Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Handicapping Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 04-20-2018, 09:29 AM   #1
mikesal57
Veteran
 
mikesal57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEW YORK CITY
Posts: 3,670
Creating Factors

OK Guys...

Lets do some real handicapping here.....
I like to better develop factors pertaining to Handi's program.


First factor I like to tackle is Early Speed......

heres the issue......

Sure you can average E1 of last 2 ,3 ,4 ,whole PP....by dist, surf ...etc and get a rating ....but does that rating tell you anything besides how fast he can run at first call??

take horse #1 at LRL ( attached)
he will have highest E1 avg...but does that mean he can wire them?
Does class have an effect on his performance?
Will/can other horses push him to defeat?

How do you create a meaningful Early Factor rating?

Mike
Attached Files
File Type: pdf LRL 8TH.pdf (134.2 KB, 69 views)
mikesal57 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 09:44 AM   #2
CincyHorseplayer
Registered User
 
CincyHorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Posts: 5,289
Started doing this on paper for maidens back in 1998. Instead of simply using the half mile time add the half mile plus the first fraction or E1 + E2. On paper the edge appears in starker contrast. In early matchups the horse that had a 68.6 vs a 69.6 had the edge. In paceless races this works. The cheaper the field the better. I add the speed figure to this number and divide by 3 and use it as my version of Mitchell's Ability Time. I've been using it in my pace program for 5 years.

Last edited by CincyHorseplayer; 04-20-2018 at 09:50 AM.
CincyHorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 09:53 AM   #3
mikesal57
Veteran
 
mikesal57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEW YORK CITY
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer View Post
Started doing this on paper for maidens back in 1998. Instead of simply using the half mile time add the half mile plus the first fraction or E1 + E2. On paper the edge appears in starker contrast. In early matchups the horse that had a 68.6 vs a 69.6 had the edge. In paceless races this works. The cheaper the field the better. I add the speed figure to this number and divide by 3 and use it as my version of Mitchell's Ability Time. I've been using it in my pace program for 5 years.
Are you using last race or a avg of ???
mikesal57 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 10:17 AM   #4
mikesal57
Veteran
 
mikesal57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEW YORK CITY
Posts: 3,670
CINCY...

Off the top of my head....and not looking at your approach

Your right on this giving an ability rating ...but its not giving the early horses ability once you add speed fig and divide by 3...

Why I say...cause horses are creatures of habit...
they will run where they are comfortable and in a position where they win from...also, most important....they will win when the fractions are in their favor.
Too fast , they lose...slow...they win..

I'm trying to figure out how to compare winning situations compared to losing situations using E1 + E2...
Maybe theres not a way but maybe someone can help

Mike
mikesal57 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 10:35 AM   #5
headhawg
crusty old guy
 
headhawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Snarkytown USA
Posts: 3,909
Great questions, Mike, and likely one of the most important for a software developer -- what factors really work? If you have a large database then you could test things yourself but you would need some knowledge of statistical methods (probably some form of regression) to know if the factor is a real predictor or just some random blip. Statistics is a fascinating topic but it's mostly over my head except in it's most basic forms.

In lieu of that you could use things that others have researched. A good place to start would be Dave Schwartz's Percentages and Probabilities. It's an updated version of Quirin's research from the 70s. I am working on my own software and using some of the things that I learned from P&P as a base. And it's currently on sale. (Dave, you can send me the commission check later. ) P&P is a few years old now but I doubt that the IVs and $Nets have changed substantially. My feeling is that the high IV factors have gotten even stronger but the $Nets have probably decreased somewhat.

And this thread might provide some good ideas to test, and I emphasize test. Some ideas might seem logical and that they will work but won't hold up under scrutiny. And it's not likely that someone will give away their secret factors.

Last edited by headhawg; 04-20-2018 at 10:37 AM.
headhawg is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 10:36 AM   #6
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesal57 View Post
OK Guys...

Lets do some real handicapping here.....
I like to better develop factors pertaining to Handi's program.


First factor I like to tackle is Early Speed......

heres the issue......

