Slowly paced turf races.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

Energy distribution means exactly what it says. How a horse distributes its energy over the course of the distance run. The most efficient distribution of energy comes with even pace running. This is generally indicated by even sectional times with the exception of splits that are run around a turn since it requires additional energy used in the form of centripetal force to keep from drifting out. Because of this a horse can run a slightly slower split around a turn and still said to be running even pace.

An exception I have noticed to the advantage of even pace running is in dirt sprints. This is likely due to the momentum gained by a faster than optimal early pace in these races which mitigates the fatigue caused by running faster than even pace early. One sees a similar effect in 400 meter races in human Track (equivalent to 6F horse races) where the momentum gained in the first quick 300 meters helps carry the runner's speed through the final 100. As the race distance stretches out from these extended strints the advantage of even pace distribution of energy dominates.

There is also an exception to optimal even pace energy distribution in dirt 6F dirt sprints having to do with slippage, traction and energy return of dirt vs grass and synthetic surfaces which is a bit more complex which I will cover in a later post. These exceptions are still consistent with the laws of physics.

Another reason that in dirt sprints horses are better off by deviating from even pace energy distribution is that on dirt there is more slippage and less traction and energy return than on grass or synthetics. That makes it more difficult for a horse to get the traction needed to accelerate in the final quarter of a 6 furlong dirt sprint. In such races the acceleration comes in the 1st half mile and its momentum helps carry the horse's speed through the last quarter though it is still decelerating. The better traction and energy return on grass or synthetic races at longer distances favors the more efficient even pace running leaving the horse with the energy to take advantage of the better traction to accelerate in the stretch in these races.

[rispa]

The pace of the race was just slow. It figured to be, as there no early speed types. After doing the other turf races on the card, it came up to be Slow 4, not bad considering the pedestrian fractions. It was not the turf condition. And the race was not mistimed as far as I can tell. But you never know.

[bobphilo]

With the TFUS pace figures they represent whether the pace was fast or slow in relation to the final time not in absolute terms. For example, though a half mile time of 49 seconds might seem slow in general, if the final time for an 8 furlong race was 1:54 on a boggy track that 49 second half would earn a very high pace figure. Pace figures are in relation to the final time which already is an indicator of track speed to be used in evaluating pace.

Of course, since many horses run very poorly on soft going on grass, or on sloppy dirt tracks, the figures earned by those that are not so badly affected will be inflated, so it is good advice to prefer races run under more similar conditions to today's when evaluating a horse's performance, as Tom has suggested.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by jay68802

My question is why, as a handicapper, you would be using a race with such an extreme, to help make a decision on how talented the horse is? Such a extreme has already caused the original poster to question his own figures. It should also cause the handicapper to question the race for all the horses involved. You can not accurately account for the extreme and all of its affect on the outcome of a race. The only thing you can do is remove it from the process, and use other races to base your decision on.

I agree. And if the public goes wild after something that happened in that weird race that you don't feel fit's the other races, then sometimes you have a bet-back or bet-against...

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by rispa

The pace of the race was just slow. It figured to be, as there no early speed types. After doing the other turf races on the card, it came up to be Slow 4, not bad considering the pedestrian fractions. It was not the turf condition. And the race was not mistimed as far as I can tell. But you never know.

When you say the race was "slow by 4" I don't know whether you mean seconds again, lengths or pace figure points. In any case, for pace figures to be useful you have to know how fast that early pace was in relation to the final time of that race, not what the pace was of other races that day. To know whether a track was fast or slow you have to calculate a variant based on the FINAL times of the other turf races that day. Otherwise, as Tom has pointed out, you don't know if that pace was the result of a slow track or riding tactics.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by jay68802

My question is why, as a handicapper, you would be using a race with such an extreme, to help make a decision on how talented the horse is? Such a extreme has already caused the original poster to question his own figures. It should also cause the handicapper to question the race for all the horses involved. You can not accurately account for the extreme and all of its affect on the outcome of a race. The only thing you can do is remove it from the process, and use other races to base your decision on.

Such extreme races are actually very useful, not so much to evaluate a horse's ability but as a possible excuse for a poor performance. If a front runner faced an extremely fast pace in it's last race that could be a valid excuse rather than thinking it is going off form. The same thing applies if a closer came out of a race with an extremely slow pace.

An extreme pace does not necessarily affect all horses in a race similarly. A fast pace will disadvantage the front runners but may help the closers. Likewise, a slow pace will help the frontrunners and hinder the closers. A freakishly fast pace may hinder both front runners and closers depending on how far off the pace they are. An example would be this years JC Gold Cup where the nuclear pace caused practically the whole field's final figures to be upgraded. For any horse anywhere near the lead the race was either a complete throwout or a particularly impressive performance such as for Diversify, Mendelsohn and Thunder Snow. The deep closing winner, Discreet Lover, was the only top finisher who did not need his final figure upgraded due to pace.

[thaskalos]

I side with Jay68802 on this one. These extreme-paced races needn't be relied upon to give an accurate estimate of what the effected horses are capable of. If the pace is extremely fast and the front-runners suffered as a result...then this race can be safely skipped over, and the handicapper can find more suitable races upon which to form his handicapping judgment of these horses. And the same applies when the pace is extremely slow. Luckily...these types of races are rare enough to be safely ignored...IMO.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I side with Jay68802 on this one. These extreme-paced races needn't be relied upon to give an accurate estimate of what the effected horses are capable of. If the pace is extremely fast and the front-runners suffered as a result...then this race can be safely skipped over, and the handicapper can find more suitable races upon which to form his handicapping judgment of these horses. And the same applies when the pace is extremely slow. Luckily...these types of races are rare enough to be safely ignored...IMO.

