Quote:
Originally Posted by dlivery
 .
Would kindly post a screen shot of the close callings  |
Certainly. In this screenshot, I would guess that the imbalance between TE and TPR in this instance is like what Mitch suggested, which was the Deceleration factor of the 3F in TPR. Note that the top TPR was a 7F turf sprint at BEL (not a "comparable" turf race) while the rest of the horses had 1m - 1 1/16m lines. For full disclosure, this is coming from the "Last Line" for example purposes, so I'm not concerning myself with "comparable" or "non-comparable" at this particular time.
The way I had originally demonstrated my process in previous postings/videos, once I had selected my lines, I would eliminate the bottom TE runners and then refer to TPR. In the first screenshot (again, this is an example, I have not handicapped this race. I am using "Last Line" as a demonstrative measure), I can remove 3-4-6-8-13 (bottom TE runners) with no problem. However, when you get to the 5th/6th TE runners, they are separated by a tenth of a point. Splitting hairs. Culling the runner blindly (without supporting guidance) would be short sighted. You can do one of two things. 1) leave the top 6 alone and evaluate them for your wagers however you choose (i.e. BLBL/Rx.) or 2) if you desire to narrow the scope of potential wagering decisions, then you would need to go to another screen.
In the TPR screen, our 6th ranked TE horse (#7) is the TOP TPR runner, while the 5th ranked horse on TE (#2) is 5th on TPR. Assuming all was equal (which it really is not, as #7's last line is a non-comparable line), I would consider eliminating #2 as a contender since TPR didn't just split a hair, it pulverized it.
But back to the original question I posed, which was whether TE and TPR are essentially attempting to quantify the same thing, albeit slightly different? If it is, then I am basically using a different version of what really amounts to be the same handicapping principle to split the 5th and 6th ranked runners. It would make more sense (to me anyway) to use other "tools in the box" to make the final call. In this case, the "Energy" screen would accomplish that, as #7's FX, L/EP and TPP "light up" as a Top 3, while #2's do not. Even evaluating the "Velocity" screen for PoH (or "Segments", which will quantify that Velocity screen into a visual aid), #7 outperforms #2 handily.
So in this case, TPR did support the elimination of #2, but I felt that it validates the need to examine the other screens for further validation. By doing this, I was able to paint a clearer picture of the respective horse's abilities. It made the horses "come alive" if you will.
Again, I did not actually handicap this race. I was merely using the "Last Line" as a default to give the example. I have no idea what the array would appear to be once proper pacelines are selected.