4.5 furlong races

[dryrunguy]

To the question posed in the original post (and after reading the responses), I tend to pay more attention to overall race speed figures in similar conditions rather than just who's likely to get the lead. And I pay close attention to the charts from previous races. There are a lot of horses running in 4.5 furlong races that cannot finish. Classic speed and fade. Even at 4.5 furlongs, I'm looking for horses that can actually finish.

But I'm not sure whether anyone should listen to me. Last night at Charles Town, which has its fair share of 4.5-furlong races, I couldn't hit the broad side of the barn. (Though I typically do well there.)

[shoelessjoe]

Thanks

[Half Smoke]

........................


theory: the shorter the race the easier it is to predict

because there is less time and distance for unpredictable things to happen

such as a horse getting bumped, or cut off, or fouled
with one turn there is less chance that a horse could be forced wide

the less unpredictability there is means there has to be more predictability



*

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

CJ's Early and Late Pace figures are very good, but they are measuring early and late speed, not stamina. It's this 3rd category that is a little fuzzy in my thinking.

There are horses that will have terrific late pace numbers, but if you stretch them out another furlong or two they can't finish because they don't have the stamina to finish fast after running a little further.

Honestly the late figures are kind of a hybrid of speed and stamina in my opinion. If they were pure speed, the shorter races would have the "fastest" numbers because the finish times are usually faster. It is tricky though, something I'm always looking to improve.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

Honestly the late figures are kind of a hybrid of speed and stamina in my opinion. If they were pure speed, the shorter races would have the "fastest" numbers because the finish times are usually faster. It is tricky though, something I'm always looking to improve.

I hear what you are are saying.

I guess in my ideal world I am also trying to get at what I would consider a more pure stamina rating. It would be like an overall assessment of both the horse's distance capability and the quality of horses it can be competitive against at that distance.

It's kind of like what we all do now subjectively when we are trying to assess a horse's chances of getting today's distance based on how it has been performing in the past, but converting it into a number.

An obvious example would be a horse like Serengeti Empress who would rate extremely high on speed but would have a lower stamina number. So depending on the distance, pace conditions, and how the track was playing, one or the other would be more important regardless of what the speed figures say.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

An obvious example would be a horse like Serengeti Empress who would rate extremely high on speed but would have a lower stamina number. So depending on the distance, pace conditions, and how the track was playing, one or the other would be more important regardless of what the speed figures say.

Even though this was an obvious example, I'm not sure it made my point well.

Imagine a horse that closes extremely well at 9F and 10F but today's distance is 12F. His late rating might look pretty good, but we've all seen those occasional closers that can't finish at 12F.

On the flip side, you might find a horse that sits close to the pace or even goes to the lead at times that could probably run 2 miles if asked.

I can see that in the PPs but I don't have a number to express that.

Maybe I need to look at early/late figures for individual races more often.

[Onesome]

Originally Posted by cj

Honestly the late figures are kind of a hybrid of speed and stamina in my opinion. If they were pure speed, the shorter races would have the "fastest" numbers because the finish times are usually faster. It is tricky though, something I'm always looking to improve.

So something like Sustained Pace in the Sartin world?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I hear what you are are saying.

I guess in my ideal world I am also trying to get at what I would consider a more pure stamina rating. It would be like an overall assessment of both the horse's distance capability and the quality of horses it can be competitive against at that distance.

It's kind of like what we all do now subjectively when we are trying to assess a horse's chances of getting today's distance based on how it has been performing in the past, but converting it into a number.

An obvious example would be a horse like Serengeti Empress who would rate extremely high on speed but would have a lower stamina number. So depending on the distance, pace conditions, and how the track was playing, one or the other would be more important regardless of what the speed figures say.

My 2 cents - stamina is dependent on speed. Any 3yo horse can get 1-1/4 in May, but how fast is what matters.

If you have a very slow, uncontested pace, the stamina horse will never catch the front runner. If the pace is contested and fast, is it the stamina horse winning or the exhausted horse quitting?

Jockamo.....was it stamina or collapsing pace?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Onesome

So something like Sustained Pace in the Sartin world?

I would say that is where you are find to find the answer - along the lines of energy expenditures and deceleration in terms of the match up in today's race.

In fact, I would suggest using Validator Manual with TimeForm adjusted times to see how it does.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

My 2 cents - stamina is dependent on speed. Any 3yo horse can get 1-1/4 in May, but how fast is what matters.

If you have a very slow, uncontested pace, the stamina horse will never catch the front runner. If the pace is contested and fast, is it the stamina horse winning or the exhausted horse quitting?

Jockamo.....was it stamina or collapsing pace?

I understand that the dynamics and time matter, but each horse will react differently to the same exact dynamics based partially on their natural speed and partially on their stamina.

I used the Seattle Slew/Dr. Fager example before.

That's two of the greatest speed horses of all time.

At 8F-9F it would not shock me if Fager outran him early and kept going.

At 12F I'd bet by everything in my wallet Slew could stalk him and beat him.

I say that because we saw what happened to Fager when he was tested hard at 10F. He'd weaken. I saw Slew tested hard at 10F in the Derby and then at 12F in the JCGC. In the Derby he wasn't even fully extended after a nightmare trip from hell and in the JCGC he was coming back again on Exceller who was a Hall of Fame horse who sat the perfect trip off the monster pace that Slew set.

There's some question in my mind who was faster, but there's no question in my mind who had more stamina.

So my goal would be to have a number that represents their speed and a number that represents their stamina. Then I would look at today's track conditions, probable race dynamics, distance, track/distance profile and decide how to weight those two numbers today.

If today's race in 8F and the track is carrying speed, I'm all over Fager.

If today's race is 10F and horses have been struggling all day on a deep and tiring track, I'm all over Slew.

What I am suggesting is similar to the profiles that the Sartin people developed, but I'm not sure "sustain" truly captures stamina in the way I'm thinking about it. I want to know how far this horse run and how deep can you test him and still watch him put up his usual numbers. I hope that makes more sense.

[airford1]

Originally Posted by dryrunguy

To the question posed in the original post (and after reading the responses), I tend to pay more attention to overall race speed figures in similar conditions rather than just who's likely to get the lead. And I pay close attention to the charts from previous races. There are a lot of horses running in 4.5 furlong races that cannot finish. Classic speed and fade. Even at 4.5 furlongs, I'm looking for horses that can actually finish.

But I'm not sure whether anyone should listen to me. Last night at Charles Town, which has its fair share of 4.5-furlong races, I couldn't hit the broad side of the barn. (Though I typically do well there.)

Lost more bets waiting for the closer to get there.