PDA

View Full Version : Woodbine


GaryG
02-20-2010, 08:05 PM
I usually play Monmouth during the spring and summer but, with all that is going on I am going to give Woodbine a shot this year. I have about 6 weeks to prepare, and am looking forward to it. I will have par tables and trainer data, but does anyone have any pearls of wisdom for me? Thanks in advance to all who reply.

cj's dad
02-20-2010, 08:18 PM
IMO and I use cj's figs, I have found that in most races 7f+, it plays like a turf course; off the pace..off the pace... off the pace..

I know the takeout is big, but honestly, my best ROI is at this track.

GaryG
02-20-2010, 08:25 PM
Thanks CJD...I like the big fields and the qualty of racing, so will give it a shot.

ArlJim78
02-20-2010, 09:01 PM
I don't think you'll regret it. Woodbine has been great to me, easily my highest ROI track.

WinterTriangle
02-20-2010, 11:04 PM
So many people say Woodbine is their highest ROI. It was mine, too, last year.

Tom
02-20-2010, 11:06 PM
They have a good track maintenance record on their web page. You often spot a bias shift by the work they do. Couple this info with trip notes/track profile and you might be cashing a few more tickets.

appistappis
02-21-2010, 12:23 AM
the more straight days in row that they 'gallop master', the speed and the inside is good.

when they 'power harrow' to 3 inches it seems to play fair.

when they 'power harrow' to 5 inches, throw the speed out and watch for the outside and the closers.......boxing 10-11-12-13-14 on these days is amazing.

46zilzal
02-21-2010, 02:33 AM
Woodbine runs in a fashsion unique to all synthetic tracks.....BEST track I play

Seven furlong profile was and is the most unique in all of racing.

illinoisbred
02-21-2010, 08:01 AM
I too am considering playing Woodbine this year. Started playing 2 years ago but after 2 months stopped because of lack of time-a thing called work got in the way. With the much reduced racing schedule in Illinois this year,I need more activity and Woodbine looks to be the best fit. I remember the lack of endless shippers being a big plus.

illinoisbred
02-21-2010, 08:22 AM
I can't find the upcoming schedule on their website. Does anyone know if they will be running an evening program on wednesdays again this year?

cj's dad
02-21-2010, 08:55 AM
I believe that the evening (Weds.) begins in the summer.

Horseplayersbet.com
02-21-2010, 09:32 AM
Woodbine Wednesday night cards start first week of May usually.

With all the people here who do well at Woodbine despite their higher takeouts (albeit WPS, Exes and Doubles are average takeouts), I wonder where all the people who lose playing Woodbine hangs out. Someone must lose there.

rispa
02-21-2010, 09:58 AM
Definitely not a track to play without a rebate.

Tom
02-21-2010, 10:47 AM
I used to drive up for a few Wednesday cards every season. The hassle at the border ended that. I miss it, but c'est live.....WO is pretty good racing.

GaryG
02-21-2010, 12:26 PM
Thanks to all....in the words of the late great Dick Mitchell, "See you on the short line."

46zilzal
02-21-2010, 12:59 PM
Very few shippers come in during the season except during the big races in the Fall so there are no problems with apples/oranges comparisons.

Fort Erie shippers generally do not do that well so their influence is insignificant.

46zilzal
02-21-2010, 01:08 PM
Look for Terry Jordan, a Vancouver based trainer, who regularly raids the place.

nobeyerspls
02-22-2010, 02:44 PM
I usually play Monmouth during the spring and summer but, with all that is going on I am going to give Woodbine a shot this year. I have about 6 weeks to prepare, and am looking forward to it. I will have par tables and trainer data, but does anyone have any pearls of wisdom for me? Thanks in advance to all who reply.
I spend the summer in Fort Erie and play Woodbine from there. Here are some thoughts:
1. The purses are huge, so they run for the money.
2. The jockey colony is nearly equal in talent.
3. Tremendous value in maiden races with large fields and playable longshots.
4. Others have posted about surface preparation. They're spot on and it's an important factor.
5. Remember that the turf course is on the outside of a one mile main track. The turns are wide so most horses get a clean trip. The stretch is very long and takes some getting used to.
6. Ignore the training track workouts. It's a dirt track and the main is synthetic.
7. You have the trainer data but watch out for Malcolm Pierce with turf horses or horses coming off a layoff. He's very good.
8. The takeout is higher than it should be especially since they have slots. The large fields still produce nice payouts despite that.
Hope this helps.

GaryG
02-22-2010, 03:52 PM
Thanks NBP....I know Pierce pretty well from FG.

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 05:14 PM
The ONLY time the Poly really plays like other polys is when they POWER harrow it and the maintenance is listed on their web site www.woodbineentertainment.com every day.

Gallop mastering is usually done about three times per card and is very shallow and usually will make no difference to any bias, which there rarely is any longer damn it.

