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

rdiam · 03-21-2018, 07:44 PM

I would like to start a discussion about what I will refer to as a race's Macro Outlook: many of the posts on this board are concerned with the "micro" of a horse race -- picking a pace line, picking contenders, tossing non-contenders, etc. I think it is important to first look at the bigger (macro) picture.

Let's define a race's Macro Outlook as a determination of how contentious the race is likely to run. On a broad level, a race will either be predictable and orderly, or unpredictable. On the unpredictable side, the races can either be open, with many (i.e. 5-7 contenders), or it can be chaos. Each macro outlook will have a prescribed betting approach.

Predictable, orderly races will generally have 1-3 standout contenders. One suggested (but crude) method of defining predictable races is when the ML odds on the favorite are 2-1 or less. This is a race where the favorite is often legitimate, one of the top 2-3 favorites is likely to win and/or place in the exacta. When betting horizontal exotics, this type of race will often produce a single, should be used on the back end of rolling doubles or in any case, a race not to go too deep.

Open, contentious races usually will require the ability to find a vulnerable favorite or second favorite, as well as a horse with an extreme pace advantage in terms of running style or superior pace figures early and/or late. It needs deep coverage in both vertical and horizontal exotics.

Chaos races exist when there are enough unknowns to make it difficult to handicap the race using running style, pace, and energy tools. This would include races with too many FTS, but it would also include races where all of the horses would qualify for what Pizzolla used to call "pigs" or the sheets guys would (politically incorrectly) call "cripples". There are usually vulnerable favorites and second favorites in chaos races, and techniques other than traditional Sartin handicapping must be utilized if the race is to be played at all.

I believe that this type of macro analysis is the starting point for any race -- first to decide if it is playable or unplayable, and second to decide which handicapping tools are best suited to create a betting strategy. Thanks.

Richard

Thoughts?

03-21-2018, 07:44 PM	#1
rdiam Grade 1 Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 606	Macro Outlook I would like to start a discussion about what I will refer to as a race's Macro Outlook: many of the posts on this board are concerned with the "micro" of a horse race -- picking a pace line, picking contenders, tossing non-contenders, etc. I think it is important to first look at the bigger (macro) picture. Let's define a race's Macro Outlook as a determination of how contentious the race is likely to run. On a broad level, a race will either be predictable and orderly, or unpredictable. On the unpredictable side, the races can either be open, with many (i.e. 5-7 contenders), or it can be chaos. Each macro outlook will have a prescribed betting approach. Predictable, orderly races will generally have 1-3 standout contenders. One suggested (but crude) method of defining predictable races is when the ML odds on the favorite are 2-1 or less. This is a race where the favorite is often legitimate, one of the top 2-3 favorites is likely to win and/or place in the exacta. When betting horizontal exotics, this type of race will often produce a single, should be used on the back end of rolling doubles or in any case, a race not to go too deep. Open, contentious races usually will require the ability to find a vulnerable favorite or second favorite, as well as a horse with an extreme pace advantage in terms of running style or superior pace figures early and/or late. It needs deep coverage in both vertical and horizontal exotics. Chaos races exist when there are enough unknowns to make it difficult to handicap the race using running style, pace, and energy tools. This would include races with too many FTS, but it would also include races where all of the horses would qualify for what Pizzolla used to call "pigs" or the sheets guys would (politically incorrectly) call "cripples". There are usually vulnerable favorites and second favorites in chaos races, and techniques other than traditional Sartin handicapping must be utilized if the race is to be played at all. I believe that this type of macro analysis is the starting point for any race -- first to decide if it is playable or unplayable, and second to decide which handicapping tools are best suited to create a betting strategy. Thanks. Richard Thoughts?