Quirin speed-point advantages

[markgoldie]

Hello members. Hopefully we're all counting up our profits from the holiday weekend when some of the money floating in the pools is less informed than normal. Back to the grind of a Monday card where all the money knows what it is doing.

At any rate, I was wondering if anybody has statistics on Quirin speed-point advantages, that is, ROI of horses with a 2-point, 3-point, 4-point, or more advantage over the remainder of the field. It would also seem more illuminating if the study were restricted to races in which the impact value of speed is the greatest. For example, the Brisnet track bias stats show the impact of speed on winning percentages. Thus, the study could reasonably be restricted to races in which Brisnet says that E runners have the highest IV (impact value) at the distance. Steve Klein also sells track speed-bias statistics, but he restricts his reports to a handful of tracks. His stats are good, but as I say, limited.

I'd also be interested in hearing if anyone out there is regularly working with pace figs, and if so, how you compare them to Quirin speed points. Are they more accurate in your opinion?? Most experts say they are not, but I am yet to read about a study which shows this to be true. I guess I should back up here and say that we are talking about the horse who has the best chance to establish a clear lead in a race at the pace call (sometimes referred to as "2p" or "E2"). We know through extensive published statistics from Klein that these horses routinely enjoy a positive ROI of over 100% in American dirt racing (this may extend to synth although I'm not sure).

All comments are welcome, even if, as they say, they are anecdotal.

Mark

[matthewsiv]

Who is Steve Klein?

Which figures does he produce?

[markgoldie]

Who is Steve Klein?

Which figures does he produce?

Klein is a noted handicapping author. He has a web site at power of early speed.com which produces early-speed figures and track speed-bias statistics at about 6 North American tracks. He is associated with DRF and his major work on the subject is appropriately named "The Power of Early Speed."

Mark

[matthewsiv]

Thanks for the information.

[MNslappy]

lots of good stuff here!

http://www.homebased2.com/km/library.htm

[fmolf]

Klein is a noted handicapping author. He has a web site at power of early speed.com which produces early-speed figures and track speed-bias statistics at about 6 North American tracks. He is associated with DRF and his major work on the subject is appropriately named "The Power of Early Speed."

Mark
I have his book and i was not impressed with it.His method takes into account field size,post position and early speed.His methods sometimes uncover a diamond in the rough but calculating every horses klein speed points is tiring and cumbersome.I have found that often times horses that show high speed in his system do not outrun others with more quirin speed points.I gave up using his method as i did not note any significant difference in selecting the early speed horse.The equation is complicated with about 8 steps.I do not use it any longer.I have found bris pace numbers to be just as effective in conjunction with their speed point calculations

[markgoldie]

MNslappy:

Thanks for the info. I believe I read that PDF file before. The breakout of advantage figures that they use is very general, only looking at horses that have 7 or 8 Quirin points in a field where no one else has more than 5. In many cases, this could lead to only a 2-point advantage, for example, if the qualifying horse had 7 points and another horse had 5. What I was more interested in is say, a breakout where a horse had a 5-point advantage over the field, followed by a 4-point advantage, 3-point, etc.

fmolf: I have the Klein book as well and I do not bother to run his figures. However, I will say this: If you look at how he sets up his speed point scale and how the Quirin scale is set up, Klein has definitely made some advancements. Since Quirin points are currently considered the "Gold Standard" in t-bred racing, it makes some sense that Klein's points should be more accurate.

I subscribe to his website where he says that he has made some improvements to his general method since the publication of the book. I have used his numbers (not bothering to calculate them on my own, which as you say is time-consuming and difficult) and I have found his numbers to be highly accurate. Currently, though, I am not using pace advantage as my major means of handicapping, but I was wondering if anyone had info on points vs. pace figs, etc.

Mark

[Partsnut]

markgoldie: I'd also be interested in hearing if anyone out there is regularly working with pace figs, and if so, how you compare them to Quirin speed points. Are they more accurate in your opinion??

In my opinion: Randy Giles who puts out PaceAppraiser would be the consumate expert on this topic. Speed points and running style, if they are accurately formulated, are the best race projectors you can use.
You might want to visit his site at: www.PaceAppraiser.com. and write him.
He's also on Twitter.

I have had nothing but excellent experiences with his product.

P.S. - I am not related to Randy and have no financial interests in his products.

[Jeff P]

I find that pace figs generally outperform speed points roi-wise. Here's what I have in my Q2 2008 database for dirt races at Monmouth which some might argue is generally a speed favoring surface:

First, just to get some perspective, here are all starters that I have for dirt races at MTH in Q2 2009:
query start: 7/6/2009 12:53:20 PM
query end: 7/6/2009 12:53:58 PM
elapsed time: 38 seconds

Data Window Settings:
Divisor = 999 Odds Cap: None
Dirt (All*) Distance: (All*) (From Index File: C:\2009\Q2_2009\pL_profile.txt)
Track: MTH

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 2434.90 2478.40 2253.10
Bet -3360.00 -3360.00 -3360.00
Gain -925.10 -881.60 -1106.90

Wins 245 485 642
Plays 1680 1680 1680
PCT .1458 .2887 .3821

ROI 0.7247 0.7376 0.6706
Avg Mut 9.94 5.11 3.51

Next, here is the data broken out by a very simple pace fig evaluation - Bris E2 (Best of Last 10) or simply Best E2:
By: Best E2 Rank

Rank Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
1 -6.90 620.00 0.9889 75 310 .2419 1.6590
2 -109.80 504.00 0.7821 50 252 .1984 1.3605
3 -220.00 436.00 0.4954 25 218 .1147 0.7864
4 -99.00 486.00 0.7963 36 243 .1481 1.0159
5 16.20 450.00 1.0360 36 225 .1600 1.0971
6 -252.60 346.00 0.2699 9 173 .0520 0.3567
7 -130.40 258.00 0.4946 7 129 .0543 0.3721
8 -79.00 148.00 0.4662 4 74 .0541 0.3707
9 -58.80 66.00 0.1091 1 33 .0303 0.2078
10 25.20 32.00 1.7875 1 16 .0625 0.4286
11 -8.00 12.00 0.3333 1 6 .1667 1.1429
12 -2.00 2.00 0.0000 0 1 .0000 0.0000

