Predicting The Pace Scenario

[Robert Fischer]

tips? methods??

[cj]

When I try to predict it I usually regret it. Even when it is obvious, if it plays out, the betting takes away the value of being right most times.

[Robert Fischer]

Even when it is obvious, if it plays out, the betting takes away the value of being right most times.

well, the whole point of being highly skilled at predicting the pace scenario is to understand those races that are NOT obvious, or those races which appear obvious but are actually counter intuitive.

[cj]

well, the whole point of being highly skilled at predicting the pace scenario is to understand those races that are NOT obvious, or those races which appear obvious but are actually counter intuitive.

I guess I'm just not highly skilled then.

[Robert Fischer]

I guess I'm just not highly skilled then.

I'm certainly not implying that.

Predicting the pace scenario is not one of my strongest points, but I feel like it could potentially connect the dots between some of my stronger points.

Right now, I just try to look at how the track is playing, and how much early speed is in the race, how many horses I believe "need" to try for the lead in order to get their best performance vs. how likely i feel one horse may get the lead uncontested.

[cj]

I'm certainly not implying that.



I wasn't offended. I'm not highly skilled. I've tried. I'm just not sure anyone really can be. How do you predict the break, jockey tactics, horses going off form, etc?

I actually did it again this weekend in the BC Sprint. I've said Big Drama was going to win for months, then changed my mind because I thought the pace would be too hot and bet that nag Warrior's Reward, the type horse I would never usually bet.

How do you predict an average pace in a field loaded with high quality speed horses?

[Robert Fischer]

How do you predict the break, jockey tactics, horses going off form, etc?



I actually did it again this weekend in the BC Sprint. I've said Big Drama was going to win for months, then changed my mind because I thought the pace would be too hot and bet that nag Warrior's Reward, the type horse I would never usually bet.

How do you predict an average pace in a field loaded with high quality speed horses?

good question

i just looked at the pps now, again, after the fact, and i see maybe 7/12! who "need" to be on or right near the pace to have any success. Big Drama is one of the 7, and he is a good one, and he has good but not dominate pace @ the calls (lots of 2nds).

then again you could have picked Big Drama as a play against due to the fact that the rail was 7% with a .47 impact value the last 92 6f races at Churchill.

:confused::confused:

[Tom]

But, how many of those 92 horses had his speed and running style?

[jayfree41]

I think the 9th race - the Breeder's Cup Mile last Saturday was instructive pace wise. This race was chockful of speed, scrolling thru the Brisnet Past Performances at the large quantiy of the "E" and "E/P" types .

Problem was I chose Mine that Bird and Gallego to pick up the pieces overlooking the synthetic closer Dakota Phone on my pick 6 ticket.

[Charlie D]

May help Robert, may not

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5715

all the best.

[BillW]

I just looked at 4000 dirt sprints (all dists < 8F all tracks). A bet on the 3 leaders at the 1st call had an ROI of $1.20. This is equally betting 3 horses each and every race. No doubt that figuring out the pace scenario is a noble pursuit!

[Tom]

Sounds easy enough, like "Hand me the piano." :D

Randy Giles has an article on his board about using the probabilities associated with speed points to get a horse;s changes of being on the lead.
I think it is called the Math of Early Speed.

[JustRalph]

Jcapper does a nice job of it........

[Robert Fischer]

good stuff guys


hand me that piano - makes me think of thelonoius monk, if only :eek:

[Tom]

thelonoius monk

Operative word being monk! :D

Cramer's RsPos is worth a look - it is pretty structured and focuses on running styles and the first fraction.

[Dave Schwartz]

I am working on what I call "New Pace." Like the form stuff it is very new. However, unlike the form stuff, it had its origins in Jim Cramer's work.

I do not understand RS-Pos well enough to use it, some of the ideas within it are truly brilliant.

Cramer is a guy that gets very little real credit in our world. If you see the performance of his speed figures you know what I am talking about.


Dave

[thaskalos]

I am working on what I call "New Pace." Like the form stuff it is very new. However, unlike the form stuff, it had its origins in Jim Cramer's work.

I do not understand RS-Pos well enough to use it, some of the ideas within it are truly brilliant.

Cramer is a guy that gets very little real credit in our world. If you see the performance of his speed figures you know what I am talking about.


DaveDave, would you tell us a little more about this "New Pace"? Pace happens to be my favorite subject...by far!

[Dave Schwartz]

I really can't. It is too premature. I will just say that it is very different than what could be called "Sartinian Pace."

I am probably 6 months away from adding the one missing ingredient. Still searching for it.



Dave

[Charlie D]

I really can't. It is too premature. I will just say that it is very different than what could be called "Sartinian Pace."





Dave


"Sartinian Pace" uses Fr1-Fr2-Fr3 information. What are you using Dave that is very different??

[Dave Schwartz]

"Sartinian Pace" uses Fr1-Fr2-Fr3 information. What are you using Dave that is very different??

Not exactly true.

Sartinian pace was founded on the principle of EP-SP-W. Modeling of these and other factors is considered a cornerstone of pace handicapping today.

I have discovered that the absolute least important thing in pace handicapping is EP. It is so insignificant that it can be ignored completely.

I think you will agree that this is a provocative statement.

