Paceline Selection
 

It seems people liked the live discussion that was happening on Ray's
thread. I know this has been done before by FTL and Mitch but thought
maybe should be visited again. Let's face it this and getting contenders is the most important part of the Sartin process.
I am attempting to get feedback so the site can be more active if not thanks in advance for viewing this.


I know that people may not want to divulge their way of doing it but
thought I would give it a shot. I know this section is for programs and
probably this should be posted elsewhere but feel more comfortable here.

I use Pizzolla's ( I know elsewhere this can be a taboo subject) LASST
method described in his classic book Handicapping Magic. It is using the
last line unless one of these reasons appear

LAyoffs and their patterns

Structure of distance

Surface change

Trouble in the race



Feel free using any type of software to post your way of doing things here

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

I will jump in

I know Howard put out a book called The Pace Line in July, 1987 - and Ted is kind enough to keep it on this site.

In it he mentioned some things I found useful - like

a contender's second best paceline in the last 10 is often more predictive than the best

and

always use the LAST RACE unless there is a valid excuse to go back further

trouble line
off track
wrong distance
wrong surface
class level too high
first race of the track in the current meeting
bottom of form cycle
bad finish - but good early
poor early - but good finish

I don't know if Pizzola came up with these originally, but when his book Handicapping Magic came out in 2000, these were really old rules by then.

Hello Jeff and Dan,

I believe you both nailed how it's done.

If this helps any, in my last study of winners in 600+ events

I just let RDSS use the auto best perceptor last 3 setting......

....and the most recent line (# 1) showed up 46.7% of the time.

It was close enough to an even split between lines 2 and 3 back

at 29% and 24.3% respectively.

I'm curious to know if anyone else got an outcome

much different than that in similar studies.

Mike

Dan, thanks for your input appreciated.


Mike, appreciate you sharing your study of best of last 3



Jeff

Hey Mike

That sounds correct to me.
I remember Howard wrote in one of the FollowUps or Manuals, that if you have to go back more than 4 or 5 lines, you should consider passing the race.

He talked to me about guys who were combining lines, which Synthesis manual entry allowed you to do, who were winning.

One thing that never seemed logical to me, was if a horse was coming off a layoff and you used its second line back - that might be from 9 months ago. But another horse that had been running recently, its 7th line back might be from 5 months ago. How do you reconcile use a 9 month old line while rejecting a 5 month old line. I have not done any type of regression testing on this, but I wonder what it would show.

When Howard told me about the combining of lines, I thought that would be a brilliant thing if you could master it, but if you made a mistake, that could be costly.

Hey Dan,

I didn't read all of the follow ups,
but I do remember Sartin talking about
the risk of going further back into the PPs.

Better prices are found back there,
but you gotta have a good story
to justify going there.

To show one type of scenario which
shows up more in the low-end conditioned claimer ranks,
I have less of a problem going 4+ lines back
for horses who run 7+ times in the last 160 days
(didn't do a study, just guesstimating from memory)
if they just qualified for today's condition (which they couldn't get into
in the last 3 or 6 months or whatever)
in the last week or so.
Many times (in this situation), I've noticed with some outfits
their last 2 lines - 3 weeks or less leading up to
today's event didn't mean much; and the horse's best or 2nd best
in the last 150 days or so was useful anywhere in
their 3 to 8 lines back.

They're not easy to get winners from but
the lines are still good enough to match up against
today's competition.

Mike :)

Dan and Mike, you both made good points here


Jeff

Mike

I know this is a bit off topic but was wondering if you had any
thoughts which was better VDC or BL/BL

Jeff

Hi Mike

Reading through the old manuals and followups, a lot of the PIRCO guys were solid going back to distant lines. That is a skill I have yet to master. For me, I seem to do a lot better picking recent stuff only and letting the program adjust surface and distance.

I am working on an AI Assistant that will hopefully be able to monitor what I am doing and then make note of when going back helped and when it hurt. I just do not have the time to pour over my records and even to keep all the records I need to keep, so am hoping an investment in AI will get a "second pair of eyes" that will help with the administrative tasks.

Jeff,

I look at Perceptor instead of BL/BL.

