Pace Scenario Question

[raybo]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I see the term energy, used and abused way too much when it comes to horse racing.. Can anyone define, what exactly you mean when you say that the horse "finished with energy" or "how a horse expends its energy during the race" (term used frequently in Sartin methodology)... As far as I know, from a mechanics scope of view, the energy to move from A to B is always the same, meaning that a horse who covered the same distance in two different timings, he still consumed the same amount of energy, regardless of how quick or slowly he did it.

I see where you're going, but the "common" usage of energy in racing, is either of the Sartin variety (%early/%median etc) where you are finding percentages between the feet per second calculations of the different fractions, and of course, the total.

The other is the assumption that, in a particular race, a horse has a specific amount of energy it can expend (depending on form and will), from 0, if he never breaks at all, to 100 if he collapses at the end of the race. So, any horse that does not collapse at the end of a race (from sheer fatigue and not from injury and/or mishap), has NOT expended 100% of its energy. The viewing of the "run-out" can used to roughly estimate how much of its total energy it expended in that race. "Form" is the hard part.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Cratos

If you are going to use a term you should at least use it properly and you don't need an understanding of advanced math or physics to do so.

That depends on whether you are using the term mathematically or as way of describing something. In this case we are just describing something (the estimated amount of physical stamina reserves).

I use the term "velocities" all the time, as do many, many other horse players, as an expression of speed in feet per second rather than miles per hour (distance, in feet, divided by time, in seconds) which is not the formal mathematics or physics meaning. Not everything has to be terminologically correct, if the people discussing it know what is meant.

Yes, we could get into "force" and "work" and "displacement" and "cosine (theta)" but why would we need to do that unless our method depended on those kinds of calculations, which I assume yours does, but the vast majority of others don't.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Cratos

If you are going to use a term you should at least use it properly and you don't need an understanding of advanced math or physics to do so.

Well, we don't. So live with it.
Getting old.....very old.
WE know what we are talking about.
Do you send emails to the 5 Hour Energy Drink people?

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by raybo

I use the term "velocities" all the time, as do many, many other horse players, as an expression of speed in feet per second rather than miles per hour (distance, in feet, divided by time, in seconds) which is not the formal mathematics or physics meaning. Not everything has to be terminologically correct, if the people discussing it know what is meant.

But, it is correct.

Furlong per fortnight, angstroms per decade, it's all correct, just different units.

[Tom]

Furlong per fortnight,

Oh, Finger Lakes!

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by raybo

Probably not, but if horses did use 100% of their energy they would collapse at (or at least shortly after) the wire. Everything is NOT about mathematical formulation, nor even, higher math at all, believe it or not.

Exactly.

Virtually all horses continue running after the wire. Sometimes it's visually clear that some have more left in the tank than others. Occasionally it's visually clear that one has a ton left in the tank.

This is one of the minor flaws in all mathematical models of measuring horse ability with fractions and final time. The goal of the rider is to win, not to maximize his final time. Very often riders are trying to use as little energy early as possible. They run relative to the other horses, bide their time, and only begin their serious run for the win when appropriate. A superior horse will sometimes finish with a lot left. Sometimes the pace is so slow a lot of horses will finish with something left.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by raybo

I see where you're going, but the "common" usage of energy in racing, is either of the Sartin variety (%early/%median etc) where you are finding percentages between the feet per second calculations of the different fractions, and of course, the total.

The other is the assumption that, in a particular race, a horse has a specific amount of energy it can expend (depending on form and will), from 0, if he never breaks at all, to 100 if he collapses at the end of the race. So, any horse that does not collapse at the end of a race (from sheer fatigue and not from injury and/or mishap), has NOT expended 100% of its energy. The viewing of the "run-out" can used to roughly estimate how much of its total energy it expended in that race. "Form" is the hard part.

Sometimes a horse or person cannot use all of their energy even if they try at 100%. If a human ran 30 yards as fast as they could they would not be out of energy after 30 yards yet they could not have run any faster. Seeing that a horse is full of energy at the end of a race might indicate that the health or fitness of the horse is good but it doesn't necessarily indicate that the horse could have run faster.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Seeing that a horse is full of energy at the end of a race might indicate that the health or fitness of the horse is good but it doesn't necessarily indicate that the horse could have run faster.

You are probably right, but sometimes it indicates they could have. You see it most often among lightly raced horses moving up the ladder and real champions. As the demands of the races they enter increase, they wind up running faster final times instead of slower final times....until of course they max out and then greater demands lead to slower final times.

One of the best examples of that was Zenyatta. That's partly why in the past I've said her PPs were a great book on handicapping. If you analyzed the pace of her races, watched her finish and gallop out, looked at the winning margins and fluctuations in her final time figures etc... it forced you to think about horses in a different way than most final time handicappers had previously.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Exactly.

Virtually all horses continue running after the wire. Sometimes it's visually clear that some have more left in the tank than others. Occasionally it's visually clear that one has a ton left in the tank.

I've learned to regard gallop-outs as largely a function of soundness and experience. Smart veteran runners know when the work is done. And riders can't WAIT to pull up a sore horse or ugly-mover. In addition, some (lazy) jocks are NOTORIOUS for yanking a horse up one jump past the wire. Others lack the strength to pull one up-some, in fact, (usually female) require the outriders to bring many of their mounts to a halt.

This aside, when I see a horse with raw or good tactical speed race sluggish and gallop-out TOO strongly, I sometimes suspect that the jock wasn't trying. I've had success playing those types right back. Hope all is well, and happy holidays, Wayne.

[mountainman]

An interesting off-shoot discussion might be : when to go contrarian and bet against the apparent pace-scenario? It's tricky, but extremely rewarding when pulled off. I have some pet-approaches to this. Any thoughts?

[Tom]

When a closer runs into a slow pace, it will likely not be able to use all it's energy because a horse can only run so fast. They may show a great gallop out, but they did nothing early on.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by mountainman

An interesting off-shoot discussion might be : when to go contrarian and bet against the apparent pace-scenario? It's tricky, but extremely rewarding when pulled off. I have some pet-approaches to this. Any thoughts?

Doesn't that just boil down to price?

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Tom

Well, we don't. So live with it.
Getting old.....very old.
WE know what we are talking about.
Do you send emails to the 5 Hour Energy Drink people?

No, but their advertising is correct. You appear to have a problem with "scientific correctness" and from what I get from your posts you will invariably used the word "we" as an euphemism to make your point(s) all inclusive which they are not.

Also what I understand is that this forum is open world wide via the Internet and therefore ambiguity should always be minimized if not nonexistent.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I see the term energy, used and abused way too much when it comes to horse racing.. Can anyone define, what exactly you mean when you say that the horse "finished with energy" or "how a horse expends its energy during the race" (term used frequently in Sartin methodology)... As far as I know, from a mechanics scope of view, the energy to move from A to B is always the same, meaning that a horse who covered the same distance in two different timings, he still consumed the same amount of energy, regardless of how quick or slowly he did it.

Finished with energy would mean that the horse did not appear to be tired at the end of the race. A human might be tired after a long day of work and not have enough energy for a night on the town.

I am all for scientific correctness but in this instance we are talking about a state of being and not a measurement of some sort.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Doesn't that just boil down to price?

Not without a handicapping component. That's the aspect I thought might make a good topic.