Bellamy Road Out

HP,

Wind is built into the track variant for the pace call. A separate variant is made for the pace call and the final time. That\'s why I said it\'s very helpful if there are multiple races at the same (or a similar) distance on the same day. The wind will be accounted for.

If there aren\'t several races at a similar distance or the wind changes direction, it gets trickier unless you were at the track to take notes on the wind.  

That why i said it\'s also helpful to have a lot of experience watching races develop.

I look at the jockey\'s hands to see how hard they were urging their horses.

I look at the stride of the horses to see if they were moving easily or were all out.

If the horses in the front distance themselves from the rest of the pack that\'s a clue that it might have been fast.

If they are all bunched up that tells you it might have been slow.

If the horses in the front are well known unrateable speedballs that tells you it might be fast.  

If the horses in the front are usually mid pack racers that tells you it might be slow.  

All of these more subjective items (and others) combine with the fractions themselves to form a view that will usually be very accurate because they tend to reinforce each other. On the occasions,  I am unsure what happened, I dig deeper and ask others that might know something I missed. If I am still unsure, you wind up getting one of my annoying posts with \"if this\" or \"if that\".

What I am doing would be a monumental task if you wanted to do it for every race. I don\'t. With only some exceptions, I only bet stakes races and usually just on dirt. It\'s no big deal for me to watch replays of most of the majior stakes and analyze the charts, fractions, and PPs of all the horses to get a good line on the results.      

I hope this explains why pace figures and insights are more than accurate enough to be useful even if they aren\'t of the same accuracy as final time figures.



Post Edited (05-10-05 18:56)

[HP]

Mall,

You\'re right I did not read your other post but I will now.  

FWIW -- For What It\'s Worth.  

I\'ll probably play Belmont/Churchill Thursday.

All I know is that Meadowlands parking lot is magic.  

Class,

You write

\"I look at the stride of the horses to see if they were moving easily or were all out.\"

Have you spent any time around horses?  Ridden them?  Fed them?  A friend of mine\'s father bred horses in his backyard, and I once spent a few months down there and I did everything including mucking the stalls.  Though it was literally a backyard, the guy did okay and he actually had a homebred filly that was stakes placed at Gulfstream (Lucky Ho) and another that ran in some decent claiming races (the name escapes me).  

We would drive to a place called Okechobee City to get feed and they had a combination diner/counter and auction in a big barn, so you could eat and watch them auction off horses, cows and other livestock and bid on it over your scrambled eggs.  LOVED it!  

Having spent this time getting REALLY close to horses and even watching them work, I can\'t tell if a horse is moving easily or all out.  I really can\'t.  My impression is that it is VERY HARD WORK to stop horses from hurting themselves and they are basically nuts.  Furthermore, I would say if a guy spends EVERY DAY looking at the same horse run he may know what\'s really going on (even then it\'s hard to say).  In fact, I really think most guys go by how the horses act when they come back (do they eat, etc.?).  

Point being, I really don\'t think you can go to the track, look at a horse you\'ve never seen run, and know with any certainty whether he was \"easy\" or \"all out.\"  

I can\'t go through the other points right now, but you are making an awful lot of dubious assumptions.  I guess I should just wish you the best.

HP

[Mall]

HP is ready & willing, & I know from past contests that he\'s able. Here\'s your chance to demonstrate how your various theories actually work in practice, not to mention the possibility of bragging rights. Plenty of stakes on Preakness Day, which ought to be right up your alley. No reason I can see for passing up a golden opportunity to unseat the Champ.

[MO]

MO said he felt the horse was done.>

When Ghostzapper entered the BC with those negative 6\'s, I had to think long and hard if they would knock him out too. I thought \"even if he bounces 3 points, he wins.\" Tapped out on him only to get robbed of my price while the race was already running.

Anyway, the difference between my assessment of Ghost and Bellamy was that Bellamy was barely a 3yo whose bones were not fully developed. Ghostzapper was done developing.

I expect to hear shortly that Bandini will be the next casualty.

[davidrex]

     \"I guess I should just wish you the best\". AMEN

                    PARTYpokerON!