If I can back that up with proof (I can but not until the rest is complete) then I'd call this important. Wouldn't you?


As I have said, I am missing one key ingredient... an element of predictability. I can do it in my software to about 80% of my satisfaction level but it is very complicated. It is no where near ready for the kind of break through technologies I release.

[Charlie D]

Her you go Dave. A brief description of the Sartin Methodolgy

http://sports-bet-advantage.com/sartdesc.pdf





Don't think you can ignore EP when doing Pace cappin , but i'm always willing to listen and i look forward to reading your thoughts when you are ready to disclose them.

[Charlie D]

Btw Dave you will see that the "Brief Descriptiion" does not include %Median or Total Energy, both of which use Fr1 - Fr2 - Fr3 in the calaculation

[Dave Schwartz]

Thanks for the link.

Charlie, I assure you that I completely understand the Sartin pace approach.


Don't think you can ignore EP when doing Pace cappin , but i'm always willing to listen and i look forward to reading your thoughts when you are ready to disclose them

Duly noted.

[Charlie D]

Thanks for the link.

Charlie, I assure you that I completely understand the Sartin pace approach.

.


I was going to post a link to Ol Yella, The Match Up and THe Dynamics of Incremental Velocity and Energy Exertion Dave, but having seen your name on some reading material somewhere, i thought the "Brief Description" would be enough to jog the memory :)

[andymays]

Video replays. Just because a horse set certain early fractions doesn't mean it will run the same fractions today. Was the horse used or not? You have to watch the Jockey in the replay. The post position also plays a big role especially in two turn dirt races.

Run Ups are also important especially in turf races. Run Ups can go anywhere from about 5ft to over 250ft. Take Del Mar main track. One mile run up is about 200ft. One mile and one sixteenth is about 70ft. On the synthetic the pace doesn't matter nearly as much but when it was dirt the run ups at those distances made a huge difference. I know that most methods of figuring probable pace take run ups into account but anyone handicapping out of the form needs to know this stuff.

Figuring out the probable pace isn't just about the numbers in many cases.

All this stuff comes down to spending time doing the hard work. It's not easy to grind this stuff out on a daily basis. I used to be able to do it but not so much anymore.

[lsosa54]

Charlie: Although this doesn't cover pace, I recall Dave telling me he was the ghostwriter for his ex on this article. Follow Up 22 came out not long after the KGEN program was released, around 1990. I joined the Sartin group sometime in 1989. Maybe Dave was germinating his HMI betting approach at the time?

In the next issue still in 1990, Dick Schmidt favorably reviewed Thorobrain, which was Dave's neural network at the time and mentioned that Dave had been a Sartin "client" for several years. Doc highly endorsed Thorobrain as "an ideal companion for all users of Sartin velocity programs, not energy based ones, due to its unlimited modeling capacity". "Bo knows baseball" and "Dave knows Sartinian pace".

Interesting that Doc added on the last page of the attached article that from his IRS mole, the estimate was that 2% of bettors reporting were winners - 1% grind it out types, and 1% exacta syndicate types. If that was ever true, I wonder if/how it's changed today?

[Dave Schwartz]

Good memory, Sosa. Thanks.

BTW, she got an "A" on that paper.


Dave

[lsosa54]

Good memory, Sosa. Thanks.

BTW, she got an "A" on that paper.


Dave

Yeah, but how much did that personal interview quoted in the footnotes cost and has Truckee Meadows CC survived the years?

[Tom]

Tom Brohamer turned me on to Dave's pars and I was buying them back then - quarterly, I think, with his newsletter Brain Waves!

Good stuff.

[Robert Fischer]

to illustrate,
the Classic this year is a good example.
Here was a race in which I strongly felt that the different runners were highly dependent on the Pace Scenario.
Zenyatta, Blame, and Lucky figured to dominate if the race played out to favor late runners. Haynesfield, Quality Road, Espoir City, First Dude, Etched would have loved to be "carried around".

I ended up using an inefficient strategy = I made two sets of tickets, One using primarily the closers, and another using the speed.

Since the the closers were all favorites, and the only well bet speed horse was Quality Road(who was no lock even with an early speed friendly race), it was clear which Scenario I was initially rooting for. The early-speed group figured to be of boxcar proportions. I felt fortunate that the trifecta (with Fly Down lumping up past a Lookin Lucky) paid as well as it did.

[matthewsiv]

I used CJ's pace figures for The Breeders Cup Saturday and had a great day just using his free condensed download and concentrating on the pace of the race.


Thank you CJ.

It is all in the match up as Jim Bradshaw would say

[TRM]

I am a former Sartinite (1990) and developed my own match-up type program throughout the years to do exactly what Robert was asking. One aspect I created was an E/E and E/L rating that actually predicts where this horse should be throughout the race, not based on past runnings, but where he should be in todays pace/race scenario. Using the example of the Big Drama race I had him as 1/2 rated EE and 1/2 rated E/L. He was much the best throughtout the race to the finish. You could also say the same for Uncle Mo even though that race imo was loaded with more speed. He still showed much the best......see attached race files.

Does this approach work all the time, of course not, and as CJ alluded, you have jockey intent, break, form, etc.....but it works enough for me.

