Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...)
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...) Interactive Teaching & Learning - Race Conditions, Contenders, Pacelines, Advanced Concepts, Betting ...

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2017, 12:47 PM   #1
Jeebs
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 909
Identifying Running Styles

This step is one of the most critical when going through our process. My way of "Run Style Analysis" has been a mix of both Jim Cramer and RichieP's intuition as he was taught by The Hat.

The brilliant handicapping mind of Dave Schwartz turned me onto Cramer's run styles. Here is his breakdown in his own words:

Quote:
E=a horse that challenges for the lead at the 1st call. (My (Schwartz's) definition is "within 1 length of the leader.)

EP=a horse that challenges for the lead for the 1st time at the 2nd call.

P=a horse that challenges for the lead for the 1st time at the stretch call.

S=a horse that challenges for the lead for the 1st time in the last furlong.
RichieP, in his introductory "Mind's Eye" thread (http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3717) initially recommends 10-15 seconds, then amends to 3-5 seconds with the first instinct that comes through your head when looking at the PPs (Hat's way).

The Hat also presents guidelines for RS analysis in multiple areas of this forum.

The challenge that I have in analyzing for Run Style in PPs comes with those horses that have shown multiple run styles over the course of the 10 races (12 if you use DRF Classic PPs online, or unlimited if you use TimeformUS) presented to us.

Here was a horse I examined the other night while looking at the PP's at Evangeline Downs:

Name:  Run Style.JPG
Views: 1311
Size:  254.8 KB

My "call" here was "Sustained Presser" as it shows a "Sustained" ability in L2, L8 and L9 and a "Press" ability in L1, L5 and L6. It shows an "Early" runner-up in the slop in L4, but it is the only "Early" style in its 10 races.

In this particular race, he broke 8th, 8th at the 1st call, 9th at 2nd call, 8th at Stretch call and 9th at the Finish. Lone comment was that the horse "was never close" at any point.

With the mix of run styles as they are, how does one truly make a "call"?

This is an area of struggle that I feel holds me back some. We all can identify the true Early horses and the true Sustained horses... its the homogenous horses that get tricky.
Jeebs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2017, 01:43 PM   #2
Bill V.
The egg man
 
Bill V.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
I know

Hi Jeebs

I know there are other here who can help you out with much better readouts
And I hope they do

In your example you only show the raw original screens.
But I feel the running style designations are dependent on the projected POR

My designations are positional based because I use phase 1 which is based on
the ancient 1 point per 1/5

Anyway
In you horse's example i could not establish a fulcrom POR because I am assuming EVG just reopened , all the horses are coming from FG or DED


Here are the pace of race EPRs for Let Him Live's + or (+)

POR EPR in + races
RDSS defaulted to presser and I would agree


Line 1 EPR 84 Presser
Line 2 EPR 78 Sustained
Line 4 EPR 68 Early X
Line 5 (+) EPR 80.5 Presser
Line 6 EPR 78.5 Presser
Line 8 EPR 78
Line 9 EPR 75 Sustained

Name:  POR.JPG
Views: 1239
Size:  210.7 KB

Last edited by Bill V.; 04-16-2017 at 01:47 PM.
Bill V. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2017, 04:44 PM   #3
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
When I have a horse that has both red and blue sticks what I do is look at the horses best races. In this case the horse's best races are in blue and its worse races are in red.
Therefore this horse is either an SP or S.

Then I consult the Velocity- POH screen and see what the designation is there. The ESP next to the % Med would be the proper designation. The other one that appears further to the right RS and which appears on the horses PP's is the visual running style. A horse can appear to be early and in reality isn't. I.e. if you have all S types in a race ,one has to be in the lead or near the pace, that doesn't mean its ESP has changed. Another example is a horse goes wire to wire, by the visual its an E horse however by its % Med it could be something different. Horses on the lead slow down when not being challenged and only do what they have to.

% Med uses all 3 FR's for total energy therefore another ex. is a horse goes wire to wire but has killed off all the competition and coasts home with a poor 3rd FR. Well that will hurt its total energy and have an effect on its % Med and ESP designation.

%Med came about in 1988 and has proven to be more accurate that the % Early that was used in the early 1980's and more accurate than the visual. Its formula is (F1+F2) / (F1+F2+F3) or a horses Fr's are: F1 60.2, F2 56.6 & F3 52.9= (116.8 Tot. of F1 & F2 or early) / (169.7 Tot. of F1,F2 & F3 or tot .energy) or early divided by total energy = 68.8 % rounded off .

Lastly % Med has several uses, consult Brohamer's book .
Mitch44

Last edited by Mitch44; 04-16-2017 at 04:47 PM.
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2017, 05:25 PM   #4
MikeB
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeebs View Post

My "call" here was "Sustained Presser" as it shows a "Sustained" ability in L2, L8 and L9 and a "Press" ability in L1, L5 and L6. It shows an "Early" runner-up in the slop in L4, but it is the only "Early" style in its 10 races.

