Post position stats

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by Achilles

Attachment 29555

Some months ago I was fooling around with Excel to see if I could extract something useful from a Post Position study.............something more than just winners as a percentage of runners per post. I finally struck upon the attached spreadsheet, which is hopefully self-explanatory. The interesting aspects of it for me are:
1) It is a pictorial display rather than just a list percentages, etc,
2) You can get a snapshot of running styles as they relate to post position, size of field,
3) You can easily tell how certain posts (especially outside and next-to-outside posts) fare at certain distances.
4) You can keep a running tally easily, day by day, distance by distance, and by
track conditions.

I would appreciate your constructive criticism. Is it a worthwhile approach, how it can be improved, etc.

I have done this!

First, it is hugely worthwhile.
I broke the study down by track-surf-dist & running style using Quirin ES points.
(78) (56) (234) (10)
...and post
Insidedness
(1)(2)(3)(the rest)
Outsidedness
(1)(2)(3)(the rest)

What was meaningful was PIV (Pool Impact Value).
(i.e. like IV but based upon wins / the pct of pool wagered on each horse.)


But there is a problem.
The book for the country was around 1,200 pages.
And that was with a really small font.

But the strategy was dead on.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by Achilles

Attachment 29555

Some months ago I was fooling around with Excel to see if I could extract something useful from a Post Position study.............something more than just winners as a percentage of runners per post. I finally struck upon the attached spreadsheet, which is hopefully self-explanatory. The interesting aspects of it for me are:
1) It is a pictorial display rather than just a list percentages, etc,
2) You can get a snapshot of running styles as they relate to post position, size of field,
3) You can easily tell how certain posts (especially outside and next-to-outside posts) fare at certain distances.
4) You can keep a running tally easily, day by day, distance by distance, and by
track conditions.

I would appreciate your constructive criticism. Is it a worthwhile approach, how it can be improved, etc.

several years ago I did a blog on mnr website entitled "mysteries of the mountain main" that incorporated running style (and track condition) with post position analysis. lots of work involved..lol..

can i assume you based running styles on how a race played out rather than preconceived classifications?

[Achilles]

First of all, thanks for the replies. When I try something new, it's always good to know that someone knowledgeable thinks it's worthwhile.

To answer "Mountainman" 's question: Yes, I took the data from the Equibase charts, using Brohamer's definitions of E/S/P.

I also identified (E+) those winners which got a a lead of more than a length right out of the gate, because they probably ran a different race than the rest of the field.

Those winners which won by more than five lengths (without the advantage of a big early lead) also just outclassed their fields, and PP probably did not influence the outcome as much as if the field was more evenly matched.

The same kind of thinking applies to accumulating data for par times (if you do that sort of thing). If the winner outclassed the field, you could just treat his time as coming from a class or two above the race he ran in.

Thanks again for your responses...........JK

[Tom]

Good stuff, Jack!

[Achilles]

Thanks Tom................Good to hear from you. Hope you are still "on the improve" as they used to say around the track. Remember when the Thumb used to open the season in March, and the biggest decision we had to make was whether to keep the snow tires on the car?