Sure you can average E1 of last 2 ,3 ,4 ,whole PP....by dist, surf ...etc and get a rating ....but does that rating tell you anything besides how fast he can run at first call??

take horse #1 at LRL ( attached)
he will have highest E1 avg...but does that mean he can wire them?
Does class have an effect on his performance?
Will/can other horses push him to defeat?


How do you create a meaningful Early Factor rating?

Mike
What do you expect the "Early Speed rating" to tell you...who will win the race? When you divide the handicapping process into separate and distinct handicapping factors...then you will often come up with different horses for each factor. The "early speed horse" may be lacking in final-time figures or form/condition; the "class horse" may be lacking in form/condition or final-time figures...and the "form/condition horse" may appear outclassed. In the example race that you have provided, the appears to have an early-speed edge, but his condition is suspect, IMO...and the race has more early speed than the can tolerate while running his best race.

A horse's early-speed rating on its own cannot tell you anything more than what this horse is capable of during the race's early stages. Whether this horse will last to the wire or not is a question that can only be answered by a more comprehensive handicapping process...of which "early speed" plays only a part. OF COURSE "class" has an effect over a horse's pace-setting tendencies. So does "form/condition"...and the make-up of the rest of the field does also. A confirmed front-runner will outrun the confirmed presser out of the gate...even if the presser shows higher early-speed ratings in his past-performances.

You can start by "tackling the Early speed factor first", as you say...but don't expect the START to show you the END. Handicapping is more troublesome than that.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 10:54 AM   #7
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,110
Factors:

1: Running Style Bris running style matches Quinn.

2: E1 Ability to first call, in this case horse has a clear ability to be in the lead. Does not matter, what you use here, average, best 3...In this case

3: Best finishes have been in sub-par races, that is Race Rating - Class Rating is -.

3: Form is declining, speed figures say this and so does start position, for E horses, not good.

4: Race Forcast: Only 3 horses have shown the ability to match Par for speed figures. Two horses are lightly raced and have to assume that they can improve. 62.5% of the field can match par, so race has a good chance to match par. Does not favor the 1.

5: Running Style matchup: Again 62.5% of the field like to be involved in the early running, andother downgrade.
jay68802 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 11:17 AM   #8
mikesal57
Veteran
 
mikesal57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEW YORK CITY
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
What do you expect the "Early Speed rating" to tell you...who will win the race? When you divide the handicapping process into separate and distinct handicapping factors...then you will often come up with different horses for each factor. The "early speed horse" may be lacking in final-time figures or form/condition; the "class horse" may be lacking in form/condition or final-time figures...and the "form/condition horse" may appear outclassed. In the example race that you have provided, the appears to have an early-speed edge, but his condition is suspect, IMO...and the race has more early speed than the can tolerate while running his best race.

A horse's early-speed rating on its own cannot tell you anything more than what this horse is capable of during the race's early stages. Whether this horse will last to the wire or not is a question that can only be answered by a more comprehensive handicapping process...of which "early speed" plays only a part. OF COURSE "class" has an effect over a horse's pace-setting tendencies. So does "form/condition"...and the make-up of the rest of the field does also. A confirmed front-runner will outrun the confirmed presser out of the gate...even if the presser shows higher early-speed ratings in his past-performances.

You can start by "tackling the Early speed factor first", as you say...but don't expect the START to show you the END. Handicapping is more troublesome than that.
Thask.....

I am not trying to win the race with just early speed...I'm trying to develop a meaningful and constructive way of calculating it...
then I will move on to other factors...
Like Head said , I can build a database with those factors and then run it thru a logic regression tool......so far this is the best way I can find to compare and weigh out these factors to a decent performance number.

Mike
mikesal57 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 11:26 AM   #9
mikesal57
Veteran
 
mikesal57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEW YORK CITY
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay68802 View Post
Factors:

1: Running Style Bris running style matches Quinn.

2: E1 Ability to first call, in this case horse has a clear ability to be in the lead. Does not matter, what you use here, average, best 3...In this case

3: Best finishes have been in sub-par races, that is Race Rating - Class Rating is -.