ArlJim78
02-22-2010, 05:28 PM
With all the people here who do well at Woodbine despite their higher takeouts (albeit WPS, Exes and Doubles are average takeouts), I wonder where all the people who lose playing Woodbine hangs out. Someone must lose there.
I count three people on this thread who mentioned that Woodbine was their best track, hardly an overwhelming number. I think a poll might give you a better picture.

cj
02-22-2010, 06:43 PM
Here are a few Woodbine tidbits. Using the Steve Klein bias ratings, which range from 0 to 300, there is a very pronounced trend. The longer the race, the worst speed does. With Klein, 0 would mean every winner came from the back half of the field at the first call, and 300 would mean every winner went wire to wire:

4.5 178
5.0 166
5.5 158
6.0 118
6.5 117
7.0 116
8.3 87
8.5 86


The big thing to note is that horses stretching out from sprints at less than 6f that displayed speed are going to have a very hard time at the longer sprint distances. Horses that close well at less than 6f should run better in the longer races.

The jockeys have certainly adapted to polytrack racing. Below is a table showing the difference in the average 2nd call pace time of the winner from the old dirt track for the last two years on polytrack:

4.5 +0.05
5.0 +0.17
5.5 +0.12
6.0 +0.57
6.5 +0.78
7.0 +1.03
8.3 +1.12
8.5 +1.44


Note that at every distance the winners have slowed down early, but again, it is really noticeable at 6f and longer.

GaryG
02-22-2010, 06:52 PM
CJ.....thank you, that is excellent info.

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 06:55 PM
The jockeys have certainly adapted to polytrack racing. Below is a table showing the difference in the average 2nd call pace time of the winner from the old dirt track for the last two years on polytrack:

4.5 +0.05
5.0 +0.17
5.5 +0.12
6.0 +0.57
6.5 +0.78
7.0 +1.03
8.3 +1.12
8.5 +1.44


.
But it could just as well be attributed to the actual beings RUNNING as deceleration of the horse, which is of course UNIVERSAL to any t-bred and any track

Polytrack looks like what comes out of the vacuum cleaner after I go in where our cats hang out. Run on that energy absorbing surface and tiring seems to be a sure thing.

cj
02-22-2010, 06:59 PM
But it could just as well be attributed to the actual beings RUNNING as deceleration of the horse, which is of course UNIVERSAL to any t-bred and any track

Since the winners are going slower early, they are finishing faster. I have no idea what you are trying to say to be honest. Clearly the track is different in both the way energy is expended and in the position from which winners tend to come.

Horseplayersbet.com
02-22-2010, 07:06 PM
Jockeys at Woodbine ride the track much like European jocks ride the grass races. First part of the race is meaningless most of the time. At Woodbine it boils down to the horse with the best late kick with 3 or 4 furlongs to go. That and who can get a late trip that doesn't have too many obstacles.

The announcer (Dan Loiselle) used to get burned all the time by horses who had the lead in route races who go 51 to the half (he'd say something to the affect that the horse will have lots left and be tough to beat thanks to the slow fractions). Almost every time, a horse will sweep by in the stretch.

He only got burned a few times last year.

I think he gets it now.

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 07:13 PM
Jockeys at Woodbine ride the track much like European jocks ride the grass races. First part of the race is meaningless most of the time. At Woodbine it boils down to the horse with the best late kick with 3 or 4 furlongs to go. That and who can get a late trip that doesn't have too many obstacles.

.
The front end is not as golden as it was pre-Poly, but it is not all Keeneland- like either. I scored big time last December on a maiden named Tabitha who was never headed.

This was not that rare a case either.

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 07:28 PM
the great thing about Woodbine is the track's consistency. Once you learn what works there, it does not change all that much and with a large stable horse population, there are no problems with inter-track variants.

Horseplayersbet.com
02-22-2010, 08:07 PM
The front end is not as golden as it was pre-Poly, but it is not all Keeneland- like either. I scored big time last December on a maiden named Tabitha who was never headed.

This was not that rare a case either.
I don't have the stats, but Woodbine is probably the worst track in North America for gate to wire wins, especially going two turns.

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 08:16 PM
I don't have the stats, but Woodbine is probably the worst track in North America for gate to wire wins, especially going two turns.
Maybe if you look at the track POSITIONALLY which is NEVER how Sartinistas look at it.....NEVER

........and in that regard it is not that different. I had to only tweak the energy standards at each distance a tad since the track changed.

cj
02-22-2010, 08:21 PM
I don't have the stats, but Woodbine is probably the worst track in North America for gate to wire wins, especially going two turns.

It is close between Woodbine and Santa Anita, and Zia Park pretty close especially considering it is dirt.

That goes for positionally as well as for energy wise or median wise or whatever 46 wants to call it. If the average pace time of the winners has increased by what I posted, and it has, of course the %E and %M have to change more than just a tad. It is common sense that they have.

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 08:36 PM
ENERGY DISTRIBUTION is independent of time, always has been, always will be.

Early/late balance has shifted a bit later at all distances but not that much, particularly routes which really surprised me.

Horseplayersbet.com
02-22-2010, 08:42 PM
ENERGY DISTRIBUTION is independent of time, always has been, always will be.

