View Single Post
Old 06-15-2013, 10:25 AM   #2
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
Setting aside that this horse was actually scratched from this race and dealing with it as an exercise in contender identification and paceline selection -

There are about as many 'methodologies' or nuances on 'the methodology' as there are individuals. The key is consistent application of what you have found to be economically effective (i.e. not just 'picking winners' but making money long term off the valid contenders in a race and series of races).

That said, here's an axiom I subscribe to: 'a horse runs as fast as it needs to, not as fast as it can.' Whether a horse's Total Energy (as a measure of its ability that day) is higher or lower than a previous race is sometimes just a function of what it had to do to win or finish the best it could against that particular competition. So, while the last line is often a good one, and a measure of what it is capable of NOW in its form cycle - it may also be capable of BETTER than that recently and simply did not have to exert itself that much in its last line.

This horse won its last race and worked 6 days earlier so we have no reason to think it was not fit to run this race (before it was scratched). Lines 1 and 3 were about the same Total Energy and the Perceptor Total numbers are close as well. The Total Energy Pace of Race (cumulative fractional velocities of the pace setter(s)) is somewhat faster for the last race, so we would say it faced a faster Pace of Race in that last line. All things being equal, prefer a horse (or prefer a recent paceline) who ran well against the faster pace of race.

Another important guideline, IMO, is to examine how the horse distributed its energy in lines you are comparing. Check the TPR/EL graph. Lines which are aberrant, or not in a typical range of how it usually runs, should generally be avoided - i.e. they're not typically how it will distribute its energy today, even if the Total Energies are similar. This horse's last and 3rd lines are both Late (typical of routes anyway) and it has generally distributed its energy in dirt routes between 10.0 and 3.2 to the Late side (i.e. more LPR than EPR per the numbers to the left). I don't know if 10.0 (lat line) is more atypical than 3.2 (3rd line).

You will notice that if you pick line 1, then swap it for line 3, it won't likely change its position on the BL/BL line score tier - so both are fair lines (which in itself it good to know: you have recent confirmation of what the horse is capable of versus the rest). I make the horse a Contender off either line. If it makes it into the Top 3 BLBL, it is a Win (and likely also Place) bet at the ML=15 odds.


Other guidelines I use are:

- all things being equal, prefer the more recent line
- prefer a line clearly more typical of how it distributes its energy, even if it makes the horse look worse (i.e. on the resulting BL/BL odds line)
- don't use a line for a horse which is a 'Bad' line (i.e. one you would designate a 'O' race) just because it has a better Total Energy, SR or Perceptor number: in these cases, this horse did not set this pace or respond to the pace - it merely got 'sucked behind' a faster pace of race. If it ran competitively for a portion of the race, say through the 3nd or stretch call, then faded, you might consider this a O+ race and still use it if there's a chance that the reasons it faded previously won't duplicate today.

Whether it can only win in the presumed lower calibre races of its last and 3rd lines is sometimes a fraught decision, but making decisions that way will definitely put you squarely with the rest of the crowd, and earn you the mutuels which the rest of the crowd gets, i.e. insufficient for long term profit. Analysing races by placing primary importance on velocity/energy distribution and how the horses will respond to the matchup of running styles today, and secondary importance on presumed race 'class' equivalencies (and trainer and jockey and post position, etc) is a hallmark of the Sartin Methodology.

The Methodology is however a 'big tent' and individual practitioners will establish, and teach, their own guidelines about what to consider first, what second, etc.

All that said (and perhaps too much said ;-) you have my admiration and respect for diving in and reading and asking questions in public and doing your own thing. Congratulations!

Name:  OP0413-4#6.png
Views: 1507
Size:  152.7 KB
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™
Ted Craven is offline