[Greyfox]

Pace at the first call can be an inexact speculation.
Some trainer may send a plug that has never been on the front before and will not last. Other horses might "spook" from the gate and think they are world beaters. I don't bother with first call times anymore.

In general, I've got a pretty good idea on how to predict the pace scenario in most races at the second call.

[cj]

I probably overstated in my first post. There is nothing wrong with pace analysis, I obviously still do it. I just think it is a secondary factor.

[andicap]

Not exactly true.

Sartinian pace was founded on the principle of EP-SP-W. Modeling of these and other factors is considered a cornerstone of pace handicapping today.

I have discovered that the absolute least important thing in pace handicapping is EP. It is so insignificant that it can be ignored completely.

I think you will agree that this is a provocative statement.
.

I agree -- that this is a provocative statement. My HTR models and Craig's SP figures (similar to EP) say you are wrong, but I can't back that up with concrete proof other than the HTR models that show where EP is more profitable than the other velocity figures. That said, I often find the first fraction to be more profitable and predictive than the EP call.

The thing about modeling for early speed effectiveness is that there are so many ways to do so -- energy figures, etc.

[Tom]

46 is having a fit somewhere! :D

[andicap]

Run Ups are also important especially in turf races. Run Ups can go anywhere from about 5ft to over 250ft. Take Del Mar main track. One mile run up is about 200ft. One mile and one sixteenth is about 70ft. On the synthetic the pace doesn't matter nearly as much but when it was dirt the run ups at those distances made a huge difference. I know that most methods of figuring probable pace take run ups into account but anyone handicapping out of the form needs to know this stuff.

Excellent point. HTR provides information about run-ups in past races in its PPs as well as in comma delimited data base files to use if you're conversant in Access. (I'm not.) Ken Massa provided a comprehensive analysis of the run-up in a newsletter last year available to HTR customers.

One key finding: Short run-ups distort the early fractions.
One issue: Lack of sample size to accurately compute an adjustment at some distances/surfaces.

He has also added an option to adjust his velocity figures WHEREVER PRACTICAL for run-ups in the modeler, tho I have not tested them much.
As he points out, it's a very tricky area. Anyone who can get a handle on this topic has a real leg-up.

[Greyfox]

46 is having a fit somewhere! :D

:lol: Lest we forget. I miss Major Hoople's "bin der, dun dat"condescending pooh pooh's regarding data bases while waving the flag of energy distribution.

[gm10]

Like many others here, I have dabbled in pace handicapping in the past. While I still (implicitly) apply the concept when handicapping a race, I have always wondered how you actually evaluate its effectiveness in determining the outcome of a race. I've never seen this done (apart from the ubiquitous anecdotes in the literature of course).

[Dave Schwartz]

I agree -- that this is a provocative statement. My HTR models and Craig's SP figures (similar to EP) say you are wrong, but I can't back that up with concrete proof other than the HTR models that show where EP is more profitable than the other velocity figures.

Eventually, you will see that it is a case of causation vs. correlation.


I made a provocative statement that I will not be able to publicly demonstrate for several months. This troubles me a bit but I think I have found a way around it.

I have "proof." Today. What I don't have (as i have said) is this one missing piece that will allow me to go public with my research.

What I would like to do is to privately demonstrate to someone what I am talking about then ask them to verify what they have seen. Now, this can be problematic, because I certainly do not want this concept to get into the hands of my competitors before I am able to complete my project.

In other words, it has to be the right person. It has to be someone who is respected enough on this forum who is truly neutral in the vendor arena. I have just the guy: MaxSpa. I think that the man who reviews everything in such an unbiased manner is perfect for the task.

So, I am going to send Maxie a message.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Tom]

Good choice!

[Greyfox]

Good choice!

C'mon Tom I always thought you were the least biased poster here. :lol:

[thaskalos]

Like many others here, I have dabbled in pace handicapping in the past. While I still (implicitly) apply the concept when handicapping a race, I have always wondered how you actually evaluate its effectiveness in determining the outcome of a race. I've never seen this done (apart from the ubiquitous anecdotes in the literature of course).
I will tell you how we evaluate the effectiveness of pace handicapping GM10.

A few days ago I was handicapping a sprint race at Delaware. There were 3 main contenders, and their recent (last 3-4) Beyer figures were almost identical. They had all been competing at the same class level, and were all obviously in good condition.

The only noticeable difference was on the tote board. One horse was listed at 6-5...while the other 2 were offered at 4-1 and 5-1 respectively. Upon closer examination, I discovered that the 6-5 horse (who also happened to have slightly lesser "Beyers" than one of the other 2 contenders) figured to have a 2 length lead at the 1/4, and a 4 length lead at the 1/2 mile, in today's race.

The 6-5 horse won by 5...while the other 2 horses struggled throughout the race.

These front running pace "stickouts" are heavily overbet, of course. But they get overbet for a very simple reason...because they win much more often than their class and over-all condition factors would indicate. Luckily...there is a lot more to "pace handicapping" than just figuring out the lead horse in a race...and some of it is less obvious, and more ignored on the tote board.

Like all handicapping factors, pace cannot stand on its own, IMO - it is only a piece of the puzzle. But it's a pretty big piece.

Ignore pace - in sprints especially - and you will be left scratching your head after MANY races...IMO at least...

