|
Google Site Search | Get RDSS | Sartin Library | RDSS FAQs | Conduct | Register | Site FAQ | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
Pace Makes the Race / TPR Discussion, Examples, Lessons from Total Pace Ratings (TPR) aka 'Phase I' from the book 'Pace Makes the Race' |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
07-10-2017, 07:57 PM | #11 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,153
|
Thanks Bill and no need to be sorry about the delay, glad you were
able to pick up some extra cash. |
07-25-2017, 05:30 AM | #12 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
|
an alternate look
I just thought I would offer an alternate look at the winner.
Before you begin to handicap any race, and therefore any horse, the first thing you must do is read the conditions of the race. It’s not me saying that, “DOC” said it. That’s right, it’s in the manual. I was doing that 20 years before I read that in his manual, but that doesn’t really matter, I was just glad to see “Doc” giving important and accurate information even though he didn’t go into any great detail on the subject. In this race those conditions are “$5,000 claiming for non winners of two races in six months”. Ok, moving along, let’s take a closer look at today’s track. Today’s race is at CT (Charles Town) a “bull ring”. Why is it called a bull ring? Because the track has a 6 furlong circumference as compared to most tracks that are 1 mile in circumference. Let’s take “Lrl” for an example, a seven furlong race there is around one turn, while a 7 furlong race at “CT” is around 2 turns. This makes trying to compare times ridiculous. There is no comparison. At “Lrl” the horses run almost ½ mile before encountering a turn. At “CT”, however, the horses encounter a turn before running ¼ of a mile. At “CT” the turns are tighter and the straightaways are shorter. These differences have an influence on not just times, but how the horse(s) actually run their race. Getting position going into a sharp turn can be crucial because the shorter straightaway doesn’t give as much time for overcoming a mistake. Also, CT is one of the cheapest thoroughbred tracks in the country. Horses don’t start their careers there, but many of them end it there. Not sure about that? How many MSW (maiden special weight) races for two year olds do you see there? For that matter, how many of those type races do you see there for 3 year olds? Now, see how many races there have horses than are 6,7,8 and older. Why am I mentioning all this? The eventual winner shows 10 races, 4 of those races are at tracks of better quality and larger circumference, “Lrl”and “PIM”. I would eliminate all 4 of those races. That leaves 6 races, all at CT. It is interesting to note that the eventual winner won 3 of those 6 races. That’s 50%. Not bad! And now the hard part. It was asked in this thread where would the eventual winner get the necessary LPR and/or TPR in order to make it a contender? Let me offer an explanation. “DOC” said, and it is in the manual, that a horse that just ran on the lead or fought for the lead in the first two fractions of its’ last race, regardless of distance, is sitting on a “big effort” regardless of how it finishes. Well, that assumes the horse is placed in a race where it can deliver that “big effort”. Obviously a $5,000 claimer that just ran on the lead the first two fractions of its’ last race and then runs in a GRADE I race is not going to deliver that “big effort”. But how about its’ next race if it returns to the $5,000 claiming level? It makes sense that it is still sitting on that potential “big effort”. But how do you quantify that potential “big effort”? Numerically, you don’t! With computer programs being what they are today, the majority of people are handicapping “by the numbers”. Here’s the problem. Horses are not machines. They don’t have settings where you can just dial up a number you want them to run. Here’s the good news though. Horses can and will deliver the numbers you are looking for based on their competition. Let’s take a look at the eventual winner’s last couple of races AND today’s race. In the race 2 back the horse had the lead for the first two calls. (REMEMBER WHAT “DOC” SAID!) In the last race the horse ran at PIM, that’s a step or two above the level of horse running at CT, not to mention a complete change in track configuration. I’m not surprised, based on the horse’s past performances, that it did not run well. Now let’s look