Michael Pizzolla's 2019 Kentucky Derby Rant

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by delayjf

I seem to recall while reading Bradshaw's match up concepts. that Bradshaw also used something akin to Pizzola's fulcrum pace, or so it seemed to me. I don't think he ever pinned a name to the procedure.

Bradshaw called his procedure the Match-Up. In the simplest of terms, the procedure was to project a likely early pace for the race, 1st and 2nd calls, and to start by eliminating any horse that did not demonstrate an ability to be in contention at those pace figures.

Some might think it a chicken and egg question, but after studying both, my take is that Pizzolla's "Fulcrum Pace" is a derivative of the projected pace concept of Sartin and Bradshaw.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by delayjf

The concept of the fulcrum pace was interesting, but I was never able to implement the concept into my play. Anybody else have better luck than me?

Fulcrum never worked for me. I frequently used Bradshaw's match-up when I used to handicap U.S. races.

[Tom]

The Hat taught the PBS numbers to Mike on an airplane ride.
PBS - Pace Balanced Speed is also Pizzola Bradshaw Sartin.
The fulcrum was the key to modify the speed figure by.

At a track like Finger Lakes, where they ran basically 4 distances all on dirt, and you made an adjustment for the DRF SR at the sprint and routes, you could do nicely using that simple idea.
I did for more than a couple of years.

Few shippers, same horse populations, minimum of noise - worked like a charm.

Fulcrum, PBS number, power third fractions - that was my life.
(oh, and Genny drafts and White Owls - the full track package).

[delayjf]

power third fractions

I found the way he adjusted or didn't adjust the third fraction didn't make sense to me. I felt there were better ways to rate turf races (Sustain pace or Quinns turf ratings). So I never really tried to put his power third fraction into play.

[Light]

The problem with Pizzola's program is evidenced in his video in that the "fulcrum" horse often does not turn out to be the fulcrum horse. In the video it shows Vekoma as the fulcrum horse but that horse was a no factor all the way around.

Vekoma can easily be seen as the fulcrum horse using Bris. In the race summary section,the top horse in the "early pace last race" by far is Vekoma. Has a 105 to the next horse with a 95. So Pizzola and Bris are in agreement. But that is a mediocre way at best of deciding who will be the fulcrum horse. In the video Pizzola admits to not knowing what to do with MS because his last speed figure is below par to his other 3 races.

No offense to Pizzolla but if you play this game just a couple of years you know a horse will only expend as much energy it needs to win. This is why it is more complicated than you think to find the fulcrum horse. It's not always the last pace line that gives the answer. And you don't want someone coming into the derby that was "all out" in his last when he's now going to meet stiffer competition. So I thought his lack of understanding of that well known concept was below par for someone selling a program called "value capper" Because that is where you get value, when speed figures look below par, especially the last. You must look at what the horse is capable of and decide if he will replicate a previous better performance.

I mainly looked at the video trying to decide whether I should try his $2K program. But after looking at this video and seeing how off the wall his predictions were of the fulcrum and the odds he thought he may get on MS, Improbable, Game winner etc, I am less inclined.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Light

No offense to Pizzolla but if you play this game just a couple of years you know a horse will only expend as much energy it needs to win.

I agree with this.

Very few horses are going to run as fast at they are capable of early. They are only going to run only as fast as they have to secure the position the rider wants. It works the other around also. Even if a horse is capable of running very fast early and getting the lead, it will often run slower next time in securing a similar position behind horses instead of going to the lead.

In looking at MS's PPs, I thought his last race pace figure was kind of meaningless in terms of his likely early position. It was obvious he had sprint speed and it was obvious the horse tended to race on the lead. So it was likely he was going to be part of the pace early unless others used their horses hard to take it and he was comfortable rating just off it.

I think figuring out race development is more about running styles, then within that how much speed the horse has, and then within that, the strategy the jockey uses given the makeup of the field. The latter part and randomness at the gate being the toughest part.

[Speed Figure]

Originally Posted by Light

The problem with Pizzola's program is evidenced in his video in that the "fulcrum" horse often does not turn out to be the fulcrum horse. In the video it shows Vekoma as the fulcrum horse but that horse was a no factor all the way around.

Vekoma can easily be seen as the fulcrum horse using Bris. In the race summary section,the top horse in the "early pace last race" by far is Vekoma. Has a 105 to the next horse with a 95. So Pizzola and Bris are in agreement. But that is a mediocre way at best of deciding who will be the fulcrum horse. In the video Pizzola admits to not knowing what to do with MS because his last speed figure is below par to his other 3 races.

No offense to Pizzolla but if you play this game just a couple of years you know a horse will only expend as much energy it needs to win. This is why it is more complicated than you think to find the fulcrum horse. It's not always the last pace line that gives the answer. And you don't want someone coming into the derby that was "all out" in his last when he's now going to meet stiffer competition. So I thought his lack of understanding of that well known concept was below par for someone selling a program called "value capper" Because that is where you get value, when speed figures look below par, especially the last. You must look at what the horse is capable of and decide if he will replicate a previous better performance.

I mainly looked at the video trying to decide whether I should try his $2K program. But after looking at this video and seeing how off the wall his predictions were of the fulcrum and the odds he thought he may get on MS, Improbable, Game winner etc, I am less inclined.