3: Form is declining, speed figures say this and so does start position, for E horses, not good.

4: Race Forcast: Only 3 horses have shown the ability to match Par for speed figures. Two horses are lightly raced and have to assume that they can improve. 62.5% of the field can match par, so race has a good chance to match par. Does not favor the 1.

5: Running Style matchup: Again 62.5% of the field like to be involved in the early running, andother downgrade.


Dont understand this...#5

par for E1 is 93

the only horse that can do this is the #1
Can the lack of competion up front make this horse better?


?
mikesal57 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 11:28 AM   #10
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesal57 View Post
CINCY...

Off the top of my head....and not looking at your approach

Your right on this giving an ability rating ...but its not giving the early horses ability once you add speed fig and divide by 3...

Why I say...cause horses are creatures of habit...
they will run where they are comfortable and in a position where they win from...also, most important....they will win when the fractions are in their favor.
Too fast , they lose...slow...they win..

I'm trying to figure out how to compare winning situations compared to losing situations using E1 + E2...
Maybe theres not a way but maybe someone can help


Mike
Do you remember the "turn-time" concept, that was talked about so much some 20 years ago by some of the "expert" handicapping authors? In case you don't...let me give you a short synopsis:

The fundamental question in pace handicapping is how to compare the horses in a given race when they have differing running styles. Early-speed ratings give a big edge to front-runners, and late-speed ratings give a big edge to closers...and comparing these two running styles remained a mystery that the final-time figures could not really solve. Well...a couple of smart guys decided that the SECOND fraction in a sprint is the one single fraction that could be used to compare these two differing running styles...because BOTH of these types of horses are asked to do some serious running during this portion of a sprint race. The front-runners run strongly during the second fraction of a sprint in order to increase their positional advantage over the rest of the field...whereas the closers run strongly during that part of the sprint so they can get closer to the pace-setters, in order to put their closing kick into effective use. Using the second fraction seemed to be a clever device with which to compare front-runners and closers in a sprint race...and this portion of the race was called "turn-time"...and was the topic of much investigation some years ago. Dick Mitchell also came up with the idea of adding the individual horse's "turn-time" to its half-mile clocking...thus creating the "ability rating" that CincyHorseplayer referenced above.

Why don't you see how Mitchell's "ability time" concept would do in the framework of your own research? You could even try adding the horse's final-time figure to its "ability time"...for a more comprehensive "performance-rating", so to speak.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 11:49 AM   #11
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,110
In this race there are 2 E8, and 3 EP runners. More than half the field likes to either be on the lead or pressing the speed.

Yes the numbers say that she should get a clear advantage to the first call. But the chances are that she will have company no matter how fast she goes. Look at the other E8 in the race. She also consistently runs to the first call with figures in the 90's range. The figures are good but the 1, IMO, only has about a 1/2 length advantage over the 3, and if the 3 goes, and that is likely, the 1 is going to have company and will not get a break till the stretch.

i have a old program that i really liked. What it did with E horses was round down the top horse, and round up all the other E horses. So in this case the 1 would be rated 95 and the 3 would also be rated a 95. This seemed to match what happened in the races more often than just going by the numbers alone.
jay68802 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 11:51 AM   #12
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesal57 View Post
Dont understand this...#5

par for E1 is 93

the only horse that can do this is the #1
Can the lack of competion up front make this horse better?


?
Mike...do you remember William Quirin? He was the math professor out of NY who originally called early speed the "universal bias". In order to predict which horse would set the early speed in a race, Quirin created some pace figures that were considered very "sophisticated", for that time-period. Well...Quirin came to eventually realize that early-pace ratings don't do a good-enough identifying the pace-setters in a race...so, he invented a more simplistic handicapping device which he called the Quirin "speed points". Even though these "speed points" had nothing to do with "velocity" in any of its forms, it predicted the pace-setters with more accuracy than the more sophisticated pace ratings did...a fact which surprised both Quirin, and myself. Consequently...I wouldn't be so sure about the early-pace advantage that the has in this race.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 11:59 AM   #13
mikesal57
Veteran
 
mikesal57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEW YORK CITY
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
Do you remember the "turn-time" concept, that was talked about so much some 20 years ago by some of the "expert" handicapping authors? In case you don't...let me give you a short synopsis:

The fundamental question in pace handicapping is how to compare the horses in a given race when they have differing running styles. Early-speed ratings give a big edge to front-runners, and late-speed ratings give a big edge to closers...and comparing these two running styles remained a mystery that the final-time figures could not really solve. Well...a couple of smart guys decided that the SECOND fraction in a sprint is the one single fraction that could be used to compare these two differing running styles...because BOTH of these types of horses are asked to do some serious running during this portion of a sprint race. The front-runners run strongly during the second fraction of a sprint in order to increase their positional advantage over the rest of the field...whereas the closers run strongly during that part of the sprint so they can get closer to the pace-setters, in order to put their closing kick into effective use. Using the second fraction seemed to be a clever device with which to compare front-runners and closers in a sprint race...and this portion of the race was called "turn-time"...and was the topic of much investigation some years ago. Dick Mitchell also came up with the idea of adding the individual horse's "turn-time" to its half-mile clocking...thus creating the "ability rating" that CincyHorseplayer referenced above.

Why don't you see how Mitchell's "ability time" concept would do in the framework of your own research? You could even try adding the horse's final-time figure to its "ability time"...for a more comprehensive "performance-rating", so to speak.
Thask...

Let me expand on why I'm trying to do this....
if your not aware, I am big in the Handifast program......
There are about 20 factors that it uses....3 of them are from Mitchell's book
and actually they are pretty good ...but that is ONLY 3 of the 20..
I have learned and worked on logic regression . I have found numerous "insignificant" factors in the program.....
My mission is to somehow improve on them or develop others...

That is why I'm pulling a meeting of the minds here...

Thxs

Mike

P.S.- I understand the Turn Time concept and I'm sure one of those 3 factors are using it.
mikesal57 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 12:19 PM   #14
mikesal57
Veteran
 
mikesal57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NEW YORK CITY
Posts: 3,670
Quote:
Originally Posted by jay68802 View Post
In this race there are 2 E8, and 3 EP runners. More than half the field likes to either be on the lead or pressing the speed.

Yes the numbers say that she should get a clear advantage to the first call. But the chances are that she will have company no matter how fast she goes. Look at the other E8 in the race. She also consistently runs to the first call with figures in the 90's range. The figures are good but the 1, IMO, only has about a 1/2 length advantage over the 3, and if the 3 goes, and that is likely, the 1 is going to have company and will not get a break till the stretch.

i have a old program that i really liked. What it did with E horses was round down the top horse, and round up all the other E horses. So in this case the 1 would be rated 95 and the 3 would also be rated a 95. This seemed to match what happened in the races more often than just going by the numbers alone.
The other E8 is a 5000 claimer...the #1 should put him away easy....along with the other early

The only thing that bothers me is the Lrl Rail...not good to early

But I'm also a "Matcher" too.....I see the 1 & 4 there at the end
mikesal57 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 04-20-2018, 12:29 PM   #15
headhawg
crusty old guy
 
headhawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Snarkytown USA
Posts: 3,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesal57 View Post
3 of them are from Mitchell's book
and actually they are pretty good ...but that is ONLY 3 of the 20..
If you're talking about CC, PS, and Power I added those to Handifast to create my version (HHX). The X was for eXperimental as I wanted users to know that it was different from the original. I wasn't sure that they had any value, but it was something that I wanted to try.

Those factors are not coded exactly like Mitchell's, btw. The EPS number is based on Quirin's research so it's slightly different, and PS does not use fps. It does use the 60-100 indexing formula from Mitchell's book. IIRC, Mitchell wrote that you could change the range if you so desired but I stuck with his suggestion. Power is weighted the same way as in the book.

Glad -- and somewhat surprised -- that those are holding up as being usable factors.
headhawg is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.