![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Google Site Search | Get RDSS | Sartin Library | RDSS FAQs | Conduct | Register | Site FAQ | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
Classic Sartin Programs - Support, Discussion Phase III/MPH, Synergism, Energy, Kgen, Entropy, Thoromation, Quad-Rater, PaceLauncher, Synthesis, Validator, Val4, Speculator, etc ... |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#1 |
Grade 3
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 64
|
Turf Racing
I have been trending the results charts for about 8 major tracks using BRIS several major tracks on a daily basis since late July of this year and have seen some fairly noteworthy bits of information that are causing me to reexamine how I handicap turf races.
Delmar, Saratoga and Arlington Park have exhibited a strong bias in favor of late pace, i.e. high sustained pace, hidden energy, high 3rd fraction velocity and low %Median and high %Hidden. Hidden Energy in my definition is the fractional velocities of the 2nd and 3rd fraction divided by 2. % Hidden is the sum of the 2nd and final fraction divided by the sum of all three race segment fractional velocities. Specifically, Saratoga, Delmar and Arlington Park turf races are characterized by the % of the 3rd fraction velocity compared to the added velocity of all 3 fractions being above 34%, in the case of Arlington is 34.6%. When you consider that this is the last race segment when the horse has already run more than 2/3 of the race (actually more like 75% of the race), you take notice when the 3rd fractional velocity is higher than the 1st and 2nd fractional velocities. This coupled with the fact that the % Median for these tracks is in the 65% range and the %Hidden range is over 67% tells me that the emphasis in these races is on late pace. I don't want to go off the deep end with turf races because these facts are not true for some tracks such as Monmouth and Gulfstream where the %Median, % Hidden and 3rd fractional velocities are more like the numbers found for dirt races on those tracks, i.e. 66 or 67% Median and 3rd fractions at 31-32% of the total energy velocity. However, when the bias does exist at a track, it seems like the thing to do is to use it, ride it for all it is worth. James Quinn, in his book "Figure Handicapping" comes to much the same conclusion but he virtually eliminates the first fraction of the race and concentrates only on the middle and third fraction in his haneicapping efforts. I think that that is a partial mistake and that the initial fraction does need to be included in the handcaipping but that the first fraction is not extremely influential. I have seem a number of Results Charts where the early speed horses in these turf routes dies in the stretch and the race is taken by a Presser or Sustained type of horse. So, my handicapping approach would be to evaluate the Sustained Pace, Hidden Energy, and Third Fraction as part of the main handicapping method and to use the % Median and % Hidden to eliminate quasi contenders who do not fall within an acceptable range for these two parameters at racetracks with the late pace turf bias as the main way to find the contenders. I don't think that just emphasizing Sustained Pace will do the trick because sustained pace is early pace + third fraction divided by 2 which does not place enough emphasis on the late end of the race. I am too new to the website to know how the various methods for evaluating contenders uses the Sartin Methodology factors, if at all, i.e. FFIV IV etc. . I suggest that a program such as I have just very roughly outlined be run for turf races at tracks with the late turf bias to see if the ROI and win% can be improved on turf races. Turf races seem to be a more murky and mysterious area because, except for James Quinn's Clf All Pars on the turf in his book "Figure Handicapping" I have not seen any published information as to average or par times for the various classes of races on the turf. Nobody except Quinn talks about the par times for turf races at any tracks that I know of and nobody talks about the average daily variant for turf races at any distance. Quinn does not really use the DRF track variant to adjust turf races but he does have some guidelines which he uses. I think that turf races should be handled the same way that dirt races are handled in terms of adjustments for the average track variant and the daily variant for individual races. Because of all the "murkiness" with turf races, I think anyone with a good well-thought out handicapping methodology could do quite well with turf races. The trick is, is what I have described above well thought out and will it work or has it worked? Has anyone else had any similar experience with turf races or already been down this road? Am I on the right track or FOS in this regard? Even if the approach of others is different, I would like to hear it and the reasons for why it is used and, most importantly, does it work? I would appreciate anyone's comments as to their experience with turf races. 1retired |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 120
|
Turf
Greetings 1retired -
What specific program are you using? I believe its Synergism based on a prior post I read. Let me know if you could. Assuming so, I believe you are right on the money with your approach. Turf normally runs later than earlier, but as you noted, it depends on the track. So handicap and play them with the same tools as dirt and model the winners. You'll find the percent medians to be a good bit lower than the dirt lines, as you are suggesting. So on Synergism or Phase 3, the winners generally revolve around sustained, hidden, and 3rd fraction. Sometimes these are supported by Factor W and sometimes not. Deep closers are not going to have the top Factor W (average pace). If you are using Synergism, I might suggest worrying less about pars and concentrate on contenders and pacelines. I use that program and only adjust in 2 ways: sometimes for class or track class, and I also change the final beaten lengths on tandems. If you are making your own variants and doing your own adjustments, that's different and pars are part of that of course. On your general questions about playing turf, I, for one, really like them and play them every time I can for several reasons. I find the average win mutual is higher, although I can't substantiate it without digging through records. Also, that's where I've hit my biggest trifectas, which is always in the back of my mind! One trick that seems to work for first time turf horses coming from the dirt is to pretty much eliminate horses with a turf rating of under 300 (that's the number in parentheses next to the lifetime turf record, whatever that's called). I also check that number for every horse and know who the top 5 are. Once in a great while a horse will seem to win on the turf for no reason other than he had the highest turf number. Talk to you soon - Chuck |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Abiding Student
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 711
|
Turf handicapping
Interesting thread. It's unfortunate that 1retired hasn't posted much since. Like CEW, some of my best mutuels have come from turf races, especially routes, where trip and late kick are paramount. (With the exception of the turf at Belmont, which is running like I-95 as I write this.) I'm new to RDSS and still searching for the combination of factors that will help identify some winners on the grass.