[gm10]

I will tell you how we evaluate the effectiveness of pace handicapping GM10.

A few days ago I was handicapping a sprint race at Delaware. There were 3 main contenders, and their recent (last 3-4) Beyer figures were almost identical. They had all been competing at the same class level, and were all obviously in good condition.

The only noticeable difference was on the tote board. One horse was listed at 6-5...while the other 2 were offered at 4-1 and 5-1 respectively. Upon closer examination, I discovered that the 6-5 horse (who also happened to have slightly lesser "Beyers" than one of the other 2 contenders) figured to have a 2 length lead at the 1/4, and a 4 length lead at the 1/2 mile, in today's race.

The 6-5 horse won by 5...while the other 2 horses struggled throughout the race.

These front running pace "stickouts" are heavily overbet, of course. But they get overbet for a very simple reason...because they win much more often than their class and over-all condition factors would indicate. Luckily...there is a lot more to "pace handicapping" than just figuring out the lead horse in a race...and some of it is less obvious, and more ignored on the tote board.

Like all handicapping factors, pace cannot stand on its own, IMO - it is only a piece of the puzzle. But it's a pretty big piece.

Ignore pace - in sprints especially - and you will be left scratching your head after MANY races...IMO at least...

It's a nice anecdote ... and I agree that it is a big piece of the puzzle in quite a few races. However, how do we evaluate 'pace handicapping'? For speed figures, an easy way to verify their potency is by checking how often the horse with the highest last race wins the race. Beyer reports a success rate of 28-30% on dirt (which is better than most imo). Is there anything similar for pace? I accept that it is more complex, a two step process if you will, but I've never seen a pace handicapping author formally write "this is how I select the most likely winner in every race, and this is how well those selections have done in the past".

[Tom]

You might want to check out MaxVel at HTR. It is a velocity program that has an intricate modleing function. I can go to any track in the country and in minutes, know if it worth playing and if so, what is winning there.

It is based on your pace line selection mode and distances and then it models by factor, AP, EP, SP, SR, Pace Fig etc. Some tracks are best played by speed ratings, some by EP, some by other factors.

[skate]

When I try to predict it I usually regret it. Even when it is obvious, if it plays out, the betting takes away the value of being right most times.

Now you're gettin it, welp, im sure you had "it" before, but NOW you're sayin "IT".

This would seem to me, part of the reason that 1 length or 1/20 of a second, will have little , if any effect on next race.

[Dave Schwartz]

C'mon Tom I always thought you were the least biased poster here.


Foxie,

For the record, Tom was my second choice and you were my third. (Even though Tom uses someone else's program, I will trust him to not tell anyone what he sees; just to verify that he saw something and to comment on it, be it positive or negative.)

Maxie has not yet said he was willing to do it.

I would really like SOMEONE to do it because it would be nice to let people know that there is SOMETHING NEW coming.


Dave

[Greyfox]

Foxie,

For the record, Tom was my second choice and you were my third. (Even though Tom uses someone else's program, I will trust him to not tell anyone what he sees; just to verify that he saw something and to comment on it, be it positive or negative.)



Dave

Thank you for the compliment. I too think that Tom would give a great evaluation. He's as honest as they come.
Myself? That would be a scarey amount of responsibility, but thank you for
the consideration.

[Dave Schwartz]

Foxie,

This stuff is so obvious when you see it that you will:

1. First, say, "That can't be so."
2. Second, say, "Wow! That's unbelievable."

In fact, let's just move on with this... I hereby officially invite Fox, Tom and Max and PA to a short (like 15 minute) online meeting to look at this stuff.

If any of you accept the invitation, the next step is to figure out a good time. I am thinking perhaps Monday evening at 5pm (pacific)... I believe you are all on the east coast, right?

And I am totally flexible on date and time. Talk amongst yourselves.


Dave

[Greyfox]

Foxie,

This stuff is so obvious when you see it that you will:

1. First, say, "That can't be so."
2. Second, say, "Wow! That's unbelievable."

In fact, let's just move on with this... I hereby officially invite Fox, Tom and Max and PA to a short (like 15 minute) online meeting to look at this stuff.

If any of you accept the invitation, the next step is to figure out a good time. I am thinking perhaps Monday evening at 5pm (pacific)... I believe you are all on the east coast, right?

And I am totally flexible on date and time. Talk amongst yourselves.


Dave

I have to gracefully decline. I've sent a PM explaining why.
No doubt you've hit upon something that I'd love to see.
But hopefully you'll understand why I can't accept this offer.

All the best,

Greyfox

[Dave Schwartz]

Fox, I completely understand.

[Tom]

Foxie,

This stuff is so obvious when you see it that you will:

1. First, say, "That can't be so."
2. Second, say, "Wow! That's unbelievable."

In fact, let's just move on with this... I hereby officially invite Fox, Tom and Max and PA to a short (like 15 minute) online meeting to look at this stuff.

If any of you accept the invitation, the next step is to figure out a good time. I am thinking perhaps Monday evening at 5pm (pacific)... I believe you are all on the east coast, right?

And I am totally flexible on date and time. Talk amongst yourselves.


Dave

I would be happy to participate. The time is good for me, or another if need be.

[Dave Schwartz]

I sent MaxSpa the time. Let's see if that works for him.

