Pace is a secondary attribute, but many play it as a primary

[Capper Al]

I want to hear from the "pace is the race" guys on this.

There are three primary factors in racing- form, class, and speed. Primary factors are different than secondary factors such as jockey, trainer, and pace. The idea of a primary factor is that together they should make your first cut for contenders in a race. After which, secondary factors are supposed to help one shift through the contenders that were cut out from the primary contenders. Yet many go right to pace as if pace is the race and the main and only primary factor. Some pace handicappers only consider other factors if they are extreme like a layoff of a year, but still weigh pace the main factor. Why?

Is it because today's racing secretaries group horses by class better than they did 50 years ago and, therefore, class is not an issue? Is it because form is too ambiguous? Is it because pace takes into account speed and, thereby, speed as an entity is not necessary to separate out?

Please speak up if you are a pace is the race player.

Thanks

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

I want to hear from the "pace is the race" guys on this.

There are three primary factors in racing- form, class, and speed. Primary factors are different than secondary factors such as jockey, trainer, and pace. The idea of a primary factor is that together they should make your first cut for contenders in a race. After which, secondary factors are supposed to help one shift through the contenders that were cut out from the primary contenders. Yet many go right to pace as if pace is the race and the main and only primary factor. Some pace handicappers only consider other factors if they are extreme like a layoff of a year, but still weigh pace the main factor. Why?

Is it because today's racing secretaries group horses by class better than they did 50 years ago and, therefore, class is not an issue? Is it because form is too ambiguous? Is it because pace takes into account speed and, thereby, speed as an entity is not necessary to separate out?

Please speak up if you are a pace is the race player.

Thanks

There are many ways to argue a point and the two most prevalent are conjecture and supposition sprinkled with peripheral facts that leads to additional argument without conclusion.

However the salient and constructive way to argue is with facts supported with verified and validated evidence.

Therefore it will be interesting to see the “facts” as oppose to the “conjecture and supposition” in response to your question.

[Speed Figure]

Pace is a big factor for me. Form really is not! what longshots look great on form? If they looked great on form they wouldn't be longshots.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

There are three primary factors in racing- form, class, and speed.

The primary factors vary from race to race. Identify the right one(s) often enough and you'll be a winner. Sometimes pace is one of them.

[LottaKash]

I agree that it really depends on the race, when it comes to what to use and what are/is of the most important thing(s) to use in any given race..

My Primary-Factors are: Ability (which, imo, is a combination of Speed/Pace&Class), Form, and Angles...and in that order..


Sometimes Ability and Form are neutralized and Angles become the deciding factor in my handicapping in any given race...And sometimes it is simply the horse with the most Ability, or sometimes Form will be the go factor.... Or a combination of all three will be the nice bargain...

[MJC922]

Nice topic. For me class is the one true primary and the ability to consistently demonstrate class may be lost through poor form and or injury.

I prefer the term 'speed' to represent raw early speed which can be used to advantage as the distances shorten. Speed becomes of lesser importance after traveling a certain distance. Even a horse with superior early speed will be unable to use it to advantage if it isn't allowed by its rider to use that speed before a certain level of fatigue sets in. This is what typically happens when one-way speed horses are rated, you get a first quarter a second slower, a second quarter a fifth faster and then a final quarter maybe a fifth faster for a net loss of three fifths. A raw deal.

Class is 'applied' during the running of a race by way of pace pressure. Sustained i.e. 'even-running' horses of lesser class beat better ones to the line every day when the better class horse isn't paced optimally. So it's possible to draw incorrect conclusions about class without a post-race pace analysis.

Pre-race analysis of pace is hit and miss. It becomes increasingly more reliable as the quantity of raw speed types in the field moves away from the mean. Chances are the handicappers who make this their primary factor are scanning cards looking for races that are either loaded with or absent speed types. The value to be found in a race top-heavy with speed types is that if it unfolds as projected (to be a very fast pace) even inferior class closers can win or be close to horses they wouldn't otherwise get within a city block of in a match race for example. See American Pharoah vs. Tale of Verve, Frammento etc.