Early/late balance has shifted a bit later at all distances but not hat much, particularly routes which really surprised me.
Show me another track with only 12% winners going gate to wire going a route.
And show me another track that has "S" for best running style:
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/editorial/article.cgi?id=21

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 08:43 PM
Show me another track with only 12% winners going gate to wire going a route.
And show me another track that has "S" for best running style:
http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/editorial/article.cgi?id=21
BRISNET :lol: :bang: :D :D :D :D :D :D

Old Happy Broadbent is still conning people

Horseplayersbet.com
02-22-2010, 08:49 PM
BRISNET :lol: :bang: :D :D :D :D :D :D

Old Happy Broadbent is still conning people
Are you saying the 12% gate to wire stat is a con job?

46zilzal
02-22-2010, 08:53 PM
Are you saying the 12% gate to wire stat is a con job?
I am saying that without reference to the PACE OF THE RACE, POSITION is irrelevant.

Some of the SLOWEST paced races, go wire to wire SUSTAINED all the time.

Actually I found it very interesting that War Emblem's last prep before his Derby win, went WIRE TO WIRE LATE, akin to a turf contest while he was ON the lead the entire trip the pace as so slow.

POSITION without reference to pace of race is irrelevent

Horseplayersbet.com
02-22-2010, 08:56 PM
I am saying that without reference to the PACE OF THE RACE, POSITION is irrelevant.

Some of the SLOWEST paced races, go wire to wire SUSTAINED all the time.
I believe sustained is defined as coming from the back half of the field.

Charlie D
02-22-2010, 08:57 PM
HPB

You have to remember Zilly is talking about ENERGY

DeanT
02-22-2010, 09:01 PM
If twelve black swans raced in a longer trip around the inner pond with a normal pace, the stalking swans would get all the marbles.

GaryG,

I play it at times. I get messed up at times there with a track profile, so much so that last year I packed it in and moved to another couple tracks.

I only say this because I know you play Tampa and MTH where things are pretty cut and dried with their tracks. That is in no way saying you can not do well there, of course, just that myself as a player who focuses on some of the things you do, had a tough time last meet (on the main track; turf was good). (FYI)

D

Horseplayersbet.com
02-22-2010, 09:03 PM
HPB

You have to remember Zilly is talking about ENERGY
The discussion here was about whether the front end was "golden" or not.
Clearly it is not golden or anything close to golden.

How this got twisted to energy distribution, I'll never know.

Charlie D
02-22-2010, 09:07 PM
Zilly

Put up one of your screen shots of Woodbine and explain

Horseplayersbet.com
02-22-2010, 09:11 PM
Monmouth Park going 170 or 1 1/16 renders 26% gate to wire winners.
I honestly don't see what the debate here is.
Woodbine has probably the least amount of gate to wire winners, especially going two turns than any track in North America. The jockeys know it too, and it has now become a self fulfilling prophecy. If a jockey is on a well meant horse they aren't going to the lead and they are going to come up the rail to win either there, regardless of whether a bias exists on that day.

The only exceptions are Ramsammy going to the lead or a Terry Jordan horse.

Charlie D
02-22-2010, 09:14 PM
If Zilly put up a screen shots and explains you should see what he's talking about HPB

Tom
02-22-2010, 09:29 PM
If Zilly put up a screen shots and explains you should see what he's talking about HPB


I doubt it. If you aren't using his program, his comments are meaningless.
Running style and energy distribution are no the same thing. He knows this, but insists on sticking his nose in every thread. For most players, CJ's stats will serve you will zilly's will bore you. He talks program-specific.

Charlie D
02-22-2010, 09:41 PM
I doubt it. If you aren't using his program, his comments are meaningless.
Running style and energy distribution are no the same thing. He knows this, but insists on sticking his nose in every thread. For most players, CJ's stats will serve you will zilly's will bore you. He talks program-specific.

Zilly can surely clear up the confusion Tom with a screen shot or two and a few words explaining readouts

There again, maybe your right :)

cj
02-22-2010, 11:18 PM
ENERGY DISTRIBUTION is independent of time, always has been, always will be.

Early/late balance has shifted a bit later at all distances but not that much, particularly routes which really surprised me.

How can it be independent if it uses time to measure the distribution?

I guess the "not that much" is where the issue would lie with me. I'm not going to get into all the Sartin calculations, so I'll keep it simple with %E. I realize there are others but the premise is the same.

Assume the average pace time for an 8.5f race at WO is 1:14.40 and the average final time is 1:46.00. The EP rating in feet per second is 53.23. The 3Fr is 52.21. So, the "total energy" is 105.44, and the %E is 50.48%. That is the current average %E for 8.5f races at WO for the past two years.

Now, look at the times for the old dirt track. Using 1:46.00 as the final time to keep it simple, the average pace time was 1:12.96. Given this, EP is 54.28 fps, 3Fr is 49.94, total energy is 104.22, and %E is 52.08%.

I don't see how anyone could say 52.08% to 50.48% is "not that much". It doesn't matter what other calculations you want to throw in, whether you call them %E or %M or %46, the relationship between the second call and the final time of the winners isn't changing and will always be an integral part of the calculations.

Charlie D
02-22-2010, 11:45 PM
CJ

If i remember correctly

Total E is Fr1+Fr2+Fr3

% Med is Fr1+Fr2/Fr1+Fr2+Fr3

cj
02-23-2010, 12:13 AM
CJ

If i remember correctly

Total E is Fr1+Fr2+Fr3

% Med is Fr1+Fr2/Fr1+Fr2+Fr3

I realize that. I gave the older and simpler %E. It should be pretty obvious that in either case, the different pace situation is going to have a big effect on both.