In this particular race, he broke 8th, 8th at the 1st call, 9th at 2nd call, 8th at Stretch call and 9th at the Finish. Lone comment was that the horse "was never close" at any point.

With the mix of run styles as they are, how does one truly make a "call"?
I would check the charts on some of those races and see if there is a pattern in how the field is running those races. Are there a lot of Es fighting for the lead in some but not in others? Is a lone E getting out front early and coasting down the back stretch? And so on. And without more to go on, I'd ignore that race in the slop.
MikeB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2017, 07:31 PM   #5
lostandwon
Grade 2
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 97
You know what opinions are like...

I want to qualify my response in that I in no way wish to speak for ANYONE let alone RichieP and/or Jim Bradshaw. I also do not wish to appear to be argumentative with Bill or Mitch or anyone else that uses the various compounded factors and screens to arrive at what works for them. I’m just trying to find my own way. I happily stumbled across RDSS, pace and cap, and then, most recently, the matchup.

With that said, I am an advocate of the idea that there are only two types of running styles…E and OTE. E is on the lead and/or fighting for the lead. Everybody else is OTE. Rather than try to split hairs about P or SP or S etc delineate them via what position they run behind the lead. This isn’t my idea, it is, of course, from the Hat.

When there are varied running styles shown, make a call perhaps based on what is shown most often. Or, make a call based on where the horse wins from.

In regards to Let Him Live. He’s an OTE horse. The only time he took the lead was at a painfully slow pace of 26.6 – 51.9. Notice how he didn’t win up front? Perhaps he was out of position and uncomfortable up front. The other lines show a pace in the 23’s & 24’s. The two wins came from 10th and 8th position which may lead me to think he needs LOTS of E horses to run against AND the front end to break down for him to get up to the wire.

One other thing about the same horse showing different running styles. If a horse can win as both an E AND OTE it is a horse that is dangerous and should be given careful consideration. Again, none of these are my ideas. Just trying to implement the matchup as taught by RichieP from Jim Bradshaw.
lostandwon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2017, 10:08 PM   #6
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
lostandwon:

The visual verses the ESP or computer generated style are two different concepts or disciplines completely.

If your a match up devotee you should be using the visual as per Bradshaw's teachings. And if your a RDSS devotee using compounded fractions etc. you should be using the ESP % Median running styles.

I believe it would be less confusing to both concepts if they didn't appear together on screens and the appropriate one appeared only on the screens that the different concepts use exclusively.

Bradshaw had a unique ability to carry the match up from the gate to the finish. Very few can do that and grasp the 3rd FR. Also by carrying through the 3rd Fr. I believe he had a better grasp of a horses running style that few can grasp. His Voodoo magic came from doing thousands of races and watching them also.

Specific ESP designations by parameters is similar to what excel and database individual's try to obtain. The difference is all the work has already been done and proven. % Med. is excellent for a track profile, to tell if a horse can stretch out or is better suited for the turf etc. There are certain ranges that very few horses can win with such as over 70% because they stop on a dime with very sharp deceleration. Not that they can't, if the field are all like that than someone has to win.

Hope this clarifies it for you.
Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2017, 10:38 PM   #7
The Pook
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Loretto, Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,535
Jeebs, further to lostandwons response, when you mention the intuitive minds-eye stuff: To do it in 3 to 5 seconds you are looking only E or OTE. It becomes even faster after thousands and thousands of races. A look or a feel while scanning raw PP's. Sometimes of course there is cause for pause. And sometimes you can't fully decide. But that is rare. Like lost says, your example is an OTE.

As I am sure you have read things get simplified in advanced matching. But in earlier application you deal with all the delineations. That works too but it is slower. It seems to me Jim moved things along like he did to enable scanning for the best of the best, spot playing many races and tracks.

If that is what you are interested in, fine. Probably if you are really digging in to each race and analyzing many screens and compound factors etc. like you seem to do you need to apply the more subtle variations of position. When a horse confuses you as to running style, pass the race.

Pook
The Pook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2017, 11:22 PM   #8
lostandwon
Grade 2
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 97
Mitch, no sweat or anything but I'm not quite sure what parts of your post were directed specifically toward me or what your clarifying for me? I mean I still got a day job & have plenty to learn but it went by me.

I wholeheartedly agree they are two different concepts or disciplines completely. I would even go as far to say they are different doctrine or paradigm or dogma etc...

The original post contained words such as: RichieP; The Hat; Mind's Eye AND it contained a link to the Hat Check Forum. Hmm
lostandwon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 12:53 AM   #9
Mark
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 318
It is so much more...

