TAM 9 2/17 MCl turf race

[Bill Lyster]

Got this without too much magic:

The main contenders were the 10-9-4. Using the Scott form factors and concentrating on improving or declining horses, I determined that the 10 was declining. In its second back it ran 144.8 at a higher level than today; its last race at the same level it ran 147.3, fully 10.5 fifths of a second slower and could not win. Both races at TAM and the TV was 1 in both cases.

You could even call the 10's last race a failure in that it did not come close to its immediately preceding race, especially given the much slower pace. I used its best line, but downgraded it for win, based on the above

The 9 and 4 came from a tandem and both were improving, obviously by eyeing the final times. The 4th contender, the 7 was left in as the only other horse with a decent TPR, but was slow early and slower late.

Not betting alot, I bet $2 to win on the 4 and $4 to win on the 9, and played a 4-9/4-9-10 exacta, which returned $27.20 to win and $36 in the exacta. Wish they were all this easy.

LT1, I was curious as to whether you ever considered track variant when assessing whether a horse was improving or declining. Scott never mentioned it as far as I can see, but I could also see that it might impact the time comparison if there was a large spread in the TV's in the last two races that were compared.

[Bill Lyster]

Forgot the screenshot of the winner,

[Bill Lyster]

The final result was 4-10-9. And I did not bet any trifectas.

[Lt1]

Nice work Bill. No Bill I don't use TV for that purpose.
Tim

[Bill Lyster]

Thanks Tim,

[Ted Craven]

Nice analysis Bill, and nice hit! Thanks for posting this.

Ted