What do you make of this ?

[Bill V.]

Originally Posted by Boe777

Hi Bill,
Getting of the subject, do you know the link that explains all the RDSS screen
columns that are abbreviated like FW, FX, TT.

Alex

This might help Alex
http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5017

Bill

[Mark]

Bill,

This goes right to the heart of Jim Bradshaw's Energy Distribution:

In most years a 3 year old that can run 24 second 1/4 miles will win the Kentucky Derby: 24-48-1:12-1:36-2:00.
As he was one of the first to say, "for every 1/5 of a second a horse has to run faster in the first fraction, his final fraction will be at least 2/5 of a second
slower".
This is one of the great fallacies of Pars: Averages can give you the general characteristics of the horse population at any track over a specific period of time. It is more germane to time of year when the track horse populations remains unchanged. In the fall and the spring and early summer the previous year's 2 year olds begin to stretch out. Horses running
in inclement weather over the winter head to the farm for a rest or begin to tail off, trainers move their stock from one track to another in preparation for longer spring-summer meets.

When you have a specific race that well matches the composition of the current track horse population then your averages will more likely be accurate. However, when the race is comprised of sprinters stretching out or shippers from other tracks or other new shooters then the dynamics of the race make it less predictable using historical
averages.

Additionally, a race can be composed of varying running styles. The more Early runners of equal capabilities the greater the likelihood that a Presser will win. If the Pressers get sucked into the early pace or are of poor quality, the greater likelihood of a relatively slower Sustained runner will pass them all in the stretch. So without a thorough analysis of the individual runners, determining what early paces they can successfully compete against and whether they have proven successful in fighting off repeated challenges
will leave you reliant on averages that are not as at applicable to the race.

Fast Early horses that run unchallenged at a distance they have shown they are able to complete successfully will always have the best speed figures
Fast Early horses that have to fight through their first and second fractions will tire and horses with slower speed figures will win.

Finally, the first fraction of any race, sprint or route is least affected by track surface speed. Horses are brimming with energy and excitement when they break from the gate.
First fractions are most impacted by the natural speed of the horses involved in the race. In your chart, you lump horses who have run 1 full point of the average together. That
means that an average of 24.5 second first fraction you are comparing a race with a 24 second first fraction to those of a 25 second first fraction. Arguably a difference of 5 or more
lengths. That's like a horse running 3 or 4 wide on each turn in a route and probably 5 wide on a one turn race.

I realize that you have your way of doing things and I have mine and there is nothing I can really do to change your mind, but there are others that frequent this website that
my view my arguments and begin to view things differently.

[Segwin]

One of your better posts Mark.

[Boe777]

Thanks Bill,
That is what I needed, I was not quit sure of a few of them.

Alex

[lone speed]

Great post.....!!!!

Good points about using pars and expressing your thoughts about some of the fallacies of using averages.....thanks for your contributions...

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

When in a discussion about projecting the pace of race
recently, I thought about all the races I have watched over many years at Parx.

I thought that I had noticed something.
I started keeping track of the pace of race from all the races at Parx.
Right now I have 170 race for 3 + male at the 1 mile distance.

Here is what I have seen. It seems to me that the longer the race goes the
less likely the splits will fall into a range of 1 from the average.

For example at the second call, the average pace of race for 3 + males is
113.4
So I went and sorted the second call pace of race to find how
many times in those 170 race the pace of race was between 113 and 114.
This turned out to happen 74 times in the 170 races

The grid below shows the results of all the splits and final time
using the same measure of within 1 of the average.

According to my chart, The first number ( around the first turn at Parx )
shows an average of 24.5 The range of 24-25 shows the highest percent
of the splits, Yet final time shows the least amount of races within 1 of the average. on 40 of 170

My idea is based on what Doc said. That a 5000 claimer runs the early pace
just as well as a champion. The difference is the 3rd fraction.

Your thoughts ?


Attachment 36350



Thanks
Bill

"Life is so simple and beautiful when you live in the present moment. what greater gift can you give then presence ? Pure presence is from the heart"

I regard to Bill V.’s post, above, in Tom Brohamer’s book he spends considerable time talking about the DRF variant adjustments. Although it does not read as simplistic as I will write here, it boils down to the same thing.