By: Best E2 Gap

>=Min < Max Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
-999.00 -10.00 -598.40 1530.00 0.6089 71 765 .0928 0.6364
-10.00 -9.00 43.80 146.00 1.3000 17 73 .2329 1.5969
-9.00 -8.00 -26.20 154.00 0.8299 11 77 .1429 0.9796
-8.00 -7.00 15.00 114.00 1.1316 8 57 .1404 0.9624
-7.00 -6.00 -94.20 142.00 0.3366 7 71 .0986 0.6761
-6.00 -5.00 -33.00 118.00 0.7203 9 59 .1525 1.0460
-5.00 -4.00 -52.40 138.00 0.6203 13 69 .1884 1.2919
-4.00 -3.00 -59.00 106.00 0.4434 8 53 .1509 1.0350
-3.00 -2.00 -48.20 126.00 0.6175 10 63 .1587 1.0884
-2.00 -1.00 -31.60 88.00 0.6409 8 44 .1818 1.2468
-1.00 0.00 -34.00 78.00 0.5641 8 39 .2051 1.4066
0.00 1.00 -40.40 190.00 0.7874 22 95 .2316 1.5880
1.00 2.00 -27.80 68.00 0.5912 8 34 .2353 1.6134
2.00 3.00 73.80 56.00 2.3179 6 28 .2143 1.4694
3.00 4.00 -1.40 68.00 0.9794 5 34 .1471 1.0084
4.00 5.00 -8.00 54.00 0.8519 9 27 .3333 2.2857
5.00 6.00 21.80 48.00 1.4542 8 24 .3333 2.2857
6.00 7.00 -15.80 30.00 0.4733 3 15 .2000 1.3714
7.00 8.00 6.70 20.00 1.3350 5 10 .5000 3.4286
8.00 999999.00 -15.80 86.00 0.8163 9 43 .2093 1.4352

By: Best E2 Num

>=Min < Max Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
-999 30 -134.20 302.00 0.5556 18 151 .1192 0.8174
30 35 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
35 40 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
40 45 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
45 50 11.20 2.00 6.6000 1 1 1.0000 6.8571
50 55 -4.00 4.00 0.0000 0 2 .0000 0.0000
55 60 41.20 16.00 3.5750 1 8 .1250 0.8571
60 65 6.20 24.00 1.2583 1 12 .0833 0.5714
65 70 -37.80 72.00 0.4750 3 36 .0833 0.5714
70 75 -112.20 152.00 0.2618 5 76 .0658 0.4511
75 80 -120.60 208.00 0.4202 8 104 .0769 0.5275
80 85 -97.60 418.00 0.7665 19 209 .0909 0.6234
85 90 -142.00 496.00 0.7137 36 248 .1452 0.9954
90 95 -217.80 580.00 0.6245 45 290 .1552 1.0640
95 100 -38.00 482.00 0.9212 43 241 .1784 1.2235
100 105 -65.20 350.00 0.8137 37 175 .2114 1.4498
105 110 -21.90 186.00 0.8823 20 93 .2151 1.4747
110 115 19.60 56.00 1.3500 8 28 .2857 1.9592
115 120 -12.00 12.00 0.0000 0 6 .0000 0.0000
120 999999 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000


And here is the same data broken out by Bris Q Speed Points:
By: Q Speed Points Rank

Rank Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
1 -171.40 668.00 0.7434 67 334 .2006 1.3755
2 -85.30 540.00 0.8420 54 270 .2000 1.3714
3 -138.60 592.00 0.7659 44 296 .1486 1.0193
4 -148.60 454.00 0.6727 28 227 .1233 0.8458
5 -69.40 480.00 0.8554 30 240 .1250 0.8571
6 -180.40 330.00 0.4533 12 165 .0727 0.4987
7 -76.60 198.00 0.6131 5 99 .0505 0.3463
8 -18.80 52.00 0.6385 3 26 .1154 0.7912
9 -26.00 36.00 0.2778 2 18 .1111 0.7619
10 -6.00 6.00 0.0000 0 3 .0000 0.0000
11 -2.00 2.00 0.0000 0 1 .0000 0.0000
12 -2.00 2.00 0.0000 0 1 .0000 0.0000

By: Q Speed Points Gap

>=Min < Max Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
-999 -8 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
-8 -7 -97.00 174.00 0.4425 8 87 .0920 0.6305
-7 -6 -75.80 164.00 0.5378 8 82 .0976 0.6690
-6 -5 -259.00 410.00 0.3683 17 205 .0829 0.5686
-5 -4 -50.80 402.00 0.8736 23 201 .1144 0.7846
-4 -3 41.40 432.00 1.0958 28 216 .1296 0.8889
-3 -2 -108.20 424.00 0.7448 32 212 .1509 1.0350
-2 -1 -108.40 380.00 0.7147 30 190 .1579 1.0827
-1 0 -95.90 306.00 0.6866 32 153 .2092 1.4342
0 1 -52.00 320.00 0.8375 29 160 .1813 1.2429
1 2 -72.80 166.00 0.5614 16 83 .1928 1.3219
2 3 -44.60 106.00 0.5792 11 53 .2075 1.4232
3 4 7.80 40.00 1.1950 6 20 .3000 2.0571
4 5 -5.00 26.00 0.8077 4 13 .3077 2.1099
5 6 -4.00 4.00 0.0000 0 2 .0000 0.0000
6 7 -0.80 6.00 0.8667 1 3 .3333 2.2857
7 8 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
8 9 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
9 10 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000
10 999999 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0 0 .0000 0.0000


By: Q Speed Points Number

Q SpdPts Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
0 -336.80 872.00 0.6138 40 436 .0917 0.6291
1 -67.20 260.00 0.7415 18 130 .1385 0.9495
2 -68.60 352.00 0.8051 22 176 .1250 0.8571
3 -105.20 400.00 0.7370 23 200 .1150 0.7886
4 -95.30 356.00 0.7323 32 178 .1798 1.2327
5 -83.80 424.00 0.8024 41 212 .1934 1.3261
6 -142.60 352.00 0.5949 30 176 .1705 1.1688
7 -16.60 180.00 0.9078 20 90 .2222 1.5238
8 -9.00 164.00 0.9451 19 82 .2317 1.5889




-jp

.

[fmolf]

MNslappy:

Thanks for the info. I believe I read that PDF file before. The breakout of advantage figures that they use is very general, only looking at horses that have 7 or 8 Quirin points in a field where no one else has more than 5. In many cases, this could lead to only a 2-point advantage, for example, if the qualifying horse had 7 points and another horse had 5. What I was more interested in is say, a breakout where a horse had a 5-point advantage over the field, followed by a 4-point advantage, 3-point, etc.

fmolf: I have the Klein book as well and I do not bother to run his figures. However, I will say this: If you look at how he sets up his speed point scale and how the Quirin scale is set up, Klein has definitely made some advancements. Since Quirin points are currently considered the "Gold Standard" in t-bred racing, it makes some sense that Klein's points should be more accurate.

I subscribe to his website where he says that he has made some improvements to his general method since the publication of the book. I have used his numbers (not bothering to calculate them on my own, which as you say is time-consuming and difficult) and I have found his numbers to be highly accurate. Currently, though, I am not using pace advantage as my major means of handicapping, but I was wondering if anyone had info on points vs. pace figs, etc.

