"S" Horse Goes Wire-to-Wire at the Fair Grounds

[Running Amok]

The 8th race at the Fair Grounds today (11/17/23) was a minor stakes on the dirt @ 1m 70y. There were 9 horses entered with two scratches. The horse that won "Vale Male", went wire-to-wire despite his Brisnet run style listed as an (S 5).

He went off a 9-1, broke from the 7 hole, was first out of the gate and got to the rail before turn. He kept a clear lead while setting a slow pace and kept the lead to the finish.

I had a hard time trying to figure who would get the lead in this race. One of those kind of races where the PPs didn't show that any horse really wanted to be on the lead.

But one thing is for sure, that (S) Run Style designation sure didn't help me find the early-speed horse.

I know Brisnet is far from perfect with it's ratings and Run Style designations. But I'm not sure any other handicapping source would have had Vale Male setting the pace either.

[woodbinepmi]

Just one of those races where there was no early speed once Free Like a Girl was entered and won in an earlier stakes race in the card. Nobody went with her and allowed her to go 25 and 49 and change and she showed courage in the lane. She does like running against state breds in NOLA.

[Running Amok]

Free Like a Girl was one of the scratches in race #8. Strange thing is in race # 8, which was a route race, she had an (E 6) run style designation. But like you mentioned, she ran in an earlier race (race #6) which was a sprint at 6F. In that race she had a (P 2) run style designation.

So she's an E 6 if she's in a route but in a sprint she's a P 2? How can that be? The chart shows Free Like a Girl came from off the pace, 6th at the 1/4 and 3rd at the 1/2. So the (P 2) does seem to be fairly similar to how she ran.

Originally Posted by woodbinepmi

Nobody went with her and allowed her to go 25 and 49 and change and she showed courage in the lane.

Yes, Vale Male set some slow fractions on the lead and thus had plenty left in the tank for the stretch run. So the S run style designation was not at all similar to how she ran.

[Nitro]

There may have been some obvious confusion regarding how this race might shape up based on the typical subjective handicapping info that was presented. This type of situation can very often be cleared up when viewing the objective info offered by the tote board.

From a tote analysis perspective #9, Vale Male’s M/L was 15/1. It opened at 8/1 and drifted up to 9/1 at post time because #6, A G’s Charlotte was getting hammered into the odds-on even money choice.

Aside from the tote analysis indicating that Vale Male was also an entry of interest, it’s been my experience that whenever a long shot is getting solid action especially when there’s an obvious prohibitive favorite in the mix, that it automatically becomes an entry to include in any type of bet. In fact, the other entry of interest getting solid action was #2, Sabra Tuff which had a 5/1 M/L and was 6/5 at post time.

The results were very profitable especially for some boxed Verticals:
Race #8 = 9-6-2-4 =

POS	#	Horse	             Win	Place	Show
1st:	9	Vale Male	      $21.00	$6.60	$3.00
2nd:	6	A G's Charlotte		$2.80	$2.10
3rd:	2	Sabra Tuff			       $2.10
4th:	4	Fort Polk			
•  $2.00 EXACTA 9-6 $69.60
•  $2.00 TRIFECTA 9-6-2 $212.80
•  $2.00 SUPERFECTA 9-6-2-4 $789.80

[cj]

This thread has zero to do with tote analysis. Start your own thread if you want to talk about that instead of derailing someone else's thread.

[MJC922]

As stated the main speed horse (#5) scratched out. Might also be worth noting there was mention of trouble at the break for the #3 who otherwise may have been out there contesting for the early lead. I had the winner tied for third on the early pace figure and tagged with an sp running style fwiw. I wouldn't bet the horse with monopoly money on paper though. The winner ran a number two back that would beat these more often than not but then it went to the sidelines for 32 weeks, comes back @ 6f doesn't appear to have done much running but apparently that race and a half mile work was enough to get the horse sharp again.

Part of the problem with this top-heavy focus the game has on bets that require the race winner is generally speaking you then need a peak effort from your horse and also at the same time need to not get beaten by a peak effort coming from another horse. Adding on to that you as the betting public have no visibility to what treatments and various other medications horses receive between races and those oftentimes dictate whether a peak effort can even potentially occur in the first place.