46zilzal
02-23-2010, 02:16 AM
Energy distribution depends upon percentage of effort per segment and therefore being a PERCENTAGE, it is independent of the actual time, ONLY the distribution is evaluated. Usually those with less than 5 total units are not competitive however.

SUM of the feet per second in each of three sections give total energy.
f1(feet per second) divided by total f1,f2,f3 feet per second gives PERCENTAGE of effort fraction 1 and so on.

Separate calculation for the same factors f2/sum of three fractions
then f3 / sum of three fractions.

Since total of three velocities is the sum, then f1 percentage, f2 percentage and f3 percentages are INDEPENDENT of any SET velocity only DISTRIBUTION.

Racing styles are then defined upon ranges of this distribution.

ANYONE who follows Sartin in any depth knows how this works.

andicap
02-23-2010, 06:14 AM
Jeez, I hate the put my nose inside this little firestorm but I've been on this board almost as long as anyone so i'm going to take a little seniority preogative here and try to explain why all this arguing is a waste of time.

You guys can't agree because your terminology and reference points are so different, but I think you're really doing similar things here.

CJ, you once told me that Keilan's energy strategies are pretty much another method of pace analysis, but with from another angle. I think this is very close to the truth. Like it or not, all of us who now use pace analysis and/or energy as an integral part of our handicapping have our roots in the same place -- Huey Mahl and Ray Taulbot.

Somewhere along the line, the terminologies, software, methodologies veered -- and personalities/pride/ego played a part -- but it's all out of a similar playbook. Which horses are best suited for today's expected pace with today's mix of running styles (or energy distribution) in the race?

There are disagreements in how you gauge a) the expected pace match-up and b) how to determine which horses are best positioned to deal with that pace.

CJ and other pace handicappers prefer to look at running styles to gauge how the race shapes up. Randy Giles' pace pressure gauge is one tool used here. 46 believes that running styles are not as effective as using median energy distribution of the horses.

For what its worth I understand where 46 is coming from and SOMETIMES he has a valid point. When he says time is not important he means how fast they run is secondary to how they run fast. Just like all pace handicappers.

An E run style horse, for example, can have a late energy distribution. That is the energy distribution of a sustained horse. When 46 says time is unimportant he doesn't mean slow horses can win or E horses that run a :48 half-mile can beat E horses that run :47. That's a TOTAL ENERGY QUESTION. Analyzing the internals of the TOTAL ENERGY is a different matter altogether and is NOT dependent on how FAST the horses run but the DISTRIBUTION of their energy. Of course time matters but in a different way. Its the fractions/the ratios that make up the total energy that matter more.

IMHO, unless they are lightly raced developing horses, these sustained E types are doomed if there are lot of early energy horses in the race that will typically they will show run styles of E8 or E7 but on occasion can show a P3 if they have run in very fast paced races recently and today are coming into a match-up that is different.

The Giles pace pressure gauge can be misleading, under this school of thought because it may falsely indicate a fast pace is coming when some of the horses with Quirin Points of 5 or 6 might actually have late energy profiles and would not be vying for the lead against a couple of early energy tigers.


I also think part of the issue here is one of personalities. 46 -- a very sharp handicapper -- tends to be rather dogmatic in his presentation. My way or the highway. Energy, in the words of Beyer are the "truth, the light."
Alternative methods of handicapping -- workouts, breeding, other forms of pace analysis -- don't work. Or don't work as well.

They just have to agree to disagree that's all.

And 46, you should lighten up a bit and open your mind. You bring a lot to the table here, but by refusing to even consider -- or even acknowledge -- that other forms of handicapping are valid at times has turned off many board members.

cj
02-23-2010, 08:26 AM
ANYONE who follows Sartin in any depth knows how this works.

Anyone that understands Sartin at all would understand that a change of more than one second in the pace calls will lead to a big change in any of the calculations you mention. I didn't cite any first call fractions, but the change is even bigger than the second call as would be expected.

Tom
02-23-2010, 08:49 AM
What could be the case is that TrackMaster uses the old dirt pars to calculate its variants - not sure if they do a pace variant or not, but if they do, it might make the adjusted times look more like the old dirt track. But that would mean 46 uses a database for his variants and track to track.:D

I know in several articles Quinn has written, he was using the old dirt pars to calculate poly variants. Not a good idea.

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 10:36 AM
Energy distribution depends upon percentage of effort per segment and therefore being a PERCENTAGE, it is independent of the actual time, ONLY the distribution is evaluated. Usually those with less than 5 total units are not competitive however.

SUM of the feet per second in each of three sections give total energy.
f1(feet per second) divided by total f1,f2,f3 feet per second gives PERCENTAGE of effort fraction 1 and so on.

Separate calculation for the same factors f2/sum of three fractions
then f3 / sum of three fractions.

Since total of three velocities is the sum, then f1 percentage, f2 percentage and f3 percentages are INDEPENDENT of any SET velocity only DISTRIBUTION.

Racing styles are then defined upon ranges of this distribution.

ANYONE who follows Sartin in any depth knows how this works.



