Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up - View Single Post

Bill Lyster · 10-05-2021, 03:29 PM

The important thing to note in most or all of these examples is that the winner 1) needed the lead or very near the lead, 2) had the best EPR, but was probably not within 5 points of the best TPR. So keeping the best three EPR and the best three LPR and any horse in the top five keeps the contender selection process alive.

These NTL types do best with little competition on the lead. Just because a horse once went to the lead does not mean it will end up there today. You need the preponderance of action on the part of the need to lead types to project them against today's pace setter. More often than not the one time leaders will lag in the middle of the pack and let the early horse alone.

10-05-2021, 03:29 PM	#88
Bill Lyster Grade 1 Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar" Posts: 2,418	The important thing to note in most or all of these examples is that the winner 1) needed the lead or very near the lead, 2) had the best EPR, but was probably not within 5 points of the best TPR. So keeping the best three EPR and the best three LPR and any horse in the top five keeps the contender selection process alive. These NTL types do best with little competition on the lead. Just because a horse once went to the lead does not mean it will end up there today. You need the preponderance of action on the part of the need to lead types to project them against today's pace setter. More often than not the one time leaders will lag in the middle of the pack and let the early horse alone.