QUINN'S TURF THEORY

[delayjf]

I've been rereading Quinns "Figure Handicapping" and was intregued that he constructed his turf parallel time charts.

Specifically he increases the value of a 1/5 of a second as the distance increases which is the opposite of what Beyer/Korvitz does with their dirt figures. He reasons that running "faster for longer" should count for more.

In my own turf handicapping I've learned through the school of hard knocks that this is true. But, I'm not convinced that his scale is the best way to evaluate late speed on the turf.

Has anybody adapted his turf theory with any success??

[alysheba88]

The finishers of turf race are usually much more bunched than on dirt races.

[John]

Delayjf,

A real nice guy that was a member on this board . Steve is his name was knid enough to show me his way and I don't think he would mind me shareing.

Steve likes to look at the class of the horse,Winning efforts begin with trainer.Incompetent trainers can make a good turf horse a certified loser. Give a so-so turf horse to a Johnathan Sheppard and you might end up with a champion.Jockeys too.A few excel on every circuit They always manage to save every inch of ground and know when to move their horses at the right time.

I don't think that there are enough turf races to get a true par.most tracks only card a few turfraces daily.

Maybe Steve, will read this and add his opinion

[Tom]

I use that method all the time.
I do not go to the trouble of making all the track-to-track adjustments, though. I made one chart, using "pars" of 24-30- and 36 seconds for the final fraction. I use the incremental splits for each horse in the Fromulator PP options, then just assing rankings from the chart directly to the PPs. no variants-only raw.
I stick to races within a half furlong of today's race as much as possiblem and I rate the last 6 or so races, as Quirin suggests. If I get good ratings 4-5 races back, and the odds are decent, I don't worry too much about recent form or numbers. I use class to break ties, so a 98 in NW1 would be better than a 98 in a MSW, or even a 100 in a MSW. I like to see some gaps in the ratings-within 3-4 points to me is equal.
Been using this method several years now-since the book came out, whenever that was.

[Fastracehorse]

That the longer the race - the easier to carry speed. That is, speed is more dangerous the longer the event is.

He reasoned: 'That especially with the rail at 0', the horse has alot to look at, he is curious about his surroundings and hence, tends to relax better on the lead.'

Alot of people think speed is better at shorter distances. But speedy routers can bottle things up behind themselves, relax, and then jet for home.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

<then just assing rankings from the chart directly to the PPs. no variants-only raw.
I stick to races within a half furlong of today's race as much as possiblem

++++++++++++++++++



fffastt

[Shacopate]

Are you saying that you have (or can make) accurate track variants for turf races?

[headhawg]

delayjf,

I have had good success with his method. I create the charts as per the book using Pars Plus, but one of these days will create my own pars.

Class is an important factor for me so that is always part of the equation, so to echo rocajack I look for at least a competent turf trainer and turf jockey.

Frontrunners win often enough depending on the track, but they still must have enough late pace to fight off the sustainers. I will look at the Energy profile as well, and favor horses that expend less energy early, sometimes using this as my "tiebreaker".

I don't pay attention to variants (notoriously unreliable) except to rule out some aberrant paceline(s).

If this matters, turf racing (routes) is the only area that I'm profitable in. Good luck.

HH

[headhawg]

Originally posted by headhawg
Oops...

Class is an important factor for me so that is always part of the equation, so to echo rocajack I look for at least a competent turf trainer and turf jockey.

Sorry, bad edit. Class is obviously a different factor than trainer/jock. BOTH are important to me.

HH

[delayjf]

In my own handicapping, I had good success on the turf doing something simular to what Quinn does, basically looking at the final fraction of turf routes and determining which horse has the biggest kick. Reviewing Quinns results at DeLmar 93, I've come to the following conclusions about their effectiveness:

- Quinns turf figures are best suited for So Cal tracks due to the lack of wet WX.

- His figures are probably only accurate within a limited range. I'm going to guess but probably within +-1 second of the classified Alw par that he uses. In his own review of Quinns Turf figures Beyer noted that Quinns parallel time (Hollywood) chart assigns the same rating to a horse who runs a super slow 1/4 in around 27 flat to a final 5/16th in 32 2/5. That final 1/16 of a mile would have to be run in blazing 5 2/5 seconds.
Using his classified Alw pars a horse which runs a 1/4 in 25 1/5( a rating of 100) will require 5 4/5 seconds to run and additional 1/16th of a mile in 31 flat ( also a rating of 100)

-Almost all his turf profits are derived from races where he's able to comparing performances at the same distances. If his parallel time chart is unreliable comparing different route distances, then whats the point of having one. In Quinns defense, he does warn about comparing races at different distances.

I'm not saying this Turf figures are worthless, only that they seem to have some flaws.

[Fastracehorse]

<Are you saying that you have (or can make) accurate track variants for turf races?

==============================

No, I'm not saying that. I think the Beyer is good enough.

Thanx,

fffastt

[headhawg]

Originally posted by delayjf
I'm not saying this Turf figures are worthless, only that they seem to have some flaws.

I'm more of an eclectic handicapper, and I don't believe anybody's figures are good enough -- given the amount of factors/errors in calculating them -- to use them as a primary or exclusive method in handicapping.

I just need to be "in the ballpark" with figs -- especially turf figs, and other factors will determine for me if there is a play. Quinn's figs work for me.

Ok, maybe the Mezzanine section of the ballpark...

HH

[Fastracehorse]

<I just need to be "in the ballpark" with figs -- especially turf figs

==================================

That's what good enough means





<I don't believe anybody's figures are good enough

And yet you use Quirin's.




JFTR guys,

Joe Takach believes it is impossible to find a 'valid' variant.




fffastt

[headhawg]

fffastt,

I didn't disagree with you; Beyers are fine if that's what you use. I imagine that some 'cappers use Bris Late Pace figs or some other type.

By using the Quinn method I personally get a better feel for the differences in the figs for the tracks I create the charts for. And the thread started by delayjf asked if anyone had success with Quinn's method, not Beyer figs, and I briefly mentioned my adapted version of it.

HH

[Fastracehorse]

Can you explain what you do??

I'd be interested.

Thanx,

fffastt