at today’s race. For today’s race we are back to CT, a plus for the horse. Today’s race is at the lowest class level it has run at in months, another plus for the horse. And now one of the biggest pluses. For the first time, the horse is in a race with a condition. (REMEMBER, “DOC” SAID YOU SHOULD ALWAYS READ THE CONDITIONS OF THE RACE BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING!) Today, the horse is running against “non winners of two races in the last 6 months”, a big drop from “open” (no condition) company, not to mention the drop in class level that comes with it. When you take all this into consideration you can expect this horse to run that “big effort” “DOC” talked about, just one race later. For me, personally, line 2 is the line. I think it was already pointed out that using that line shows the horse to be a couple of points higher on EPR than any other horse. (for me personally, I would have an “FFR” (first fraction rating)) Anyway, if line 2 shows this horse to be a couple of points higher on EPR than any other horse, then how much better will it be today with all the various factors mentioned in its’ favor? Sorry. There is no formula for developing a number. The handicapper has to decide this for themselves. The better handicappers will “get it”. The other ones won’t. Recall that Jim Bradshaw talked about “VOODOO”. Has anybody figured that one out yet? I didn’t think so. But many people still adhere to it. Funny. Perhaps “voodoo” isn’t some mysterious, black magic “BS”, but rather, an understanding of horse racing. Here is the horse with the races at “Lrl” and “PIM” lined out, leaving only relevant races at “CT” remaining. Then see the review of each race after the horse's PP's. Let's look at the winner line by line starting from the bottom. line 10 - a win vs. NW2L for $5,000 line 9 - a win vs. NW3L for $5,000 (winning these two conditions back to back is uncommon) line 8 - a more or less even race vs. "OPEN" company for $6,250 line 7 - a race at "Lrl" that should be ignored line 6 - a win while moving right back to the same condition and claiming level as line 8 line 5 - a race at "Lrl" for $7,500 vs. "OPEN" company that should be ignored line 4 - a race at "Lrl" for $7,500 vs. "OPEN" company that should be ignored line 3 - a race vs. "OPEN" company for $10,000 (way over its' head) line 2 - a race vs. "OPEN" company for $6,250 (it leads at the first two calls) line 1 - a race at "PIM" vs. "OPEN" company for $7,500 that should be ignored TODAY'S RACE - NW26M (non winners of 2 races in the last 6 months) vs. $5,000 Best of luck to everyone.
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own |
07-25-2017, 11:55 AM | #13 |
The egg man
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
|
Discussion
Hi FTL
Thanks for the workup of the winner I have a couple of questions for you. 1. You show line by line the 3 horses class history but did you also do that for the other 7 horses in the race? Perhaps the 1 5 7 and 6 also had class advantages from their lines. Next question Here are horse three's LPR's from all it CT races LPR from races at CT Line 10 82.5 Line 9 81.5 Line 8 77.2 Line 6 82.0 Line 3 74.4 Line 2 64.7 It is my opinion based on our work over the years you are heavily biased against the Sartin programs because you feel the 3rd fractions are overly weighted. However, with Phase 1 the LPR is a point system based on the horse's velocity with beaten lengths and track to track and daily varient adjustments, It truly is a good measure of the horse's velocity ability, Basic Match Up principles says, The more energy a horse uses in the EPR the less it will have in the LPR Looking at these numbers What LPR do you project the 3 running today? In 6 races its best ever LPR was only 82.5 In My, Mitch Shoeless and Tims conversations, the question is where is the 3 going to improve? I do not see it and I bet against the 3 |
07-25-2017, 05:30 PM | #14 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,153
|
FTL
Nice job explaining things, I always enjoy your posts and wish you would do so more often. Jeff |
07-26-2017, 01:54 AM | #15 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
|
further discussion
A further discussion.
Quote:
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own |
|
07-26-2017, 07:03 AM | #16 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,706
|
"On the segments screen why isn’t the 3rd segment simply “3rd fraction” to keep in line with the first two segments?