:cool: Zilly (remember, not everyone is a Sartin Energy student)


andicap

:cool: post imho.

PaceAdvantage
02-23-2010, 10:48 AM
Andicap,

I think I speak for most everyone when I say that you should seriously think about posting more often around here.

Your racetrack pal,

Mike

pandy
02-23-2010, 11:20 AM
The two top riders, Chantal Sutherland and Patrick Husbands, have great agents and really seem to consistently pick the right horse. Sutherland is very good the first time she gets on a horse, she consistently wins from off the pace while other riders are killing their horses. Like most synthetic tracks, horses turning back in distance do well.

cj
02-23-2010, 11:27 AM
:cool: Zilly (remember, not everyone is a Sartin Energy student)


andicap

:cool: post imho.

I'm not really sure how not being a Sartin student changes the numbers. Just because I don't use Sartin numbers doesn't mean I don't know how to perform the calculations. Again, there is no way the change in the pace to final time ratio can't have a big effect on the %E or %M calculations.

Though he is a program user, I suspect I know more about the actual math than he does. His posts certainly point in that direction. Either that, or he is using bad data.

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 11:32 AM
No, no CJ


As andicap stated

You guys can't agree because your terminology and reference points are so different, but I think you're really doing similar things here.



Sometimes explanations of A,B and C are needed to help makes things clear and remove confusion.

46zilzal
02-23-2010, 11:41 AM
J

And 46, you should lighten up a bit and open your mind. You bring a lot to the table here, but by refusing to even consider -- or even acknowledge -- that other forms of handicapping are valid at times has turned off many board members.
I have said OFTEN and REPEATEDLY that there is no one way up the mountain top, it is just that I get `corrected`by the same tired sources over and over when I suggest that all of us are no slavish proponents of the same method.

I don`t want a SINGLE disciple of the way I look at pace. just the platform to harbor dissent. A provable logical alternative way of looking at pace Invented BY THE WAY, by Jim Bradshaw.

Light
02-23-2010, 11:42 AM
Woodbine has probably the least amount of gate to wire winners, especially going two turns than any track in North America.

You havent been watching SA. It is worse. Woodbine may only have 12% but SA has only 10% at same distance from same people.

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/editorial/article.cgi?id=104

cj
02-23-2010, 11:44 AM
No, no CJ


As andicap stated

Sometimes explanations of A,B and C are needed to help makes things clear and remove confusion.

I am speaking in terms of Sartin for 46. Where is the confustion? Are you saying it is possible the %E and %M have changed, but "not that much", when the ratio of pace to final times have changed by more than 7 or 8 lengths? I'll say if that is true (it isn't) it is a completely worthless measurement. Of course it isn't true as I demonstrated with actual numbers. I can do %M if anybody wants to see it, but it won't change anything.

46zilzal
02-23-2010, 11:45 AM
Though he is a program user, I suspect I know more about the actual math than he does. His posts certainly point in that direction. Either that, or he is using bad data.
The ACTUAL math was suggested and honed to a hard edge by Jim Bradshaw and introduced in 1988 as the program ENERGY and as stated in the instruction manual, it would be a radically new concept because it was more about style (running style predicted by energy distribution) over substance (the ACTUAL times).

PERCENTAGES of totals are un-related to the absolute totals they are based upon ..............PURE and simple

This process allows one to predict which dirt horses can run on grass, which babies are ready to graduate, when babies can or cannot stretch out to the Derby preps distances (totally eliminated ones like Hard Spun from the Belmont for example and Bellamy Road from the Derby), when many odds on horses are going off form (Pico Central was a great example of this angle before the NYRA Mile), allows one to evaluate how shippers will do against the standard profile of the track they arrive at...etc. etc.

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 11:49 AM
CJ

I got impression HPB did not seem understand where Zilly was coming from, now A,B and C has been explained i think he may understand.


That was what i was trying to achieve here, nothing more.

cj
02-23-2010, 11:50 AM
The ACTUAL math was suggested and honed to a hard edge by Jim Bradshaw and introduced in 1988 as the program ENERGY and as stated in the instruction manual, it would be a radically new concept because it was more about style (running style predicted by energy distribution) over substance (the ACTUAL times).

PERCENTAGES of totals are un-related to the absolute totals they are based upon ..............PURE and simple

Give me an example with numbers then.

This seems to contradict what you are saying now:

Energy distribution depends upon percentage of effort per segment and therefore being a PERCENTAGE,

46zilzal
02-23-2010, 11:54 AM
Give me an example with numbers then.

This seems to contradict what you are saying now:
After breakfast I will quote a few examples taken directly from readouts

however of one has a total of 3 and finds the percentages of each of course each would be 33.33%

if the total was 9, each fraction would be 33.3%

total 27, each segment would be 33.3 and so on so the distribution is independent of the total

cj
02-23-2010, 11:54 AM
After breakfast I will quote a few examples taken directly from readouts

Don't bother if you aren't going to explain the math.

46zilzal
02-23-2010, 12:14 PM
example will have to wait as the better half tells me we are going to the Russian pavilion this morning.

FenceBored
02-23-2010, 12:20 PM
The front end is not as golden as it was pre-Poly, but it is not all Keeneland- like either. I scored big time last December on a maiden named Tabitha who was never headed.

