You guys downloaded 406 Race Shapes the first day we put them up, and that does not include those who hit the link in the email and took them that way. I can\'t believe not one of you has a comment.
I\'ve been very busy. I\'m sure I\'ll have something to say after I use them for awhile. I already think the format is excellent. I really can\'t see how people aren\'t going to like this product once they get used to using it. IMO, it\'s a no brainer to be a significant plus in anyone\'s handicapping.
jerry , no offense but the quirin points that were invented 25 years ago and are included in the bris pp\'s are the gold standard as far as race shapes goes, they consistently outperform anything that is on the market, THAT;S MY COMMENT.
high roller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jerry , no offense but the quirin points that were
> invented 25 years ago and are included in the bris
> pp\'s are the gold standard as far as race shapes
> goes, they consistently outperform anything that
> is on the market, THAT;S MY COMMENT.
But how do you know if Quirin\'s is still the best on the market if you don\'t even try the TG product?...It\'s free to try so why not..
I will be using it this upcoming week and should have something to say then..
Yeah, I remember another product that preceded us by 25 years that used to be the gold standard.
Unless Quirin is using wind, ground, an accurate variant, proper turn corrections for different distances at different tracks, and adjusting for runups, I think we\'ll do okay heads-up. And even better after we\'ve had a couple of months of feedback. and make any changes necessary.
Is Quirin expressing his figures in actual time, adjusted for the recent speed of the track they are running over today?
JB,
Dr. Quirin\'s figs were called speed points and are almost none of what you have alluded to in so far as component makeup of your race shapes.I believe you would scoff at his methodology but it was ahead it\'s time in 1979.The book is called Winning At The Races,Computer Discovery in Thoroughbred Handicapping and you would appreciate it\'s content relative to the time it was written.
Your product and modern pace figs are an extension to what he set out to do years ago. I could shoot lots of holes in the theories being used today but they are absolutely better than no data at all.The manner in which you are approaching it(similar to Randy Moss) is very comprehensive but synthetic/poly will render these race shape figs less reliable than if all races were run on dirt tracks.When fields begin to have more of a mixture of dirt/synth/poly runners, there will be some head scratching for \"speed\" bettors, like me.
The actual first standard for pace figs that I saw goes back 40+ years to a \"system\" devised by disciples of Julie Fink and the \"speed boys.\" Astonishingly they factored at wind, gate placement, path, bias to name some elements. Not too many players had a clue about such matters back then. These guys were betting $1,000.00 per race when $50 bucks was considered a big bet.
Mike
Miff-- my guess is that you know my friend Connie Merjos (The Beard). He also speaks about Fink and all those things he and others were doing before Ragozin invented them.
You should be able to pick out the poly lines from each horse and use those, if they\'ve already run on it.
Jerry, wind, variant and such have absolutely nothing to do with race shapes, the quirin numbers have for 25 years outperformed everything that has been invented, unless your race shapes can predict in high percentages what horse will be leading at the pace call or quarter mile call, they are useless.
i will forward you in percentage terms what the quirins produce so you can check it against yours.
Yeah, you\'r right, how fast they\'ve run in the past has nothing to do with how fast they\'ll run today.
The way you know how fast they have run first quarters in the past is basically the same as the way you know how fast they ran for a whole race-- which means all those factors are crucially important. Especially since some times the first quarter has been wind aided, or the opposite, sometimes they are running around a turn, or not, sometimes it\'s an 8 foot runup, sometimes 100 feet-- little things like that.
I particularly like that you have made this judgement without looking at the Race Shapes for, say, 50 races.
Early% = percentage of time a horse with this speed point total is 1-2-3 at the first call.
Dirt Sprints (no wet tracks or maidens tested)
8 - 91.2
7 - 82.7
6 - 66.3
5 - 49.6
4 - 41.0
3 - 35.4
2 - 27.5
1 - 18.3
jerry, a horse with 8 quirin points will be 1,2,3 at the first call 91% of the time. let\'s do a trial (100 races)with your new numbers and see if you can match that or be in the same area.
