Slowly paced turf races.
 

For certain tracks, I make my own pace/speed figures for turf and dirt. When the pace of a turf race is say nearly two lengths slower than par, do you make any adjustments to the final time? Or, do do you leave it as is?



Thanks.

cj is probably the best source of how to adjust for pace though I think his algorithm for this is proprietary. Personally, I find that only a couple of lengths off par would have little if any effect on the final time on any surface. The effect of pace variations is exponential rather than linear. That means that small deviations from par have less of an effect than the same magnitude of changes at larger deviations. I posted a thread on this a couple of years ago on how I evaluate the effect of pace.

Excuse me, that should read 2 full seconds slower than par; not lengths. Sorry for the confusion.



Thanks.

my question would be..... WHY do you think turf and dirt are different as regards pace?
pretty sure the riders don't go out there and think...."we are on turf today.....we have to go slower early than if we were on dirt."



how do you define par as far as pace goes?
does it account for class of nag?
interested in your reply there.



and two seconds slower than 'par' does not really say anything, unless we know the section length and the going and.......


for self there is NO adjusting the speeds(apart from weather related events) as they are what they are.
i would just have different factors that account for that pace in a different way.

It's not a good idea to make adjustments for pace at the "race level" because individual horses within a race will run different fractions and therefore will be impacted differently.

What I would do is report the actual speed figures for each horse, but add a notation that the figure was probably impacted by the extreme pace.

Then if I had some kind for formula for adjusting a performance based on pace, I would create another number for each horse that represented his actual ability/performance.

I create a Pace notation of time (in tenths of a second) faster or slower than adjusted par for each PP line. Got that idea from the old horse racing game (forgot the name) that use to tell you if the pace was fast/moderate/slow during the race and included in PP lines.

I've noticed over the years that slowing down the pace on turf doesn't benefit front runners nearly as much as main track races. The stretch runners seem to still be effective if they possess a big kick. Almost seems like the speed types would be better suited going Highland Reel on them.

Agree with V J here, on turf, I would much rather see my speed horse loose by 4 or more lengths, rather than facing any kind of duel, even if they are going slow. Any turf race with a very slow pace is suspect, and probably not worth using in any way.

Check via charts or replays to see whether the results differed from the projected race flow.

I agree.

Small variations around average in either direction have less of an impact on the result in turf races.

example is the 6th today at GP...

the 11 horse exits a series of slow paced races where he had poor setups. Last race he was near the back in a race where they broke fast for 1st-turn-position, and then took hold onto the backstretch.

So, the trainer/connections' answer is to drop in class. Doesn't get the full literal drop because this is a more contentious meet. Does fit, and does get Irad.

Nothing esoteric here, he should take money and likely run about to his odds, but the point is about the pace.

The comments for the last race are not reflective of the reality. "Mostly 4W; outfinished".

He was not 'outfinished'. He finished fine.

photo
 

head bob

I had a UDM in jcapper (data model) that proved this pretty well for most tracks. In fact it showed that some nice late runners were up much closer in this scenario, and had an advantage not normally seen.

This was ten years ago probably, the way they ride everything slow up front, who knows nowadays

I always make my own Hambleton pace figures.


I find the opposite than you stated.


Example--


From Santa Anita Turf race 1:11.0 1:35.0

From Churchill 1:13.0 1:36.0

Pace figs SA 90 95 185 TPR
Pace figs CD 80 100 180 TPR

The faster SA course usually has faster earlier fractions either because the grass is shorter than midwestern turf courses and/or the jockeys ride faster early.


I like favor fast closing fractions on grass, yet a fast closing fraction can be deceptive by the faster early fraction.


If the two races above had the horses 5 lengths behind at the second fraction, both did close just as well but the CD horse would have a much faster time and would look like a better closer with it's figures.


And if the SA horse ran at CD, and the CD horse ran at SA the pace numbers probably would be reversed.

When I bet a confirmed closer on the dirt and he's laying unusually close I don't like it. On the grass it doesn't seem to hurt. They typically give the same last 1/4 kick.