongs a horse has run in a certain time period..2 wks or a month..that was works, races, etc., added together. Can't remember where I saw it, maybe someone else here has and idea.

[GR1@HTR]

"You have mail"

[NoDayJob]

Originally posted by hurrikane
Agreed Rick. there was someone working on an idea about number of furlongs a horse has run in a certain time period..2 wks or a month..that was works, races, etc., added together. Can't remember where I saw it, maybe someone else here has and idea.

Allen H. Hickman did a study 4 decades ago. "Hickman's Guide to Thoroughbred Racing" Kimberly Publishing ~ NDJ

[Tom]

I think Mark Crammer wrote somethng about this in one of his newsletters-I check my archives tonight. I know that this is a readout in ProPace software. I don't remember exactly how, but I also thing Tom Hambleton might have used this in some way in his Form Points.
Again, I'll look that up tonight.
I had forgotten all about the Hickman Guide-that was pretty cutting edge stuff back then-actual data on horse racing!
Tom

[Rick Ransom]

Don't laugh you guys, but I have a copy of Hickman's guide. Now you know how old I am.