So much for that issue." To answer that question: simply because its on the FPS screen if one cares to look, exactly the way you would like to see it.. "For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased." TS + 3rd Fr is there because it has proven to be an effective factor in routes and especially route grass races. TPR and 3r FR of TPR has also proven to be a very effective factor for those that understand it. My analysis always start with TPR. However I also use several other factors from RDSS but not any one screen or all the factors within RDSS. If one wants to believe Fractals are important their free to use it, BTW personally I don't. Bottom line is its up to the individual to determine what's important and to that situation. 3 rd FR is important and vital to success and one reason why its on several screens. I could make the same argument on EP or SC which on some read outs is also double weighted because it has proven to be effective. Hindsight is always perfect. I admire Bill for putting up this example and is honesty. I could have been dishonest and said it was a play but I didn't because I wouldn't have had it. What really counts is when the shoe leather hits the road by putting up your picks before the race goes off rather than a contrarian opinion based only on Monday morning quarter backing. Ditto with trashing RDSS,"For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased." Your free to use Energy just remember its part of RDSS! Factors by Sartin and staff within RDSS have stood the test of time, some are better than others which is up to the user to determine. MItch44 Last edited by Mitch44; 07-26-2017 at 07:14 AM. |
07-26-2017, 06:14 PM | #17 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,153
|
FTL
Thanks again for posting Jeff |
07-26-2017, 07:39 PM | #18 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,153
|
FTL
Why do you say when looking at PP'S start from bottom up? Jeff |
07-27-2017, 04:21 AM | #19 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
|
Quote:
If I wanted to know the life story of “Shoeless” I would probably go back to the day you were born. Who were your parents? How many brothers and sisters did you have? Where did you go to school? Were you a good student? Did you play sports? What sports were they? And so on and so on. The idea being to learn how “Shoeless” got to the point in life where he is today. I am sure that as your life unfolded we could see high points and low points. We could see where you made good decisions and bad decisions. We have all made them. In horse racing we only get to go back 10 races, but in most cases that is enough. By starting from the bottom and reading up we get to learn a lot about the horse, as it happened, but at all times we must read the conditions of today’s race first. That way we know where the horse is headed (today’s race), so in the back of our mind we are comparing each of its’ efforts to where it is going today. We try to determine if today’s race will be better or worse for the horse. What we are doing is reading each line paying attention to not just the claiming price, but to the condition of the race. We pay attention to the track the horse ran at and does that have any bearing on the horses performance? We look at the type of track (dirt, poly, turf). How did the horse react to each type of track it ran on and did it run good or bad on “off” tracks. If the horse had a bad performance was it because of the type of track or perhaps the horse was place at a class level where it could not compete. When you come across a race where the horse won or ran very well, was there anything in its’ races just before it that indicated a coming good race? Look at the time between races. Does that information tell us anything? A very lengthy layoff could indicate the possibility of an injury. At all times we are paying attention to “how” the horse ran in each of its’ races. Was it early, presser or sustained? Did the distance of the race have a bearing on how the horse ran? As an example, I have seen many horses that run early at 6 furlongs, but consistently run as a presser at 5.5 furlongs. Take note of claims. Horses don’t always take to new surroundings and regiments. They may need a race with a new trainer before reverting back to form. Owners/trainers claim horses because they think they can improve the horse. That doesn’t always pan out. Many times they end up with buyers remorse. Just be aware of it. In short, you have to be aware of every piece of information you can see. It all matters, good or bad. In some cases, but not all cases, following the horses life (so to speak) leads us to the conclusion that the horse is a legitimate contender in today’s race. Other times our journey shows us the horse is not prepared to compete today. It is not easy and is not something you learn overnight, but you have to start sometime if you are interested in improving your handicapping skills. I take a lot of heat for analyzing a horse after it won or a race after it is over. Most recently, that was the case with the horse that won the CT race. It was the only horse shown so I looked it and offered and alternate look at it to allow people to see the horse in a different light. (my alternate look was based on what I just laid our for you) When I think about it, I can’t recall any teaching race in any follow up that was shown before that race was run. Funny how that works. When trying to teach you use examples. Examples naturally come from past experience. I can’t think of any author who writes a book illustrating how to lose races. I doubt that that would be a very big seller. Authors always show old races, races that are long since over, as examples of how to get a winner. I wonder if they get heat too? Nahhh. They just get money from the sale of their book that “red boards” on every other page! But, hey, who cares? People hand over their money and are happy to so if it means learning how to pick more winners. As far as they are concerned..."red boarding" be damned. Just show us how to get more winners! You have been around here a long time. I think you understand that my interest has always been in trying to help people to get more winners. And what the hell, it doesn't even cost anything!
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own |
|
07-27-2017, 07:52 AM | #20 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,153
|
FTL
I know that you post here to help people out and I appreciate it and thanks for the insight about reading PP'S bottom up I used to look at race conditions all the time but in recent years have gotten away from it, the first person to really write about it was Steve Davidowitz in Betting Thoroughbreds had a great chapter devoted to it. Jeff |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Personality test | Bill V. | Classic Sartin Programs - Support, Discussion | 25 | 05-29-2018 06:14 PM |
RDSS 2.1 Test Results | Lt1 | RDSS 2.2 (and previous versions) | 5 | 01-12-2017 07:50 AM |
Right or Left Brain Test | Bill V. | General Discussion | 27 | 01-04-2014 10:06 AM |
I' m Running A Test on TUP Race -3, Need Help | partsnut | General Discussion | 19 | 12-23-2012 05:24 AM |
For test / Philly VDC | Bill V. | Races of Interest | 43 | 12-14-2009 04:03 PM |