Parx today Race 6 Quad Rater

[Bill V.]

Hi Ted

Yes thats our Pace and Cap Bradshaw Sartin Place horse
forty prayers

I had it too

[Ted Craven]

Here's an example of a good reason to use the best line of the last few (here, the 2nd line), rather than the last line.



The last line was simply a slower Pace of Race, which the horse Pressed as it does normally. Projecting to today and saying the last line is all the horse is capable of when fit, misses that it has shown itself capable of pressing a faster pace and finishing.

Of course, it surely could have finished out of the money today (instead of 2nd), but the concept of consistency and using not only the last line (be sure it's not over matched today, and is fit) will have you including horses like this one among your contenders often enough to pay.

I try to remember: when I make a contender identification decision and betting decision, I am not only making it for today's race, but for the next 20 races like this one. If my decisions don't work out in this race, that should surprise no one (a stochastic - short-term unpredictable - endeavour), but with a solid method, consistently applied, prudently bet, long term success is inevitable.

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

Ted,

Nice picks.

Maybe I missed something, but the "PRX 6th" we have been discussing was from yesterday 10/30.

And don't worry about the "red board". lol

The joke is on me - I was wondering why none of the other illustrious handicappers in this thread picked the same horses as me!

I missed that the thread was about yesterday's 6th race at Philly haha

Bill - I though that name sounded familiar - an old friend!

Ted

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

Here's an example of a good reason to use the best line of the last few (here, the 2nd line), rather than the last line.

Attachment 24487

The last line was simply a slower Pace of Race, which the horse Pressed as it does normally. Projecting to today and saying the last line is all the horse is capable of when fit, misses that it has shown itself capable of pressing a faster pace and finishing.

Of course, it surely could have finished out of the money today (instead of 2nd), but the concept of consistency and using not only the last line (be sure it's not over matched today, and is fit) will have you including horses like this one among your contenders often enough to pay.

I try to remember: when I make a contender identification decision and betting decision, I am not only making it for today's race, but for the next 20 races like this one. If my decisions don't work out in this race, that should surprise no one (a stochastic - short-term unpredictable - endeavour), but with a solid method, consistently applied, prudently bet, long term success is inevitable.

Ted

Ted,
It sure is hard to argue with plain old good common sense, so I won't try. Everyone should take note of everything you said here. However, I will offer my approach to reaching the same conclusion regarding your line selection, at least in this instance.

Naturally, I cut my teeth on this line selection business when I first became involved with the methodology, so there was a learning process involved. Regardless of what "doc" use to say about his preference for teaching newcomers to the game, rather than those with preconceived ideas, I felt fortunate that I had already been involved with handicapping for many years prior to my introduction to the methodology. I think what "doc" should have done is "qualify" his thought with regard to teaching the methodology. I'm sure when Brohamer became involved with the methodology he didn't forget everything he already knew. In retrospect, I think as the methodology evolved, "doc" made it easier and easier for those with no knowledge of racing to participate and hopefully make a profit. Ok, on to the race at hand.

I would absolutely take the line 2 back. Now the reason.

The are a couple of factors that I adhere to on a consistent basis when picking a line and they are not difficult.

1 - the horse had to finish "in the money"
OR
2 - the horse had to be 1st or 2nd at the first or second call regardless of finish (within reason)

Both of the above had to be lines that are the same comparable distance and surface

Consider just how many running styles fall into those two factors. It gives a horse a lot of leeway with regard to running styles. It also gives you the main factors in any race.
1 - early
2 - presser
3 - late
What these factors give you is "FORM".

So, with the horse in question here, it did not demonstrate either of the factors I noted above in its' last line, therefore the line is not used.

"Doc" originally laid out guidelines that said to use the last line UNLESS there was a "good reason" to go back 1 line. For me, there is a "good reason" to go back 1 line and in doing so, found the line I want to use. A line where the horse finished "in the money" (won). This would be my line under ANY circumstances as long as today's race is on the dirt and at a comparable distance. Now let's look a little further.

This horse won its' race 2 back vs. NW2L. In most cases, a horse does not come right back and beat the next condition, NW3L. This is another reason to "forgive" the last line. Many times it will take a race or two in the new condition before the horse beats the next level condition. Naturally, it depends on the horse and the match ups it gets. For an example, let's take a horse, that by its' PP's clearly shows it is an "early" horse. Let's also say it just won in a NW2L condition. Today it comes right back in a NW3L condition and is clearly and without question, the ONLY early horse in the race. would you be surprised if this horse wins right back? No. Seldom does the next race at the next level offer such good match ups for the horse moving up to the next level off of a win and the lower level. This horse is a good example.

