Fast and Slow Paced Races

[Tom]

Do fast paced races favor closers?

Here is data for Belmont, 6 furlongs, fast tracks, 2000 - 2009, May

The chart shows the percentage of winners that were wire -to-wire, a neck to 2 lengths back, 2-5 lengths back, and over 5 lengths back, all at the second call. The blue percentages are cumulative.

To call a race fast of slow paced, I took all the races, 1291 of them, and divided the second call time by the final time, with times in this format: 45.8 72.1

I then calculated the median percentage of the results and the standard deviation. I called anything within 1 standard deviation as average pace, and over 1 st dev as fast or slow. The numbers came out to be:

Median - .6474 Fast - .6402 Slow - .6545

This is all raw times, no adjustments. I use this in my charts review to analyze the pace of the races.

One fact that jumps out is that in 9.5 years, only 62 horse have been able to close over 5 lengths at 6 furlongs on a fast track to win! Looking only at average paced races, that number falls to 34 in almost 10 years. And in a slow paced race, only 1 horse has been able to make up 5 lengths or more.

But in slow paced races, 94% of the winners were 2 or less lengths behind.

[CBedo]

Do fast paced races favor closers?

Here is data for Belmont, 6 furlongs, fast tracks, 2000 - 2009, May

The chart shows the percentage of winners that were wire -to-wire, a neck to 2 lengths back, 2-5 lengths back, and over 5 lengths back, all at the second call. The blue percentages are cumulative.

To call a race fast of slow paced, I took all the races, 1291 of them, and divided the second call time by the final time, with times in this format: 45.8 72.1

I then calculated the median percentage of the results and the standard deviation. I called anything within 1 standard deviation as average pace, and over 1 st dev as fast or slow. The numbers came out to be:

Median - .6474 Fast - .6402 Slow - .6545

This is all raw times, no adjustments. I use this in my charts review to analyze the pace of the races.

One fact that jumps out is that in 9.5 years, only 62 horse have been able to close over 5 lengths at 6 furlongs on a fast track to win! Looking only at average paced races, that number falls to 34 in almost 10 years. And in a slow paced race, only 1 horse has been able to make up 5 lengths or more.

But in slow paced races, 94% of the winners were 2 or less lengths behind.Good stuff. Confirms what we all talk about that "one run" closers are very rarely good wagers. I wonder what it would look like if you used the first call instead of the second? This could possibly then take into account the closers who are able to make progress in the second fraction.

[andymays]

I wonder what the stats were for Santa Anita this last meet?

[bisket]

I wonder what the stats were for Santa Anita this last meet?
at 6 furs probably similar, but at mile or more i'm sure they favor the closers big time

[Jake]

Do fast paced races favor closers?

Here is data for Belmont, 6 furlongs, fast tracks, 2000 - 2009, May

The chart shows the percentage of winners that were wire -to-wire, a neck to 2 lengths back, 2-5 lengths back, and over 5 lengths back, all at the second call. The blue percentages are cumulative.

To call a race fast of slow paced, I took all the races, 1291 of them, and divided the second call time by the final time, with times in this format: 45.8 72.1

I then calculated the median percentage of the results and the standard deviation. I called anything within 1 standard deviation as average pace, and over 1 st dev as fast or slow. The numbers came out to be:

Median - .6474 Fast - .6402 Slow - .6545

This is all raw times, no adjustments. I use this in my charts review to analyze the pace of the races.

One fact that jumps out is that in 9.5 years, only 62 horse have been able to close over 5 lengths at 6 furlongs on a fast track to win! Looking only at average paced races, that number falls to 34 in almost 10 years. And in a slow paced race, only 1 horse has been able to make up 5 lengths or more.

But in slow paced races, 94% of the winners were 2 or less lengths behind.

Tom,

As always, good stuff. Thanks.

[46zilzal]

Each race is distinct and results from the interaction of pace pressures from the combatants in that contest. It is only within the bounds of a single race that any broad brush chateristics as something as basic as pace can result.

Often a speed type gets alone on the lead and runs much later, energy distribution wise: an early horse wins without pace pressure.

Then there are the energy standards for each distance and each track, which based upon changes in maintenance or water, can be very different day to day.

What blurred generalizations? Mix your data.

Want accurate knowledge of the state of the surface? Keep an energy profile race to race.

[Fastracehorse]

Each race is distinct and results from the interaction of pace pressures from the combatants in that contest. It is only within the bounds of a single race that any broad brush chateristics as something as basic as pace can result.

Often a speed type gets alone on the lead and runs much later, energy distribution wise: an early horse wins without pace pressure.

Then there are the energy standards for each distance and each track, which based upon changes in maintenance or water, can be very different day to day.

What blurred generalizations? Mix your data.

Want accurate knowledge of the state of the surface? Keep an energy profile race to race.

There are alot of similarities between your 'distinct' races. Comparative analysis - very useful. It's not all distributions of E or pace - often it is the sharpness of the animal on the lead. My point: a horse setting a favorable pace may not be able to take advantage of it because of dullness. That is why many horses in Tom's sample don't win after setting a slow pace. Obviously it could be ability as well.

fffastt

[bisket]

speed horses usually have their peacock for 2 to 3 races.

[Barney Rubble]

One fact that jumps out is that in 9.5 years, only 62 horse have been able to close over 5 lengths at 6 furlongs on a fast track to win! Looking only at average paced races, that number falls to 34 in almost 10 years. And in a slow paced race, only 1 horse has been able to make up 5 lengths or more.



In the last year alone, my data shows 14 horses able to win from more than 5 lengths behind at the second call on a fast Belmont strip going 6 furlongs.

Are you sure that your data is correct? Or, are more closers winning in this last year?

[Tom]

My data is only through May this year, and I omitted any sealed fast tracks,too.

[sally]

speed horses usually have their peacock for 2 to 3 races.

I'm assuming this means they are fit and ready? Just to clarify....

[Barney Rubble]

My data is only through May this year, and I omitted any sealed fast tracks,too.

OK, thanks.

Looks like closers really get the worst of it at this distance.

[Tom]

Here is the same study, but 7 furlongs - 683 races.
The multipliers for fast/slow at 7 furlongs are

Median - .5487
Fast - .5410
Slow - .5564

[markgoldie]

Apparently, this confirms the conventional wisdom that a fast pace tends to improve the chances of closing types and I can't recall any rational reasoning which challenged this wisdom. But do these figures even prove that? Not really, since we have no analysis of the speed profiles of those that won after having closed 5 or more lengths. For all we know, they might have all been E horses or E/P types who were simply outrun early by a breakneck early pacesetter. Frankly, I think we're still better served by the Brisnet analysis of win impact values of runner type for the specific track and distance.

[Tom]

I find the BRIS RS designation next to worthless.

[Tom]

Ooops.....got cut off editing.

Add this:

And for analyzing charts, they are totally worthless.
This is a method of understanding who was helped or hurt by the pace of the race. I don't even look at running styles at this stage. If I see a horse made up 5 lengths against a very fast pace, I am not impressed. If he did against a slow pace, I pay attention. I use Quirin's race-shape ideas and only how the horse ran in this race.