It's races like these which break the bankrolls of most of the betting public. It's why IMO different types of bets need to be introduced like for example horse-vs-horse match ups if tracks want to build a safety net for their customers money. That's the only way IMO to start getting more consistent winners on a daily basis which leads to them coming back tomorrow for more churn. You could probably run this same race next week with the same group of horses and the 3 would break, the 9 would press and do the dirty work instead of walking the dog... 6 would then go right over the top. It's just random events like the break but that's the nature of the game is there's so much random chance involved that having this monk-like money management discipline takes on incredible significance. People sense that after a while and stay away, I can't blame them...

[Bullet Plane]

I think the combination of Turf to dirt, sprint to route, and very poor form on the horses made the computer pace designations tough in this race (or human by eye for that matter).

1 : was going sprint to route off a loss of 14 lengths. Closer.

2 : horse had been murdered in his last two tries, overall form so bad I can't really see a running style. and due to class drop was a favorite

3 : Good form in cheaper in a sprint . A route back in Jan had him close to the pace.

4 : Poor form on turf. 21 May had a on the pace route.

6 : Layoff and poor finish in a turf route. 7 Apr 23 went wire to wire in a route.

8 : Poor finish in a sprint, 21 May 23 a close to the pace dirt route.

9 : A poor finish in a odd race up at Ind. 15 Mar 23 close to the pace in a route.

A real puzzle on pace. My program couldn't make a first call projection.

But, Graham, the old pro jockey, sure did take advantage of the situation.

[Nitro]

Originally Posted by cj

This thread has zero to do with tote analysis. Start your own thread if you want to talk about that instead of derailing someone else's thread.

Apparently, you have no clue about the most valuable handicapping source that’s available to all who know how to apply it properly. Granted it won’t inform you how the horses might be running, but it does tell you who will be trying to win. If your goal is to make money in this game maybe you can explain to everyone where that same info would be located among any PP data.

Originally Posted by Running Amok

0
I know Brisnet is far from perfect with it's ratings and Run Style designations. But I'm not sure any other handicapping source would have had Vale Male setting the pace either.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by Running Amok

...I know Brisnet is far from perfect with it's ratings and Run Style designations. But I'm not sure any other handicapping source would have had Vale Male setting the pace either.

Below is a clickable thumbnail showing a screenshot of JCapper PPs generated with HDW data for the winning horse.

Full disclosure before I dive in:

I didn't bet this race. My reason for posting is to address the red text from the above quote.

The only data point I'm presenting in this post unique to JCapper is Speed Points.

Everything else in this post should be visible to players using any of the other software partners using HDW data (All in One, HTR, Horse Street, Track Judge, etc.)

That said, let's dive in:

Vale Male, a 4 yo filly, has 7 in the money finishes from her 10 most recent (visible) running lines.

She was within 2.5 lengths of the lead at the second call in 5 of those 7 running lines.

In her 7th running line back, October 12, 2022 at Delta Downs, she earned a 151 HDW F1 (first fraction) Pace Fig - the highest HDW F1 Pace Fig of any horse in the field.

That alone says she can get the lead in this spot provided she breaks cleanly from the gate and her rider sends a little.

I've highlighted her second running line back from March 23, 2022 where she raced on or near the lead throughout and pulled away late - which was run at The Fairgrounds.

Her record at The Fairgrounds is 2 wins, 2 seconds, and 2 thirds from 6 career starts. She has an affinity for the track. (See the earnings box in the upper rights of her PPs.)

I'm doing this after the race (where hindsight is always 20/20) but if I were handicapping:

I would draw an X through her most recent running line which was her first race back after a 234 day layoff - and was run at Horseshoe Indianapolis.

I say that because I view the layoff and her non-competitive effort after a temporary barn switch as an afternoon workout. For today's race she's back in the hands of her regular trainer.

For Run Style HDW designates her as a Ps (a type of Presser.)

The algorithm I wrote for JCapper gives her 5 Speed Points - tied for third highest in the field.

I'm not at all surprised she found herself on the front end in this spot.




-jp
.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Nitro

Apparently, you have no clue about the most valuable handicapping source that’s available to all who know how to apply it properly. Granted it won’t inform you how the horses might be running, but it does tell you who will be trying to win. If your goal is to make money in this game maybe you can explain to everyone where that same info would be located among any PP data.

Has absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote. You went completely off topic of the thread. You want to talk about it, start your own thread about a race.

[Running Amok]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I would draw an X through her most recent running line which was her first race back after a 234 day layoff - and was run at Horseshoe Indianapolis.

I say that because I view the layoff and her non-competitive effort after a temporary barn switch as an afternoon workout. For today's race she's back in the hands of her regular trainer.

For Run Style HDW designates her as a Ps (a type of Presser.)