HP,

I\'ve been watching races for about 30 years.

It isn\'t that difficult to tell if a horse is running hard or easy. Heck, my girlfriend doesn\'t have a clue about horseracing yet sometimes when we watch the big races together she blurts out \"that horses is done\" on the turn and is almost always correct. She can see it and she is clueless.

Personally, I don\'t get all the hostility on this board.

We just witnessed a Derby where the pace was obviously a factor in determining the outcome.

We just saw a situation in which certain horses that looked like that they had good enough figures to contend were trashed by pace oriented handicappers because of the expectation of this very pace scenario. Regardless of  all the possible reasons these speed/pressers lost, would you really want to bet any of them now knowing what you know about how the race developed?

IMO, you\'d have to be a NUT to!

I come here and post my views on pace, often under attack for various reasons, and usually respond in a courteous manner despite that.

I thought by now we would be beyond the \"classhandicapper\" is an idiot that posts gibberish stage and would be having a mutually beneficial conversation on applications of the pace factor to the TG figures.

WTF was I thinking?

[HP]

Class,

You wrote,

\"It isn\'t that difficult to tell if a horse is running hard or easy.\"

I just spent a relatively friendly post telling you that it absolutely IS hard to tell.  I\'ve been watching horses for 30 years and taken care of them and ridden them for months at a time.  Your girlfriend watching a horse tire on the turn is not what I thought we were talking about.  

This is where the hostility comes in...but I have other things to do today.

Would you put your picks up for Preakness Day, with an analysis of how you get there?  That might result in a constructive dialogue, as opposed to post-race speculation about pace and bias.  Otherwise I don\'t see the point of batting this around anymore.

HP

HP,

I wasn\'t talking about her watching a horse tire. I was talking about her watching a duel in action and realizing beforehand that the horse would never survive it because she could see how hard the horse was being used.  

I\'m sure I\'ll discuss the Preakness next week. Good luck.

[Mall]

Under the circumstances, the \"I don\'t understand why everybody\'s being mean to me\" argument is nonsense. I haven\'t read all of the exchanges, but the recent ones consist of you taking a position & others either disagreeing with or questioning the thinking behind your position. If you think I\'m wrong, let me suggest one possibility which never seems to enter your mind, namely whether you\'ve brought any of the hostility you think you\'re being subjected to on yourself. Let\'s take an example I\'m familiar with. derby 1592 offers the opinion that supertesting & security had an important impact at CD over the weekend. I agree. JB agrees. In short, two handicappers who spent many hrs doping, betting & watching the races in question, along with someone who has devoted his life to the subject, are of the same opinion. Your response? In words or substance, it was that the three of you are wrong about the Derby, & that we won\'t be able to tell if you\'re also wrong about the other races, the ones I didn\'t handicap or bet on, until I check on them & get back to you. Do you understand why someone might interpret your response as being just a tad bit on the arrogant side?

I tried, unsuccessfully obviously(I do know what FWIW means & Mike Smith didn\'t really shave Giacomo), to diffuse things by interjecting a little humor into your discussion with HP. More to the pt, the reason I suggested a contest was I thought that perhaps I could get some idea of exactly what it is that you\'re trying to say. I know you\'re explaining your own brand of handicapping, & I know that it\'s not pace handicapping as most people understand the phrase, but I didn\'t know until today that your method requires what some might consider expertise in making subjective judgments about how each race was run. I\'ve been watching races longer than you or HP, though not as long as both of you combined, & I\'m more than a little skeptical on this one, but maybe that\'s because I don\'t understand how this factor fits into your equation. If you post your analysis of all of the stakes on the Preakness card, maybe we could all learn something.

As someone who\'s been around racing for three decades, you must understand that it makes sense to be skeptical & raise questions when anyone claims or implies that he or she has discovered some version of the holy grail of handicapping. Personally, my skepticism increases exponentially when that person takes the position, as you did today, that in the \"typical (speed) duel ... the race collapses in the late middle and allows the closers to get into contention with ease.\" If you have a study or studies which supports this, I for one would love to see it, both because it contradicts every other study I\'ve seen(including but not limited to the 2yr, 200,000 race one I have in my hands now), & because I think what you\'re doing is repeating an old wives\' tale which has been proved wrong many times over. Putting aside the question of what constitutes a \"typical\" speed duel, & forgetting about all of the reasons why a \"paper\" speed duel might not materialize, in races with a lot of early speed, early speed horses still have an impact value considerably above 1, with an r.o.i. which is significantly higher than in races where there are less early speed horses. Until I read your post, that was something I thought all serious students of pace understood.

