How Do You Determine Class?

[pondman]

Originally Posted by Magister Ludi

Would you agree that a succinct definition of class would be “the intangible and nonrandom component that remains after a horse’s performance is decomposed into speed, pace, form, jockey, trainer, and other quantifiable factors?”

No.

Why insist that these variables are part of a class equation or function? And need to be peeled away prior to finding something hidden?

Class stands by itself.
You can routinely bet on it without PPs.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by pondman

No.

Why insist that these variables are part of a class equation or function? And need to be peeled away prior to finding something hidden?

Class stands by itself.
You can routinely bet on it without PPs.

I think you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is saying that "inherent"/"true" class does stand by itself. The other factors he mentioned are just that, other factors. If you determine class by including other factors then it becomes a "composite" or calculated class, ie: a "performance" class rating.

[FiveWide]

Does anyone factor a horse's age into their class equation?


-Five

[raybo]

Originally Posted by FiveWide

Does anyone factor a horse's age into their class equation?


-Five

IMO, age should be factored into all ratings.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by raybo

IMO, age should be factored into all ratings.

What matters the most is not that much the age of the horse as how many races he has ran so far. The less races the higher the probability for a wrong class estimate (either by crowd or connections) which is what we are looking for as handicappers and bettors.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by raybo

I think you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is saying that "inherent"/"true" class does stand by itself. The other factors he mentioned are just that, other factors. If you determine class by including other factors then it becomes a "composite" or calculated class, ie: a "performance" class rating.

I don't like the word "remain" in the statement. I also don't like the word "intangible", as if class is a form of good or bad will.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

What matters the most is not that much the age of the horse as how many races he has ran so far. The less races the higher the probability for a wrong class estimate (either by crowd or connections) which is what we are looking for as handicappers and bettors.

Or the correct assessment, if the horse is a 2 or 3 year old. I believe this to be a much more profitable end for those who play the young horses, than playing the older horse scenario.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

What matters the most is not that much the age of the horse as how many races he has ran so far. The less races the higher the probability for a wrong class estimate (either by crowd or connections) which is what we are looking for as handicappers and bettors.

I agree, but there is still an "age" component, as young horses mature, in every aspect, as they age, and in some aspects regardless of the number of races run.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by pondman

I don't like the word "remain" in the statement. I also don't like the word "intangible", as if class is a form of good or bad will.

I think "remain" directs towards their base class, what they were born with. "Intangible" has nothing to do with "good or bad", it simply means something not tangible, as in it can't necessarily be measured, in a traditional mathematical/material way.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

Sounds like to me that you think you already know the answer. Might be some superiority complex on your part. What didn't you understand about me being happy with my class figs?

Because you are happy with them does not indicate that anyone else would be willing to pay for them. Of course, that is easy to determine. Offer them for sale and see how many takers you get.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by traynor

Because you are happy with them does not indicate that anyone else would be willing to pay for them. Of course, that is easy to determine. Offer them for sale and see how many takers you get.

Oh he'll get some takers, for sure. But, probably not much return business.

[traynor]

A major part of the problem may be that "class" means something different to each person. Another big part may be that "stuff" (mostly unforeseen results) is attributed generically to the effects of "class" when it may be the result of entirely different factors/circumstances.

In DeltaLover's example of MSW dropping to MCLM, there may be far more going on than a "higher class" horse dropping into a "lower class" race. That is the surface. Beneath that surface is the reality that the perception of a horse as being allowance/stakes grade has changed to being just another claimer--for sale to anyone with the price (qualified to buy, of course). It may be that the trainer/stable/owner is taking great care to assure at least a win (and winning wagers) if the horse is claimed. Extra effort may be made that has an influence on the race outcome--including more careful selection of the field against which the horse will compete, with late scratches against tough fields.

It may also be that the trainer/stable/owner has been using MSW races to condition a horse that is assumed to be "just another claimer" in the hopes of selling it for a premium price when "dropped in class." This is a business, folks. Blurting out one's strategies to anyone who will listen is not usually a part of what trainers do.

With that in mind, the MSW winner in a MCLM (and many, many similar situations) may have little or nothing to do with "class," and trying to "explain" something that is part of a trainer's business strategy may do little more than further obscure an already obscure phenomena.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by traynor

A major part of the problem may be that "class" means something different to each person. Another big part may be that "stuff" (mostly unforeseen results) is attributed generically to the effects of "class" when it may be the result of entirely different factors/circumstances.

In DeltaLover's example of MSW dropping to MCLM, there may be far more going on than a "higher class" horse dropping into a "lower class" race. That is the surface. Beneath that surface is the reality that the perception of a horse as being allowance/stakes grade has changed to being just another claimer--for sale to anyone with the price (qualified to buy, of course). It may be that the trainer/stable/owner is taking great care to assure at least a win (and winning wagers) if the horse is claimed. Extra effort may be made that has an influence on the race outcome--including more careful selection of the field against which the horse will compete, with late scratches against tough fields.

It may also be that the trainer/stable/owner has been using MSW races to condition a horse that is assumed to be "just another claimer" in the hopes of selling it for a premium price when "dropped in class." This is a business, folks. Blurting out one's strategies to anyone who will listen is not usually a part of what trainers do.

With that in mind, the MSW winner in a MCLM (and many, many similar situations) may have little or nothing to do with "class," and trying to "explain" something that is part of a trainer's business strategy may do little more than further obscure an already obscure phenomena.

Of course!

[traynor]

Back in the 1980s, Michael Pizzola did a presentation at a Sartin seminar in New Orleans. Pizzola described a strategy used by a New York betting syndicate that combined class evaluations (using a proprietary process that was unrelated to the Sartin apps) with a specific money management strategy. The crux of the matter was that the class evaluations that formed the basis of the strategy selected enough winners at high enough prices to shift the focus from "just winning" to optimizing return. It was a fascinating presentation.

Even more fascinating was the number of people who shifted their focus in race analysis from the (generally accepted as The Way and The Light) emphasis on pace and speed to class. That emphasis was especially evident in the Sartin users, in particular when James Quinn "became associated" with the Sartin group, and in-depth understanding of The Handicapper's Condition Book, class levels, and the overall effect of class on race outcomes was considered entry-level expertise.

That was like 25-30 years ago. And now--all those many years later--people still believe that massaging earnings, purse levels, and pars are going to give them some kind of "edge" that no one else has. Been there. Done that. Along with many, many others. I think it takes a bit more to gain an edge in effectively using class than massaging a few readily available (to everyone) numbers and declaring that one has discovered the greatest thing since sliced bread.

That is not intended in any way to criticize anyone's definitions or strategies for analyzing class. It is only intended to state that a lot of highly motivated people have been working on those strategies for many years, and most have discarded the use of earnings, purse levels, and pars as insufficient to be of real value for serious bettors. Of course, that is only my own (highly subjective) opinion. YMMV.

[classhandicapper]

I determine class by measuring the quality of the "fields" a horse has been competing in and then comparing how that horse did within those fields compared to other horses given their trips (pace, bias, ground, trouble etc...).

You measure the quality of the fields by developing an understanding of the pecking order at your track (circuit) and examining exactly who was in the race and how well they ran. It also helps if you know the common shipper tracks.