I hate long threads, time to start a new one....
HP, in re-reading your comments I see you were talking on a much more general scale than I was thinking. I was referring to using this type of analysis strictly for the Derby, I agree in most other cases there is some merit to pace analysis at a very small extent, but in the Derby it is much more important for identifying horses that may/may not get the stretched out distance or may be subject to fatigue becuase of a hard-run campaign of front-end running races.
Really the only other place I give pace this much stock is in 6.5F races down the turf at Santa Anita. Throw out the TG numbers here, find the horse who is running at the end and you can get some real bombs (not always the winner, but in the trifecta at nice prices). For instance, the $68 winner yesterday had the 2nd highest BRIS late pace figure in the field. In route races, I do the exact opposite, throw out the pace numbers and use the TG figs, maybe with a small adjustment if there is a horse likely to be alone on the lead. There the TG #s are rock solid (leading me to that beautiful $4100 trifecta on Sat).
I read the Brohammer book, in general I like some of the Sartin theroy, but think the figure making for handicapping is garbage. Keep the calculator at home. BRIS already gives you everything you really need, given that their pace figures probably do not include adjustments for ground loss either. Having a general idea of the pace scenario and identify running style is one thing, but taking the time to calculate the exact feet per second and energy used is worthless. Especially when you only pick one race to do it, how do I pick the right race? Am I saying I expect the horse to run the same race today? To me, this in an exercise in what the horse has already done, not what can he do today, and that is a recepie for failure in my book.
You are right, I was talking more in general. The Derby is unique. In terms of getting the mile and 1/4, I think the breeding is going to be more important than the pace, although I have seen in recent years that quantifying breeding (dosage, etc.) is another tough issue. Accepted values are changing. A horse wins and they back-date the chef-de-race ratings and poof!, now you know. Of course, after the race. And then when you think you\'ve got some insight on this, it turns into the kind of race where pace is a little more important.
The Derby is also unique in the sense that it is a huge field and a roughly run race. Many horses wilt in the crowd and it\'s tough to say what the precise cause was. Could be the pace and it could be they don\'t like getting knocked around like a pinball.
I would say in the ten years or so I\'ve played the Derby with TG, the TG figures and patterns account for the results more than any of the other factors. It\'s not like I\'ve seen anything that was a huge surprise based on pace or breeding. Probably the biggest surprise winner to me was Charismatic. How could he jump up eight points and pair up on short rest? But it\'s not like he wasn\'t fast enough going in (I think he ran a 3 in the...Lexington?). Not to say I always get it. I managed to key a bomber last year (Invisible Ink) and didn\'t see a nickel. Thought Monarchos would back up, but he was fast enough going in. I bet they will zig and they zag. It happens. My only regret is not including them at reasonable prices, but since there are usually a few strong contenders, my temptation is always to try to eliminate SOMEONE. This year I\'m going to try to be more inclusive (if necessary) since often the payoffs are worth the extra investment here.
I don\'t think pace is generally a huge factor in the Derby because the field is usually big enough that there are going to be a few in there to insure an honest pace. And then either one of the pacesetters hangs around to get in the picture or they set it up and get blown by in the stretch. It\'s pretty rare where you get a \'lone speed\' or even a \'no speed\' scenario. It\'s usually a fast pace (or at least honest - in the 45-47 for 1/2 range), and I end up looking more at the other angles.
I\'ve experimented a little with the BRIS numbers, and it sounds like you have some good insights on using them. I find it tough to look back and forth between too many different things, and with the BRIS, the TG, the board and figuring out the best bet for the situation (man I stink at this), I would love to whittle things down a bit. I\'ll give it another whirl at some point. HP
I should probably wait until I actually read the book, but I couldn\'t resist the rare thread where my entry might be among the shortest.
Fortias agree with TH\'s problem with the Sartin approach, which he says is fundamentally flawed, & instead is arguing that consideration of a horse\'s overall development should include its entire pace profile(variant-adj. Sartin figs) as well as its final figs, since one can thereby get a better read on its current & likely future condition,which he believes is the factor which should be given the most weight in the vast majority of races.