Paceline Selection

[Pace Cap'n]

Now that the Triple Crown fervor and furor is dying down (?), how about a change of subject?

I would be very interested to see a discussion of "paceline selection". What it is, by definition, and how it is used in handicapping, both from a software approach and the traditional pencil and paper.

This is one handicapping term that I have seen little reference to in handicapping literature.

Although I use the word "Pace" in my handle, it's probably closer to being an abbreviation for "Space" than a reference to an abundance of expertise. I'm always eager to learn more, and this board is one of the most informative sources of racing information around. Thanks to all who respond.

Steve

[cj]

My opinion, trying to pick one race to quantify a horses abilities is pure folly.

CJ

[Lefty]

Cap'n, back in my Sartin days paceline selection was a big, big topic and occupied a lot of my thghts. What you're trying to do is pick the line that best typifies how the horse will run today.
Now most software prgms relieve you of that chore although in most of them you can override the software's choice.

[Tom]

Whatever you do, be consistent. If you decide to use the last line only, and then see a $30 horse that you would have had by using best of last three, you might find yourself zigging and zagging (ask me how I know). Different methods will get you different winners. Peep (Carl) has posted that he lives and dies on the last line. His db is set up for last line, and he knows what to expect using last line. Other players have their own personal method.
I am playing around with the idea of recovery lines from Cardello's book to pick a pace line, in hopes of getting better prices. Ainsle reccommended using the horses best line at the highest weight - to see what the hosre can do when fit and ready, and then using handciapping rules and angles to decide which horse were likely to run their best today.

[GR1@HTR]

Good point lefty about picking the line on how the horse is going to run today...Prob w/ most computer progs is that the default setting will pick how the horse best runs, and we know that horses always don't run their best every day...It's up to the stiff behind the computer screen to determine how the pig will run today...

[ranchwest]

GR1,

You're so right. If every horse ran back to his ideal pace line every time, my dog could pick winners. Hey, he looks at me kinda funny when I'm yellin' at TVG. lol

There has to be something predictive in the manner you select and utilize a pace line or it is of little value.

[keilan]

I thought what Michael Pizzolla (Handicapping Magic) described in great detail about pace line selection and also estimating today’s pace was very good. IMO the two best chapters of that book.

Picking pacelines is certainly an art. But I would add that selecting pace lines for mature horses and young developing horses require two different thought processes.

[Shacopate]

Interesting topic. In my opinion, every single post in this thread so far is on the money. I don't really handicap like this anymore so I would probably agree most with CJ.

I don't like or use Pizzola's numbers, but they are his own and work for him. However, his FORM CYCLE WINDOWS chapter is excellent (as Keilan suggested).

If you're gonna handicap with pacelines, then as Tom said, be consistent. Otherwise, you'll be kicking yourself over using the wrong paceline when you miss a potential longshot.

Lefty's approach will lead to some big scores.

A method that worked well for me in the past was to take the most recent race that was comparable to todays Class, Surface, and Distance with a six race cutoff.

[Fastracehorse]

<My opinion, trying to pick one race to quantify a horses abilities is pure folly.

Do you have your own speed figure??

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

<I thought what Michael Pizzolla (Handicapping Magic) described in great detail about pace line selection and also estimating today’s pace was very good. IMO the two best chapters of that book.

A synopsis by you of the above is what I request.

I too will add to this topic - too late right now.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

<using the wrong paceline when you miss a potential longshot.

There are theories that use more than one paceline?? And you have to choose one??

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

fffastt

[Shacopate]

One of the biggest hurdles that pace or speed handicappers must overcome is chosing the the right race to evaluate.

[cj]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
<My opinion, trying to pick one race to quantify a horses abilities is pure folly.

Do you have your own speed figure??

fffastt

Yes, I adjust :)

CJ

[delayjf]

I always felt that something might be missed using only one paceline, so I used to look at all a horses pacelines that I felt were relative. For example; in a sprint I would look at all the relative sprint pacelines that the horse was competitive and compare them to themselves. I wanted to know, how good the horse was and under what circumstances he performed his best. Sometimes I would enter more than one race into the program to see how that effort panned out against the field. Again I wanted to know if the horse could compete, then I would apply form analysis to determine if the horse WOULD compete.