It is races like this where lone speed wires the field or where a searing pace collapses and a lone closer picks up the pieces at a price, this is why some handicappers make it their primary factor, they believe this is where the value is to be found. On a race to race basis I agree this is not the primary factor but it has the characteristics of a valuable handicapping factor in that many times it means very little but sometimes it's decisive. All of the true keys to success IMO are factors like that. The ones that always mean something like class are more 'operational framework' they always matter, aren't particularly well hidden and don't make anyone much money.

[thaskalos]

I remember years ago, when I too considered pace to be "only a minor handicapping factor". I would wager on "classy", "fast", and "in-form" horses...without giving any thought to the pace flow of the race...or where these horses figured to be at certain key stages of the given race. I was mesmerized by the high speed figures that these horses possessed...and I thought that they would be able to reproduce these high figures, regardless of the differing pace scenarios.

This type of thinking kept me broke for over 10 years.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I remember years ago, when I too considered pace to be "only a minor handicapping factor". I would wager on "classy", "fast", and "in-form" horses...without giving any thought to the pace flow of the race...or where these horses figured to be at certain key stages of the given race. I was mesmerized by the high speed figures that these horses possessed...and I thought that they would be able to reproduce these high figures, regardless of the differing pace scenarios.

This type of thinking kept me broke for over 10 years.

Without a doubt (at least for me) pace ultimately decides nearly every outcome one way or another, the trouble is we bet before the race which means it has to forecasted. As you know it's the forecasting bit which is problematic. The unreliability of the forecast makes it a secondary factor in totality. If I had a nickel for every race loaded with six speed horses where one of the first two at the quarter mile goes on to win the race I'd be loaded.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by cj

The primary factors vary from race to race. Identify the right one(s) often enough and you'll be a winner. Sometimes pace is one of them.

I do agree somewhat with this. my formulas adjust by race type. But that's more about the mix. The big three are still primary. Also, please note, that implied is how I see it and I am asking input form those who don't see it my way and use pace as a primary factor.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by LottaKash

I agree that it really depends on the race, when it comes to what to use and what are/is of the most important thing(s) to use in any given race..

My Primary-Factors are: Ability (which, imo, is a combination of Speed/Pace&Class), Form, and Angles...and in that order..


Sometimes Ability and Form are neutralized and Angles become the deciding factor in my handicapping in any given race...And sometimes it is simply the horse with the most Ability, or sometimes Form will be the go factor.... Or a combination of all three will be the nice bargain...

I'm open to discussing primary factors that are not pace also. Some of my thinking might come from coding. I consider these other factors as secondary after I get my output.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I remember years ago, when I too considered pace to be "only a minor handicapping factor". I would wager on "classy", "fast", and "in-form" horses...without giving any thought to the pace flow of the race...or where these horses figured to be at certain key stages of the given race. I was mesmerized by the high speed figures that these horses possessed...and I thought that they would be able to reproduce these high figures, regardless of the differing pace scenarios.

This type of thinking kept me broke for over 10 years.

When does pace come into judgment? After these other factors, or before them?

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Without a doubt (at least for me) pace ultimately decides nearly every outcome one way or another, the trouble is we bet before the race which means it has to forecasted. As you know it's the forecasting bit which is problematic. The unreliability of the forecast makes it a secondary factor in totality. If I had a nickel for every race loaded with six speed horses where one of the first two at the quarter mile goes on to win the race I'd be loaded.

You might be the handicapper this thread was started for. I know several handicappers begin and end their selections with pace. Is pace so good for you that all the other factors aren't necessary?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Without a doubt (at least for me) pace ultimately decides nearly every outcome one way or another, the trouble is we bet before the race which means it has to forecasted. As you know it's the forecasting bit which is problematic. The unreliability of the forecast makes it a secondary factor in totality. If I had a nickel for every race loaded with six speed horses where one of the first two at the quarter mile goes on to win the race I'd be loaded.

