What really matters?

[For The Lead]

Thanks, Pook, for posting this horse. There are examples here that can be explored and that is what I intend to do.

1 – I didn’t write this, Doc did.




The following is just a “guess” on my part, since I don’t pay attention to such things, but I’m sure Bill V could correct me if I am wrong.
At the time Doc wrote this I believe the “best” of last three meant the best speed rating. I’m not sure if that is RAW speed rating or ADJUSTED speed rating, but in this case it really doesn’t matter. Either way, line 2 would be Doc’s choice, which keeps in line with what he wrote.

2 - Ok, this for for the “matchers” out there.
Bradshaw said when you use a deep line (that means a real old line at the bottom) there are questions you should ask yourself.
1 – is the horse still a horse? Rather than write what I’m thinking, I’ll just say “yes”.
2 – has the horse changed its’ running style and become a slow horse? Since line 2 has a faster speed rating than the deep line and since line 2 shows the same running style as the deep line, my answer would be “no”.
3 – if it is an early horse, can it still get on top of its’ fractions? As I recall, Bradshaw used RAW time. Obviously, line 2 has faster fractions than the deep line, so my answer would be “yes”.


Here is what has always made me laugh about this.
If the answers to these questions are in the “negative” then you throw the horse out.
BUT, if the answers are in the positive, then you use the deep line?
That’s crazy. If the answers are in the “positive” then considering the deep line is considering the wrong line.
Obviously, the more recent line that allows you to answer these questions in the “positive” would be the line to use.


3 - DON’T GO ANYWHERE YET! There is one more.
Using Doc’s original guidelines, if the last line is a “+” or a “(+)” then use it, UNLESS it is the wrong distance, surface, class, etc. If the last line does not qualify, then go to line 2.
In this case line 1 does not qualify as it is a sprint race and today’s race is a route race, so we’ll look at line 2.
Line 2 is a route race and a winning effort and therefore a “+” race.
Therefore, using Doc’s original guidelines line 2 is the correct line.

3 for 3 !!

Here’s the horse.

[Mitch44]

In this case L 2 or L 9 the horse comes up in the top rated horses. How you bet it or select your top 2 is an individual thing. At the odds I would not have made a win bet.
Either way its a subjective thing. I'm just saying what line I would have chosen. In looking at this race I also would have had the winner the # 6 and if the horse didn't run back to L9 I still would have had the winner. BTW I wouldn't bet it to win either as it also left the gate at. very low odds.

As I stated earlier wherever that takes me is where I go and don't believe the horse should be faulted for the trainers decisions. As with any line you win some and lose some, the two horse bet helps smooth out some decisions.


Even a lost wouldn't change my mind as this has worked very well for me. If your not sure on a line run them both, many times as in this case more than one line can get a horse. If you get it in your top 4 and bet two of them your in the game. Good analysis and corollaries gets the best two.
Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Thanks for the write up FTL
Yes Doc is referring to the Adjusted Speed Ratings
Those are the speed ratings to the far right off the PP's
In line 2 horse 4 earned a 77 and in line 9 horse 4 earned a 75
The other speed ratings are what non Sartin programs but trackmaster
costumers are using. The reason the trackmaster speed ratings are different
than Doc's adjusted speed rating is the adjusted speed ratings are made
with Doc's algorithms. Trackmaster uses their own. Non Satin trackmaster
users do not see the Sartin Adjusted Speed ratings they are private for
Sartin download programs.
They are what fuels most of the readouts, You can see this on many of the
various analysis tabs,
I have the Energy tab opened you can see only the Sartin speed ratings are
used under SR



Mitch You are right line 4 or line 2 or line 9 makes no difference
The winner # 6 is still right on top
It is interesting how Line 9 is a -2 on the early/late readout
But on line 2 it is a 12.5 Early
Looking at the 2 lines on the energy readouts
The total energy is close but in line 2 It used much more energy
early

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

It is interesting how Line 9 is a -2 on the early/late readout
But on line 2 it is a 12.5 Early
Looking at the 2 lines on the energy readouts
The total energy is close but in line 2 It used much more energy
early

Attachment 44998

Naturally, Bill.

The fractions in line 9 are MORE THAN 2 full seconds slower.
Since the total energy on both lines are very close, as you said, the slower early fractions in line 9 have an effect on the early/late graph, however, it doesn’t change the fact that the horse is an EARLY horse.
And this is the reason line selection is important. It doesn’t matter if there are 3 lines that can be used. What matters is, which line represents the horse’s running style. Certainly NOT line 9.

