10 finished 4th for a $86.30 super on a dime. 10 was the second favorite and a logical horse.

Particularly, to pre-classify a race based on expected volatility… I use an A,B,C,D, and F grading system with Grd A being highly predictable and Grd F being the most volatile — Jack Price

Is there anything you can share about your volatility ratings?

Ranch, the attachment is a basic overview of my pre-handicapping process (the “science”)…. I really prefer not to give you my secret sauce regarding "grading system"; however, using the tote board favorite to “slice and dice” is a major clue (see page 2 of the attachment for win% results for the “off” time race favorite).

BOL!

Thanks, Jack! It is always interesting to see what a serious handicapper is doing.

No problem.

Don’t mean to “redboard” but when I looked back at the AQU8 race I noticed the Pace Pressure was “zero”…. That can sometimes cause chaotic results as jockeys and trainers think about stealing on the front end and can consequently, go to fast (setting up for the closers)… For me, Pace Pressure = Zero is always an alert for careful handicapping.

Excellent job Ranch!!!

Excellent job Ranch!!! — Tony Kofalt

Thanks, Tony! I was yelling at the YouTube feed. lol

Don’t mean to “redboard” but when I looked back at the AQU8 race I noticed the Pace Pressure was “zero”…. That can sometimes cause chaotic results as jockeys and trainers think about stealing on the front end and can consequently, go to fast (setting up for the closers)… For me, Pace Pressure = Zero is always an alert for careful handicapping. — Jack Price

That's basically the same as my thought. I guess we just get to that point a tiny bit differently. Somebody has to be on the front end and none of them belong there.

Ranch, looking at you Aqu5th example, the lone early, and favorite, was the best speed fig by a significent gap, but that number was his best ever and came almost 2 month ago. The rest of the field was a cluster, so as you suggested, when the early dosen't show, chaos can step in.

Going back over the data I used to set up my Ultimate Odds project, 90% of the winners were ranked 1-5 in Bris PP. There were 15% horses that paid $18.00 or more. Of those, 71% were ranked 5 or higher on PP, and of those fully 50% were ranked 1-2-3 in LP last race.

I would have thought early would be the common thread, but it appears your observation of a recent closing effort is worth following. I will be adding a step to my handicapping to look for horses from this group.

Great thread!

Oh yeah, and the trifecta in that was Dave's video premise of "within 1 of the third ranked horse."
There were only 3 contenders, and they ran 1-2-3.

looking at you Aqu5th example, the lone early, and favorite, was the best speed fig by a significent gap, — Tom

I can't fully explain why, but in chaos races the speed figs often make little difference. And speed figs get bet. I think that may partially explain Dave's idea of bet the rest.

Wow!! 20-1. And picked BEFORE the race. This is definitely worth looking into. Great pick, Ranch.

Wow!! 20-1. And picked BEFORE the race. This is definitely worth looking into. Great pick, Ranch. — andicap

Thanks!

I think there's a converse side to this. It is good to know when chaos is unlikely so traditional handicapping has greater reliability.

@Colty

It is. Thanks for noticing.

Tom brought up today's 8th at TAM as the favorite being a good bet against. So, I looked at the race and the chaos pattern is opposite of what has previously been discussed in this thread. The %M's of this race suggest that the field likes to expend their energy early, very early. My chaos number is 1.57, very low. The early horses tired and once again the horses that had recently shown an ability to close came in. The 2 and 7 were the closers. The 2 paid $41.20 to win and the 2-7 exacta paid $96.30.

But pace doesn't work. <wink><wink>

Does this approach work on races with many starters like the Kentucky Derby? For instance, was the Mine That Bird derby a chaos race?

This concept is fairly new, so I have not even gone through one KD with it yet.

At this point, I'd say that this concept finds potential chaos races. Not all fall apart. But many of the ones that do fall apart follow this pattern. One of the caveats is to proceed with caution when there's an obviously solid favorite.

And, it isn't much of a bet if there's no closing longshots.

Does this approach work on races with many starters like the Kentucky Derby? For instance, was the Mine That Bird derby a chaos race? — Atakante

The rating for this race was 5.000, very much a chaos potential with 3.2 and above being potential chaos. But it might take several Derby races to establish any sort of pattern.

Thanks, RanchWest. The Derby sure felt like a chaotic race to my bankroll! :))

Thanks, RanchWest. The Derby sure felt like a chaotic race to my bankroll! :)) — Atakante

As a wise man once told me, turn the page.

I was reading over this thread and recalled a discussion I had a with friend regarding chaos races. My friend noticed less predictable results when handicapping a race where entrants had not run to PAR. I remember doing a brief test about 10 years ago after our discussion. What I did was compare my projected figs to the race PAR. In my case it was the Beyer PAR. Some time has passed so I don't have the actual test data but I do recall seeing more unusual results in those races.
Has anyone conducted any similar tests? I have no idea why I didn't pursue this path other than I was very reluctant to make any changes to what I was doing at that time.
Ranch hoe has work on your chaos theory been working out?

I'm still refining.

A\.t least 6 horses are required, preferably 7 or more.

The horses need to have been away with good position early while not exerting high %Median. So, there needs to be some Quirin points. I'd say the top three Quirin horses should total a minimum of 15.

If there's an odds-on horse, be wary.

As for what your friend told you, I don't think that's necessarily contradictory to my approach. I would think that horses not running to par are frequently not exerting early energy (low %M).

So, I would think that both approaches are worth tracking.

I know that it is not unusual for me to find 10+/1, even 20+/1 horses with my chaos approach. But, admittedly, more precise testing on a defined approach needs to be done. But, at these odds, there appears to be some wiggle room.

Also, I think this is a dirt only method. Definitely not for turf... they all have low %M. May not work on All-Weather, though I just watched a winner pay $14.60 at GP, R11. But there were 3 playable horses.

Thanks Ranch

Have either of you two tried/tested Quirin Speed Point percentage? When it's less than .15 weird happening occur. — Biniak

No, I am not sure I understand. 15 percent of what?

I look at the top 3 Quirin speed figures because that is what will usually drive the pace. I also look at the Giles high Quirin count.

Yes, I believe I understand now. So, your example would qualify because 7 is less than 15% of 47.

I also have my own number that I call "pressure", but I haven't found a correlation to chaos for it.

I think I see the premise for your number. The whole field is supplying more pressure than the high pressure horse can withstand. I have added that to my program to see if I find merit. Thanks.