If I may, I'm going to play a little devil's advocate here for the sake of discussion and say when selecting a single representative paceline to predict today's outcome, This may give you the runner's "ability level"...but would seem to ignore the condition and form cycle pattern of the runner when that particular representative paceline was earned...which could have no relationship to the current condition and form cycle pattern...which greatly affects today's "ability level." Thanks guys.

Rich, interesting.

.but would seem to ignore the condition and form cycle pattern of the runner — Dustin Korth

Good point, Dustin. I think this is where the art of handicapping comes into play. I think one thing that helps is to look at recent composite speed ratings and compare those to the pace line speed rating. it's also good to note the points at which the horse was claimed. And, which race off the last layoff. Lots of stuff available to make me look foolish. lol

If I may, I'm going to play a little devil's advocate here for the sake of discussion and say when selecting a single representative paceline to predict today's outcome, This may give you the runner's "ability level"...but would seem to ignore the condition and form cycle pattern of the runner when that particular representative paceline was earned...which could have no relationship to the current condition and form cycle pattern...which greatly affects today's "ability level." Thanks guys. — Dustin Korth

Absolutely right!
"How good is the horse?" and "Is the horse in form?" are certainly two different questions.

The other day, I posted this as a reply in the Live & Breath Handicapping Facebook group when someone was looking for ways to figure out a complicated race conditions. I suggested this.



Here's a screenshot I just took of a concept I built back in 2001.
The yellow box represents the last 10 races for each horse.
_________
G=Won on today's surface, at today's approximate distance, at today's class or higher.
(Losing by a neck or less counts as a win.)
_________
B=Lost today's surface, at today's approximate distance, at today's class or lower.
_________
The Dots are races at the wrong surface, wrong distance, too high a class, or off-track.
IOW, the horse had a valid excuse.
_________
As you can see, very few horses actually are entered in a race where they actually fit.
BTW, the LINE column indicates the horse's odds in the most recent race where they got a G.
The theory is that if the horse won at what he's trying to do today, then he should be an overlay at that price or higher.

Of course, this worked out.

I write handicapping stuff, right? LOL
_________

(Losing by a neck or less counts as a win.) — Dave Schwartz

I'm trying to follow along. Should that be 2 lengths? And maybe 3 in a route?

I'm trying to follow along. Should that be 2 lengths? And maybe 3 in a route? — RanchWest

No. It is exactly as I said:

G=Won on today's surface, at today's approximate distance, at today's class or higher.
(Losing by a neck or less counts as a win.) — Dave Schwartz

G=Finish within a neck or a win.

Okay, I'm lost. I don't understand how the two example horses earned a G for the races marked. There's something I don't understand here.

Okay, I'm lost. I don't understand how the two example horses earned a G for the races marked. There's something I don't understand here. — RanchWest

Because they won those races.
Or, they finished so close that it counts as a win.

More specifically, #6 won her 5th race back which was:

• Same surface as today.
• Similar distance as today.
• Same or higher class as today.

What are you not understanding about that?

(Losing by a neck or less counts as a win.) — Dave Schwartz

If that were true, I would be A rich man.
Would you contact NYRA and explain that to them?

TY

#6 I am showing .75 back.
#5 I am showing 1.75 back.

Sorry I am being a pest, but what I have learned from you is helping me so much that I don't want to misunderstand this. In a few days I am going to post about my journey.

My mistake.
I forgot that I changed the rules about 5 years ago.
Had to go look at the code.

It appears that I changed it to 1st or 2nd, or less than 1.00 lengths.

Good catch.

Thanks, Dave! You always follow through.

I asked Rich about this (above), but I should have asked you. I am a confused on the need to Sort by. Can you explain a little or give an example? Thanks for sharing! — Biniak

Easy.
You have 10 pacelines for a horse.
There are 3 issues:
1. Which pacelines are QUALIFIED?
2. How many do we want to SELECT?
3. How should we ORDER them to determine which to select?

1. Is similar surface, similar distance, lengths behind/ahead.
2. Is a determination that should change depending upon the confidence we have in the selection.