The "forecasting" aspect of pace is only a minor part of its use...and perhaps its least effective. The most important part of pace handicapping, as far as I am concerned, isn't in trying to "predict" what will happen in the race that's yet to be run today. That's the part that I emphasized in my prior post...because that's the part that's easiest to explain.

To me...the most effective part of "pace handicapping" is in trying to understand how good the horses' PRIOR performances have been. Without a thorough understanding of pace...a handicapper can easily misinterpret a horse's high speed figure...and he can also fail to notice the valid reason for a performance which, at first glance, appears unforgivably bad.

I look at the past performances...and I see that a horse runs a sharp race whenever he is allowed to set a 46-second half mile in a sprint. I look at the horse's last race...and see that he finished a tired 7th while battling on the lead in the exact same class and distance that he usually runs. At first glance...this appears to be the sort of race which might lead me to think that this horse is the sort of horse that's best avoided in its subsequent start...for fear that the horse is tailing off "form". Then I look a little closer...and I see that the horse was asked to travel in 45 seconds flat at the half mile of its "tiring" race. Now the performance makes sense to me. There is nothing wrong with this horse...it was just the victim of the fast pace scenario which unfolded in its last race. Now...I look with anticipation for the horse's next start...thinking that I perhaps could get a better-than-usual price on this horse as a result of this apparently bad performance.

I know that this example sounds obvious...but variations of this example can be found every day. The pace scenario often spells the difference between a horse winning its race...or it finishing a tiring 7th. That hardly seems like a "minor factor" to me.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

You might be the handicapper this thread was started for. I know several handicappers begin and end their selections with pace. Is pace so good for you that all the other factors aren't necessary?

If my suspicion were the value in today's game is in pre-race pace analysis then I would cherry-pick and concentrate my prime bets only in those races. I have friends who do that and I have done it in the past as well. Frankly I don't know if that's where the value is to be found today. Someone else knee-deep in the game fulltime these days might know.

However, I think what you're getting at here Al is do you currently have the proper 'order of execution' -- and in that case I believe the answer is no. IMO projected pace should be a very early if not the earliest step because otherwise we risk being shallow on contenders, eliminating horses who in a typical pace scenario have little chance but in the extreme pace scenario these are potentially very live longshots. Especially if you're a verticals player, some of the best value can be found with suck up horses that based upon class (or speed figs) appear to have almost no chance.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The "forecasting" aspect of pace is only a minor part of its use...and perhaps its least effective. The most important part of pace handicapping, as far as I am concerned, isn't in trying to "predict" what will happen in the race that's yet to be run today. That's the part that I emphasized in my prior post...because that's the part that's easiest to explain.

To me...the most effective part of "pace handicapping" is in trying to understand how good the horses' PRIOR performances have been. Without a thorough understanding of pace...a handicapper can easily misinterpret a horse's high speed figure...and he can also fail to notice the valid reason for a performance which, at first glance, appears unforgivably bad.

I look at the past performances...and I see that a horse runs a sharp race whenever he is allowed to set a 46-second half mile in a sprint. I look at the horse's last race...and see that he finished a tired 7th while battling on the lead in the exact same class and distance that he usually runs. At first glance...this appears to be the sort of race which might lead me to think that this horse is the sort of horse that's best avoided in its subsequent start...for fear that the horse is tailing off "form". Then I look a little closer...and I see that the horse was asked to travel in 45 seconds flat at the half mile of its "tiring" race. Now the performance makes sense to me. There is nothing wrong with this horse...it was just the victim of the fast pace scenario which unfolded in its last race. Now...I look with anticipation for the horse's next start...thinking that I perhaps could get a better-than-usual price on this horse as a result of this apparently bad performance.

I know that this example sounds obvious...but variations of this example can be found every day. The pace scenario often spells the difference between a horse winning its race...or it finishing a tiring 7th. That hardly seems like a "minor factor" to me.

I think we agree, in post-race evaluations which I see your example equating to (or represented by) fractional times in the past performances IMO pace is king. Al is asking about the forecasting bit (if I'm understanding him correctly).