[Jake]

Originally Posted by kahunab

Jake, I love the conversation going back and forth because I learn from that too. When I say, "a good place to start", I am basically referring to the arrow horses. Even at the Breeders Cup with full fields and a lot of great horses, look how often the arrow horses, for lack of a better term, provided the win or place horse. When you can use RX3 to get to 5 contenders. Then examine the arrow horses knowing you have a great expectation of having the win or place in 2 or 3 horses. At the Breeders Cup there were 14 playable races and 13 of the races had the Win or Place in the 2 or 3 Arrow horses. How you choose which one to bet or leverage can be different. I like to figure out the match up and the amount of pressure and which horse those factors favor. The starting point for me is getting down to 2 or 3 horses quickly.

Thanks to you, Tim and Don for your continued interest.

Dick

Dick, allow me to clear the air a bit here. You're a remarkably gracious man, with a strong learning and teaching motivation, which is apparent. I went back and have read all your posts back to 2012, watched all the Zoom videos, and read or seen yours and Bill's presentations. So, I know how long you have personally been trying to solve this puzzle, and the huge amount of cognitive work you have poured into this long endeavor.

As you know, I contacted you privately after failing to get answers from you twice while you were traveling for a number of weeks. I sent you a private message with three written questions about your reasoning behind your pace trilogy: Quirin Points for pace pressure determination, the New Pace numbers, the low/high pressure concept with SR ranges. Instead, of a simple written responses to those questions, with a few succinct answers, you offered my Zoom time with you. That told me what I needed to know, Dick, which is why I deferred and told you I would go back to my own data projects with AI on this.

Here's why I asked you on this thread about your Breeder's Cup experience. Not about the Blue Arrow horses, but because of the questions above involving the rest of the process for finding the key horse, all relative to this pace trilogy.

Here's what I know from my own analytics in handicapping data over 35 years, with heavy large-size databases from Bris, and HSH data, among other sources.

First you can use Quirin Points for a lot of things which are helpful to understanding pace and matchup, but what you can't do with it is determine total race pressure for all 3 fractions. In fact, it uses the wrong fraction to even attempt this. It's good for determining first fraction individual pressure match ups, but that's about it, with a few exceptions. Mitch44, Dan Boals, and others have this absolutely nailed this, kudos here, and deserve some revisiting of their old threads.

Secondly,and this is connected at the hip with the above comments, is the New Pace numbers. They are badly flawed for a similar type of reason; and Dave Schwartz has finally figured this out in his new AI program: here's a quote from his deTERMINATOR page--"just decide how the race will be run."
"Pick the call that matters
E - 1st call
EP - 2nd call
LP - After 1st Call
SR - Stretch Run"

With New Pace and Quirin Points, you are often sampling in the wrong fraction! Get it wrong and your pace match-up and pace pressure falls apart.
Going to the SR ranges at this point won't save you.

Finally--sorry this is so long-winded--this ultimately still begins and ends with the correct paceline selection. Without the right one chosen, all this is moot. I have strong opinion on this, but won't bother to share them.

Dick, I learned a ton from your work, so this thanks is sincere. I like to think that I understand most of your method quite well; if I'm mistaken, this too will be reflected in a para-mutuel feedback loop that is never shy at punitively reminding us of our overconfidence.


Jake