[Dave Schwartz]

I have sent emails with the meeting link to both of you. See you Monday evening.

Dave

PS: Thanks.

[skate]

I agree -- that this is a provocative statement. My HTR models and Craig's SP figures (similar to EP) say you are wrong, but I can't back that up with concrete proof other than the HTR models that show where EP is more profitable than the other velocity figures. That said, I often find the first fraction to be more profitable and predictive than the EP call.

The thing about modeling for early speed effectiveness is that there are so many ways to do so -- energy figures, etc.

Seems to ME me me, the track will make for differential opinions, so it depends and dont forget the weather man/ladies.

[Capper Al]

I probably overstated in my first post. There is nothing wrong with pace analysis, I obviously still do it. I just think it is a secondary factor.

CJ, I always was of the belief that Pace was a secondary factor. I believe Ainslie started me on this path. Randy Giles, in his book Extreme Pace Handicapping, suggest it as a primary factor. Now I am re-examining this premise.

[andicap]

CJ, I always was of the belief that Pace was a secondary factor. I believe Ainslie started me on this path. Randy Giles, in his book Extreme Pace Handicapping, suggest it as a primary factor. Now I am re-examining this premise.

I think it can be a primary factor -- if you pick your spots very carefully and wait for value and keep up on any track biases (a whole other controversial subject -- some biases are institutional) instead of applying pace in a knee-jerk fashion on every race.

I had to search for a bit but I found a qualifying race -- admittedly I'm redboarding here. Philly on Friday 7th race, 6.5f, a five-horse field. The 3 -- ML of 2-1 -- was the only horse with less than 6 Quirin Points. Yet he went off 3rd favorite and paid a decent 7.40 for a tiny field.

Positional handicapping came into play here as well since the chalk, the 1 had never proved it could close and find herself 3 lengths back at the first call. You can sometimes look at a horse's past match-ups and see if today's is less or more favorable.

[cj]

CJ, I always was of the belief that Pace was a secondary factor. I believe Ainslie started me on this path. Randy Giles, in his book Extreme Pace Handicapping, suggest it as a primary factor. Now I am re-examining this premise.

I say secondary because ability of the horses comes first. An extreme example was the Apple Blossom this year. It didn't matter if the pace was 45, 49, or 52 to the half, Zenyatta was winning. Ability comes first, then when it is close, pace can be factor to separate those that are close.

I made this mistake in the BC Sprint. I knew Big Drama was the best horse, yet I bet Warrior's Reward thinking the pace would be very hot. Maybe had it been he could have won, but I prefer to bet horses that could win with a fair pace, and if a beneficial one comes along they will win. Warrior's Reward needed everything to go his way to even be a contender...bad bet by me.

[Dave Schwartz]

Max and Tom had our meeting tonight. Max posted about it here:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1004545&posted=1#post1004545

[mrhorseplayer]

you need to know where the horses are going to be in a race to handicapp or at least this is the way I capp. know the speed and hten if it can hold up or not and how far back the stalkers, closers are going to be makes the race. I believe you have to make the race to get a good picture of how it is going to shape up.

[Robert Fischer]

thought it was cool to finally watch the 'Duke Matties video, and he says:
"I design the race". Then he goes on to simplify and describe some factors he considers(and he does name many of the factors, tips, and techniques PACEADVANTAGE horseplayers have noted in this thread :ThmbUp:).

He designs the race. :confused:
"Design" is an interesting word choice because it implies creation and control and power. All training jokes aside, that is simply a positive way to frame the concept of "Predicting" and "Visualizing" the race.

It's fair to say that designing, predicting, visualizing the race in significant detail may be a little more comprehensive than the more specific act of Predicting The Pace Scenario. Still kinda interesting.

If in fact he has those skills, it would be very impressive indeed.

[Charlie D]

Robert

Read The Hat's 5 Step Approach or T Brohamers MPH( both are The Match Up) as many times as needed for understanding the methodology.



Go here http://mysite.verizon.net/whobet/trks2day.html

Select Decent Claimers, Allowance, State bred, Graded races


Practice, learn from your mistakes, practice more, learn from your mistakes and practice more


All the best


Pace primary or secondary.

Pace = rate of movement, horses have different rates of movement or abilities. You can use these different rates of movement or abilities to find the TRUE contenders and the non contenders ignoring trainers, Class (clm 10k,Alw etc) jockey and more should you wish.


This being so, it makes Pace a Primary handicapping factor imho.

[Charlie D]

You can use software to help, but remember it can not THINK and Garbage IN, results in Garbage OUT.

[JustRalph]

I design the race too.........

Now if I could only get the jocks to sign on to my design...........

[Robert Fischer]

I design the race too.........

Now if I could only get the jocks to sign on to my design...........


I prefer to think of myself as "the architect"
http://www.teesforall.com/images/Seinfeld_George_Architect_Blue_Shirt.jpg

[Dave Schwartz]

Charlie,

Where on the WhoBet page would we go for what you are talking about?


Dave

[Charlie D]

Charlie,

Where on the WhoBet page would we go for what you are talking about?


Dave



Whobets page is just for Free PP's for people to use to practice with Dave. Link to Hat's Step Approach is on Page 1. Tom Brohamers book can be found at Amazon and other decent book stores :)

[notchback]

Charlie,

Where on the WhoBet page would we go for what you are talking about?