[Molock]

Surely someone's done some sort of database paceline selection, i.e. run through a billion races using the last line, best of last three, best two, average of last three, etc. What were the results of that, I wonder? Sartin claimed that their records (which I believe was done with Sportstat) said that the best of last three worked best.

[cj]

Originally posted by shanemooney
Surely someone's done some sort of database paceline selection, i.e. run through a billion races using the last line, best of last three, best two, average of last three, etc. What were the results of that, I wonder? Sartin claimed that their records (which I believe was done with Sportstat) said that the best of last three worked best.

Worked best how? ROI? Win %? In the money? You need a more concise definition than "best."

CJ

[GR1@HTR]

Something close:
http://www.homebased2.com/km/pdf/Automatic%20Paceline%20Mode%20Selection.pdf

And here are the results of a couple of us trying to beat the computer in picking pacelines, dutching 2 horses.
http://www.homebased2.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=2434

[Lefty]

Shanemonney, you're mixing. The Sportstat study was pointing to the fact that SR+Var was superior to any other no. on the mkt.
Sartin's last thght on paceline sel was take best of last 3 comparable dist and surf and not go beyond 5.

[BillW]

Originally posted by GR1@HTR
Something close:
http://www.homebased2.com/km/pdf/Automatic%20Paceline%20Mode%20Selection.pdf

And here are the results of a couple of us trying to beat the computer in picking pacelines, dutching 2 horses.
http://www.homebased2.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=2434

GR1,

What was the criterion for the computers wagering selections? How about the humans (I assume the same?)

Bill

[keilan]

2 cents worth – should all races be handicapped with the same mind-set?

For instance does anyone handicap “2 and young 3yo’s” the same way they handicap a “3yo+ 50k claiming race” or “cheap maidens” vs. “mdspwt”? Most seasoned players probably do not, either consciously or subconsciously.

A question that might be asked is “what pace line/s” would consistently render the best result for this condition? With this approach I think you get closer to selecting the winner more often.

[Tom]

I do no tlook at all races the same. 2 and 3 year olds are always doing better than they ever have - using an old paceline will understate their real abilities. I find pace not that good a tool in young horses sprinting. After they start routing, I will use pace.
10MW was a prime example tis year, as was WE lst year. If you beleive the huge number each jumped up to, then you have to decide if the horse would bounce. If you thought no, you had to use the big line, and it might not run vack that good. If you though it would bounce, you had no good lines to use.

In truf races, I will average 2-3-4 good lines together.

Which brings me back to K-Gen....the best little conteder program ever written, IMHO. Run every line on every horse through it, throw out abberent lines (visually look at the graphs) and then use the best of any of the "normal lines" for each horse.
Now, if it were only not just manual entry...it takes a while to use this program like that.

[keilan]

Tom you and I are on the same page but I have a feeling we’re not alone!

[GR1@HTR]

Bill,

Ken Massa just picks a race of the day to handicap. Usually some Chaotic race w/ a large field. The players pick their own lines (could be just 1 line or all lines for a horse, a free for all) vs the computer (PL5). Player post thier top 2 nVEL horse. nVEL is a consensus rating composed of Fr1, Fr2, Fr3, EP, SP, FX and LP(fr2 +fr3).

In reality, a players top nVEL horse may not be a horse that the would bet in real life...As I might be more attracted to a top EP1 horse (w/ big odds) that might rank 4th or more in AP or nVEL.

[Tom]

Originally posted by keilan
Tom you and I are on the same page but I have a feeling we’re not alone!
We had this same conversation, about energy percentages, on the HTR boards in March of 2002. I just did search and looked it all up...rather long thread on the topic.
The example I used there was more real - horse varied from 50.xx% to 52.xx%, all in wins.

[keilan]

uhh Tom I thought we were talking about pace line selection here? I know it does get a little confusing at times.