I think you are comparing Apples to Oranges here.
The Quirin points explicitly don\'t try to predict where a horse will be positioned in the race which Jerry\'s numbers obviously do try to predict. It\'s one thing to know that a horse will be in 1-3 at the first call (which Quirin\'s numbers can predict) but not knowing where anyone else in the race will be after the first call (which Quirin doesn\'t help with) makes that analysis less useful
Uh... out of curiosity, what do you do if 4 horses in a race have 8 points?
Match what? We don\'t give out points. And your percentages add up to about 400%, by the way.
If we arbitrarily said we would say our equivalent of an \"*8\" was a horse that came up 2 lengths or more clear on the Race Shapes, and threw out maiden races, I guarantee they would be 1-2-3 at least that % after a quarter. But is that really the only question you care about?
Just wondering if you guys have given any though to the other half of the races shape, the last quarter? Would be a huge tool for the slow paced turf and poly races, which may be more predictable with the race shapes first 1/4 numbers. Seems like it would be all the same methodology. Either way thanks for the free trial!
Several people have asked this and related questions. We\'re not rating the horses, or trying to measure ability with the Race Shapes-- just trying to give some idea how the race will set up.
High Roller - your stat amazed me a bit based on my experience with QP. So, to double check I ran a quick study from this year\'s spring KEE meet. Perhaps KEE is not the best meet to run this study but stats should be stats right?
Anyway, out of 1,388 starters in the KEE meet spread among 151 races over 16 days there were 478 horses that were in the top three at the first call (in some races there were four horses in the \"top 3\" because of ties in beaten lengths). That leads to an average field size of 9.2 horses per race.
Here\'s the results of the study based on QP and position at first call.
8 QP = 26 of 32 for 81%
7 QP = 28 of 35 for 80%
6 QP = 86 of 142 for 61%
5 QP = 72 of 128 for 56%
4 QP = 59 of 135 for 44%
3 QP = 49 of 191 for 26%
2 QP = 42 of 175 for 24%
1 QP = 47 of 222 for 21%
0 QP = 21 of 162 for 13%
FTS (no QP) = 48 of 165 for 29%
So, at least for this meet the QP trend is not quite as clean as indicated. I guess what is also noticeable to me is that 45% of the horses who were in the top 3 at the first call had QP between 4 and 6 - clearly not all that great a predictive tool as one might imagine. Another way of looking at this is that only 2.3% of the total starters had 8 QP with another 2% having a 7 QP.
Anyway, just some data to mull over.
Dehere, I\'m glad you jumped in, since I know you use pace products. Comments on the RS so far?
did you see the stat 6f sprint no maidens, no wet tracks.
dehere Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> High Roller - your stat amazed me a bit based on
> my experience with QP. So, to double check I ran a
> quick study from this year\'s spring KEE meet.
> Perhaps KEE is not the best meet to run this study
> but stats should be stats right?
>
> Anyway, out of 1,388 starters in the KEE meet
> spread among 151 races over 16 days there were 478
> horses that were in the top three at the first
> call (in some races there were four horses in the
> \"top 3\" because of ties in beaten lengths). That
> leads to an average field size of 9.2 horses per
> race.
>
> Here\'s the results of the study based on QP and
> position at first call.
>
> 8 QP = 26 of 32 for 81%
> 7 QP = 28 of 35 for 80%
> 6 QP = 86 of 142 for 61%
> 5 QP = 72 of 128 for 56%
> 4 QP = 59 of 135 for 44%
> 3 QP = 49 of 191 for 26%
> 2 QP = 42 of 175 for 24%
> 1 QP = 47 of 222 for 21%
> 0 QP = 21 of 162 for 13%
> FTS (no QP) = 48 of 165 for 29%
>
> So, at least for this meet the QP trend is not
> quite as clean as indicated. I guess what is also
> noticeable to me is that 45% of the horses who
> were in the top 3 at the first call had QP between
> 4 and 6 - clearly not all that great a predictive
> tool as one might imagine. Another way of looking
> at this is that only 2.3% of the total starters
> had 8 QP with another 2% having a 7 QP.