Mark
His ideas are worthwhile and make sense,regarding field size,lengths ahead. I just think the improvement is not great enough to use his methodology or his numbers.I prefer to look at the bris E1 & E2 numbers to get a feel for who the likely pacesetters will be.What is never taken into consideration is post position and whether a horse has the speed to clear the field from outside posts.This is best done using pace numbers or even raw fractional times.

[markgoldie]

Jeff P:

Thanks for the obvious effort you put into that post. I think what it shows more than anything else is that the sample is too small to gather too much in the way of conclusions. Thus, you have proximate rankings which in many cases are drastically different from each other. This, no doubt is due to a high-priced winner or two which occurred in one rank and not in the other.

However, I take your vote seriously that pace figs are the better ROI indicator of a potential race winner. And I note that Partsnut disagrees.

Thanks.

Mark

[Speed Figure]

How are most looking at this? early speed points are for 1st call figures right? meaning which horse has the best 1st call early speed. 2f in sprints and 4f in routes. Would it not be better to look at the E1 and not the E2? E2 is the pace figure. Many horses may have low speed points, but in fact be better to the 2nd call while another horse could have high speed points, but fade to the 2nd call.

[CBedo]

I thought the Klein book had some interesting statistics. The biggest issue I had with it was that the only statistics he didn't provide were on the figures he made! Not exactly a ringing endorsement of their overall effectiveness or even improvement over the Quirin speed points.

[sjk]

Jeff P:

Thanks for the obvious effort you put into that post. I think what it shows more than anything else is that the sample is too small to gather too much in the way of conclusions. Thus, you have proximate rankings which in many cases are drastically different from each other. This, no doubt is due to a high-priced winner or two which occurred in one rank and not in the other.

However, I take your vote seriously that pace figs are the better ROI indicator of a potential race winner. And I note that Partsnut disagrees.

Thanks.

Mark

Seems like I posted ROIs for a much larger sample when you were asking about this a month or so ago.

[fmolf]

I thought the Klein book had some interesting statistics. The biggest issue I had with it was that the only statistics he didn't provide were on the figures he made! Not exactly a ringing endorsement of their overall effectiveness or even improvement over the Quirin speed points.
i found in my experiment with his method that it pointed out a lot of speed and fade types.Did any one esle find this to be true?

[Jeff P]

How are most looking at this? early speed points are for 1st call figures right? meaning which horse has the best 1st call early speed. 2f in sprints and 4f in routes. Would it not be better to look at the E1 and not the E2? E2 is the pace figure. Many horses may have low speed points, but in fact be better to the 2nd call while another horse could have high speed points, but fade to the 2nd call.Early Speed points typically exist on a scale of 0 to 8 and represent (my opinion) willingness to compete for the lead. Closely related to running style, there are several different "accepted" ways of calculating early speed points. The higher the speed point number the greater the tendency of the individual horse to compete for the lead. E run style horses with 8 speed points almost always compete for the lead but for many different reasons may not win the race. Methods of calculation for early speed points that I've seen frequently employ pace call position and beaten lengths.

Pace figs are raw time, par for the surface-distance, and variant based. In theory they are a measurement of how fast a horse ran to either the first (E1) or second (E2) point of call.

Q. Would it not be better to look at the E1 and not the E2?

A. I've seen arguments for and against both. My own large sample studies show E2 as the (slightly) better indicator. However, IMHO, it really depends on the circumstances. At certain distances on certain surfaces E1 will get you a better result roi-wise. At other distances and/or track surfaces you're better off looking at E2. A third, better (again my opinion) alternative is to derive a compound number using both.

Random thoughts posted on a keyboard while I take a much needed break from painting the living room today...

-jp

.

[fmolf]

Early Speed points typically exist on a scale of 0 to 8 and represent (my opinion) willingness to compete for the lead. Closely related to running style, there are several different "accepted" ways of calculating early speed points. The higher the speed point number the greater the tendency of the individual horse to compete for the lead. E run style horses with 8 speed points almost always compete for the lead but for many different reasons may not win the race. Methods of calculation for early speed points that I've seen frequently employ pace call position and beaten lengths.

Pace figs are raw time, par for the surface-distance, and variant based. In theory they are a measurement of how fast a horse ran to either the first (E1) or second (E2) point of call.

Q. Would it not be better to look at the E1 and not the E2?

A. I've seen arguments for and against both. My own large sample studies show E2 as the (slightly) better indicator. However, IMHO, it really depends on the circumstances. At certain distances on certain surfaces E1 will get you a better result roi-wise. At other distances and/or track surfaces you're better off looking at E2. A third, better (again my opinion) alternative is to derive a compound number using both.

Random thoughts posted on a keyboard while I take a much needed break from painting the living room today...

-jp

.
sometimes an E8 isjust not fast enough to go with an E2 or 3 this is determined by pace figs in conjunction with speed points.Quite often a 7 0r 8 point E type that does not get the lead before the 4f mark will throw in the towel qand fade away.

[InFront]

Thus, the study could reasonably be restricted to races in which Brisnet says that E runners have the highest IV (impact value) at the distance. Steve Klein also sells track speed-bias statistics, but he restricts his reports to a handful of tracks. His stats are good, but as I say, limited.

I'd also be interested in hearing if anyone out there is regularly working with pace figs, and if so, how you compare them to Quirin speed points. Are they more accurate in your opinion?? Most experts say they are not, but I am yet to read about a study which shows this to be true. I guess I should back up here and say that we are talking about the horse who has the best chance to establish a clear lead in a race at the pace call (sometimes referred to as "2p" or "E2"). We know through extensive published statistics from Klein that these horses routinely enjoy a positive ROI of over 100% in American dirt racing (this may extend to synth although I'm not sure).
Mark

Read Klein's book and think it was useless. It's one of those statistical studies "after the fact kind of post-race mumbo jumbo". Like horses that get the early lead go on to win 28% of the time. Too bad we don't know who that horse will be. That is like saying the horse that runs the fastest time in TODAYS RACE wins 100% of the time. Also dabbled with his Klein points and never seen them work any better than something that is already calculated for you the Quirin points.

Another thing is I contacted BRIS/TSN about when they give stats how what type of runner is doing at a specific track/surface/distance and if those stats are based on LABELED PRE-RACE RUNNING STYLES or are derived from after the fact running styles. They said they are based on post race crap which means once again useless. This means if a horse is marked as E/P but runs like a P horse and wins it is counted as a P horse not a E/P horse. What good is that?

So much of this kind of sold products are recorded after the race runs, we need to use and know stats/factors that work decently before the race is run.