I don't believe that you can separate Running Style from Projecting today's pace.
First there are two aspects that you want to determine for Running Styles:1) Will the horse pass other horses, will he run past a bunch of horses in a single pace segment 2) When the horse wins or runs very close where was he at the 1st Call. OK, maybe 3. Will he fight when he is challenged or does he quit and let the other horse go by.
Now can you project the pace of today's race? Is there a FPLR N-T-L Early in today's field? These are the easiest races to handicap.
The biggest fallacy about ESP is that it will change any number of times in the horse's pps depending on the pace the horse ran against. It shouldn't surprise you that the horse will be much more consistent in races where the early pace requirements allow the horse to assume its preferred 1st Call position.

Beyond these points, a horse race is a continuum of energy exertion. Even slow S horses will have to run faster to maintain contact with the back of the pack. Earlier running horses will be on or near the pace no matter what the early pace is. If it is too fast, they fade. When looking at these horses' pps note the early pace when they maintain their position 2c- stretch call and also gain lengths in the same segment. Compare those when the horse backs up. Every day I see turf races where there is a relatively slow E that takes the lead in early fractions that many of the other OTE horses have demonstrated they can win against. But they don't. That E is really an S or L and he is running as fast or faster at the end than the OTE horses. They can't gain ground. Just because a horse has chased a faster pace and closed doesn't mean that by going slower today he will have more energy late if the leader is rolling because he set a slow pace. For years I couldn't figure this out.
Lastly, what makes this even more difficult, is the horse's condition. You must consider each race from a fitness perspective. A horse off a lengthy layoff generally can run early but is not fit enough to sustain that run. How much conditioning is enough. Depending on the workout routine, if you have 45 to 60 days of published works on the horse, 1 race will do it. If works are more sketchy, probably two. Also consider the class perspective. A horse today entered at C5K NW-1Y, who has been off most of that year but who previously raced for higher tags and ran well, may not have to be fully cranked to get a major portion of today's purse. Horses with 3 to 5 races between substantial layoffs are basically unsound so a trainer will crank these horses up so they can win some purse money before his horse goes bad again.
I subscribe to Jim Bradshaw's Running Styles: E, P, S. Somewhere in the Hat Check blog he broke it down by position;
E - on the lead or within a length of the lead, usually going gate to wire.
EP - Jim's experience with an Appaloosa gelding he owned and raced at "Outlaw Tracks of Oklahoma was that an EP has to be laying on the leader, Pressing on the leader. This came to be defined as within a 1/2 length in 2nd or 3rd position but most commonly 2nd or 2nk. He also noted that these horses only took the lead when the E faded and if he got the lead out of the gate he would not win.
P - runs in 2nd or 3rd position within 2 lengths of the lead or so.
SP - runs in 4th or 5th position up to 5 lengths off the lead.
S - they are generally in the back and identified by one run in the final fraction. They do not gain substantial ground in the 2nd fraction, that's an SP. However, Jim said there were 3 types of S horses: 1) Just a slow horse, 2) a horse that closed in the stretch, 3) that went to the lead. These latter horses are very hard to beat because they don't slow down. You can see what early pace these horses can handle in the lead, you may designate them E but when you look at the Velocity-POH you see he was S or L. This happens most often on turf but I have seen it over the years in big money handicap races over 9f on dirt.
I always designate a horse the most sustained Running Style he has won at or run very close. I do that because I want to see on the Segment screen where he is going to be at the 1st call. If a designated E is not on the lead or within a length at the 1st call on the Segment screen - see ya! I'm looking for horses to be where their Running Styles tells me they should be and if they aren't that it is an indication that their paceline POR was either too fast or too slow and they may be out of position today.
In the final analysis, you either believe or you don't. If Bradshaw was right and you follow his teachings, after a period of time and you gain experience you start to win and your horses pay double digit prices. You stay out of races where your best option is a 5/2 winner, maybe 7/2. So much can happen in a horse race that taking odds like that, unless you were Jim Bradshaw, is not sensible.
Give this a try, all you can do is fail and that is a success in its own regard!
Mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 08:13 AM   #10
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
lostandwon:

No problem. As Pook said Jeebs uses RDSS in all his posts and having talked to him by phone I'm aware of his procedures.

In answering his question and being familiar with both concepts I knew it would confuse matchers so in the same post I discussed the difference between visual and % Med along with who should use what to prevent that confusion. Members are free to choose what they like.
I apply bits and pieces of the match up but primarily use RDSS and pace.
Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Grouping by Running Styles mick General Discussion 1 08-22-2016 08:51 AM
Running Style CaptDon100 Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...) 8 11-14-2013 03:55 PM
Running Styles joseph General Discussion 1 01-23-2013 11:42 PM
'Running Style' Discussion - Changed Styles mikesal57 RDSS2 / FAQ's 8 07-05-2012 04:44 PM
Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to learning the Matchup RichieP Hat Check - How Can We Help You? 1 05-25-2009 09:52 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:05 AM.