Now in his later years, Quinn's approach to turf racing has greatly simplified. In his latest book, The Complete Handicapper, the late turf pars are gone. (I'm somewhat familiar with them as years ago I wrote a program that would parse a DRF or BRIS data file, identify the turf races on a card and compute late turf figs using his pars. It was a great programming exercise but the results weren't equal to the effort.) You can find his new approach on pages 204-207. He's now using a 12-second-per-furlong standard for every track. Adjust for lengths gained or lost in the final segment, award a point for each 1/5th under the 12-second standard, subtract a point for each 1/5th over the standard and basically ignore slow early fractions. With all the data that RDSS provides that should help with turf races, e.g. L/EP, Hidden Energy, F3 Velocity, %Med, it's simply a matter of finding the right combination. So, it's back to the turf factor models. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 120
|
Hi Mick -
Yes, just handicap and model and you'll find the winning readouts of course. I have not read the Quinn book you mention, but his 12 second par sounds like an elementary TPR approach. And as you say, he has simplified his approach. Amazing (!). I've been using TPRs for the last year, which as you know, gives only an Early Pace, 3rd Fraction, and the sum of the 2 (TPR). It's effective on the grass. I am not an every day player, but work constantly so I am ready when I do go. I've cashed some good turf mutuels and races with TPRs and don't feel it lacks, although I feel like Sustained should be superior in the back of my mind. If I were losing turf races and pinned it on the difference between Sustained and 3rd Fraction, I would simply adjust my program to manufacture Sustained Pace. Best, Chuck |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
turf historian
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,455
|
Epiphany from an early Sartin teacher
I used to shy away from turf as I could rarely do well over it. Over the years I have discovered why SOME of that was a problem (timing is notoriously bad over the lawn at most venues because of lack of compensation due to rail placement, and all those trips that make good efforts look less than spectacular) UNTIL I read Micheal Pizzola's book Handicapping Magic.
Pizzola, a former teacher at PIRCO, suggested the simplest of answers: GRASS horses DO NOT have form cycles like dirt/artificial surface horses. Rather than simply evaluate the best of the last several, OPEN up the past performances to ONLY use the best of whatever number of lines are available. Once this was done a very profitable angle evolved: TWO lines better than the field. Find the best two TPP lines of each horse. Eliminate from those. Sounds simple and it is. One of the most impressive turf runners I have seen in person over the years was Court Vision (Breeder`s Cup Mile, where he beat Goldikova, and Woodbine Mile winner). His third fraction velocities were almost on par with many a sprinter's OPENING fractions. IN evaluating this horse for that Breeder`s Cup race, I had to go a ways back to find his best two, but in using those he was right up there with Goldikova and hit for a very nice price. LESSON: Don`t handle turfers pace line selections like a main track horse.
__________________
Albert Einstein:"The monotony and solitude of a quiet life stimulates the creative mind." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
turf historian
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,455
|
Modeling for the lawn
My E/L modeling NEVER worked for the turf as the early paces of races are all over the place since MOST of the time the real race is from the 2nd call to the wire.
