Testing Early Pace Theories

[Tom]

Follow up thread to Mountainman's thread.

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/brisw...5/summary.html

Scroll down to today's date

Looks like an interesting one.
I'll post my thoughts in a little while.

[cj]

Attaching the running style and Pace Projector from TimeformUS.

[Tom]

Sorry I missed the race - we had a power outage here and just got back as the race went off.

I won't red board, but I thought the speed was ,,
and the best closer was the

Now, form had to be considered, but on race set up, those were the four I thought had the best shot.

And too late to even try to make a bet.

But, in the interest of the thread topic, the pace setters were two routers and a sprinter against a bunch with little early speed.
The race looked to me like three horses vying early, maybe the close to them, and all three with defects other than pace, and one horse closing late.

Nothing else in the race looked to have pace advantage, so contested early speed by horse of suspect form, and a good closer, I would have looked hard at the
Now, speculating, I would have played the exactas as

5,6,7/1
1/5,6,7

and lost the ex plays and the WP on the 1.

But been close!

I'll post another.
Class is exempt.

[cj]

All the theory guys went in hiding.

I thought the 5 was an interesting case. Normally you want to avoid claims from Navarro, but in this case he was claimed during a stretch when he was ice cold and not the usual Jorge. It was a case of small sample size being better than large sample size.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by Tom

Sorry I missed the race - we had a power outage here and just got back as the race went off.

I won't red board, but I thought the speed was ,,
and the best closer was the

Now, form had to be considered, but on race set up, those were the four I thought had the best shot.

And too late to even try to make a bet.

But, in the interest of the thread topic, the pace setters were two routers and a sprinter against a bunch with little early speed.
The race looked to me like three horses vying early, maybe the close to them, and all three with defects other than pace, and one horse closing late.

Nothing else in the race looked to have pace advantage, so contested early speed by horse of suspect form, and a good closer, I would have looked hard at the
Now, speculating, I would have played the exactas as

5,6,7/1
1/5,6,7

and lost the ex plays and the WP on the 1.

But been close!

I'll post another.
Class is exempt.

Sounds intriguing, but the attachment wouldn't pull up for me. Sparks an idea for another spin off thread. lol..

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

All the theory guys went in hiding.

Here's the issue.

We all have different methods of assigning running styles and our criteria for categorizing the ultimate race flow will also be different.

Ultimately, either your own projections predict the pace and race flow often enough to be of betting value for you or they don't. IMO, people should test their own ideas on paper or via database (if they have one) unless we want to handicap 1000s of races in this thread and prove little if anything.

What I've been saying is that I've already tested this.

Other people may have better/inferior metrics or better/inferior handicapping ideas, but there's definitely still value in projecting races and upgrading/downgrading horses out of extreme races if you are doing it well.

I've already proven that and even posted my test results covering 5 years of racing at all the major tracks.

What we really should be discussing is when it works best, what kinds of races to avoid, how to upgrade/downgrade horses coming out of extreme races etc... That's where you learn to avoid the projection and betting pitfalls.

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Here's the issue.

We all have different methods of assigning running styles and our criteria for categorizing the ultimate race flow will also be different.

Ultimately, either your own projections predict the pace and race flow often enough to be of betting value for you or they don't. IMO, people should test their own ideas on paper or via database (if they have one) unless we want to handicap 1000s of races in this thread and prove little if anything.

What I've been saying is that I've already tested this.

Other people may have better/inferior metrics or better/inferior handicapping ideas, but there's definitely still value in projecting races and upgrading/downgrading horses out of extreme races if you are doing it well.

I've already proven that and even posted my test results covering 5 years of racing at all the major tracks.

What we really should be discussing is when it works best, what kinds of races to avoid, how to upgrade/downgrade horses coming out of extreme races etc... That's where you learn to avoid the projection and betting pitfalls.

All that aside, it wouldn't kill anyone to post a few thoughts on a race before it happens. Nobody is going to judge anyone for a few losers. We all lose more times than we win, most many more times. But putting real races and horses to a theory really helps the discussion IMO.

[classhandicapper]

When I run my reports for a few of Saturday's stakes I'll post my thoughts, but these kinds of pace projections are way sketchier for turf races because my research indicates it takes bigger extremes for the setup to matter much.

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

When I run my reports for a few of Saturday's stakes I'll post my thoughts, but these kinds of pace projections are way sketchier for turf races because my research indicates it takes bigger extremes for the setup to matter much.

I'd agree with that.

And for the record, my post wasn't aimed at you or anyone specifically. Just seemed odd hardly anyone even bothered to respond.

[classhandicapper]

To be honest, I'm too lazy to spend time on races that I'm not considering betting. If not familiar with all the horses I'd just be giving a half ass opinion on a race I'm not even betting.

I at least glance at just about every major stake and other miscellaneous races where I have a horse to watch or something.

I'll toss in some projections and opinions on those races.

[Tom]

I was looking REAL hard at the but the claim made me shaky.
I never would have looked at that race, as it was GP, and I don't play GP. But I wanted a race running that day, and one I have no "extra" info about - fresh off the the printer, I did the race in 5 minutes. Idea was look at pace and let that be my guide.
Damn near walked away with a pocketful of cash.

What factor is the most important? Not every race has a class droppers, or a super fit horse, or any fit horses....not every race has an overlay. But every race a pace set up. No exceptions. Some horse or horses are always helped or hindered by how the race shapes up. That was my point - use that framework to bet it.

I'll post some more races - hopefully more will jump in.
Thanks to CJ for the Pace Projector - I looked at it after I did the race, to see how good I did!

[classhandicapper]

Here is a partial extract of my running styles/pace projection report for the stakes today.

I highlighted the relevant data.

FR = less pace pressure likely than is typical for this distance/surface
FR+ = much less pace pressure likely than is typical for this distance/surface

CL = more pace pressure likely than is typical for this distance/surface
CL+ = much more pace pressure likely than is typical for this distance/surface

H = honest

I look for the possible extreme paces along with the W2W% (which is the % of wire to wire winners at that track at that distance on that surface in my entire database) some more detailed track profile data, my projected running styles etc.. and then actually handicap the races because I don't always agree with the systematic reports.

Basically, I'm trying to find races that are projected to be run in a way that is consistent with what the track/distance/surface profile tends to be to begin with. Then I take it further with the handicapping to try to find horses that could benefit. (late scratches, track biases etc.. can obviously change the projections and my thinking)

Stakes.PNG

[classhandicapper]

Here are my automated upgrades and downgrades for today. I haven't even reviewed them yet to see what I think of any of the details. Unfortunately, I see the 1st strong upgrade at AQU actually won, but I didn't play it because I just got home and just got started. It figures.

Capture2.PNG

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Here are my automated upgrades and downgrades for today. I haven't even reviewed them yet to see what I think of any of the details. Unfortunately, I see the 1st strong upgrade at AQU actually won, but I didn't play it because I just got home and just got started. It figures.

Attachment 26289

Cool stuff, thanks.

I covered most of these races in the Forecast with David Aragona this week if people want to listen. It is posted in that thread.

[taxicab]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Here are my automated upgrades and downgrades for today. I haven't even reviewed them yet to see what I think of any of the details. Unfortunately, I see the 1st strong upgrade at AQU actually won, but I didn't play it because I just got home and just got started. It figures.

Attachment 26289

Today's the first time on put any effort in to the PP's in many months.
I did handicap the Santa Anita card,so I'll try with projected pace looks........we'll see.
Big scratch in the 8th.........Spiced Perfection out in favor of GP later.
First race......forget it,horrid betting race.
I'll pick them up in the second.