Dave

Dave, maybe try this link :

5-Step (http://www.paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5715)

I don't know about you, but the Whobet page makes no sence to me at all. Maybe I'm getting old :-)

Doug

[Charlie D]

C'mon guys wake up please :)

The Link to the 5 Step had already been posted


http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1002207#post1002207



BTW, i have never designed a race, the races design themselves via The Match up.

[Tom]

Dave, scroll down a bit, look for the track list on the left, and the next column is the races available.

[Dave Schwartz]

Thanks, Tom.

[Charlie D]

You yanking my chain Mr Schwartz? If not, accept my apologies for the misunderstanding.

[Dave Schwartz]

Charlie,

I'm not trying to be difficult.

First, you posted a link to a very busy page. I had no idea where on that page to find what you were talking about.

Then you posted a link to a thread - not a post - telling me that the answer was in the thread. Since I still had no idea what you were talking about I likewise had no idea what link I was looking for.

Finally, I believe you posted another link to another thread - same result.


Perhaps you assumed I had read these threads and was familiar with the "5-step" approach. While I have certainly heard of (and read) The Matchup I did not make any connection to the "5-step." (For all I know, it was the first 5 steps out of 12, although that is generally a different process.

Anyway, I did not say anything to "yank your chain," nor was this an attempt at subtlety. I simply asked for clarification. Eventually it was forthcoming and I have added the link to my "must read" list (which currently has a dozen items on it).

Nothing personal intended.

Thank you for the lead to a different approach. And thanks also to Richie P (a great human being in his own right) for doing all the grunt work in writing that post.


Dave

[Charlie D]

Thanks for the explanation Dave, but i seem to have caused problem. I'm very surprised you did not scroll down Whobet page though.

Anyway mate, please accept my apology for the misunderstanding and all the best with the Hats 5 Step.

[Dave Schwartz]

No problem.

Actually, I did scroll down. I just did not notice anything that said "5-steps" (which, of course, does not mean it isn't there).

My wife says I can't find anything because I don't have a uterus. :rolleyes:


Dave

[speculus]

.....

I have discovered that the absolute least important thing in pace handicapping is EP. It is so insignificant that it can be ignored completely.

.....

100% true, Dave. I agree. Without reservation.

I think many a fine handicapper is foolishly wedded to this idea that early pace has some or great value. Zero, if you ask me.

I will go ahead and make an even bolder statement that a race--ANY RACE--is just the last three furlongs. Barring interference of a SERIOUS nature, nothing that happens earlier really should matter to a handicapper.

[Ted Craven]

For reference, Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to The Match Up is a summary of an entire Forum's worth of exercises, examples and demonstrations by Jim 'The Hat' and by Richie P. It is also, effectively, the same contents and beyond what Jim wrote in his last book, The Match Up 2, so no need to fret about it being unavailable.


Located at Paceandcap.com, here http://sartinmethodology.com/The-Match-Up


Ted

[thaskalos]

100% true, Dave. I agree. Without reservation.

I think many a fine handicapper is foolishly wedded to this idea that early pace has some or great value. Zero, if you ask me.

I will go ahead and make an even bolder statement that a race--ANY RACE--is just the last three furlongs. Barring interference of a SERIOUS nature, nothing that happens earlier really should matter to a handicapper.
How a horse--ANY HORSE--runs during the last three furlongs, depends on what the horse does during the FIRST three furlongs. The first part of the race is as important as the second part...as far as race analysis is concerned.

Many a fine handicapper is foolishly wedded to the idea that one part of the race is more important than another...but after a little more experience, they realize their mistake.

The only way to truly comprehend a horse's performance is by analyzing ALL of it...not just the early or the late part.

You may place added emphasis on either the early or the late part, depending on the circumstances...but you should NEVER ignore the remaining parts.

[Dave Schwartz]

I will go ahead and make an even bolder statement that a race--ANY RACE--is just the last three furlongs. Barring interference of a SERIOUS nature, nothing that happens earlier really should matter to a handicapper.

Well, I cannot possibly agree with this statement. So, we are still on opposite sides of the fence when it comes to pace.

[Charlie D]

What happens Early has an impact on who wins, who finishes second and third, how far horses are beaten and final time.

How you can ignore something that has this kind of impact on a race i'm not sure, but i look forward to seeing Dave's stuff.

[Light]

For reference, Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to The Match Up is a summary of an entire Forum's worth of exercises, examples and demonstrations by Jim 'The Hat' and by Richie P. It is also, effectively, the same contents and beyond what Jim wrote in his last book, The Match Up 2, so no need to fret about it being unavailable.


Located at Paceandcap.com, here http://sartinmethodology.com/The-Match-Up


Ted

Were there any empirical studies done relating to ROI using these methods? I found the part about tandem races to be great for beginners but seriously doubt it would put a regular horse player in the black. It lacks a whole other dimension. But that may have been covered elsewhere?

[speculus]

How a horse--ANY HORSE--runs during the last three furlongs, depends on what the horse does during the FIRST three furlongs. The first part of the race is as important as the second part...as far as race analysis is concerned.

You are, unwittingly, proving my point.