[Mitch44]

In this case the horse is the same horse that it was in L 9 . Not always the case and something that has to be determined.


I only picked this line based on what Pook put up. My normal procedure is that I have 3 panes open on my screen : 1st is the original pane, 2nd the TPR screen and the BLBL screen. I always check the sticks to insure I'm picking a line that conforms to the horses running style. Never had a chance to see that or get into it and didn't download the race.

In watching the re-run it appears this horse was forced to run too fast early and didn't quite have it late or wasn't in peak condition.
Based on your screen shots Bill he appears to be a NTL horse who is more comfortable on the lead, all those E's & many % Med of 70% & +. I forget which horse went way out front but it did have an impact on the race. The 4 didn't give it up through and ran more like a presser but couldn't get it done based on the match up.The 4 is very consistent at a route distances.

This example shows the importance of using all the information available on various screens to analyze a race. Far too many only use the BLBL screen with no analysis.

Mitch44

[Lt1]

I thought I toss this in regarding lay off horses. On the 1993 Las Vegas seminar videos [believe it's tape 1 available in the video library] Ted ask the Doc and panel how the would treat horses coming back from long layoffs. It was in reference to Woodbine where they take a long break between meets. Doc, after having at little fun with Ted, stated to stop worrying about the layoffs and treat the horses like they ran last week. Now, before folks start posting lay off stats again, Doc was addressing a track specific situation. If I remember correctly I believe Dick Jorgesen and Vic Palermo also chimed in with a similar view of the seasonal tracks they dealt with. Just a little food for thought with your morning coffee.
Tim

[lostandwon]

FTL,

Thoughts from a matcher re: your point #2 for the matchers.

I of course can only speak for myself and solicit opinions and input from others. I also feel compelled to say I still got a day job.

I don’t think a matcher employing the matchup (as presented in the hat check forum) would go to L9 for precisely the reasons you stated.

My perception is that the object of going deep was to make the horse as fast as you can. Line 9 doesn’t do that with those painfully slow fractions.

[The Pook]

To the original poster of this thread as to what matters:

When I posted Pachama I was illustrating how interpreting pace line guidelines in a certain way could get you to line 9 on that horse. A rarity. But there is success doing it this way if you are consistent, as shown by some members. Bradshaw encouraged you to open up the entire PP's and even blend lines in certain circumstances from deep down. Difficult but doable by some members. Sartin used one of the last three lines almost always. Done by many.

These two approaches from polar opposite positions both work as do many interpretations in between. They all get there own winners and are passionately defended by their practitioners but can confuse the new.

A lot of these folks have decades of experience and were acquaintances of the founding fathers. One guy has been handicapping for over 50 years. It takes time to find your own comfort zone.

May you find yours,

Pook

[Lt1]

Well stated Mike. This is the main reason I recommended that folks watch the 1998 one on one videos done by the Doc. There is no confusion where the Doc stood at that time nor is one left to try to figure out what he meant on varying topics. You get it straight from the mans mouth. One is then free to pursue what ever approach they wish.
Tim

[Mitch44]

Very well said Pook and your correct. One can get in trouble going back too far but I always ask the question; Is this the same horse? In this case the answer was yes? Technically I could argue the horse may not be the same even from its last line or other more recent lines but I won't even go there.


I can see where a newbie could be confused, I would recommend they go no further than 5 lines back which was his (Sartin) latest guidelines. New people like rules or structure and that will get them off to a better start. Experience does matter in any endeavor.


All this talk of a slow pace is immaterial in reference to L 9. The preceptor supersedes that. A slow pace can be from the variant, a slower track or in this case a very fast 3rd FR. The horse wasn't challenged and did what he had to do, can't fault it for that. That 3rd FR was super for that line and 3rd FR's are incorporated into SP,FX HE and of course 3rd Fr etc. That's 4 of the 7 Primary factors and as Doc stated the compounded Fr. are what propelled things forward and really expounds on this in the 1998 tapes. Probably why that Preceptor is so good for that line. I'm not a speed handicapper and all Fr's are important for which the factors are derived. The Preceptor is extremely hard to beat as far as lines go and IMO supersedes the old SR + variant to get a pace line, which I learned in the early 90's.


Based on the information I had at the time L 9 was my choice and the correct choice. Would I have changed the line based on other information? YES!! I'm very attuned to running styles and some matchup techniques such as NTL ,% Med. fighters etc. While not a matcher per say I'm more eclectic and even use the old phase 1 or TPR, always trying to use the best of everything that's proven. In another case I may not have changed L 9. All anyone can do is use the information on hand at that time.


Mitch44