Even though much I read say that Quirin "POSITIONAL" Points supposed to be more accurate I would disagree overall. If I had to choose between Quirin Points, Running Styles or Early Pace Figures I would agree with others and use Pace "SPEED" Figs overall. At least they are based on Speed and not Positional factors. Hope this reply helps.

[fmolf]

Read Klein's book and think it was useless. It's one of those statistical studies "after the fact kind of post-race mumbo jumbo". Like horses that get the early lead go on to win 28% of the time. Too bad we don't know who that horse will be. That is like saying the horse that runs the fastest time in TODAYS RACE wins 100% of the time. Also dabbled with his Klein points and never seen them work any better than something that is already calculated for you the Quirin points.

Another thing is I contacted BRIS/TSN about when they give stats how what type of runner is doing at a specific track/surface/distance and if those stats are based on LABELED PRE-RACE RUNNING STYLES or are derived from after the fact running styles. They said they are based on post race crap which means once again useless. This means if a horse is marked as E/P but runs like a P horse and wins it is counted as a P horse not a E/P horse. What good is that?

So much of this kind of sold products are recorded after the race runs, we need to use and know stats/factors that work decently before the race is run.

Even though much I read say that Quirin "POSITIONAL" Points supposed to be more accurate I would disagree overall. If I had to choose between Quirin Points, Running Styles or Early Pace Figures I would agree with others and use Pace "SPEED" Figs overall. At least they are based on Speed and not Positional factors. Hope this reply helps.E/P means just that, a horse who has exhibited both running styles depending on the race, the pace and his post position and jockey/trainer strategy for that particular race.It is my opinion that E's, P's and S types very rarely change their running style.I have found the bris race summary and bias info to be quite accurate.Not perfect but when used as a factor in your analysis of race, can be quite helpful.I use speed points,positional and fractional calls to assess the pace scenario in my handicapping.

[cj]

Pace figures fare much better than QSPs ROI wise on my numbers, it isn't even a contest.

[fmolf]

Pace figures fare much better than QSPs ROI wise on my numbers, it isn't even a contest.
everyone has their own style ...i use pace figs speed points and the positional and fractional calls to assess the pace of a race.

[CincyHorseplayer]

The Quirin numbers are just a nice,simple function and starting point when you are trying to figure out "How the race will be run"?I don't think there are any technical guidelines beyond that.If you have an 8 in a field of 1's and 2's and 3's even quitters can get it done.By I think it's best function is the visual aspect of the numbers as to ho the race will unfold.

One very simple things I do,after the raw numbers are adjusted is add the 2nd call to the first fraction.If there is a full second advantage in that number,those horses have a great early pace advantage.

[Cangamble]

I use Klein's method (sort of) in determining bias overall for a day when doing track variants for certain tracks. That alone, made it worth me buying the book. I've found the results to be useful enough for my style of handicapping.

His book is a bit outdated thanks to the influx of artificial surfaces that came in after the book was published. Speed horses on polytrack are about as useful as a fridge is to an Eskimo most of the time.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I use Klein's method (sort of) in determining bias overall for a day when doing track variants for certain tracks. That alone, made it worth me buying the book. I've found the results to be useful enough for my style of handicapping.

His book is a bit outdated thanks to the influx of artificial surfaces that came in after the book was published. Speed horses on polytrack are about as useful as a fridge is to an Eskimo most of the time.

If an etch-a-sketch is the Amish laptop(didn't you have that as your signature??)

Isn't a fridge and Eskimo sauna??!!:)

[CBedo]

I use both the speed points & style, along with the E1/E2 type numbers. To me, they both help tell the story of the beginning of the race. Also, to me, I don't look at them on an roi basis. I use them as a tool to help understand the beginning of the race, trying to understand possible scenarios which help me understand what other tools will lead me to roi.

[Bison]

I've read Steve Klein's book, and I think it's pretty good.
His theories look like they might be useful. I'd be interested to know what percentages his and Quirin's methods are actually able to predict the first call leader.

[InFront]

E/P means just that, a horse who has exhibited both running styles depending on the race, the pace and his post position and jockey/trainer strategy for that particular race.It is my opinion that E's, P's and S types very rarely change their running style.I have found the bris race summary and bias info to be quite accurate.Not perfect but when used as a factor in your analysis of race, can be quite helpful.I use speed points,positional and fractional calls to assess the pace scenario in my handicapping.

The point I was making is these BRIS/TSN stats are based on how ANY horse ran the race and just happened to win. It can be a "labeled" P horse that ran like a S horse and won. It be a "E labeled" horse and ran like a P and won. And this is how they do a final count for the style bias of the track/distance which to me is not really accurate, yes accurate based on after the fact races but not before.

As you said "most" horses don't change their running style but change it from what? When a horse is labeled as say a P horse does this mean it usually runs in this fashion all the time or only in it's better races based on how it actually finished it ran a P style race? Just like a E labeled style horse does the horse usually run that way all the time regardless how it finished or when it runs a better competitive race it then runs as a E style runner. This is something that I have not clearly seen and described in any BRIS/TSN literature as to why and how each horse is labeled.

And as you probably seen in many live races depending on the pace and setup of the race and other style horses involved sometimes E horses sometimes run like P's and then we have P's right near the front?

[fmolf]

The point I was making is these BRIS/TSN stats are based on how ANY horse ran the race and just happened to win. It can be a "labeled" P horse that ran like a S horse and won. It be a "E labeled" horse and ran like a P and won. And this is how they do a final count for the style bias of the track/distance which to me is not really accurate, yes accurate based on after the fact races but not before.

As you said "most" horses don't change their running style but change it from what? When a horse is labeled as say a P horse does this mean it usually runs in this fashion all the time or only in it's better races based on how it actually finished it ran a P style race? Just like a E labeled style horse does the horse usually run that way all the time regardless how it finished or when it runs a better competitive race it then runs as a E style runner. This is something that I have not clearly seen and described in any BRIS/TSN literature as to why and how each horse is labeled.

And as you probably seen in many live races depending on the pace and setup of the race and other style horses involved sometimes E horses sometimes run like P's and then we have P's right near the front?
i understand what you are saying and agree with some of your points.The better class horses can maybe change their running style effectively.here is how i personally define the styles
1) E= a horse that runs as fast as it can right out of the gate.battling for the lead until it tires.this type of horse will tire when pushed by other e types to battle for the lead,going faster than his stamina will allow him to finish the race strongly.
2)E/P= these horses may be rated or sit just off the pace depending on jockeys choice during the first furlong.this horse will usually sit back one length off the frontrunners or battle for the lead or take the lead himself if pace is slow enough.(jockeys call)
3)P= these horses sit in the front half of the field,usually saving ground, 2 or three lengths off the pacesetters and make their moves when the jockey feels the timing is right.may be a move on the turn,may be a move in the stretch.
4)S=these horses sit in the last half of the pack and unleash one run usually in the stretch,often coming up short or getting into traffic problems.