If, as you say, "how a horse runs the last three furlongs depends on what the horse does during the first three furlongs", then, the effect of the early pace is already 'codified' in the last three furlongs, and a handicapper who has the capacity to decode that information, can happily disregard the early pace.

Many a fine handicapper is foolishly wedded to the idea that one part of the race is more important than another...but after a little more experience, they realize their mistake.

Since the result of the race is decided by the verdict at the winning post, surely one part of the race (closer to the winning post) is more important than another (closer to the starting gates).

The only way to truly comprehend a horse's performance is by analyzing ALL of it...not just the early or the late part.
I think this is a very erroneous view. A horse's performance--ANY HORSE's performance--can be distilled down to certain moves (or the lack of those moves) in the last three furlongs, and a handicapper should rarely need anything else to form a reasonable opinion about the horse--its condition, form, class or potential.

You may place added emphasis on either the early or the late part, depending on the circumstances...but you should NEVER ignore the remaining parts.
If at all you wish to place more emphasis on either the early or late part, it makes sense to take the latter more seriously because in it are already present the seeds of the early part. The vice versa is, clearly, not true.

[speculus]

Well, I cannot possibly agree with this statement. So, we are still on opposite sides of the fence when it comes to pace.

Dave, could you please elaborate by giving example? Thanks in advance.

[speculus]

What happens Early has an impact on who wins, who finishes second and third, how far horses are beaten and final time.

How you can ignore something that has this kind of impact on a race i'm not sure, but i look forward to seeing Dave's stuff.

This is a very good question. But to answer that we must first decide what is important to a handicapper.

I think the only thing that is important to a handicapper is the future utility of the opinion that he forms about a horse/horses after analyzing a past run. You believe that it is impossible to form a good opinion without looking at the whole picture; I think it is perfectly possible to form a better (as in more useful) opinion by only concentrating on the last three furlongs of the race if you know what to look for. (Actually, it is "essential" to cut out the "noise" hitting you from the unimportant part of the race).

At the end of the day, each of us must stick to what works for us, really. But since disregarding early pace reduces the work load by tons without any loss of profitability (at least that is what I have observed), I am supporting Dave's opinion to disregard the early pace (though, Dave clearly doesn't see it my way, by his own admission!)

[Charlie D]

What is important to the handicapper is understanding what a horse race is and that is, a horse race is a Fr1+Fr2+Fr3 Match Up is it not??

[Dave Schwartz]

Dave, could you please elaborate by giving example? Thanks in advance.

As they say in Spanish, "Manana," which, as I understand it actually means, "Not today."

[thaskalos]

Speculus...

You have not been specific enough as to the WAY that you would go about analyzing those last 3 furlongs. From what I read in your response to me, all I can say is that I am in complete disagreement with your expressed point of view.

If we look solely at the last portion of the race - because that's when the REAL running occurs - won't we be giving an unfair advantage to the stretch runners...who also happen to be some of the worst win bets around?

[HUSKER55]

It seems to me that the faster the EP the faster the final time. Meaning a horse that needs to close will probably have trouble in such a situation. I do not believe those horses are speeding up at the end of the race.

A horse either beats the pace or falls to it. I am really interested into why early pace does not matter.

looking forward to the discussion.

[speculus]

Speculus...

You have not been specific enough as to the WAY that you would go about analyzing those last 3 furlongs. From what I read in your response to me, all I can say is that I am in complete disagreement with your expressed point of view.

If we look solely at the last portion of the race - because that's when the REAL running occurs - won't we be giving an unfair advantage to the stretch runners...who also happen to be some of the worst win bets around?

Thaskalos,

Unfortunately, I cannot be specific enough without giving out that which perhaps has put me ahead of this game, and which I would hate to share. But I will make two statements which should give a hint to the one who is looking for it:

1. If the EP horse has dropped out of the pace by the three-furlong marker, THROW HIM OUT. Any early pace effort that cannot be sustained until that point is generally worthless for future consideration.

2. As for stretch runners, their future consideration should depend on three main factors:
a) How many horses (NOT how many lengths gained, please mark my words) a stretch runner has overtaken between point x & point y (I cannot throw more light than to say these two are perhaps the MOST VITAL CALLS in ANY race)
b) Has the stretch runner "pulled away" by the time he crosses the point y?
c) Also important is the verdict (in lengths) at the finish (not only the winning margin, but also the margins between the placed horses) which can either strengthen a stretch runner's claim for future consideration or not.

I am hoping that a little of the guilt I am feeling for making a provocative statement without willingness to clarify fully will now ease off for me after giving away what I would have possibly not shared ever even if someone put a gun to my temple.;)

[PhantomOnTour]

Speculus,
Your claims are interesting and thought provoking. I see you are in India; do you play American racing? American dirt racing? I have no doubt that your statements are accurate regarding turf racing...they tend to go to the quickest closer (and that's how i build my turf figs...around the final fraction), but I have found dirt to be different. Winter is review time for me and I will look into your ideas. Stay in touch.


Doesn't Pizzola promote a derivation of the final fraction in his book? I am not familiar with his methods...is it the Power Fraction?
And what about ability times? Aren't they also based on the 3rd fraction as well?
I may be way off about the above two methods...set me straight if I am.