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by shanemooney
Surely someone's done some sort of database paceline selection, i.e. run through a billion races using the last line, best of last three, best two, average of last three, etc. What were the results of that, I wonder? Sartin claimed that their records (which I believe was done with Sportstat) said that the best of last three worked best.

With what age level? At what track? At what class level? In which month? How many days from the beginning of the meet? A top jock up? How good is the trainer? Is the trainer good with this type of a horse? How many days off? How deep into the form cycle? Coming off of what class race? Coming off what level performance? A claim?

When you have to take a billion races and then match them up with a billion variables, it takes a while to come up with the solution. At least it would on my 450 mhz processor.

Each race is a puzzle.

[SAL]

"Speed to Spare" did a good job of explaining the ups and downs in a horse's Beyers. A lot of what he wrote could be applied to paceline selection.

If you have a horse who just ran back to back races near his best speed figure wise, do you use the last line as your selection? Or if you have a horse who ran a fast race three back, but seemed to have bounced in his last two, do you use the 3rd race back? Sometimes using the best of the last three is not the answer.

This is what makes handicapping. That's why I don't trust a program to pick the lines for me. There are way to many variables to go into here, but I try to combine what a horse is capable of AND what I think will happen today. It's a tough task sometimes.

[Shacopate]

1. MSW races--- add 12 points to second time starters (Beyer wise) and then compare them to the ones that have started.

2. Mdn Clm races-- find a horse dropping from MSW that was within 3 lenghts at the half. Doesn't matter how bad he faded. The more the better. Price is the key.

[maxwell]

I come up with a betting line first.I then use five races that match up on distance,surface, and price.

example:

My line is 10/1 ~ I would look for lines that around 8/1 and up. I don't care if the horse has relevent races at 30/1 because I'm looking for natural early speed.

sprints:

5f ~ 2 lgts. (up to 2 3/4 lgts within the leader)
6f ~ 3 lgts. same as above
7f ~ 4 lgts. same as above

routes:

5 lgts. same as above ~ one or two turns.

In sprint races I expect the horse to get as many points as there are relevent races in e1 ( 1/4 m ) OR e2 (1/2 m ).

I give the horse 1 pt. for being within range and another pt. for being in the first half of the field; as long as there are a minimum of eight horses in the race. The horse MUST be within range in order to get the second pt

example: 4th by 4 1/2 @ 7f. in a 10-horse field = 2 pts.

example: 4th by 6 lgts. in a 10-horse field = x pts.

example: 4th by 4 1/2 in a 7-horse field = 1 pt.

The same holds true in routes,but the horse has to do it in TWO of the three calls: e1, e2, or pace ( 6/8 ths )

If you can only find three races to use in a sprint: 3 pts. e1 OR e2.

I will not look at a horse that does not have at least two relevent races.

[Fastracehorse]

<One of the biggest hurdles that pace or speed handicappers must overcome is chosing the the right race to evaluate.

This is not meant to be condescending but yes, the hurdle is called handicapping.

There are many races that are difficult to filter, but that is called risk determination.

To get over hurdles, powerful trainer intent angles are very helpful.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

You are ignoring me.

fffastt

[keilan]

Can’t I just buy you the book? I’m sure that would end up being a lot less effort on my part. Damm your high maintenance.HA

[Tom]

Originally posted by keilan
uhh Tom I thought we were talking about pace line selection here? I know it does get a little confusing at times.

Oh. Yeah. Huh?:confused:

[Pace Cap'n]

Thanks to all who took the time to submit thoughtful and well-reasoned replies.

Aww, heck, you too, Fffast....:)

I cut, pasted, saved, and printed, and ended up with four pages of great information for my handicapping library. What a wonderful resource this board is.

[Shacopate]

You're right and like I said in my earlier post, I don't handicap like this anymore. I was just saying that it's difficult for the ones that do to chose one race that best respresents a horses ability.

Trainer intent, indeed.

Pace Cap'n try this:

Cut out the past performances of the winning horses at your track. File them by trainers, after a while you'll have a good library of trainer patterns.