If a horse wins a race exhibiting a different running style than what he is labeled as this will show up for astute handicappers in the running lines.As for the bias report they are only reporting which style of run is winning at this track.If an E type wins a race where he is left at the gate then slowly gains on the field running asa P or even an S type would you like them to skew the bias report and list the race as having been won by an e type.the bias only purports to tell us what general running style is winning.whether their is a post position bias.I pay more attention to winners average lengths behind than the running style designation.If an E/P wins running on the lead the race ws won by an e horse.the report it that way.I have no problem with it.I find it accurate and helpful.

[jeebus1083]

I have his book and i was not impressed with it.His method takes into account field size,post position and early speed.His methods sometimes uncover a diamond in the rough but calculating every horses klein speed points is tiring and cumbersome.I have found that often times horses that show high speed in his system do not outrun others with more quirin speed points.I gave up using his method as i did not note any significant difference in selecting the early speed horse.The equation is complicated with about 8 steps.I do not use it any longer.I have found bris pace numbers to be just as effective in conjunction with their speed point calculations

I have an incomplete (incomplete meaning that it's still "buggy") Excel spreadsheet that produces Klein Speed Points from the BRIS Single File PPs.

The thing with the Klein Speed Point system is that the points are weighted by field size (it's easier to sprint clear in a 5 horse field than a 12 horse field depending on the circumstances), distance, and surface. Also, horses don't know what their speed points are.

I use both Quirin Speed Points and Klein Speed Points. The Quirins are helpful in creating a pace pressure gauge, and the Kleins are helpful in separation, if any. A Quirin pressure gauge may look like 25/3 (late runner favoring), the first number meaning the total points of all the Es, EPs, and Ps, and the 2nd number being the total # of E-style runners. However, I will look at the Klein scale and see where those E's stand. Often, the E's will be close in Klein points, and a pace battle appears likely. However, if one of the E's looks to have a big Klein advantage - despite the Quirin scale indicating otherwise, AND has a pace figure that could allow them smooth sailing, I may go "against the grain" and zero in on that horse in my wagers.

[jeebus1083]

Pace figures fare much better than QSPs ROI wise on my numbers, it isn't even a contest.

I agree that QSPs don't tell the whole story. You need an accurate set of pace figures to validate those numbers, and be aware of race shapes and run styles. The pressure gauge is a good starting point, as well as matching up the E's. Sometimes, I'll see a P or S horse with the top pace figure, but will likely discount the figure if theres a cluster or Es and EPs. Sometimes, a field is so bad, that the top pace figure will go to the front by default, but overall, I find that if a horse with a late-speed run style has the top pace figures, they will generally run to their normal style, completely rendering the pace figure irrelevant. Of course, there are other handicapping factors to weigh in on, and the horse may still be a solid play with their normal run style. It all depends on how the race shapes up when all the other variables are put into play.

[fmolf]

I agree that QSPs don't tell the whole story. You need an accurate set of pace figures to validate those numbers, and be aware of race shapes and run styles. The pressure gauge is a good starting point, as well as matching up the E's. Sometimes, I'll see a P or S horse with the top pace figure, but will likely discount the figure if theres a cluster or Es and EPs. Sometimes, a field is so bad, that the top pace figure will go to the front by default, but overall, I find that if a horse with a late-speed run style has the top pace figures, they will generally run to their normal style, completely rendering the pace figure irrelevant. Of course, there are other handicapping factors to weigh in on, and the horse may still be a solid play with their normal run style. It all depends on how the race shapes up when all the other variables are put into play.
i agree pace numbers in conjunction with speed points are a better method than either standing alone.klein points are cumbersome to calculate and i have found that they overrate performances in larger fields.More important for early positioning is post position and other early speed inside of the horse that you are looking at.He also gives too much weight in my opinion to horses that get the early lead.His bias ratings do not take into account when the most logical horse(best horse in the field)wins unless he is a 3/5 or less.Most of the accepted theory statesthat a bias is when horses not good enough to win a race are helped to the winners circle by the track favoring its particular running style/or a certain portion of the track is faster propelling unlikely horses to wins against better class animals.I do not see where Klein takes this into account

[markgoldie]

Seems like I posted ROIs for a much larger sample when you were asking about this a month or so ago.
Sorry sjk, somehow I missed it. This wasn't on the thread about "pace pressure gauges" was it? I f you remember, just tell me where it is. Don't bother to repost. Thanks.

Mark

[sjk]

My bad. I looked up the post and what I calculated was the percent that made lead rather than ROI.

Let me know if it is of interest and I could do an ROI for a significant sized sample.

I would never bet a horse based on a single attribute such as speed but rather use the speed to modify the odds line that I would otherwise assign that horse.

If it is not already apparrent I find a quantified pace number useful and I do not use the speed point methodology.

[ryesteve]

The point I was making is these BRIS/TSN stats are based on how ANY horse ran the race and just happened to win. It can be a "labeled" P horse that ran like a S horse and won. It be a "E labeled" horse and ran like a P and won. And this is how they do a final count for the style bias of the track/distanceAre you sure about this? I really don't think that's how they do it. Not only does it make more sense to base the tally on how the horse was tagged going into the race, it's also a lot easier to do it that way.

[markgoldie]

My bad. I looked up the post and what I calculated was the percent that made lead rather than ROI.

Let me know if it is of interest and I could do an ROI for a significant sized sample.

I would never bet a horse based on a single attribute such as speed but rather use the speed to modify the odds line that I would otherwise assign that horse.

If it is not already apparrent I find a quantified pace number useful and I do not use the speed point methodology.
Not that important. I don't bet horses based solely on speed either. In fact, what I'm really looking to do is bet against the apparent speed because I think the pendulum may have swung too far to the early-speed players who are pushing the odds down too much. Yes, the speed wins most often but you have to ask yourself what price you are getting.

What would make me feel better is knowing that there are healthy negative ROI's associated with early-speed playing and I think there may be. At least that allows for the possibility of finding better value elsewhere.

Mark

[Secretariat]

A lot of good discussion on pace and quirin and klein speed points.

Just curious, has anyone ever developed a comparative Late Speed Point approach.

It's a little harder it seems using position, since for early speed points they are all equal coming out of the gate. A horse in 5th who moves to 4th for example is gaining a position but may have lost 5 lengths on the lead to a tiring field.

As far as lengths, Quirin gives a ESP to a horse within 2 lengths in sprints and 3 in routes. And a point for 1-2-3.

So could late speed points be something like -

1 point for gaining 2 lengths in sprints and 3 lengths in routes from the second call to finish, and 1 point for a gain in position in the lead or holding position if 1-2-3.