Mall,

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you.

There have been many cordial exchanges and disagreements between myself and others, but I have also been attacked by a few people even when I attempted to be cordial.

>Let\'s take an example I\'m familiar with. derby 1592 offers the opinion that supertesting & security had an important impact at CD over the weekend. I agree. JB agrees.....Your response? In words or substance, it was that the three of you are wrong about the Derby, & that we won\'t be able to tell if you\'re also wrong about the other races, the ones I didn\'t handicap or bet on, until I check on them & get back to you. Do you understand why someone might interpret your response as being just a tad bit on the arrogant side?<

If that\'s the way it came off, I understand your point of view.  

It\'s my opinion that there\'s not much evidence from the results of K Derby to indicate that drugs played a major role.  

I base that on my assessment of the abilities of horses coming in and the impact of the pace on the outcome.

If I were only using a set of speed figures, I\'d probably agree with you guys because I\'d have no way of explaining several of the performances that IMO were very respectable and in line with prior performance.    

I could go through the list of all the horses that raced for \"supposed drug trainers\" and their performances, but obviously we might disagree on how good they were coming in, how well they actually performed in the Derby, and what else could account for their subpar performance. That\'s an endless loop. It would also require that we include all the horses that ran for \"supposed drug trainers\" and not just the ones that help make the case.    

That\'s a conversation worth avoiding, but obviously since I have 30 years of experience at this also I am entitled to an opinion that I have a lot of confidence in.

Since I respect all your opinions too, I said I would look at the results of some of the other races at CD for the week for some other evidence because as far as I am concerned there\'s little or none from the K Derby.

There \"were\" some interestng results from the rest of the week though. :-)

If there was any \"attitude\" on my part it was because of the story about Afleet Alex and/or Closing Argument being washed/moved to another barn - which I guess supposedly accounts for why they ran well for their \"move up trainers\". That sounded a lot more like an episode of the X-files and excuse making than an analysis of the Derby.  

>but I didn\'t know until today that your method requires what some might consider expertise in making subjective judgments about how each race was run.<

Most trip handicappers do not use numeric pace figures. They use subjective visual skills etc...

Most numeric pace figure makers don\'t spend a lot of time watching races. They crunch numbers.  

I have found flaws in both methodologies (or probably weaknesses on my part in using both).

I use both because they tend to either reinforce or contradict each other. When they reinforce each other, it adds confidence to my opinion. When they contradict, I have a problem and know it. I consider confidence level to be highly valuable at the windows.  

I don\'t consider myself to be a super expert at either, but I think using both is somewhat unique and gives me a bit of an advantage over people that work with just numbers and those that are all visual. So you might say I stole from everyone and made something that works better for me than either of the parts.      

>you must understand that it makes sense to be skeptical & raise questions when anyone claims or implies that he or she has discovered some version of the holy grail of handicapping.<

This really blows my mind more than you can imagine.

I haven\'t discovered anything and never claimed to. People were making and writing about pace figures before I was even born. (I\'m 46). People have been using and writing about trip handicapping for just as long. Dozens of books have been written on making your own pace figures, combining them with final time figures, subjective trip handicapping etc...

I have done 3 things.

1. Read and studied all those books and gone through the process of making my own pace figures for a very long time, watching thousands of races, studying race results, and finding applications of that information that seemed to not be reflected on the odds board or understood by the general public.    

2. Studied my betting results endlessly until I knew what I was winning at and what I was losing at and then only betting on the stuff I was winning at.

3. Developed a high degree of self control and discipline and now only got to the windows when I feel I have a very sigificant long term edge.    

