Sidebar

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by traynor

I have little or no interest in chasing the rainbow of universal truths applicable to all races. Specifically, testing pace analysis involves layering--isolating and extracting those specific races in which the "pace scenario" in question would (be believed to) apply, and testing it against that specific sub-population of races. Plain vanilla, first semester community college data analysis will work fine for starters.

Consider it the equivalent of, "Yeah, this junk looks good in that race, and maybe even in a couple of races from Nowhere Downs, but what is going to happen if I repeat the process in x number of similar races" (in which I would erroneously believe that I have/had some piece of information that was predictive of the result)?

I do not seek agreement. I only suggest that anyone who intends to use "pace analysis" in his or her wagering would do well to go beyond the simplistic ideas most consider "pace analysis."

What you seem to be arguing is that you are doing something that you think has more value that pace prediction (which is great). I put more energy into after race pace analysis and watching the races than pre race analysis because I think it has more value. But imo you are vastly overstating the case against being able to predict extreme and impactful paces. I have loads of data that prove it can be done and have done it successfully at the windows. I'm kind of private about picks, but CJ does it publicly in threads and on twitter all the time when it seems clear. There are tools on the market that demonstrate that it can be done well enough to add value.