This was not that rare a case either.
I don't have the stats, but Woodbine is probably the worst track in North America for gate to wire wins, especially going two turns.

Maybe if you look at the track POSITIONALLY which is NEVER how Sartinistas look at it.....NEVER

........and in that regard it is not that different. I had to only tweak the energy standards at each distance a tad since the track changed.

How else can you define the "front end" of a field except positionally? If the horse is first, it's on the "front end." If the horse is last, it's not on the "front end". The horse running 5 horses and 10 lengths behind the leader is somehow according to Sartin energy distribution the "front end?" Also, a "gate to wire" winner is defined POSITIONALLY not by any other method. Otherwise, every winner (having started in the gate and finished at the wire) is a "gate to wire" winner.

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 12:30 PM
From Bill V over at Paceandcap



The amount of percent medium of a horses total energy
will determine its ESP running style



Hope it helps.

FenceBored
02-23-2010, 01:09 PM
From Bill V over at Paceandcap

quote:
The amount of percent medium of a horses total energy
will determine its ESP running style
Hope it helps.

Yes, but the thread you're quoting (http://www.paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5143) does use "wire to wire" in the standard fashion (positionally), not in whatever way 46Zilzal was trying to use it.

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 01:14 PM
Zilly is a Sartin Energy Program user and being so he uses %Median readouts to determine EPS and not the standard 1-1 1-1 1-1 or 3-5 4-5 5-5

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 01:47 PM
Sorry

That should be uses the EPS as determined by %Median.

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 02:52 PM
He doesn't post much, but when Bob Cocharan does it is good advice i think. Some may find his thread here http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3963 useful for Woodbine etc

FenceBored
02-23-2010, 03:09 PM
Zilly is a Sartin Energy Program user and being so he uses %Median readouts to determine EPS and not the standard 1-1 1-1 1-1 or 3-5 4-5 5-5

Fine, I know he claims to be a Sartin user. But look at the results from the following search:

(http://www.google.com/search?q=%22front+end%22+site%3Apaceandcap.com&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a)http://www.google.com/search?q=%22front+end%22+site%3Apaceandcap.com


Post after post, thread after thread, people using "front end" in a positional not an "energy distribution" sense as refering to a horse running at the front of the field or near the positional front.

I can certainly understand a methodology that refers to a horse who uses a higher percentage of its energy in the early part of a race as an E (regardless of its position relative to the leader). However, would a horse who trails the field in a mile race by 10 lengths while running his eyeballs out through the first 4f and then fades badly from there be considered "on the front end" in any legitimate sense?

But, thanks for the initial pointer to that site.

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 03:17 PM
Fenceboard


I'm not as educated as Zilly is on Energy Program use so he should probably give explanations, but i believe Zilly is following Energy program instructions. Others may not be, some may be mixing different approaches

Charlie D
02-23-2010, 03:44 PM
Here are screenshots of the program Zilly uses

http://www.paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5945

GaryG
02-23-2010, 08:19 PM
Thanks again for all of the info guys, I will have to ask for help more often! Fence Bored, love your signature to death. RIP Joe Strummer.

46zilzal
02-23-2010, 08:23 PM
Post after post, thread after thread, people using "front end" in a positional not an "energy distribution" sense as refering to a horse running at the front of the field or near the positional front.

I can certainly understand a methodology that refers to a horse who uses a higher percentage of its energy in the early part of a race as an E (regardless of its position relative to the leader). However, would a horse who trails the field in a mile race by 10 lengths while running his eyeballs out through the first 4f and then fades badly from there be considered "on the front end" in any legitimate sense?
.
These references relate to thousands and thousands of races which have shown that horses NOT close to the early pace (EP or 2nd call velocity) OR, conversely, have contended versus a pace that is at or very close to the fastest pace of race, have NO shot at the majority of dirt courses.

Since the second call is EARLY pace, and most of the horses move on that EARLY pace, it is the FRONT end that dictates EVERY RACE, EVERYDAY.

Horses sitting back contribute NOTHING to the pace until they CHASE it.

That is just the way it is: closers are, and always have been at a disadvantage at almost every dirt distance at 9.5 furlongs or less.

46zilzal
02-23-2010, 08:44 PM
I can post hundreds of EARLY horses that were NO where near the front of races and conversely,
can show lots of horses ON THE LEAD that ran sustained, even LATE energy distributions.

Tom
02-23-2010, 10:04 PM
psssst.

46.

pssst.


None of this nonsense has anything to do with Woodbine!

cj
02-24-2010, 12:00 AM
psssst.

46.

pssst.


None of this nonsense has anything to do with Woodbine!

I think he is upset I know more about the calculations for his program than he does.

46zilzal
02-24-2010, 12:57 AM
I think he is upset I know more about the calculations for his program than he does.
you wish..
I have access to the original code written by the programmer for whom I tested the prototypes

FenceBored
02-24-2010, 07:13 AM
psssst.

46.

pssst.


None of this nonsense has anything to do with Woodbine!

Sorry, Tom. My fault, I set it off. Won't ask Zilzal for explanations of 'postal' inconsistencies in the future.

Again, my apologies.