If you go to some of the pace forums you will literally find hundreds if not thousands of horse players
that have gone through the same process as I have and come to many of the same conclusions and use the same applications. (just ask beyerguy. he\'s aces!!!!)  I learn from them all the time and hopefully I occasionally provide a nugget of info that helps them too.  

>Personally, my skepticism increases exponentially when that person takes the position, as you did today, that in the \"typical (speed) duel ... the race collapses in the late middle and allows the closers to get into contention with ease.\">

The point was that a race can be faster than average from start to finish (like the Wood)or it can faster than average to a certain point and then be slower than average in the middle to late portion. Those are obviously 2 different race developments and could impact closers differently depending on when they move and how vigorous that move was.

>>Putting aside the question of what constitutes a \"typical\" speed duel, & forgetting about all of the reasons why a \"paper\" speed duel might not materialize, in races with a lot of early speed, early speed horses still have an impact value considerably above 1, with an r.o.i. which is significantly higher than in races where there are less early speed horses. Until I read your post, that was something I thought all serious students of pace understood.<<

Yes I do understand that early speed is generally an advantage and that races loaded with early speed do not always produce a speed duel that compromises their chances.

IMO it\'s a factor that has to weighed by asking questions like this.

What are the probabilities that a duel develops or that the pace will be very slow and how will either of those scenarios impact the race and individual horses?

What are the chances that some of these speed horses might be able to rate and win anyway?

What are the chances of horse \"X\" getting loose and gaining an advantage?

What are the chances of a certain closer getting better position than he usually gets and not being impacted by a slow pace?

I ask lots of questions like that.

To give 2 specific examples from Derbys:  

I hated High Limit because I thought it was highly likely that this pace would be fast (1 clear cut rabbit, one cheap speed that always goes, a quality speed, and a load of pressers) and it would impact him negatively because of what I had seen from him to date -which was a horse that was dead at the end of the BG after facing one cheap speed at 9F.

I bet War Emblem even though I knew a pace duel could happen that would compromise his chances because it was much less certain than on this last Saturday. He has also shown one race where he rated OK and had more stretch punch. However, when I made my odds line on him I absolutely and certainly reduced his chances of winning relative to his very fast speed figures because he wasn\'t highly likely to get loose like he did his prep. He was still an overlay though.

For me it\'s all about value and handicapping the probabilities of various scenarios. No one can get them all right. I am wrong constantly, but I am right often enough to add value.



Post Edited (05-11-05 20:01)

[Mall]

You very much need to do something about this fixation you have with the Ky Derby. I have no interest whatsoever in discussing or reading your views on that race again, ever. What I\'m trying to say is that I have no interest at all. None. Zero. Nada. In fact, I\'d be very much obliged if you never mention the Ky Derby & how you feel pace impacted the race again, ever, if there is even the slightest chance that I might have to read or hear anything you have to say on the subject. Are we clear on that? Because if we\'re not, then I\'ll have to join those who have reached the conclusion that it\'s impossible to have any kind of dialogue with you.  

The original posts were clear that we were also talking about the other races & it\'s not possible for you to have confused what I said above. With respect to those races, it\'s not a question of \"if\" you came across as arrogant, although given what you\'re saying now, I\'m not surprised that you still don\'t seem to grasp that. And it really doesn\'t make sense or matter to me that your excuse is that Jerry said something about the Ky Derby that you don\'t agree with. If you have a dispute with Jerry on that subject, take it up with him. Just do it when I\'m out of earshot.  

Standing alone, your suggestion that I go to some of the pace forums to learn how people are using pace & trip handicapping together doesn\'t make a great deal of sense. Are you suggesting that I quit the one I\'m a prominent member of in favor of some other one(s) that you think are better, or are you operating under the assumption that you are the only one who has read the books & understand & use their methods? Comments like \"...if I were only using a set of speed figures, I\'d probably agree with you guys..\" suggests it\'s the latter. What baffles me is how you could read & post here & not understand that us \"guys\", as you put it, are not \"only\" using a set of speed figures.