Just as I said, while these races may not be a good way to measure a horse's ability in general, if the pace is very fast and the horse is a front runner it gives the horse a valid excuse if its previous race(s) indicates it has ability. This way you know the horse is still a contender and is not going off form. In fact, in those rare races where the rare horse is able to set a fast pace figure and still earn a good final figure they do tell us something special about that horse.

You will occasionally come across a race where the horse was able to run a very fast pace and still finish strongly enough to earn a good speed figure. In those rare cases, you have found yourself a top horse and would do well to remember that performance.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

TimeformUS does adjust its final figure for pace but Bris, Beyer, Equibase, T-Graph and Rags do not. The advantage of adjusting for pace is to give a horse credit for having run a race unevenly. It is an attempt to correct its final figure to what it would have likely run if it had run a better early pace. I do see your point that if a horse did run extremely an fast or slow early pace it would not be the best race to judge a horse's ability, especially if one uses the unadjusted final figure. In either case it is always better to use the last most representative race of a horse in terms of pace, distance, surface and trip. However, in many cases the horse's pace was enough to affect it's final figure but not enough to be a throwout. that's where a pace adjusted final figure is most useful. but not extreme enough to make That's what TFUS does when it gives the Spotlight Figure.
Just because the pce of the race was fast doesn't mean that the horse's own pace figure was fast too. It may have laid back off that hotpace. That's why you should use the individual horse's pace figure rather than the one for the leader.

Thoro-Graph will put a lower case "p" next to the number to alert you take a very slow or very fast pace into consideration if you choose. They won't however change the final number.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

Just as I said, while these races may not be a good way to measure a horse's ability in general, if the pace is very fast and the horse is a front runner it gives the horse a valid excuse if its previous race(s) indicates it has ability. This way you know the horse is still a contender and is not going off form. In fact, in those rare races where the rare horse is able to set a fast pace figure and still earn a good final figure they do tell us something special about that horse.

You will occasionally come across a race where the horse was able to run a very fast pace and still finish strongly enough to earn a good speed figure. In those rare cases, you have found yourself a top horse and would do well to remember that performance.

I agree with everything that you say here...but this doesn't invalidate Jay's point. Only the sloppiest of handicappers would ignore a horse who battled against a very fast pace, simply because it failed to run credibly during the last part of the race. Yes...a race such as this provides a valid excuse for the horse. But to adjust the final time of this horse in order to properly account for the extreme pace that it battled against is an exercise in futility...IMO. The biggest score that I've ever made featured a horse just like this...who was EASED under the wire after its exhaustive early-pace battle. I know that the current trend is to turn every speed figure into a "performance rating"...but I don't think that this is warranted in these rare extreme cases.

Another interesting thing that my extensive experience in the game has told me is that, these horses who battle through very fast early paces and still go on to post good speed figures somehow disappoint their next-race backers much more often than not...and often at unappetizing odds. Speaking strictly for myself...I am more inclined to wager next out on the horse who battled against a very fast race...while subsequently posting an unimpressive speed figure.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by bobphilo

Another reason that in dirt sprints horses are better off by deviating from even pace energy distribution is that on dirt there is more slippage and less traction and energy return than on grass or synthetics. That makes it more difficult for a horse to get the traction needed to accelerate in the final quarter of a 6 furlong dirt sprint. In such races the acceleration comes in the 1st half mile and its momentum helps carry the horse's speed through the last quarter though it is still decelerating. The better traction and energy return on grass or synthetic races at longer distances favors the more efficient even pace running leaving the horse with the energy to take advantage of the better traction to accelerate in the stretch in these races.

How can a horse evenly distribute energy and still accelerate in the stretch? Wouldn't a horse have to conserve energy to do that?

[cj]

Interesting discussion. I'm on the side that riding turf races like dirt races will lead to a lot of losing rides. Turf racing isn't new. Jockeys of course over do it at times but in general they are riding the right way.

Seems to me the kickback on dirt has a lot to do with this. Also, turf just isn't as tiring as dirt. Horses are rarely running as fast as they could have on turf. The races are far more tactical.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by cj

Interesting discussion. I'm on the side that riding turf races like dirt races will lead to a lot of losing rides. Turf racing isn't new. Jockeys of course over do it at times but in general they are riding the right way.

Seems to me the kickback on dirt has a lot to do with this. Also, turf just isn't as tiring as dirt. Horses are rarely running as fast as they could have on turf. The races are far more tactical.

If turf weren't as tiring as dirt why wouldn't horses set much faster fractions?

[cj]

Originally Posted by AndyC

If turf weren't as tiring as dirt why wouldn't horses set much faster fractions?

I have some ideas, but I can't prove them. What I do know is if run the stretch on a dirt track I'll be more tired than if I run the stretch of a turf track. You don't think turf is less tiring?

[thaskalos]

Would the Usain Bolts of the world become mere mortals if they switched to running on grass? Why are the horses excelling on one surface...and not on the other? Could it be that the thoroughbred contains certain mysteries which we will never uncover?