Maybe one could elablorate on byes or improve on this. Wrote to Bill Quirin a few years ago who said he's out of the game, but if he were doing it today he'd be a "universalist" whatever that means.

My own studies of his stuff show similar win percentages, but much lower ROI's. Problem with a good book is it gets hammered at the mutuels working against the initial discoveries in regards to price.

[CBedo]

In a relatively small sample that I looked at, the Klein speed points weren't any better than the Quirins for projecting first call leaders. The big advantage that they have is that they don't have as many top ranked ties, so you don't have to have a tie breaker procedure for rating them.

[ryesteve]

Wrote to Bill Quirin a few years ago who said he's out of the game, but if he were doing it today he'd be a "universalist" whatever that means.Perhaps he meant he wouldn't be trying to dynamically model and chase short-term tendencies and biases, and would instead be focusing on static strategies that could achieve broad success.

[fmolf]

A lot of good discussion on pace and quirin and klein speed points.

Just curious, has anyone ever developed a comparative Late Speed Point approach.

It's a little harder it seems using position, since for early speed points they are all equal coming out of the gate. A horse in 5th who moves to 4th for example is gaining a position but may have lost 5 lengths on the lead to a tiring field.

As far as lengths, Quirin gives a ESP to a horse within 2 lengths in sprints and 3 in routes. And a point for 1-2-3.

So could late speed points be something like -

1 point for gaining 2 lengths in sprints and 3 lengths in routes from the second call to finish, and 1 point for a gain in position in the lead or holding position if 1-2-3.

Maybe one could elablorate on byes or improve on this. Wrote to Bill Quirin a few years ago who said he's out of the game, but if he were doing it today he'd be a "universalist" whatever that means.

My own studies of his stuff show similar win percentages, but much lower ROI's. Problem with a good book is it gets hammered at the mutuels working against the initial discoveries in regards to price.
scott had a method or a theory he called ability time....it was the adjusted pace call raw time + the final fraction + or - beaten lengths...so say a horse ran a 46.6 was beaten 1 lenght adjusting this to 46.8 his final fraction was 25.2 and he won the race gaining that 1 length,his adjusted last fraction would be 25.0 add this to 46.8 and you have a 71.8 ability time for this horse.he also has a chart to adjust these numbers according to the drf variant i do not have these adjustments handy.

[RichieP]

Just curious, has anyone ever developed a comparative Late Speed Point approach.


Jim "The Hat" Bradshaw's Matchup Concepts factor in"Power Moves" or multi positional gains on O.T.E. runners between 1c-2c and 2c-sc. All moves from sc to finish are ignored for all intent and purpose for THIS exercise.

The stronger the move vs the faster the pace of race the better.

Speed points of any kind are completely ignored

[jeebus1083]

i agree pace numbers in conjunction with speed points are a better method than either standing alone.klein points are cumbersome to calculate and i have found that they overrate performances in larger fields.More important for early positioning is post position and other early speed inside of the horse that you are looking at.He also gives too much weight in my opinion to horses that get the early lead.His bias ratings do not take into account when the most logical horse(best horse in the field)wins unless he is a 3/5 or less.Most of the accepted theory statesthat a bias is when horses not good enough to win a race are helped to the winners circle by the track favoring its particular running style/or a certain portion of the track is faster propelling unlikely horses to wins against better class animals.I do not see where Klein takes this into account

While I'll agree that biases in racetracks do exist, they are also an overrated phenomenon. Horses generally not good enough to win a race on paper, win on fair-playing racetracks all the time. Why? Many reasons. Changes in ride tactics, pace (or lack thereof), trainer changes, distance changes, surface changes, class changes, medication changes, equipment changes, post position, track condition, other horse's bad luck, dream trips, and field quality can collectively revitalize a bad horse. There are a lot of races (NY-breds for example) everyday that are so bad, that any horse can move up out of the blue, and win at huge mutuels. Someone has to win, even if it's the bum whose been blasted by 200 lengths over 10 starts. If the perfect storm of factors works in a bad horse's favor, they are as good as the rest of its competition.

[castaway01]

Early Speed points typically exist on a scale of 0 to 8 and represent (my opinion) willingness to compete for the lead. Closely related to running style, there are several different "accepted" ways of calculating early speed points. The higher the speed point number the greater the tendency of the individual horse to compete for the lead. E run style horses with 8 speed points almost always compete for the lead but for many different reasons may not win the race. Methods of calculation for early speed points that I've seen frequently employ pace call position and beaten lengths.

Pace figs are raw time, par for the surface-distance, and variant based. In theory they are a measurement of how fast a horse ran to either the first (E1) or second (E2) point of call.

Q. Would it not be better to look at the E1 and not the E2?

A. I've seen arguments for and against both. My own large sample studies show E2 as the (slightly) better indicator. However, IMHO, it really depends on the circumstances. At certain distances on certain surfaces E1 will get you a better result roi-wise. At other distances and/or track surfaces you're better off looking at E2. A third, better (again my opinion) alternative is to derive a compound number using both.

Random thoughts posted on a keyboard while I take a much needed break from painting the living room today...

-jp

.

Jeff, what color is the living room going to be?

[fmolf]

While I'll agree that biases in racetracks do exist, they are also an overrated phenomenon. Horses generally not good enough to win a race on paper, win on fair-playing racetracks all the time. Why? Many reasons. Changes in ride tactics, pace (or lack thereof), trainer changes, distance changes, surface changes, class changes, medication changes, equipment changes, post position, track condition, other horse's bad luck, dream trips, and field quality can collectively revitalize a bad horse. There are a lot of races (NY-breds for example) everyday that are so bad, that any horse can move up out of the blue, and win at huge mutuels. Someone has to win, even if it's the bum whose been blasted by 200 lengths over 10 starts. If the perfect storm of factors works in a bad horse's favor, they are as good as the rest of its competition.correct on all of your points.
I was just debunking kleins method of bias detection.His method points i believe to biases that are not really there.I personally believe bias's are rare in this day and age.I need to see some illogical results(more than one) before i really believe a bias is responsible for them

[Cangamble]

If an etch-a-sketch is the Amish laptop(didn't you have that as your signature??)

Isn't a fridge and Eskimo sauna??!!:)
That wasn't my signature. I can't remember whose it was.

[Jeff P]

Jeff, what color is the living room going to be?It's something called Stone White... and it looks really sharp.

Most of the paint found its way onto the walls where it's supposed to go...

But somehow a little bit ended up in my hair, on my shoes, and on one of my favorite black t-shirts. <G>


-jp

.