I guess everyone's pace projections must be perfect right! You do know that Timeformus had the #6 as the leader on the pace projector right? he did clearly say he didn't know if the horse bounced, had a performance decline or basically coasted home and did just enough to win. Did you watch any of the other videos?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Speed Figure

I guess everyone's pace projections must be perfect right! You do know that Timeformus had the #6 as the leader on the pace projector right? he did clearly say he didn't know if the horse bounced, had a performance decline or basically coasted home and did just enough to win. Did you watch any of the other videos?

Are you using this particular print type so you can force us to pay special attention to your posts?

[Speed Figure]

Not at all! I simply like writing in courier font!

[Light]

Originally Posted by Speed Figure

I guess everyone's pace projections must be perfect right! You do know that Timeformus had the #6 as the leader on the pace projector right? he did clearly say he didn't know if the horse bounced, had a performance decline or basically coasted home and did just enough to win. Did you watch any of the other videos?

If you read my post in a calm state, your brain would see that I covered everything you just said. I said Bris, (instead of TF) also had #6 as the leader. So there is no disagreement there and no surprise that TF had the same figs.

I said Pizzolla did not know what to do with the horse because MS's last SR was kind of low to Pizzolla. So there is no disagreement there either.

Are you just interested in fighting for the sake of fighting?

What I am saying that you may disagree with is that the fulcrum horse is often not the horse with the best E2 figure. Speed figures are not always the correct tool for that. Picking the Fulcrum horse is more complicated in a lot of cases.

This race (the KD) is another example of old school theory having been dis proven time and time again. The "fulcrum" method needs an overhaul.

[Appy]

"What I am saying that you may disagree with is that the fulcrum horse is often not the horse with the best E2 figure. Speed figures are not always the correct tool for that. Picking the Fulcrum horse is more complicated in a lot of cases."

I agree with your statement that speed figures may not be dependable in accurately predicting the fulcrum horse.

"This race (the KD) is another example of old school theory having been dis proven time and time again. The "fulcrum" method needs an overhaul."

I do not agree with this statement. Max Sec past performance indicated he would likely be on the lead or at least contending for it, and could hold it with strong finish. That is exactly the way the Derby unfolded. Apparently a lot of people read it that way, as MS was the fave. The Derby order of finish did not disprove any old school theory with exception of surprise performance of Country House, who IMO did not project to produce that caliber a race.

I studied Sartin Methodology and everything included in the compilations branded as such. Used to have a complete collection of the Followups (lost in a computer crash). Still have a stack I printed out, including the Matchup. I learned a good deal from the experience that will stick with me forever. I also acquired a number of friendships I value highly during that time, including Ted.
I moved on from that to, among others, studying Pizzolla's writings and methods. Again, I learned a good deal which I will always use to advantage. He is a handicapper, player, and instructor, I admire a good deal. IMO he is, in his own right, a proven commodity.
Whether I agree with each and everything any of those guys present is my own business and I am free to accept or reject at my own discretion. In any case I am appreciative to all of them for the considerable gains I have made. I do not see how trashing any of them could make me feel any better about myself.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Appy

I do not agree with this statement. Max Sec past performance indicated he would likely be on the lead or at least contending for it, and could hold it with strong finish. That is exactly the way the Derby unfolded.

It was clear to me as it was to you and the general public that MS would be the fulcrum horse and could go w-w. It was not clear to Pizzolla who is the fulcrum expert. Pizzolla did NOT pick MS as the fulcrum horse. He picked Vekoma. So did Timeform and so did Bris.

[Tom]

My take on MS was that he was certainly an early horse but he lacked anything close to early pace figures good enough.
He needed major improvement in the Derby.
I will bet against this type every time.

He was lucky, IMHO, that so many other riders chose Derby day to show what bad rides they are capable of.

[Tom]

Here is how i used the Fulcrum for the Derby.
Best E2 was by Far Vekoma with his 114 E2 last race. He had a previous 110, within 2 lengths ( 2 pts = 1 length) BUT, it was by and far the best. The fulcrum is not supposed to be the best, but the one that keeps the most horse involved - most likely to be run today. That said, I used Tax as the fulcrum with his 105 last time backed up by his 103 two back.

Not sure if your carried it out to PBS, but in BRIS, a length is equal to 10/dist, so 1.2 at 9 furlong and 1.2 at 8.5. I just use 1 for both distances for sake of ease.

MS had a 101 off a 77 E2, so his figure need to be reduced by 7 lengths, making him a non contender with a 94 SR.
Vekoma gets a 105 after adding four lengths to his SR, off a 114 E2.

BMS - 99, Tacitus - 104, Game Winner - 98

Now it didn't pan out, but I don't think you can use one race to throw out a whole method.

This was not like any other race you are going to betting this week!

[Appy]

The way I saw the derby in preview had a lot in common with yours, Tom, except I did see MS as forwardly placed, at worst, but with enough late speed and energy to take it.

I agree conceptually with Light but I would say it differently in that due to so many variables even running style is getting very difficult to nail every time, particularly if you are depending on figures software automates. That's why I always do a manual take (ignoring any odds line) on the pps for the important races. But regardless what I did I had a number of horses in consideration ahead of Country House.