Because of this WIDE variability, Turf pars cannot be relied upon in my opionion
__________________
Albert Einstein:"The monotony and solitude of a quiet life stimulates the creative mind." Last edited by Tim Y; 07-18-2016 at 11:25 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 389
|
Quote:
Very interesting thread you started here. I noted when you started talking about your usage of late pace and Hidden energy specifically at DMR, SAR, and Arlington. Id like to also add that these statements of well ranked hidden energy and late pace horses also do well at Belmont. In my own handicapping after i have selected my contenders, i specify which readouts are most important for that race and make my selections based on odds from there. Yesterday at Bel the 7th race was an ALW Turf race, and i was able to hit the 17-1 FREE N CLEAR to propel me to a victory in the contest i was in, barley holding off a few others. With 3 races to go i hit one more winner and barley held off the $88 dollar second place finisher in this smaller 7 race contest. Reviewing what works is always important. Notice how she was ranked first in both HID and in LP, in a turf race full of extremely late energy horses, she was able to have the most powerful closing kick of all of the L energy type horses. Great thread. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
turf historian
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,455
|
I have to give the Equibase fellow the beaten lengths taken off the panorama photo of each race each day. NO WHERE else on a day's card does one find more blanket finishes than on the lawn. Sometimes 1st through 5th is only two lengths.
TURF races are upside down and that is one of the many reasons they are so tough to beat. Quirin, in his great book, Winning at the Races: Computer Discoveries in Thoroughbred Handicapping makes it very clear: CLOSERS have three major obstacles to overcome; 1) they have NOTHING to do with the pace (slow early paces are a huge problem for them to overcome, 2) the rider has to get a very good sense of the pace of the race and MOVE at exactly the right time and 3) with several horses ALL making that late move, his mount has to be lucky enough to get through the traffic jam that a late moving group of horses puts in his way. How often is the BEST charge blocked when there are 5 or 6 hoses all trying to move late? I assume this is why the big turf courses of Europe (just look at the late run in the Arc each Fall in Paris) widen noticeably through the lane to give the big late closing group room to get by. I know that Newmarket is the same way. NONE of our North American courses compensate in increased width late. The wide variability of early pace of race does not allow a uniform platform from which to calculate a late move unless you search for similar paces of race. As a rule of thumb, I discount slow early paces of race for ever being the pace lien for serious evaluation. When the front end gets away with a canter, they will have a lot left in the tank down the lane.
__________________
Albert Einstein:"The monotony and solitude of a quiet life stimulates the creative mind." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,706
|
Through my record keeping I have found my percentages in turf races are lower. There are several reasons for this and a big one is unknown factors. Many races have FTS on the turf which are essentially a maiden race but the public generally does not handicap it that way or treat it as such, along with other unknown factors. I do play turf races but eliminate races with 2 or more unknown factors. The better class races and older horses tend to be more form full and beatable.
It's unwise to just assume turf races run sustained as many do run early,particularity a horse that rates and just does the minimum on the lead and has the advantage over come from behind types because it has a lead over them and makes the first run. Many courses like SA, GP etc. do run early while some courses do run late. Recent weather also effects all turf courses and horses as they do have preferences for certain types of footing, another unknown factor that's not always apparent in its PP's.It pays to have a model and know your track but it also comes down to the match up too. If your going to play these iffy type races one should reduce your normal wager to a fun bet and demand better odds to compensate for the risk. If you keep records and evaluate for known factors you'll get good as to which to play, avoid or turn into a fun bet. Records by age and class helps also. As far as pars Bris gives pace and speed pars which can be an aid to evaluate for contenders, in playable races. most players play too many unplayable races and when they do take the worse of it by not demanding odds to compensate for that risk to include MSW races etc. Bottom line is you have to match the horse to todays conditions to determine unknowns factors. Play at your own risk. Mitch44 Last edited by Mitch44; 07-18-2016 at 03:43 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 120
|
Hi guys -
Grant (Latekick)....nice hit in that tournament you discussed above! A good example of early speed taking it all the way in turf racing has been the inner turf at Saratoga the past few years. I've hit several big mutuels on that course and looking for forward to going up there again next week. The outer turf runs more average pace or late compared to the inner. Chuck |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SA 6.5 furlong Down the Hill turf course | Bill Lyster | Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...) | 34 | 06-27-2014 07:08 PM |
Turf Paradise 9th at 1-7/8 miles on turf | Bill Lyster | Matchup Discussion | 1 | 05-07-2013 12:37 PM |
Ontario Racing Update | Ted Craven | General Discussion | 5 | 01-24-2013 10:16 PM |
State of Texas Horse Racing | noddub62 | General Discussion | 0 | 09-18-2012 02:22 PM |
New to horse racing and the site. | dabombbizzle | General Discussion | 8 | 05-24-2011 04:20 AM |
![]() |