[Fastracehorse]

,,,,,,,,let's get serious - just a brief summary - BRIEF.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

fffastt

[keilan]

– estimating today’s pace “fulcrum pace”

Pace line selection to follow if time allows, can’t promise.


Very simply put, the Fulcrum Pace is a conservation estimate of what second call pace the horses in today’s race must run against to compete successfully. The fulcrum pace serve’s to eliminate horses that have proven to be unsuccessful in races in which the second call time is at the fulcrum pace or faster. If today’s race is a sprint, we only use sprint race’s second call for purposes of the fulcrum pace.

Fulcrum Pace; is the fastest second call time ( plus adding the horse’s beaten lengths at the second call ) of all the contestants in the race taken from their last race, provided that the race is competitive.

Competitive is that the horse must have been beaten by 5 lengths or less at both the second call and at the finish of the race.

The second requirement is that the performance is not atypically fast for the horse. The Fulcrum horse must have shown previously, that it ran as fast or faster than its top second call time, or at a bare minimum, two fifths slower.

On another post by Sal, I thought he made a excellent point when he stated “That's why I don't trust a program to pick the lines for me. There are way to many variables to go into here, but I try to combine what a horse is capable of AND what I think will happen today. It's a tough task sometimes”.

[GR1@HTR]

What about the Adjusted Fulcrum???

[keilan]

fffast will explain all that in depth when he returns from his nap!

[GameTheory]

It always seemed to me that the Fulcrum should be attached to running style some how. For a closer, wouldn't the effect be reversed? A closer is more likely to compete well with a fast pace than a slow one, therefore I would eliminate the closer based on the fulcrum being TOO SLOW for him rather than too fast. Just a thought...

[andicap]

Originally posted by GameTheory
It always seemed to me that the Fulcrum should be attached to running style some how. For a closer, wouldn't the effect be reversed? A closer is more likely to compete well with a fast pace than a slow one, therefore I would eliminate the closer based on the fulcrum being TOO SLOW for him rather than too fast. Just a thought...

Pizzolla says no -- that the fulcrum is not meant to predict the pace of the race, just to tab the contenders who can keep up with a conservative estimate of what would be needed to be competitive today.

[andicap]

Originally posted by Tom
Which brings me back to K-Gen....the best little conteder program ever written, IMHO. Run every line on every horse through it, throw out abberent lines (visually look at the graphs) and then use the best of any of the "normal lines" for each horse.
Now, if it were only not just manual entry...it takes a while to use this program like that.

I do something like that in my handicapping but with a couple of changes
-- I limit the horses best lines to his last 3 representative races (as long as they are within 6 months), meaning on today's surface, fast track, within 1 furlong of today's distance and no big excuses (checkled, stumbled out of the gate, etc., they have to be major, 4 wide won't cut it except on the first turn of a route).

- THen I look at the PPs in 4 chunks: last 45 days, last 90 days, last 6 months and "back figures" for horses who don't have enough qualifying races in the past 6 months. Yes, I have to use judgement to decide what to do with the back figs if they good. I've been burned plenty a time by these horses who run back to 8-month-old figures that beat the field and pay $20 or higher. To me this is the toughest part of handicapping: figuring out how to deal with the layoff or 2nd or 3rd off layoff horses. That's why I'm looking at trainers more closely these days -- they are probably the key to this.

-- I use as a contender any horse who is 1st or 2nd in one of those chunks (or 3rd if the figures are close -- that's the trouble with using blind rankings in databases: if Horse A has a 92 and B has a 90 and C has an 89, the DB would say "C" was 3rd, but one point is often just like a tie.).

From there, I try to narrow the field down to 3 horses using form cycles, distance, etc., and use the odds to make my selection, betting two horses if necessary. If both of the top 2 horses are below 3-1 I don't bet. Or if the odds-on horse looks solid, I'll usually pass.

[Fastracehorse]

<What about the Adjusted Fulcrum???

That sounds dirty.

:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

The FULCRUMIST enthusiasts appear like they are just describing class from a different perspective.