The algorithm I wrote for JCapper gives her 5 Speed Points - tied for third highest in the field.

I'm not at all surprised she found herself on the front end in this spot.


-jp
.

Perhaps I need better glasses but I do not see anywhere in the clickable thumbnail that shows 5 Speed Points.

EDIT: I see it now, after the horse's name along with the run style designation.

However, I agree with drawing an X as it was clear to me that her most recent race was not a solid effort to win. Because if it was, then I seriously doubt she would have been entered in this stakes race, despite the modest purse.

I also agree she appears to like to press the pace. So the (S) run style designation by Brisnet is questionable.

But as MJC922 pointed out, there was mention in the result chart of trouble at the break for the #3 who would have likely contested the lead. But then Vale Male may have pressed the pace like she has before.

It's clear that even if you go by speed points or prior F1 pace figs there is no pace line that shows Vale Male was ever on the lead at the 1st or 2nd call. That of course doesn't mean she cant get the lead, but it did surprise me.

I liked #6, A G's Charlotte. She has certainly been successful at the Fair Grounds in the past. Had nice works and loves the distance. And I actually used # 9 Vale Male, behind #6 A G's Charlotte in my exactas. But I thought the 6 would win the race, so I didn't box.

As soon as I seen Vale Male take the lead and seen the slow fractions I knew my bet was in trouble. And Vale Male shows she also likes running at the Fair Grounds. I just couldn't see her getting the lead.

But after the evidence Jeff P presented, it isn't as surprising as I thought.

[Jeff P]

Top left inside of parenthesis just to the right of the horse's name:

VALE MALE (P 5)

Translates as main run style P with 5 speed points.


-jp
.

[Running Amok]

Yep, I guess I was blind for a moment. I see it now.

[cj]

I don't think it has been mentioned, but the horse that most likely would have led bobbled pretty badly at the start then got ping ponged between horses while the 9 had clear sailing on the outside.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by Running Amok

Perhaps I need better glasses but I do not see anywhere in the clickable thumbnail that shows 5 Speed Points.

EDIT: I see it now, after the horse's name along with the run style designation.

However, I agree with drawing an X as it was clear to me that her most recent race was not a solid effort to win. Because if it was, then I seriously doubt she would have been entered in this stakes race, despite the modest purse.

I also agree she appears to like to press the pace. So the (S) run style designation by Brisnet is questionable.

But as MJC922 pointed out, there was mention in the result chart of trouble at the break for the #3 who would have likely contested the lead. But then Vale Male may have pressed the pace like she has before.

It's clear that even if you go by speed points or prior F1 pace figs there is no pace line that shows Vale Male was ever on the lead at the 1st or 2nd call. That of course doesn't mean she cant get the lead, but it did surprise me.

I liked #6, A G's Charlotte. She has certainly been successful at the Fair Grounds in the past. Had nice works and loves the distance. And I actually used # 9 Vale Male, behind #6 A G's Charlotte in my exactas. But I thought the 6 would win the race, so I didn't box.

As soon as I seen Vale Male take the lead and seen the slow fractions I knew my bet was in trouble. And Vale Male shows she also likes running at the Fair Grounds. I just couldn't see her getting the lead.

But after the evidence Jeff P presented, it isn't as surprising as I thought.

You had a good horse in the 6, should've won. On the other hand there may have been ways to actually put together a ticket that would lead to more potential for long-term ROI. As there was no confirmed front-runner (no 'e' horse after the scratches) one ticket based upon leveraging the race flow and price makes sense to me. There's a perceived advantage in this race to anyone that either makes the lead or is right up on the pace, you could put together a ticket with the 3,4 & 9 in the DD as all three are price horses which project into the top three early, then you have to just sit and hope, you hope for a big effort from one of the three that may clear off and hope for not the biggest of efforts from the 6. We should probably look for correlations and synergies when we construct tickets as well because if the 9 makes the lead we can infer two other things from that, i.e. the 3 did not break and that the pace will be slow. Computers struggle with this, sure they'll tell you the likelyhood the 9 horse will be in front at the quarter but should that occur the other two correlations will go unaccounted for. As for the betting action on the 9, I mean we should have half an eye on these things. If we're able to detect action it makes a top effort all the more likely. If this horse were 20-1 then I don't think the conditioning would've been sufficient to hold off the 6 no matter what the pace was. In other words when horses seem to be taking a little money we probably should be handicapping them with a lot more emphasis on their best efforts.