Tom
02-24-2010, 07:32 AM
Sorry, Tom. My fault, I set it off. Won't ask Zilzal for explanations of 'postal' inconsistencies in the future.

Again, my apologies.

Hey, it's a mine field here some days. :D

cj
02-24-2010, 08:09 AM
you wish..
I have access to the original code written by the programmer for whom I tested the prototypes

Then where are the numbers that show the track changed "not that much" when polytrack was installed?

Kimsus
02-24-2010, 12:18 PM
I usually play Monmouth during the spring and summer but, with all that is going on I am going to give Woodbine a shot this year. I have about 6 weeks to prepare, and am looking forward to it. I will have par tables and trainer data, but does anyone have any pearls of wisdom for me? Thanks in advance to all who reply.

I find Woodbine to be one of the more speed friendlier tracks that some might believe it's kinder to a closer's profile for polytrack. It's not as speed biased when it was dirt but EP and E horses seem to produce the most winners.

The best jockey on the circuit and I am not going by the simplistic looking up win % is no doubt Enrico Rosa Dasilva. Simply put he gets more out of horse than anyone on the circuit and he wins his fair share...That's how I judge it. The second best rider imo is Chantal Sutherland for the same reasons above.

cj
02-24-2010, 12:43 PM
I find Woodbine to be one of the more speed friendlier tracks that some might believe it's kinder to a closer's profile for polytrack. It's not as speed biased when it was dirt but EP and E horses seem to produce the most winners.



I find the labels applied at WO are not very important before the race. However, if you want to bet a horse that is labeled E or EP, you really should be betting he runs like a P or PS.

bettheoverlay
02-24-2010, 02:07 PM
April at Woodbine is somewhat unusual. There were 116 sprints, and only 3 routes and they occurred in the last week of the month. 75 of the sprints were at 5 or 5 1/2 furlongs. Horses that stayed in Canada, layoffs of 90 days or more accounted for some huge payoffs. Horses that raced through the winter were overbet. E (Bris) horses did very well in these sprints, even when they started carding 7F races, in which there were 32 E horses and 9 winning. The long layoff horses ceased to win in May quite dramatically.

Kimsus
02-24-2010, 02:41 PM
April at Woodbine is somewhat unusual. There were 116 sprints, and only 3 routes and they occurred in the last week of the month. 75 of the sprints were at 5 or 5 1/2 furlongs. Horses that stayed in Canada, layoffs of 90 days or more accounted for some huge payoffs. Horses that raced through the winter were overbet. E (Bris) horses did very well in these sprints, even when they started carding 7F races, in which there were 32 E horses and 9 winning. The long layoff horses ceased to win in May quite dramatically.

This is true from what I have noticed throughout the years at the beginning of Woodbine meets, the problem is finding those little gems. One almost has to have access to workouts to know which horses are ready to run, I believe most races begin at the 5 furlong sprint distance and Woodbine has pushed up their opening date significantly the past few yrs.

Tom
02-24-2010, 03:22 PM
Question of the E SP P S designation at BRIS....when they list the track summaries for the meet and last week, do they use the designations going in to the races or how they actually ran....in other words an E horse might have run as a P. How do they tally that?

bettheoverlay
02-24-2010, 04:34 PM
This is true from what I have noticed throughout the years at the beginning of Woodbine meets, the problem is finding those little gems. One almost has to have access to workouts to know which horses are ready to run, I believe most races begin at the 5 furlong sprint distance and Woodbine has pushed up their opening date significantly the past few yrs.

I've found trainer study can locate some of these gems. I have a list of some obscure trainers who have sent out winning runners from limited starters off long layoffs in April in each of the past 3 seasons at terrific prices. Some higher profile trainers have been skunked from lots of starters. Woodbine in general is a great track for trainer study, everybody pretty much stays in one place and it's a long meet.

46zilzal
02-24-2010, 05:10 PM
work outs again.

Do you know how many training tracks are within a few hundred miles of the track at Rexdale? I drove around Calledon and was amazed at the number or active facilities. MANY barns do ship in until close to the time of the t-bred only meet as the entire facility is shared with the standard breds.

New barns, to cover the standard bred overlap, were built two years ago outside the clubhouse turn on the main course, but inside that same turn on the turf. As a result of the blockage of view from the grandstands to the start of many of the main track runs, many of our cameras had to be moved higher up to continue to capture the back stretch shots for the Canadian Parimutuel Agency.

Still many barns only come in for qualifying works so using the overall workout scheme to somehow establish some pecking order for racing is far fetched at best since a good deal of the foundation work is not even done there.

riskman
02-24-2010, 06:30 PM
Question of the E SP P S designation at BRIS....when they list the track summaries for the meet and last week, do they use the designations going in to the races or how they actually ran....in other words an E horse might have run as a P. How do they tally that?

Yeah, I would also like to know the answer to this question.
I have a feeling it is the RS in which the horse won the race and not the designation of the RS in the PP's prior to the race.

cj
02-24-2010, 06:41 PM
Yeah, I would also like to know the answer to this question.
I have a feeling it is the RS in which the horse won the race and not the designation of the RS in the PP's prior to the race.

That is exactly what I was getting at with my post. Rubber races are much more tactical and many times prior running styles go out the window.