[InFront]

i understand what you are saying and agree with some of your points.The better class horses can maybe change their running style effectively.here is how i personally define the styles
1) E= a horse that runs as fast as it can right out of the gate.battling for the lead until it tires.this type of horse will tire when pushed by other e types to battle for the lead,going faster than his stamina will allow him to finish the race strongly.
2)E/P= these horses may be rated or sit just off the pace depending on jockeys choice during the first furlong.this horse will usually sit back one length off the frontrunners or battle for the lead or take the lead himself if pace is slow enough.(jockeys call)
3)P= these horses sit in the front half of the field,usually saving ground, 2 or three lengths off the pacesetters and make their moves when the jockey feels the timing is right.may be a move on the turn,may be a move in the stretch.
4)S=these horses sit in the last half of the pack and unleash one run usually in the stretch,often coming up short or getting into traffic problems.



I read similar in some of the BRIS literature. So regardless how good or bad a horses finished a race if in general a horse like to run races from the lead then it will be labeled as a "E" horse even if in many of those races it finished poorly. So in otherwords regardless how a horse FINISHES any race it as no influence in calculating or giving him a labed RUNNING STYLE, is that correct?

And also how many races are used in originally determining a running style: last 3 races, 10 races, life, etc. and do horses ever change their style say from race 6-10 races back to their most recent 5 races?

[46zilzal]

Jim "The Hat" Bradshaw's Matchup Concepts factor in"Power Moves" or multi positional gains on O.T.E. runners between 1c-2c and 2c-sc. All moves from sc to finish are ignored for all intent and purpose for THIS exercise.

The stronger the move vs the faster the pace of race the better.

Speed points of any kind are completely ignored
The KEY to the match up

[markgoldie]

I read similar in some of the BRIS literature. So regardless how good or bad a horses finished a race if in general a horse like to run races from the lead then it will be labeled as a "E" horse even if in many of those races it finished poorly. So in otherwords regardless how a horse FINISHES any race it as no influence in calculating or giving him a labed RUNNING STYLE, is that correct?

And also how many races are used in originally determining a running style: last 3 races, 10 races, life, etc. and do horses ever change their style say from race 6-10 races back to their most recent 5 races?
This is a key question and something which bears watching. A horse's running style is labeled pretty early on in the animal's career. Brisnet will list a horse as "N/A" when it does not feel there is enough information about the animal to determine a running style. However, the vast majority of horses receive a label within a half-dozen outings, with most far fewer.

I have seen several descriptions of how a horse's running style is determined, but for me, the one that makes the most sense is determining HOW THE HORSE HAS WON IN THE PAST. If he has only won when on or near the front early, he is a legitimate E in my opinion. If he has stalked the pace into the stretch and then come on to win, he is a P. If he has won both on the front and through stalking, he is an E/P. And if he has only won with a run from well back, he is an S type.

I find this is important because more than anything else, I want to know how the horse can win the race at hand. In other words, where he can be in the early running and get the job done?

The other crucial question is whether or not a horse can change his running style and the answer is "yes". Generally, this will happen when an E/P either loses the ability to stalk and close, making him an effective E horse, or he loses the ability to ever gain the front and becomes a P. S-type horses seem to rarely change their style.

I mentally change the designation of such horses all the time. When I see a horse listed as an E/P by Brisnet who in his last 10 races has NEVER closed any significant lengths from the pace call to the wire, I know I am effectively dealing with an E, rather than an E/P. Why is this important? Because with MY designation, if I can see that there is such speed in the race that this horse will never see the front, I feel sure that I can eliminate him as a winner.

Similarly, if I see a horse designated as E/P by Brisnet who in his last 10 races has not made the front but who has occasionally closed from a stalking position, I feel I can confidently throw this horse out of the pace mix of the race. That is, at this point in his career, he is no threat in my mind to duel the E speeders into submission in the pace portion of the race. For me he is now a P horse and nothing more.

In general, I think you must keep your eyes on the designations which seem to rarely get changed and adjust them according to what you see on the form.

Mark

[fmolf]

This is a key question and something which bears watching. A horse's running style is labeled pretty early on in the animal's career. Brisnet will list a horse as "N/A" when it does not feel there is enough information about the animal to determine a running style. However, the vast majority of horses receive a label within a half-dozen outings, with most far fewer.

I have seen several descriptions of how a horse's running style is determined, but for me, the one that makes the most sense is determining HOW THE HORSE HAS WON IN THE PAST. If he has only won when on or near the front early, he is a legitimate E in my opinion. If he has stalked the pace into the stretch and then come on to win, he is a P. If he has won both on the front and through stalking, he is an E/P. And if he has only won with a run from well back, he is an S type.

I find this is important because more than anything else, I want to know how the horse can win the race at hand. In other words, where he can be in the early running and get the job done?

The other crucial question is whether or not a horse can change his running style and the answer is "yes". Generally, this will happen when an E/P either loses the ability to stalk and close, making him an effective E horse, or he loses the ability to ever gain the front and becomes a P. S-type horses seem to rarely change their style.

I mentally change the designation of such horses all the time. When I see a horse listed as an E/P by Brisnet who in his last 10 races has NEVER closed any significant lengths from the pace call to the wire, I know I am effectively dealing with an E, rather than an E/P. Why is this important? Because with MY designation, if I can see that there is such speed in the race that this horse will never see the front, I feel sure that I can eliminate him as a winner.

Similarly, if I see a horse designated as E/P by Brisnet who in his last 10 races has not made the front but who has occasionally closed from a stalking position, I feel I can confidently throw this horse out of the pace mix of the race. That is, at this point in his career, he is no threat in my mind to duel the E speeders into submission in the pace portion of the race. For me he is now a P horse and nothing more.

In general, I think you must keep your eyes on the designations which seem to rarely get changed and adjust them according to what you see on the form.

Mark
exactly why i use pace figs in conjunction with speed points to see who will gain the lead.Using one without the other is fraught with the perils you just outlined.Often times i have found an e/p or even a p type that will be faster than some e types to the first call so a thorough analysis is needed to determine who and why they will get the early lead.If a horse is ratable a good jockey will know at what pace the horse is comfortable and in a slow paced race may have the p type horse on the lead or closer than usual...what makes this game so interesting is every race is a new riddle that we are trying to solve.

[ddog]

This is a key question and something which bears watching. A horse's running style is labeled pretty early on in the animal's career. Brisnet will list a horse as "N/A" when it does not feel there is enough information about the animal to determine a running style. However, the vast majority of horses receive a label within a half-dozen outings, with most far fewer.

I have seen several descriptions of how a horse's running style is determined, but for me, the one that makes the most sense is determining HOW THE HORSE HAS WON IN THE PAST. If he has only won when on or near the front early, he is a legitimate E in my opinion. If he has stalked the pace into the stretch and then come on to win, he is a P. If he has won both on the front and through stalking, he is an E/P. And if he has only won with a run from well back, he is an S type.

I find this is important because more than anything else, I want to know how the horse can win the race at hand. In other words, where he can be in the early running and get the job done?

