Pace handicapping

[HP]

Talk about pace handicapping, how about yesterday\'s Kentucky Cup at Turfway? Whew. Everything on the lead.

3rd race - Speed one-two. The winner fit on figs, figured to want the lead, loved the track (3 wins at TP), stalked briefly and took over. Results on the chalky side. We\'ll take it.

5th - inside speed. Day takes the place with the rail horse (kills my exotics) and outside speed comes 3rd.

7th - According to pacefigures.com (!) the winner has the best early lick, so I give that extra credit in addition to the fact the the horse figures on TG. Decent price, favorite figured to stalk a lot of speed, does, and comes second. Middlin exacta and miss the tri.

9th - Here\'s where it gets a little sticky. The winner wired them around two turns, but who could figure that I\'m a Dixie Girl wouldn\'t chase? She looked like the speed all the way and I figured she might even get the lead to herself since Day may want to wait on Winning Season instead of dueling. I liked the winner because I thought she would stalk and instead she just blasted them. I\'ll take it.

10th - Place horse takes them all the way (surprise!) I figured Sequoia Cat and Storied Cat (even money, sitting on a good one, but slower going in) would duel, and I liked the former better (he\'s much faster). I like the winner and the show horse to pick up the pieces in the exotics, but who could figure Magna Graduate to lead them all the way and hang around for second? Not me. Painful, as the bad favorite ran as expected and still couldn\'t nail it.

So to sum up, it was obvious that the speed was the way to go, but figuring out who would capitalize on it was much harder -- and this is no reflection on the value or potential value of pace figures.

Anybody else play these? HP

[Thehoarsehorseplayer]

You touched upon one of the vulnerabilites with pace handicapping to me, namely that pace scenarios often fall apart; too often for my liking.
To the extent that I pace handicap at all, it\'s only in the situations the pace advantage jumps out at me that I will factor it in.
A horse ran into a brutal early fraction last time (and finds himself in a paceless race or is dropping in class today) I\'m interested.  A track is obviously favoring closers and there is lots of early speed in the race, I\'m interested.
But my experience, which is only thirty years worth of going to the track, is to expect the race will be run according to a predetermined pace scenario is asking to have your heart broken.
Though I will say this: a horse is more likely to run according to his workouts than to his previous races when there is a divergence in the consistency of what is being asked of him.  A young, seemingly come from behind horse, that has a bullet from the gate for today\'s six furlong event is probably going to be running on the lead today despite what the PPs say.  And the speed burner that has a breezing five followed by a breezing four furlong workout since it\'s last race was probably being taught to rate for today.
Now I don\'t want to leave you with the impression that I don\'t pay attention to an individual horse\'s running style. I\'m very aware of the \"Internal Logic\" of every horse, who are the speed horses and who are the closers.  I\'m more much likely to bet a speed horse on the Inner and a closer on the Widener.  But what I\'m saying is that I try not to eliminate horses whose \"Interal Logic\" indicates a big race today, because they might be compromised by another early pace horse.  When all the other variables say \"Go,\" I\'ll take my chances.



Post Edited (09-19-04 20:55)

[HP]

I try to add pace to the mix after I do my TG handicapping. It\'s one way of separating contenders. Out of the five races I played, three came out about how I expected and two didn\'t. Interestingly the best prices came out in one of the races that didn\'t, even with a fairly short field. Tough game. HP

[TGJB]

Both Holthus stake winners at TP yesterday came from far back.

[HP]

The first winner at least saved ground. The point about the second race was more about Magna Graduate doing the unexpected on the lead.

HP

Random thoughts on pace and bias:

1. As soon as the smart jockeys realize there\'s a speed bias they tend to get more aggressive out of the gate. That causes  faster than average paces which tend to offset the bias. The reverse is also true. You see this on sloppy speed favoring tracks all the time.

2. Even if there is a reasonably strong bias you shouldn’t expect every race to be won by a horse with the advantageous style or position.  It’s just a bias in the results, not a lock on the results.