Also, it is dangerous to put a blanketing 2nd call # to eliminate contenders - beacuse as you know - some sharp horses are masked by PP's - and this is where alot of upsets are had.

And upsetting people is very important if you want to be a winning hoss player.

Thank you so much for the synopsis Keilan,

Hope it didn't tax your reserves too much.

fffastt

[GameTheory]

But if you make PSB numbers you are upgrading horses that based on them coming out of races faster than fulcrum. It seems like you should downgrading closers that came out of fast races, not the other way around...

[Fastracehorse]

<But if you make PSB numbers you are upgrading horses that based on them coming out of races faster than fulcrum. It seems like you should downgrading closers that came out of fast races, not the other way around...

What are PSB #'s??

How would U be upgrading horses??

I'm not so sure if U can favour either type of runner - I have long believed that pace is over-rated - it is more important to bet sharp horses and yes, some running styles perform better due to various conditions.

Further, since extreme pace scenarios influence the outcome of races this is not what I was referring to when I said, "Pace is over-rated."

fffastt

[GameTheory]

I should have said PBS, actually -- Pizzolla Balanced Speed rating. Why it's an *ADJUSTED* speed figure! Details in his book Handicapping Magic...

[andicap]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
<- I have long believed that pace is over-rated - it is more important to bet sharp horses and yes, some running styles perform better due to various conditions.

Further, since extreme pace scenarios influence the outcome of races this is not what I was referring to when I said, "Pace is over-rated."

fffastt

Believe it or not, everyone, Davidowitz agrees with fffast on pace figures. Believe only extreme (maybe a second faster/slower than normal) paces are worth noting.

The trouble with pace is you can make an argument on both sides because pace doesn't always work. Those that use it, fffast, believe it works enough at good prices to be worthwhile.

And everyone uses it differently anyone. I use pace figures, but don't necessariy do the same sort of pace analysis that others do. I don't look at the overall running styles of the race that much -- have never found that consisently works, except as you said in extreme situations. (I've found that when the pace breaks apart after big duels you can throw final times right out the window.)

[Tom]

Another good use of the fulcrum is as an excuse - if the last race pace of race was faster than the fulcrum (I use 2/5's) then the race can be excused and I now have a reason to go back past it.
This whole fulcrum thing is pretty good using raw DRF times, but if you use adjsuted Quirin style pace/speed figs, it really improves it.
Glen, try it with Pac/Per numbers - I had good results. Also, the Pace/speed figs from the MPH module work well. With those figs, I use 5 points at the pace call as significant. So if the fulcrum is, say 98, then I look at 103 as the significant boundry.

[cj]

Originally posted by GameTheory
I should have said PBS, actually -- Pizzolla Balanced Speed rating. Why it's an *ADJUSTED* speed figure! Details in his book Handicapping Magic...

I read the book and liked some things, but the PBS rating just isn't one of them. Any rating that upgrades a closers performance because the pace was fast is a dangerous proposition in actual practice.

Example...Say the fulcrum is 46 flat.

Horse A is dueling with 2 others for the lead in 44 2/5, gets beat 10 lengths, earning a speed rating of 90. His PBS would be 98.

Horse B runs in the same race, and is 15 off the early lead. He "rallies" late to get 4th, beaten 4 lengths, earning a speed rating of 96. His PBS would be 104.

This is the exact opposite of reality in my opinion.

CJ

[andicap]

If I recall correctly (and I might not be), PBS was supposed to be an "early" measure. Pizzolla had another figure for late energy/speed and after he computed the two figures decided how to balance the two -- or choose between the two depending on how the race shaped up pacewise or any track model/bias he had found.

If that's true (a big if), than CJ's example would be irrelevant because who cares about the PBS rating of a horse 15 lengths behind.

[GR1@HTR]

Tom, I agree. PER and PAC work very well. Also found FPS PP's to be great as well but more time consuming.

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by cjmilkowski
I read the book and liked some things, but the PBS rating just isn't one of them. Any rating that upgrades a closers performance because the pace was fast is a dangerous proposition in actual practice.