Still waiting on that data from 46 that shows the track has hardly changed since the switch from dirt.

46zilzal
02-24-2010, 09:04 PM
That is exactly what I was getting at with my post. Rubber races are much more tactical and many times prior running styles go out the window.

Still waiting on that data from 46 that shows the track has hardly changed since the switch from dirt.
I am not going to search through retired data which is only looked at in 10-14 days periods, to prove or disprove anything. I do not keep a database so the search would be extensive and completely unnecessary.

I just remember that when Demi Song won the first race on poly I was surprised that NONE of the early/late balances shifted that much. I was surprised then and continue to be as it is the only synthetic track where that did not happen.

cj
02-24-2010, 09:12 PM
I am not going to search through retired data which is only looked at in 10-14 days periods, to prove or disprove anything. I do not keep a database so the search would be extensive and completely unnecessary.

I just remember that when Demi Song won the first race on poly I was surprised that NONE of the early/late balances shifted that much. I was surprised then and continue to be as it is the only synthetic track where that did not happen.

Why not just admit you are wrong? It would be less funny than basing your whole opinion on the first ever race on the surface. I have data to back up my assertions. You have nothing but a flawed guess.

46zilzal
02-24-2010, 09:14 PM
Why not just admit you are wrong? It would be less funny than basing your whole opinion on the first ever race on the surface. I have data to back up my assertions. You have nothing but a flawed guess.
Because that would be a lie pure and simple as many of us who use the Sartin methodology came to that conclusion independent of one another.

cj
02-24-2010, 09:51 PM
The data doesn't lie. Either you believe I'm making up the data, which I'm not, or you are just so stubborn you will fight and pretend it doesn't matter.

The track has changed positionally and energy wise by a lot at all distances greater than 5.5f. Again, the numbers don't lie. Your perceptions are useless.

Tom
02-24-2010, 10:37 PM
Before breakfast.......

After breakfast I will quote a few examples taken directly from readouts [/QUOTE]

After breakfast.......

I am not going to search through retired data which is only looked at in 10-14 days periods, to prove or disprove anything. I do not keep a database so the search would be extensive and completely unnecessary.


Wuszzup....your eggs runny? Toast burnt? :confused:

46zilzal
02-24-2010, 11:51 PM
In a prime example of the "earliness" of the track at Woodbine just look how the projected match up for Mike Fox's Queen's Plate predicted that the top three earlier pace horses would be the ones near the wire.

46zilzal
02-24-2010, 11:53 PM
now note the chart from my friend's updated book on The Queen's Plate a Royal Tradition. The horses projected earliest ran 1 2 3.

Top three ranked second call colts ran 1 2 3.

46zilzal
02-25-2010, 12:20 AM
But many of these examples are repetition.

Suffice it to say as far as understanding pace and applying it, you and I are like two people conversing with one speaking English and the other Norwegian.

Your numbers, as far as I understand it, are accepted by a large group of people. I have never commented upon them one way or the other. I WILL LEAVE IT THAT WAY.

The basic understandings and applications of the current Sartin methodology are accepted as the way I use them, as I repeatedly state, by a growing number of handicappers.

Lets leave it at that: we both have a different and workable understanding of pace.

MANY changes in evaluation have taken place since the demise of the Sartin workshop in Beaumont California, and along with the late Guy Wadsworth and a group of testers, those basic notions have progressed quite a way with concepts like e/l relativity, order within chaos, style over substance, aspects of going off form, the Pizzola window for turf races, and many other more subtle but less practical ideas which have come out of discussions amongst the users of this way of evaluating the races.

I don't need a teacher or a little boy coming around "correcting me" all the time when it is day and night YOU are trying to convince people are somehow the same.

Dahoss9698
02-25-2010, 12:27 AM
You gave CJ one example of what he was asking for and then 4 that had nothing to do with the topic.

You actually exceeded my expectations.

46zilzal
02-25-2010, 12:31 AM
You gave CJ one example of what he was asking for and then 4 that had nothing to do with the topic.

You actually exceeded my expectations.
the topic strayed to the notion that POSITION was the only way to describe running style and it is certainly not.

cj
02-25-2010, 08:36 AM
Absolutely nothing you posted proves anything. I can post a few examples of top late speed horses winning 4.5f maiden races at Charles Town...that doesn't mean the distance favors closers for maidens at CT.


For the last time, if the average pace time changes by more than a full second while final time is held static, the track has changed a lot. If you don't understand this, there isn't much else I can say. If you argue it, you just look stupid.

cj
02-25-2010, 08:37 AM
the topic strayed to the notion that POSITION was the only way to describe running style and it is certainly not.

That is certainly not what I said. I said energy and median measurements also have changed a lot. Learn to read.

PaceAdvantage
02-25-2010, 10:54 AM
CJ, yup, you may have rightly removed those many useless replies by 46, but in the process, you denied many of our fine readers a glimpse at some classic "thread-drift" comedy.

cj
02-25-2010, 11:13 AM
CJ, yup, you may have rightly removed those many useless replies by 46, but in the process, you denied many of our fine readers a glimpse at some classic "thread-drift" comedy.

It was comedy, now it is just sad.