Greater Respect of the first fraction

[Tim Y]

Ever since I put to memory many of the findings of Dr. William Quirin's book: Winning at the Races: Computer Discoveries in Thoroughbred Handicapping, I have been a advocate for the early horses since they win most of the races.

I came to a new appraisal of the 1st fraction as a result. Horses that can propel themselves INTO the pace early on, positionally are in a better place throughout the contest. Add to that a decent 2nd fraction, and many of these steal off to win the entire thing as fatigue overtakes the animals lagging behind just as Huey Mahl predicted.

Many cold weather tracks show such a severe early bias that many can be predicted an outcome merely by who gets out of the gate first. Animals don't like to run into debris flying in their faces.

This game is on the EARLY side and most later paced winners are defaulted to win by a pace falling apart.

[CEW]

Hi Tim -

Not sure why you are bent on your posts concerning 1st fraction & early pace. Are you handicapping and playing races with the goal of winning? Or are you trying to keep stats like Quirin? He has already skinned that cat.....so I believe the question is how are you applying this information and is it helping you win races and improve your win percentage / average mutual?

Regards !

Chuck

[rmath]

Tim, I agree with Chuck in that I would like to see some statistics on how often the top 3 F1 horses win or run second.
Also do you keep track of how often the top 3 LPR horses run first or second.
If you have these stats , are you willing to share them with all of us ?

Thanks, and continue to keep your stats, I know how much work is involved as I also keep track of my contenders and how often they run 1st & 2nd and how often I have the exacta in the contenders.

Rmath

[Tim Y]

Many years ago (LONG before the majority here had ever heard of Sartin), I was reminded (BY HIS OWN WRITINGS) that just like a screwdriver works to screw in and out screws, allows one to open paint cans, scratch things into metal. etc etc.... What we all have here in the methodology is a TOOL: Nothing MORE nothing LESS.

My impression of a forum is a place to present HOW that wide range of TOOLS can be utilized in finding the best way to wager on the outcomes of racing contests.

There is NO one way to eat an ear of corn, polish a car or mow a lawn..and there is DEFINITELY NO one way to evaluate a race.

Try, it reject it....It still represents a COGENT proven variation using the same tool that the rest of us use.

Possibly over the years I have just honed in on the tracks where this principle works better, YET what I know of exercise physiology tells me that earlier is better most of the time.

[Tim Y]

I don't play ONLY to win any longer EXOTICS only

What I have found is that NO ONE survives betting to win only unless you wager about 3 times per month.

[Tim Y]

Not using MULTIPLE pace lines, disdaining the OBVIOUS INFLUENCE of sample error, conclusions more closely follow Bernoulli's Theory of large numbers.

The chance of choosing one, or sometimes even two lines that do not represent the horse's style, ability, form cycle, is always there.

Particularly MISLEADING is the choice of a early pace line challenge that was too slow.

ANY longer I look for how the particular horse's range of response from similar pace pressures works out. THAT is the only competition that really occurs race to race, FRACTIONAL PRESSURE. Since the USUAL sustained animal HAS NO FRACTIONAL STRESS put upon it, the less likely it is a standard from which to predict.

The longer a race, or the faster the early pace, the more exertion physiology determines the outcome.......has forever on the main tracks of North America...with the possible exception of the Fair Grounds.

[Lt1]

Tim I would tend to agree that while in general ep horses tend to win more at most tracks I've have also noted that tracks like Bel and CD will tend to favor other than early. It was mentioned at several seminars by Tom B that Hollywood routes were favoring sustained while sprints were early at that time. I have an interesting situation going on right now at Parx where at a mile and seventy yards off the pace horses have won 22 of the last 28 races while at all the other dirt distances ep has been winning. What's really interesting is that my model has it even at 1-70 while the profile is sustained. What I'm saying is in my opinion one has to keep both a model and a profile at the tracks they play and be ready to adopt to changing situations.
Tim G

[CEW]

Sorry Tim.....the reason you believe players who prefer the win pool can find only 3 plays a month is because, as Howard said a thousand times: you are clinging to mainstream rules (like Quirin's first call contender guideline). And you get mainstream results.

There are still players out there, including myself, that drive a high average mutuel and a healthy win percent and double our banks every three to five racing days. This is pure Sartin.

This site is Sartin Methodology based, is it not? You are quite possibly leading people astray when you downplay the effectiveness of the Methodology, which is what I read from your posts above.

Chuck

[Tim Y]

I have been, and remain a tried and true Sartinite, but just found a use for the TOOL that is NOT in the classic "rules".: Things progress because different sets of eyes, seeing the same things, come up with new interpretations of what they mean. Any of us could do that same thing with the same tool.

This is a tool. One that it's author, stated MORE times than I could remember:"There are no rules!"

Over the years I have discovered, and posted more angles than just about anyone else via long term retrograde analysis of what USED to be hard and fast rules, for instance the idea that you should not use a pace line when the horse was beaten more than 7.5 lengths. I charted about 20 examples of said horses winning their race (usually maidens). Many of these horses were just learning to run and gaining in the ability to apportion their speeds over a distance of ground, so it was simply catching improving early speed in another format (an angle in horse racing basic to any handicapping approach).

Sartin based angles posted over the years: 2nd call maidens (best and most productive Sartin angle I ever found), the modeling of a track by INCOMING e/l standards for distance and surface, the standards to look for in prospective K Derby runners and how to eliminate those who got earlier in style as the distances increased, how to use the % median to discover horses going off form, the Damon Runyon angle (when a field of routers wind up with TRUE SPEEDS WITHIN A SINGLE DIGIT, the winner usually comes from the best deceleration), the use of deceleration standards for turf courses and races (most hover between 98 and 108%), the use of the e/l to discover track biases, Two Lines Better Than the Field (low prices, but huge win percentage angle).

Each and every one of these (and I cannot remember all of them) were gleaned ONLY within the basic framework of the principles I learned since I was with Pirco and the days of Phase III (the first big old floppy disk program), then Energy, Kgen, Engen, then Thoromation, Quad Rater, Synthesis, Valdiator and finally the program I tested for the original programmer: Speculator..NO where else.

[Tim Y]

I cling to NO mainstream rules........

Recently Sandy Hawley and a jockey's agent confirmed their opinions as far as the influence of any one particular rider on a horse.

Paraphrasing Hawley: "Of course there are some horses that only perform their best with them on their back but they are in the minority. AT MOST the rider could be 10 to 15% of the outcome, but without a competitive horse, any journeyman rider cannot make them any better." Agent agreed too as they made up now about 15 ex-riders to which I have posed that question.

Man Made class structure: FICTION

Influence of TRAINER? It is the horse the horse the horse. Would we have ever heard of Buddy Delp without Bid? Or Cam Gambolotti without Spend A Buck?

Workout? Once you actually see them you realize how irrelevant one's opinion of things you do not know amount to. There are a myriad of ways to disguise a good move.

Does that sound like the classic belief system to you?