Yeah, exactly what I was getting at. Of course you could use early or late running style as a sort of a fulcrum for the fulcrum, to determine whether you add or subtract points based for a quicker pace.

[Shacopate]

Once the fulcrum pace is set. Then Pizzola uses two techniques to select a paceline. The first is called LASST, which uses the horses most recent race unless something is not right about the race. The reason the that it is called LASST is that the major reasons for not using the most recent race are: Layoff, Surface, Structure of Distance, and Trouble.

The second technique, prefered by the author for price potential, is called opening the Form Cycle Windows. This is done by finding "two reasons" to go beyond the last race. They include, Layoff, Surface, Structure, Trouble, Pace, Class, Post Position, Break, Early Speed, Move, Claimed, Change of equipment or drugs. He also suggests that you add your own.

Then he goes to the second line applies the same, going until he can't go any further. When your stopped at a line, you've opened the Form Cycle Window as far as it will go. You then take the highest rated race within the Form Cycle Window.

This said, I DO NOT LIKE OR USE PIZZOLAS NUMBERS. This is his approach, not mine.

[cj]

Originally posted by andicap
If I recall correctly (and I might not be), PBS was supposed to be an "early" measure. Pizzolla had another figure for late energy/speed and after he computed the two figures decided how to balance the two -- or choose between the two depending on how the race shaped up pacewise or any track model/bias he had found.

If that's true (a big if), than CJ's example would be irrelevant because who cares about the PBS rating of a horse 15 lengths behind.

Actually, I think I have it right, but I don't have the book anymore to check. I do know he has two ratings, PBS and PPF I think. He looks at what he thinks the pace of the race will be. If he thinks there won't be a lot of pace in the race, he leans towards the PBS, but if there is lots of speed, he leans toward PPF. So in a race with little speed, he would still favor the horse I listed second, the closer. Like I said, this is all from memory, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, PBS is for dirt races only, turf he goes strictly PPF.

CJ

[Brian Flewwelling]

This is a very interesting Thread and I know I am rather late to it but I have an interest in understanding this better.

Let me explain. I am rather new to the game (started dabbling in 97). I got hooked because of my interest in databases as much anything else about the game. I used BRIS data files (after a year with ITS), but they objected to my posting of my derived speed and pace figures, so I have devised my own figures based on Equibase Charts.

To handicap I use a program that displays a summary of the Entrants in a race, including the Entrant's speeds/race ratings for the last 4 races, trainer and jockey data, and my "projected" Speed, Pace at each Call, Late Pace, EP, SP AP, X, TotalPace (actually averaged) and Pace-Rankings. Most of these Values are ranked (summary form displays the rankings and the 'values').


I am getting to my point. To get the 'projections', I simply click on the horse's number and a separate form displays the 'all' the horses previous performance lines. I can then set a Weighting for each line. The linear average of the speeds and paces becomes the 'projected' values for that horse. the program now does a default projection using a very silly system of decreasing weighting from the most recent race at a similar distance.

So the relevance to this thread is the choosing of the weightings ... if one believes only one race should be chosen, then do it, I prefer to use at least 2, and usually 3. If a horse had a killer race last out, I can use a lesser performance to reflect a 'bounce', if I think a horse is on the upswing, use the last race, and a better one from the past....

Once the Summary is complete, the real handicapping begins. Speed is a measure of the horse's capability, but it is a 'sloppy' measure, quick is good unless there are several as quick, fast closing is good if ... Trainer intent is very important ...

If you have interest in this kind of handicapping I would be pleased to share a copy of the program, and a datafile. Just drop me an email. The program weighs 364KB and a datafile is about 1200-2200 KB. If you do request a copy, please suggest a Race Card you would like to look at (NOT BEL for the Belmont ... my figs for PIM are embarrassing), or you will get STP for the 15th of June. In return, I would appreciate feedback via this site, discussing the 'methods' of determining the Pace line .. or Projecting a pace line. Severe criticisms should me sent to me by email, so I can use my delete key <gr>.