First he writes that first fraction adjustments should be kept to a minimum. He goes on to say that the biggest adjustment to the first fraction should be on a “track to track” basis. Further, he says that even on a track labeled as “heavy”, the first fraction remains very close to the track par whether the speed of the overall track is either fast or slow by many lengths.

Finally, he initially says the second fraction should receive 50% of the DRF variant, but goes on to say that the first fraction should also receive a smaller portion of the second call adjustment. It should receive a smaller portion for the reason mention above. And, of course, the final time would receive a 50% Adjustment.

Looking at Bill V.’s chart, below, you can see that what was written more than 20 years ago remains the same today. The first fraction in Bill V.’s chart is very similar throughout the year regardless of the track condition and daily variant and therefore not requiring much of an adjustment.



When my son and I were writing program code for my database, we took the variant adjustments live about a year after we initially started. The reason for that was so we could gather information on 10’s of thousands of races and see if we agreed with what we had learned from Brohamer. Once we had this additional information we “tweaked” it a bit for our own purposes based on what we learned from our research before finally taking the coding live.

[wannabeapro]

Brohamer also talks about tracks having a "predictable average DRF number" for its variant. Looking at the data, in March and September the final times went down into the 137-138 range. This would tend to push the DRF variant down as well. But the track profile had flipped. Instead of early speed and slower finishes, the data shows slow fractions and strong finishes. Is the track really faster or is this the "new" norm for the month? I would say it is the latter. This is why Brohamer says to continually update your models as things change.

A examination of the win model for the periods of March and September in relation to the other months would be of value. The avg final time was faster in these two months as the winners took advantage of the slower pace and posted big finishes.

Horses that won while running during this these two months would be running against the profile in other months. They would be facing a faster early pace and should be downgraded as a result. (provided things stay the same in other months!)

[Bill V.]

thanks everybody for your input on this subject

I just would like to add I did name this thread What do YOU make of this ?

I have my own thoughts on the reason that the first fraction
pace of race is more consistent than the other fractions and why as the race goes further along the times spread out.

I am dealing with averages at this point because the sample size I have
is limited. Right now I'm only looking at 3 + older males

I soon will have data for females and then I will start to break the data down by class. I also will include the DTV averages for each month I find this subject interesting so I will continue to study it

Yes I am only dealing with averages at this point. However I hope we are not
looking at the charts I present and thinking that every month has the same amount of races at 1 mile for 3 + males. The amount of races in a month,
good bad and ugly changes. Some have more ugly races than others. Some have many more mile races than others. The race condition book is based on filling cards based on the available horses .

They can only count on so many horses to ship in for the better races
Many of the cheaper races are filled with tandems..

What am I making of this ? Well I do see how the pace of race does
change and how a fast pace of race effects the match up.
I have been reading about a fast pace of race or a slow pace of race for many years. This study is helping me understand the importance of
looking at the POR from which the horses ran their + races.

[Mark]

Every race has its own cast of players. At each condition you have a collection of horses, some from a last race tandem but also other runners. Within that tandem you have horses that are a race or two off of a layoff, some could have already hit their top and are on the downside or still others that may benefit from the matchup today: Early or OTE.
There is only one thing that we can count on: the past performances of the horses in today's race. That's all we have. Yes, we can say that there are different variants and distances but in the final analysis all we have really is the past performances of each of the horses. We need to make an educated guess as to who will take the lead and what kind of first fraction will be run.

Think about it. If the horses have to run fast in the first portion of the race to stay in contention that is energy consumed. If they do not or don't have the speed then they are trading ground lost for energy conserved. It they walk away from the gate then everyone is in play. Regardless of the average second calls or TPR numbers you have to gauge how much energy is consumed by the Early horses, how
fast are they going to go and who wants the lead.

If you do nothing more and attempt to project the first fraction of the race, you will further your understanding why certain horse win races and that will make you money
in the long run.

[Segwin]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

This study is helping me understand the importance of
looking at the POR from which the horses ran their + races.

Me too Bill. Thank you for the post and sharing.