I'm sorry, not sure where I am giving an E-horse a 4, EP a 3, etc.

I think you've misunderstood something.

Ok.. maybe.. I think misunderstood something from an old post back on paceadvantage. When I handicap at times particularly as a tool, I will go through my recent track final results and compare how horses are running during the meet at certain conditions. (Note I already know that you brilliant enough Dave... to code this into your HSH and The Determinator which I have been watching your videos etc and find very interesting although I would need learning tutorial. Before I ask my question, have you sold out on your copies yet... if so.. very happy for you. If not, only takes time.

My question is for example.. Churchill Spring Meet. ran 15 races at Mcl levels from 10k to 100k at 6F.
My results show a breakdown of 3 Winners as an "Early" 2 Winners as "EP" and 4 Winners as Pressers and 6 Winners as Sustained. Remember, I am in the process like you in your early years without the benefit of running code but was trying to get an idea on how I can take at certain distances or certain levels and incorporate this into a Speed Type Reliability Index as you have.. In other words, I do think I understand your SRI index in that how consistent the speed plays at certain tracks or changes.. (I could be wrong.) I have done this type of winning style of running for a number of tracks that I use in terms of the circuits. I.e Tampa to Mommouth shipping-Big A.. or Gulfstream to New York-etc. I guess how would I go about processing this style year to year... Any ideas? Hope you say hi again.

Now I understand.
You are mixing different approaches -
A) the Race Weighting during the Par Making Process
B) the actual Speed Reliability Indexing process.

During the Par Making process I weight the races depending upon how early the ultimate winner first challenged for the lead. That is on a 9-4-2-1 scale. (Began as 4-3-2-1.

The SRI is a rather simple approach where where I total the wins of horses that get into the top 3.
That is done by using:
Sprints: Best Rating of the Last 2
Routes: Best 2 of Last 3

Your Par making approach is (basically) what Beyer suggested.
It is not a good way to build pars because it is dependent upon the quality of each race level last meet..

Those are not consistent from year to year as they were decades ago when we had so many horses in each level that there were also eligibles.

Now things have changed.
The goal is to determine how fast the track is.
You do this by building a $10k level par (even if the track doesn't run a $10k).

Begin with a rigid class structure - $10k is a 100, $12k/$12.5 is a 101, $15/$16k is 102, etc.

Build ONE PAR for each TRACK-SURFACE-DISTANCE.

I see.. I am kind of doing that... I have taken every class i.e. Mcl. from 10k to 100k. and seperated boys and girls and distances. So I have taken All Maidens Sp. Wts. same process. all the way to G1. and once have the pars. base the speed par on that class. so I take the Mcl. 10k. and rate each level to the top of the class. Or.. are you saying take every time at one distance and rate it according from Mcl. 10 all the way to G1. They are very comparable in terms of each class at times.. except. I see fillies/fm a tad slower at times. So. if my par time for MCL 10k. for 6F for whatever age is 1:10.00 example. as the best time than the par for the class/speed is set at 100. and any time above that you would deduct from the 100 rating?

@Chuck

I am saying that building class pars before you have track pars is a complete waste of time.

I am also saying that building class pars for this year from last year's data will produce a good set of pars for what happened in the past but will not reflect in the future because the levels are just not that consistent from year to year.

In addition, there are races labeled as c$16,000 that are good enough to be called c$25k and others that can barely stretch to c$10k.


It is better to:
1. Build solid track pars.
2. Use a Strength Rating approach for each individual race and completely ignore the class level system entirely.


PS: Explanation of Strength Ratings can be found in Percentages & Probabilities 2012.

I am not building class pars.. I am building track pars... And I understand your ratings. Dave. They are in depth and broken down very wisely. Right now, with a way a track is playing.. With the way I am doing my Track Pars, I attach a bias based on what winning horse went off.. you can judge a race, a speed, a type of running style based on the condition. I.E. In using past results charts of a current meet.. You can determine if tracks are playing a certain way obviously based on training habits etc. I am not talking betting here or gambling.. "I am talking handicapping" For Instance.. looking at race last Sunday.. playing. 3 Race approach.. ie. betting 3 races and one tourney... I looked up my last year speed par. for Maiden Sp. Wt. (Ny. Breds) My Par.. and the amount of subsuquent races based on the condition had A. E-Type Runner dominated the winning, not necessarily the winning times but the winning style of the horse and the race. Case in point. Although, points of Call had Race # 7 Belmont. Big A. Sunday. June. 30. the running line shows.....1st C. 2nd by 1/2. 2nd. Call 2nd.again by. but overtakes at 3/4 pole and goes all the way to the wire. Now.. a computer generated system.. may look at this programmed and may consider this a Sustained or Jim Cramers PS. I did.. not based if the programmer has programmed his handicapping object or factor to consider his running style based on the class and the speed.. So.. when I bet this race... I caught this horse at 30-1..along with the exactor at 1 dollar because I live on fixed budget still and based on jockey/trainer combo and the understanding of how trainers think and how angles are calculated and how they are designed. Speed. or Front Run Style 1st Out.. or off the lay off. followed by a race to continue the process of building a young horse's stamina. Black Magic/Valuecapper had the bias of based on Late or Closing Bias based on Odds. However, after I did my handicapping.. I change the bias to Early.. not doing it before I handicap.. or out of the box... like fact checking.. guess who the Early horse was when I changed the bias to Early? And I do not lie about this stuff ..there is no point.. it is not about ego... it just the point..You can take a million statistical anomalies and etc..in a gambling/slash betting.. in terms of what your principles are and have sucess.. The fact is that card cost me 1.00 american plus my original purchase, my knowledge, my learning.. and years of my playing. I enjoy listening you to Dave.. I helped show what was going on in my computer.. etc. The fact is you are great teacher.. and I give you credit... for your coding ............etc.

I am not building class pars.. I am building track pars... And I understand your ratings. Dave. — Chuck

Respectfully, I got this far before my brain disconnected with the giant paragraph.

The way my brain is wired, I read a single line in about three eye movements. Hand me a giant paragraph without carriage returns and it will take me 10 minutes to read it.