I AM NOT Trying to Sell This Program!!!



Help me Understand.

Brian

[andicap]

the program Darkhorse uses a similar system as yours Brian although only with basic speed/pace figures. It weights them either as defaults or your own weights.

[Brian Flewwelling]

andicap
"the program Darkhorse uses a similar system as yours Brian although only with basic speed/pace figures. It weights them either as defaults or your own weights."

1. is this good, bad, ....?

2. What is a good 'default'?

and why?

Brian

[Fastracehorse]

Is it time consuming for you??

My method for determining horse ability is a quick mathematical calcualtion - I can do it in my head now - I have to - playing 5 tracks a day.

The strongest value in my resultant #'s is that they find alot of overlays.

It is interesting that you find trainer intent important - I think this is natural for somone with a good fig because they realize figs - like my own - are only a partial solution.

fffastt

[andicap]

Originally posted by Brian Flewwelling
andicap
"the program Darkhorse uses a similar system as yours Brian although only with basic speed/pace figures. It weights them either as defaults or your own weights."

1. is this good, bad, ....?

2. What is a good 'default'?

and why?

Brian

Don't know whether it's good or bad...just an FYI. I was never comfortable with weighting measures myself, but that's just me. I don't know what a good default is since I don't weight -- actually I do, but I weight all my figures equally unless my models tell me a certain figure is doing better than another. Then I weight it higher in my mind, but with no definitive percentage because i couldn't say.

[Brian Flewwelling]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
Is it time consuming for you??

My method for determining horse ability is a quick mathematical calcualtion - I can do it in my head now - I have to - playing 5 tracks a day.

The strongest value in my resultant #'s is that they find alot of overlays.

It is interesting that you find trainer intent important - I think this is natural for somone with a good fig because they realize figs - like my own - are only a partial solution.

fffastt

Yes it is time consuming. But Handicapping is time consuming. I just want to get the numbers out of the way quickly, so i can get to the real handicapping sooner.

Will you explain your method of getting a horse's ability? (or reference it's source? Please!

Brian

[Brian Flewwelling]

Originally posted by andicap
Don't know whether it's good or bad...just an FYI. I was never comfortable with weighting measures myself, but that's just me. I don't know what a good default is since I don't weight -- actually I do, but I weight all my figures equally unless my models tell me a certain figure is doing better than another. Then I weight it higher in my mind, but with no definitive percentage because i couldn't say.

Good point about weighting of factors. It has been my view that selecting the weighting (relevance) of factors is the central point of the Art of handicapping. So the importance of a factor like early speed depends on the distance of the race and the early speed of the the other competitors, and so on.

My question is about getting those factors from the past performance lines ... and if there is no single best line to use, weighting of the various lines to project how the horse will run this time. The weighting is then used to calculate a weighted average of the factors in the PP lines, which become the projected set of performance factors.

Brian

[Fastracehorse]

<Yes it is time consuming. But Handicapping is time consuming.

But how much time do you spend??

<Will you explain your method of getting a horse's ability? (or reference it's source? Please!

I essentially adjust a commercial speed figure, for various factors, to get my derivation.

Uncannily accurate.

I have a project on DRF's forum - I have posted 56 top pick winners over 6-1 this year. Of course there are many, many more lower priced winners - but it is the overlay I'm concentrating on.

fffastt

[Brian Flewwelling]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
<Yes it is time consuming. But Handicapping is time consuming.

But how much time do you spend??

<Will you explain your method of getting a horse's ability? (or reference it's source? Please!

I essentially adjust a commercial speed figure, for various factors, to get my derivation.

Uncannily accurate.


fffastt

I don't have a good handle on the time. I am unemployed due to age and attitude, so time is not a significant factor in my mind :).

I suppose I do a race card in about 2 hours, finding 3-5 plays.

You say you adjust a commercial speed figure, but I see lots of speed figures in the past performances of most horses. Which one of these do you adjust? or do you have another type of speed fig?

Brian

[Fastracehorse]

I adjust the Beyer for various factors.

fffastt