Based on what I\'ve read & confirmed with a member of our group who many consider an expert on the subject, some of your views on trip handicapping & what certain clues may or may not mean, are a little, shall we say, out of the mainstream. No problem. I\'m all in favor, but what I would like to see, even if it\'s just once, is for you to identify, in advance, a horse that you bet on or against entirely or partially because of the way a jockey was moving his hands in a previous race, or because of your interpretation of a horse\'s stride in a previous race, or for that matter, because of any of the clues which you say \"might\" indicate a race was slow or fast. That is & will always be the test, & with replays as widely available as they are, everyone would then have an opportunity to look at the previous race(s)& make their own judgment.

I\'m open to the idea that you are particularly adept at watching & interpreting races, but what strikes me as odd is how & when the question came up. Maybe this is something you\'ve been emphasizing all along & I missed it, but it sure seems like you spent a great deal of time explaining your theories, over & over & over again, as one poster put it, & then presto, at the last minute, when HP was pressing you for an explanation of how your pace figures account for wind, you turn around & say, by the way, did I mention that my approach requires that you be something of a grandstand horse whisperer?

Nonetheless, it is the last part of your post which concerns me the most. You quote what you said originally which, as I pointed out, is simply wrong. There\'s no getting around it. It\'s not something you can change by going over the Ky Derby again, or by changing the subject, or by being long-winded. I\'m wondering, of course, what happened to the studies you claimed you did, since I\'m sure it would be instructive to compare & contrast them with the one I mentioned, since that one was done by someone who is widely considered to be one of the top pace experts in the country. But there is a more fundamental problem we need to deal with. When you\'re as wrong about something as you were on this one, you need to just admit you made a mistake, whatever the reason. I promise to do the same. That way you save the time involved in typing a long & superficial recitation of general handicapping principles, & readers avoid the time involved in reading what they already know, only to learn that you did not even attempt to address the question.

[shanahan]

I\'m with Mall on this one...the TG guys are avoiding a lot of ? lately...we all make mistakes, why the doubt?  I still believe TG is the best, and one oddball day doesn\'t change that.

[MO]

Well that didn\'t take too long. Here\'s the report:


http://tcm.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=28085



Post Edited (05-12-05 08:13)

mall,

I responded to you.

1. If there was anything in my responses about the Derby it was because the \"supposed drug issue\" first came up in reference to the Derby results.

Do you think I should blindly accept the views of other handicappers just because they are experienced and not look at results I haven\'t analyzed myself?

Sorry, I respect other people\'s opinions but still want to form my own.    

2. I\'ve given plenty of examples and insights of what I do before the races. I don\'t expect that you read them all or even remember them all.

3. Unlike others, I have never had any problem admitting any of my mistakes. I bet on Bandini and Greely\'s Galaxy. That was freakin brilliant wasn\'t it? LOL

4. Personally, I don\'t know why anyone wouldn\'t want to go other forums to discuss racing insights. I know very little about claiming races/trainers, breeding, and first time starters. If I could find a forum where guys specialize in those things, I\'d surely go there to learn about those topics instead of the paceadvantage and pacefigs forums and vice versa.

5. As far ideas that are out of the mainstream, you can read any of these books. These guys couldn\'t be any more mainstream.

\"Beyer on Speed\" and \"The Winning Horseplayer\" by Beyer.

\"Figure Handicapping\", \"Class of the Field\" and \"The Handicappers Stakes Festival\" James Quinn.

\"The Four Quarters of Horseracing\" Mark Cramer.

Anything by Steve Davidowitz, who IMHO, is the best!

Those books contain over 90% of what I do. Plenty of good pace/trip techniques in these books - both numerically and subjective race watching.



Post Edited (05-12-05 09:10)

[davidrex]

     Due to the stressfull situation brought about from a particular race last Saturday in Kentucky...I find that {some} divulgence is in order.
     Please do not take what I am about to divulge on this board as eavesdropping.
     I am the personal physician to a certain party that posts rather frequently with a somewhat laborious style.
     Although I am not here to defend my client ,I must condemn the brutal treatment he has recieved from EVERYONE at this spot.
     As a matter of aside.....you gentlemen would make terrific psycho-analyists.{Do you have any idea how many mirrors my client has in his tiny apt.?!}

               PARTYpokerON!