[Robert Fischer]

I tend to believe that different parts of the race can have different levels of importance depending on a myriad of factors.

for example a 5F dirt sprint will many times go to the horse with the best gate quickness and the dominant early speed. Certain speed biased situations or off-tracks as well.

however a 10furlong turf race may not depend much at all on the early fractions barring major trouble...

those are examples of 'track bias'
then you have situations where you are looking at a horse like Zenyatta or Quality Road who may need the race to play out a certain way although they don't necessarily dominate the pace scenario themselves.

Theres also a difference between stating that "E1" is not as important as the 2nd Call, than stating that the race doesn't start until "LP"

[Ted Craven]

Were there any empirical studies done relating to ROI using these methods? I found the part about tandem races to be great for beginners but seriously doubt it would put a regular horse player in the black. It lacks a whole other dimension. But that may have been covered elsewhere?

Perhaps there were empirical, scholarly studies re ROI, though I am unaware of them. Plenty of anecdotal evidence though, over The Hat's 20 year teaching and writing career, largely conducted in public. I have heard of a number of individuals who have made their living working races this way, though they have not shared their betting records with me.

And there is a lot more to it than the Tandem concept, as you can see in the archive.

This positional approach to the Matchup is perhaps not everyone's cup of tea (e.g. not mine, more comfortable with Sartin's software-oriented, incremental energy disbursement approach). But take from it what you will.

cheers,

Ted

[lsosa54]

I think Pizzola's "reversal" concept is based on or similar to Doc's tandem concept

[speculus]

Speculus,
Your claims are interesting and thought provoking. I see you are in India; do you play American racing? American dirt racing? I have no doubt that your statements are accurate regarding turf racing...they tend to go to the quickest closer (and that's how i build my turf figs...around the final fraction), but I have found dirt to be different. Winter is review time for me and I will look into your ideas. Stay in touch.


Doesn't Pizzola promote a derivation of the final fraction in his book? I am not familiar with his methods...is it the Power Fraction?
And what about ability times? Aren't they also based on the 3rd fraction as well?
I may be way off about the above two methods...set me straight if I am.

PhantonOnTour,

Thanks.

No, I don't play American tracks.

Many years ago I had seen a video, liked a horse, and when the horse was due to run next, asked a friend staying in the US to bet $20 for me. It won and paid I think $50, that's $30 for profit. After that I have never had a close look at the US cards at least for the betting purpose.

Not exactly dirt, but I have followed closely some racing on AW tracks in my own country, the UK and some races at Hong Kong, and I found that what I have said here holds true, perhaps equally well.

I don't know about Pizzola's work, nor do I have any idea what "ability times" mean, so I am unable to comment.

[PhantomOnTour]

PhantonOnTour,

Thanks.

No, I don't play American tracks.

Many years ago I had seen a video, liked a horse, and when the horse was due to run next, asked a friend staying in the US to bet $20 for me. It won and paid I think $50, that's $30 for profit. After that I have never had a close look at the US cards at least for the betting purpose.

Not exactly dirt, but I have followed closely some racing on AW tracks in my own country, the UK and some races at Hong Kong, and I found that what I have said here holds true, perhaps equally well.

I don't know about Pizzola's work, nor do I have any idea what "ability times" mean, so I am unable to comment.
Thanks for your reply...i had a feeling you didn't play American dirt racing. It is for the most part a speed biased surface. Oddly, one could make the argument that your theory be turned inside out for our dirt races. That is, the first 3 furlongs are all that matters, and one can toss the final fraction altogether.

The two guys i mentioned are racing authors/handicappers who've written a "formula" for gauging a horses performance and it focuses on the final fraction. I may be mistaken about their "formulas" or equations as i don't follow them, but others on this board surely do and know more about them.

Always good to hear fresh opinions and new viewpoints about racing, such as yours. :ThmbUp:

[delayjf]

How do you predict an average pace in a field loaded with high quality speed horses?

Reminds me of War Emblem's KY Derby.

[RichieP]

For reference, Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to The Match Up is a summary of an entire Forum's worth of exercises, examples and demonstrations by Jim 'The Hat' and by Richie P.

Ted

Actually this is incorrect.

All my posts in the forum are a reflection of the way "Hat" taught me and he made a point up front to point out he was NOT teaching me using the 5 step approach. He taught me his "kinda out there" way of working races while the 5 step approach is an almost rule based way of attacking a race. When Jim worked a race there he never referred to working it with the 5 step approach because he didnt do races that way. :)

For those interested the way Jim "The Hat" taught me HIS match up is found basically in the "Mind's Eye" series of threads.

[RichieP]

Were there any empirical studies done relating to ROI using these methods? I found the part about tandem races to be great for beginners but seriously doubt it would put a regular horse player in the black. It lacks a whole other dimension. But that may have been covered elsewhere?

If you want Jim "The Hat' Bradshaw's take on tandems when he taught me it was this:

1) Pay attention in tandem races to the horse that was ahead in the early part of the race even if he lost the tandem finish. Extra attention if that horse led at the stretch call before losing.

2) Having said the above he clearly stated to me " Rich use the tandem concept if it helps you get a clear picture of the race and whom to bet. If it does NOT then leave it alone and ignore it."

#2 above is a direct quote from Jim taken directly from my notes I kept while he was teaching me.

Merry Christmas :)