To me, Perceptor or BL/BL are good to
see if a runner I didn't have a high opinion of
may still have a shot in today's race.

VDC is helpful too, but according to my eye test
it's more late energy friendly (or 3rd fraction friendly)
than I would like it to be.
With VDC, I'm more interested in the number
than the ranking.

If I had to choose, I'm more confident using Perceptor.

I'll share some screenshots of what I noticed about
BL/BL and VDC as soon as I can.

Mike

I try to stay to the best of the last 3[within 1 fur surface & dist[as much as possible but have no problem going back as far as line 10 if I have justification. It is a matter pf having confidence in your process.
Tim

Thanks LT 1 for adding some fuel to the fire, much appreciated

Thanks Mike and Dan for continuing the discussion

LT1

I could not go back as far as line 10 as chances are slim that
it would be predictive to what the horse could do today.


Jeff

Jeff I don't do it that all that often but I have no problem doing it when I can justify it. It is like anything else if you have the bankroll and the confidence to do it it doesn't worry one to take a shot now and then. No one should ever go out of their comfort zone when picking pls or placing bets.
Tim

I never went to a Sartin seminar, but my Dad went to several. He said it was not unusual for one of the teaching members to go way back to get a paceline and often they would win because of it.

I think the people who like LT1 says, have a reason to go that far back, are probably smart to... it is a gutsy move, but if your records show you are okay doing it, I don't see why you would not.

I think the best thing about records is they show what you are successful doing and what you are not. Hard to argue with the numbers. I look forward to the next release and hopefully we will have even better recording tools.

Jeff,

In my 634 race study (non-maidens dirt & turf),
here's what I have for BL/BL.

In 7 horse fields 25%+ of your winners will score 20.5 or better,

and 85%+ of your winners will score 7.5 or better.

Special note: These were run WITHOUT designating main, secondary, and non-contenders.

Mike

Same study.

Again no secondary or non-contender categories.

I could only get 2 win% columns for VDC,
which made any sense, instead of the 4 I could do for BL/BL.

I use the 100% DTV adjustment,
so those who use 50% are likely to
see smaller numbers.

Mike

Hi Dan. I attended over a dozen seminars from Saratoga to Vegas. I was fortune enough to hang out with Doc, Hat and a bunch of teaching members in the bar after the day was over as well as having 1 on1 dinners with several different teaching members. Learned a heck of lot during that time especially from the East Coast folks who played the tracks I did at the time. As Doc use the say the light bulb finally came on for me after 8 yrs of floundering, Now we have this site where folks who wanting to learn can ask questions either in public or by PMS. Let us continue the tradition of helping each other win.
Tim

tIM

No one asked, but here.

Same study, last screenshot today.

In 8 horse fields, 50%+ of the winners
will be no greater than 6/1 odds
according to Profit Line;

and about the same 50%+ will
score 16 or better in Rx3.

Mike

Hello Jeff & Dan and to others. I think the Pace Line manual and also Pizzolla LASST are good places to start. Yes, Pizzolla took his methods from Sartin. No problem as if you read the foreword he wrote it. If you read a couple of pages later, Sartin stressed intuition. The manual and tapes were for those of us where the paceline(s) didn’t jump off the page.

Mike

Thank you very much for sharing the study you did.

As a person who is not good with numbers what is your
conclusion with this.

Jeff

Dan, LT1, and Pianoman


Thanks for your replies, I for one like the story's you guys have
of the old days, I wasn't around at that time.

Hey Eric

I agree with you and "intuition". I think that is what LT1 is saying as well. Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book called "Blink" where he talks about first impressions and snap judgments. I think his conclusion seems to be that if you have a ton of experience and knowledge, then you should trust your first instinct or gut impression. He used the fake statue at the Getty museum as an example, where lots of art history people just said it is wrong. Their 30 and 40 and sometimes 50 years of experience did not tell them what was wrong, but they just "knew" it was wrong.

I think people who handicap for decades, get that same level of instinct on what line is the correct or most telling to use. I don't have that for pacelines, but I do have it for horses at times, where I look at the history of the horse and I am just like, this isn't right, this horse is dangerous in spite of low numbers and low rankings. Obviously, you want to see recent ability at this track, surface and distance, but sometimes the big odds are when you do not.