In line 9 this horse beat NW2L. It came right back at the same claiming price in a NW3L and ran a dull race. For some reason, the horse's connections then decided to move the horse up to double the claiming price and run it in routes on the turf. Although it did not win any of those races, the horse continued to show "form". By the way, raising a horse up in claiming value on the turf is a fairly common practice.

Finally, the horse comes to PRX and is lowered to a more suitable claiming level. Many times a horse will not perform to its' full potential the first time across a track. Although this race would not fall into either of my to categories noted above, but it was an out and out bad race. It did gain ground at every call and it did gain position at the second call and stretch call. It is not a line I would use, but a line worth noting. In the next race the horse won vs. NW3L. Please take note of the rather lack luster race last out vs. NW4L for the first time.

This horse is a definite contender in today's race.

So there is my take on this horse. Now I have a question for you.

If this horses last race was the faster POR of the last two races, which line would you use??

[shoeless]

Ted no need to apologize for redboarding at least you and Bill go into
detail showing why you liked the horse and include screenshots of it.


FTL nice job of explaining of how you went about capping the race


I remember years ago for Charles Town before they had the conditions printed in the form I would I keep all of my old racing forms in the basement.The reason being the condition races being the bread and butter there I would go back to the charts and look them up.I got the idea from reading Davidowitz's book Betting Thoroughbreds and the excellent chapter A Edge in Class.

[gl45]

"Rate the horse's, using the race where the winner's final time is the fastest and where the horse was either close to the pace or where it finished within about 5 lengths of the winner.
This will usually be the race where the horse earned its best speed rating.

"Remember that it never pays to back a final selection that goes to post at odds of less than 3 to 1. Price is just as important as winning percentage. Never knowingly support any horse at short odds regardless of how well the animal figures....."

From Ray Taulbot teachings just select line 2 and pray.

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

So there is my take on this horse. Now I have a question for you.

If this horses last race was the faster POR of the last two races, which line would you use??

If it attended that faster PoR as well as it did actually, I would likely use it (its Total Energy and Perceptor ratings would likely be better). Despite stepping up to new conditions. You never know when these guys are going to fire, or for how short a time they'll maintain good form. Who knows the outcome of a single race - maybe the odds are against hitting a Claiming N4L conditions first asking. That could also be too much analysing. I would like to hit 50% of 10 races like this. Maybe 3 times I'll hit the 5-1, and 2 times I'll hit the 3-1. Guaranteed a few times there will be much longer odds horses. Exactas add a whole other level of gravy.

Ted

[Bill V.]

Im very confused As usual


Are we discussing the 9 horse from todays 6th race 10/31
or the sunday race 6 10/30 on a muddy track

First off the 2 won this race. for horse 9 I used line 1
Here are my reasons the 87 speed looks way faster than anything else this horse ever ran The distance today is 7 furlongs which means not only is the horse moving to a harder condition NW3 to NW4 it has to go the difficult
7.0 distance. Everybody is making good points

Looking for help

Bill

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

Im very confused As usual


Are we discussing the 9 horse from todays 6th race 10/31
or the sunday race 6 10/30 on a muddy track

First off the 2 won this race. for horse 9 I used line 1
Here are my reasons the 87 speed looks way faster than anything else this horse ever ran The distance today is 7 furlongs which means not only is the horse moving to a harder condition NW3 to NW4 it has to go the difficult
7.0 distance. Everybody is making good points

Looking for help

Bill

Don't be confused Bill. This was today's 6th race at PRX. Ted was making the point that the last line is not always the best line to use. I agree. Ted said the 2nd line back was the better line to use. I agreed. Ted explained how he came to the 2nd line back. I went on to explain how I got to the 2nd line back. In this single case, Ted and I reached the same conclusion with respect to the line to use, we just came to our conclusions in a different manner.

The discussion wasn't about how to get the winner, rather, it was simply about line selection and how to get "real contenders"...even if they finish 2nd.

Ted made very valid points and, naturally, I feel I made very valid points.
I think it would be in everyone's best interest to read both sides of that discussion if they are having problems with their line selection.