The other crucial question is whether or not a horse can change his running style and the answer is "yes". Generally, this will happen when an E/P either loses the ability to stalk and close, making him an effective E horse, or he loses the ability to ever gain the front and becomes a P. S-type horses seem to rarely change their style.

I mentally change the designation of such horses all the time. When I see a horse listed as an E/P by Brisnet who in his last 10 races has NEVER closed any significant lengths from the pace call to the wire, I know I am effectively dealing with an E, rather than an E/P. Why is this important? Because with MY designation, if I can see that there is such speed in the race that this horse will never see the front, I feel sure that I can eliminate him as a winner.

Similarly, if I see a horse designated as E/P by Brisnet who in his last 10 races has not made the front but who has occasionally closed from a stalking position, I feel I can confidently throw this horse out of the pace mix of the race. That is, at this point in his career, he is no threat in my mind to duel the E speeders into submission in the pace portion of the race. For me he is now a P horse and nothing more.

In general, I think you must keep your eyes on the designations which seem to rarely get changed and adjust them according to what you see on the form.

Mark


IN the cheaper races you need to keep an eye out for the horse that "figures" to run today, but for "some reason" ;) was not allowed to run his normal style.

Check those back next time, forget the styles they showed.
You will have a live horse most every time.

Prices come when the "style" or "form" is changed all of a sudden.

There are people that need to make a living at this game besides us handicappers as I am sure you know.

You can get tied down with these styles I think.


:)

[fmolf]

IN the cheaper races you need to keep an eye out for the horse that "figures" to run today, but for "some reason" ;) was not allowed to run his normal style.

Check those back next time, forget the styles they showed.
You will have a live horse most every time.

Prices come when the "style" or "form" is changed all of a sudden.

There are people that need to make a living at this game besides us handicappers as I am sure you know.

You can get tied down with these styles I think.


:)
I agree a pet peeve of mine and i think we probably have all bet on one.Is when a horse is trying to tug the jockey to the lead ,full of run and the jockey strangles the horse effectly killing his chances of winning!For whatever reason a lot of jockeys will not let a horse dictate where in the race they want to be,I am certain this has cost some horses wins.

[InFront]

All good points. But this is why I was asking the question is when a horse is labeled as "X" style is it based solely on cause the horse usually LIKES to run this way or based on when the horse finishes a race well this is how he "just happened" to run that good effort race? As posted by most it seems all style labeling is based on how a horse "usually" runs a race regardless how good or poorly he finished. Now it's up to us as handicappers in determining if a horse in question would be able to run his "usual running style" depending on the pace setup of todays race.

[fmolf]

All good points. But this is why I was asking the question is when a horse is labeled as "X" style is it based solely on cause the horse usually LIKES to run this way or based on when the horse finishes a race well this is how he "just happened" to run that good effort race? As posted by most it seems all style labeling is based on how a horse "usually" runs a race regardless how good or poorly he finished. Now it's up to us as handicappers in determining if a horse in question would be able to run his "usual running style" depending on the pace setup of todays race.
i think it is very hard to tell.does a bad race happen because a horse was off form,not feeling well that day..or was the e type beaten to the lead and quit...or the p type could not catch the frontrunner while chasing a slow pace.....thats what makes labeling horses with a running style so tricky...Then some horses do run their race every time out of the gate.

[markgoldie]

All good points. But this is why I was asking the question is when a horse is labeled as "X" style is it based solely on cause the horse usually LIKES to run this way or based on when the horse finishes a race well this is how he "just happened" to run that good effort race? As posted by most it seems all style labeling is based on how a horse "usually" runs a race regardless how good or poorly he finished. Now it's up to us as handicappers in determining if a horse in question would be able to run his "usual running style" depending on the pace setup of todays race.
InFront: While there are some nuances to labeling a horse, it's not as difficult as you make it sound. If you look at a horse's last 6-10 lines, it becomes pretty apparent what he is trying to do. T-bred handicappers somehow survived in the past before someone dreamed up the idea of labeling the running styles. So it is by no means a necessity for handicapping. However, it can come in handy once in awhile. First, if a horse appears to be a straight E and it also appears that he will never make the lead in the race under consideration, chances are pretty good he won't win or even make a gimmick ticket (which is what I personally am more interested in). So as a shorthand reminder, we might remember to eliminate weak E types. S types almost always have low win percentages compared to E and E/P types, so as a shorthand, I am reminded mentally when I see the "S" designation, NOT to put the horse on the top spot of my ticket unless, (A) the horse has very good overall fig numbers relative to the field and (B) the pace match up shows enough pressure that the speed might backup in the stretch. I am also reminded to put low-quality S types in the under positions of my superfecta tickets because it is precisely this type of plodder who winds up passing the staggering speedballs late in the stretch, making the ticket at often boxcar mutuels.

If you are really interested in reading up on the styles, I recommend Randy Giles of paceappraiser, who is an expert on running styles and who also throws in a nifty little nuance called "pace comfort zones." The idea here is that horses have their preferred styles of running, but will the pace profile of the race at hand allow that horse to race comfortably or not?? Will he be able to run where he wants to relative to the pack without straining himself to do so?? This is an interesting theory which postulates that horses not only have to be in form to win, but they have to feel "comfortable" in their running position during the course of the race. Clearly this has some merit. When both the horse and jockey are happy with the horse's position early in the race, chances are you're going to see the best of what the horse has to offer on that day. Some food for thought.

Mark

[RichieP]

Just curious, has anyone ever developed a comparative Late Speed Point approach.



Sec,
John who used to post here under "The Fat Man" uses his "Fat Charts" to wait for spot plays on closers who rallied strongly into fast final fractions. He focuses mainly on turf and polytrack surfaces.

He gets a graphic picture from his charts that are really cool and I would say real effective as he has hit bombs.

All of John's charts and data reflect the raw actual times that the races are run in. He does no adjusting or manipulation of data.

He also has spot plays like the "wipeout" and other goodies

If you haven't seen his charts do a search if you'd like and check them out

[fmolf]

Sec,
John who used to post here under "The Fat Man" uses his "Fat Charts" to wait for spot plays on closers who rallied strongly into fast final fractions. He focuses mainly on turf and polytrack surfaces.

He gets a graphic picture from his charts that are really cool and I would say real effective as he has hit bombs.

All of John's charts and data reflect the raw actual times that the races are run in. He does no adjusting or manipulation of data.

He also has spot plays like the "wipeout" and other goodies

If you haven't seen his charts do a search if you'd like and check them out
He's successful betting only closers?.......I still believe you need to use the pace figs and the speed points to get the most accurate picture of the way the race will unfold.also throw in post position as being an important factor in who will get the early lead as well.

[cutchemist42]

How are you supposed to view P horses with okay QSps?