3. Sometimes the sprint races around one turn are different than the two turn routes on the same day.

4. A bias advantage/disadvantage does not help/hurt every horse equally.  A strong speed bias will generally help a horse with a lot of early foot but questionable stamina more than a horse with both a lot of speed and stamina.  A tiring track will hurt a horse with questionable stamina more than a horse with a lot of stamina even if they are both of the same style.  For Example: A speed bias is not going to help Seattle Slew run much faster at a mile. It might help a Grade I 6-7F horse that generally tires run a lifetime best by a wide margin at a mile.    

5. Horses rate. Prior fractions often tell us little about the amount of speed the horse is capable of showing if pressed for the lead.



Post Edited (09-20-04 09:58)

[HP]

Actually Jerry, one of the horses you are referring to (the second Holthus STAKE winner) was in the 13th race, which I didn\'t play. The horse I was talking about was the Holthus horse that won the fifth. I stand by my comments an additional 50%. HP

[beyerguy]

A lot of frontrunners winning races is not pace handicapping.  Pace handicapping involves looking at the performance of the horse (speed figure) in relation to the pace of the race.  In the 13th race, the horse was the ONLY closer in a field of pure frontrunners.  The question was, did he have the ability to win even with the proper pace setup.

Well, for one thing, the horse had run like 6 times in a row on turf and was not bred for the surface at all.  His previous dirt races made him very competitive and with the likely advantageous pace, he was a bet at 10-1.

The Lukas winner was another example of \"pace handicapping.\"  She had similiar final time figures to the other contenders, but had earned them while competing in tougher races against faster paces.  Another example of pace handicapping.  This horse was a huge overlay at 6-1.  This is what pace handicapping is all about, not picking which horse will be the frontrunner.

[HP]

Beyerguy,

I can\'t address your points since I did not handicap the races you mentioned. In the races that I did handicap, knowing who the frontrunners were likely to be was actually very useful, thanks. HP

[jbelfior]

I personally try to project what the pace will be and then look to see what horses will run well against that pace.

As an example, I\'ll use BIRDSTONE. Likes to rate comfortably off of medium type fractions and will then kick strongly around the turn. Did not particularly care for his chances in the Travers as I projected a much faster pace. Didn\'t happen. (As the races get longer, pace figures get more useless.)

BIRDSTONE pretty much faced a pace scenario (at least for the first 3/4 m) similar to the Belmont Stakes. I would be interested to see how he would perform in a BC Classic with a .23; .46 2/5; 1:10 pace scenario.


Good Luck,
Joe B.

[beyerguy]

HP,

I wasn\'t saying knowing the probable frontrunner wasn\'t useful, didn\'t mean it that way at all.

It just happens \"everything\" on the lead wasn\'t true at least twice, and both times, a form of pace handicapping could have produced the winner.  I\'m just saying there is a lot more to I guess what should be termed pace analysis than merely figuring out the probable frontrunner.  That is a big part of it, its just not the end of the analysis.

[Silver Charm]

>I\'m just saying there is a lot more to I guess what should be termed pace analysis than merely figuring out the probable frontrunner.

I have seen many a card at Turfway Park where that was all you needed to figure out.

[HP]

Beyerguy,

Excuse me, but if you read my post, you are referring to TWO RACES I DID NOT MENTION AND DID NOT HANDICAP (nos. 12 & 13).

You wrote that

\"It just happens \"everything\" on the lead wasn\'t true at least twice, and both times, a form of pace handicapping could have produced the winner.\"

What I said IS TRUE for the races that I DID handicap, nos. 3, 5, 7, 9 and 10, with the exception that Jerry pointed out, which was that the Holthus horse ran down the frontrunner in the 10th from off the pace, and even there the unlikely frontrunner held on for 2nd.

There is also the obvious point that it was a long day and the track may have changed by the time you were able to nail your winners with your \"pace handicapping\" insights, but that\'s neither here nor there.

You are comparing apples to oranges. I can only talk about the races I handicapped and watched, not races 12 & 13. I would have stayed for those later races but I had to go home to get yelled at by my wife.

Sincerely,
HP

[TGJB]

You didn\'t handicap those races, so they don\'t count?

THERE\'S an idea for election night.

[HP]

Yes, that\'s what I\'m saying Jerry. The races don\'t count. Way to chime in bro. If it wasn\'t for these crappy sheets of yours my kids would be going to Harvard instead of New Paltz. Now you live with that guilt! HP