3. Is what you asked about.
Imagine you have 10 pacelines.
Step 1 slims that down to (say) 3 pacelines.
If it slimmed it down to just one, you would need a sort, right?

But with 3 pacelines, you need some way to ORDER them.
Sort by:
most recent
closest distance
fastest final time

This particular sort will really only require "Most Recent" because there will never be a tie (unless the horse raced twice in one day. - It HAS happened.)

But some of the other conditions require more sorts.

THE POINT
You will sort and take the TOP LINE (or top 2, 3 or whatever).

Hope this explains it.

I find that usually use 3 pacelines each weighed a little differently based on the way I feel the form cycle is moving. This is a great thread

I find that usually use 3 pacelines each weighed a little differently based on the way I feel the form cycle is moving. This is a great thread — Tony Kofalt

Is that something you are doing through HSH? Is there some automation involved in the form cycle weights or is that pretty much subjective?

Is that something you are doing through HSH? Is there some automation involved in the form cycle weights or is that pretty much subjective? — RanchWest

HSH supports that - even via the systems.

(Tony hasn't used HSH for a long time.)

It can be done through HSH. I did it using ThoroBrain in the past. It's a pretty subjective process for me right now.

It's a pretty subjective process for me right now. — Tony Kofalt

So, I assume your extensive experience guides you in making these calls, correct?

Experience does help. But I'd have to say that my experience with Thorograph played a big part. Especially the concepts around form cycles

Experience does help. But I'd have to say that my experience with Thorograph played a big part. Especially the concepts around form cycles — Tony Kofalt

Tell us as much as you can, please, about that process.
Or links to TGraph docs.

BTW, HSH does have built in Rag-style numbers.
Do you like those?

So if we have 3 lines to sort/weigh, might using a Fibonocci be useful?
Good thread!

So if we have 3 lines to sort/weigh, might using a Fibonocci be useful?
Good thread! — Tom

Ted Craven told me how to compute CSR, Composite Speed Rating, which is the speed ratings of the last four races, time decayed through Fibonacci. So, I implemented that for BRIS speed numbers.

Well, I am always tinkering, so I applied the same concept to BRIS pace figures.

I tend to not trust individual numbers and computations... I look at things a lot of different ways and see if they all jive or what the outliers are. So, I take these Composite Pace Ratings (CPR? ha!) and compare them to other pace numbers, such as pace line Early Pace and Late Pace. Once I also look at %Median, %Median for the field, Quirin speed points, etc., I start to get an idea of what the pace should look like.

But, it seems to me, that this still doesn't accomplish what Tony is doing, looking at the actual time line for the form cycle. That concept really interests me.

BTW, HSH does have built in Rag-style numbers.
Do you like those? — Dave Schwartz

I've always felt that the precision in the Thorograph numbers was amazing. I'm comfortable that the adjustments made to the numbers (wide trips, weight on/off, wind) were appropriate and added value. With a little practice, the presentation of the figs in graphs was good for my eye. I felt I could see both obvious and subtle improvements and regressions in a horses form. Key distinction is that I compared a horses recent form with his past form to determine where they may be in their form cycle.
I don't recall reviewing SLT in HSH so a comparison is difficult. I'm not sure what 'number' is used to build the HSH sheets. Could you please add a little detail for me?
I'll address the paceline process soon but right now I'm preparing for Belmont

Let's catch up after this weekend.
I'd really like to run some ideas past you - especially on the note taking.

I've been trying out this paceline selection for a few weeks and have been happy with the results, albiet a small sample size. The prices are certainly better than focusing on recent lines.
Recent posts here have been extolling the value of time-decay ratings, so I am looking at testing using this line selection method to identify 3 races to use for a TDR rating of several factors, as Ranchwest talked about yesterday. My goal is update my Ultimate Oddsline method, to hopefully grab a few of the better prices out there.

My odds line is currently using the BRIS pace from 4F and LT from my selected pace line. The decayed pace of the last 4 races might be a good element to the odds line... I certainly use it in my handicapping.