I don't do a lot of summer racing. I am playing around with Saratoga right now, but not having a lot of success. Normally I avoid summer racing because there are too many tracks running and therefore smaller fields and smaller mutuels and since I am a longshot player, that hurts my bottom line. Also, my health tends to be a lot worse during the summer due to the heat. Hopefully when it cools a bit, we can meet up at Atlantis if you are still okay with that. Maybe for Keeneland or early fall racing. Glad to see you following the topic, hope you are doing well.

Jeff,

I'll just stick to BL/BL for this answer.

For the higher BL/BL scores, I would look for a vulnerable
first or second public betting choice to exploit.

Let's say even if the post time favorite is #1 BL/BL
if there are more than 1 other runners within 1 point of
him/her, I'd be interested in seeing if there's another
significant point which can be made against that top BL/BL /
post time favorite which says this one might be a weaker prospect
than they look to the public.

For longshots, say 8/1 or higher I would prefer
their scores be within 1 point under the 50% column
or better.

From memory it seems many of those longshots who win or complete
exactas meet that standard, but I can't say I did a study on that.

Hope that helps.

Mike :)

Thanks, Mike, for your reply it helps

Dan nice reply as well


Jeff

It's nice to see a thread where everyone gets along with each
other and making good posts

Jeff

I should have mentioned the Match Up manual as well. Bradshaw in the manual was much more strict than Sartin in what constitutes a + race. He stated the horse had to finish 1st or 2nd or within 2 3/4 lengths. Since I've retired, I now have time to review my work. I've come to the conclusion that Trackmaster pp's don't work for myself. Like what Dan stated about the Greek statue in Blink, I've always had a nagging feeling something was not right. The DRF and Trackmaster are like apples and oranges. No use in attempting to make them compatible. What may work for RDDS and the other Sartin based software programs is not the same for the DOS programs. Yes, I know there is an export function in RDDS but without viewing the DRF to see what actually is the best of last three it doesn't usually selecting that paceline. Since I live in Reno I get free pp's. I'm using Thoromation 2A and I'm feeling much more comfortable in my results. I'm receiving the results Sartin promised - 70% win wager two horses with Thoromation. Like what Lt1 ends his posts with - Trust but verify,

Pianoman


Great to hear that you're getting good results with Thoromation and
and posting about the Match-UP manual.

Jeff

Ray,

I have not heard from you hope that you and your wife
are doing ok.

Jeff

Pace Lines
 

So when you use the DRF to pick your pacelines how do u go about choosing your pacelines

Hi Bob

I am using Pizzolla's LASST method described in his book Handicapping
Magic. Basically, taking the most recent race unless it's a surface,
distance, bad trip issue. I don't go beyond 90 days picking paceline.

Jeff

Ray,

Calling out again to you pal I hope everything is ok.

Jeff

i will go back as far as needed to get a line that will best represent how the horse will run in todays race. I talked with AwesomeAgain about this and going back even a year is ok.

I stay within the last three pacelines and start viewing the animals with the best DRF speed ratings. Then I decide how I expect the race to be won. Early or Other than Early.

Hi Guys

Thanks for the responses.

I still can't see how going back a year will be of any benefit showing
the condition for today's race.

Jeff

Going back that far is not my cup of tea. But if it’s profitable to you, whom am I to say don’t do it.

pianoman

That is a true statement

Jeff

Just to let everyone know I heard from Ray, these days needs to
be resting more so that's why has not been posting lately.
Not sure of the reason.

Get better Ray and hoping your wife is healthy.

He told me to keep posting but the way my horses have been doing doubt anyone wants to see that



Jeff

Follow up to my using Thoromation. Still going strong. I’m wagering less races which is good. Since retiring, I’m more particular of races that I have a wager. More win wagers than exotics. Good for the bankroll. Rarely go back more than two pacelines. I can always pass if not clear.

Eric

Hi Eric

If you wouldn't mind maybe you could put up an example of
how you use it.

Jeff