>
> Anyway, just some data to mull over.
>Unless Quirin is using wind, ground, an accurate variant, proper turn corrections for different distances at different tracks, and adjusting for runups, I think we\'ll do okay heads-up. <
Quirin speed points aren\'t an effort to use fractions to determine who the speed might be. They are an effort to examine running styles. The idea is that horses tend to run as fast as they have to early in the race in order to get the position they prefer. So if the horse gets the lead often, that is telling you something about his chances of getting the lead today (and so on). There is some truth to it. Most pace analysts (myself included) think in both terms. IMO, the key is to get the fractional analysis correct the way you are. The rest is more subjective and depends on the makeup of the field. If you\'d like some input on a speed points rating that you can add to your product at a later date let me know.
High Roller - nope, missed that one but it seems kinda reminiscent of HRC trying to find a winning formula. Unfortunately, I guess your limitations rules out California, Keeneland, Turfway, Woodbine, Arlington, Presque Isle. In the interest of fairness, I\'ll take a look somewhere to see whether the summary holds up under the guidelines suggested.
JB - do you look at the Raceshapes as being limited to certain races/conditions?
To answer your question, the first time I used the product I found it to be extremely telling about how the race would \"shape up\". I have not really utilized it enough to have much feel for it though at this point.
It\'s not my job to defend Race Shapes, but even though the Quiren Speed Points are valuable they are not the whole answer.
Let me ask you a question.
Who do you think will get the lead between 2 horses with 8 Quiren Speed Points?
A. The horse that typically runs 22 flat and recently ran a 21.3
B. The horse that typically runs 22.2 and whose best is 22.1
The answer is obvious when you have good fractional information to work with and not so obvious when you just have speed points. Using Race Shapes does not mean you can\'t also look at speed points and vice versa.
Dehere-- I don\'t really know yet about race types and conditions, but from what little I\'ve seen the dirt sprints are rock solid, the grass routes more tactical and thus less predictable.
Fkach,
I don\'t think that it\'s any great revelation that a horse with certain Quirin speed points will be 1st, 2nd or 3rd at the pace call.You need Quirin points to know that? No axe here, but compared to pace data available today,Quirin points are rather light weight.
On the other hand, if a track is playing giant inside speed I would find it of value to know that the rail horse is consistently 22 flat(adjusted) to the quarter and thats tops in the race by even a fifth or two.
Mike
High Roller - I stand corrected. I did not have time to go through a complete study as the database isn\'t really conducive to seeing who is w/i top 3 (it is directed more towards beaten lengths data), but I did take a a look at LRL since January 1st under the criteria you established. Of 39 starters with 8 QP, 37 (95%) were within top 3 at first call.
That result was based on 1,399 starters. With an average field size of say 8 horses, that means that there were some 175 races. So, there was a horse with 8 QP once in every 4.5 races. Thus, finding that 8 QP horse is great for 22% of the non-maiden dirt sprints on a fast track, but what do we do the other 78% of the time?
Anyway, I agree that QP is fine for projecting how a specific horse may run in a particular race, but QP does little to predict how other horses may perform in a particular race and what the overall shape of the race may be.
We pace players often also look at the number of horses in a race that have 5 or more QP. With 3 such horses there is an indication that the race may lead to a speed dual. With only one horse above 5 QP and particularly when that horse has 8 QP perhaps we have lone speed. I have yet to do this, but it will be interesting to see how the Race Shapes looks for those kind of races.
Jerry Used the race shapes and TG #\'s for Churchill and Belmont on Sat. and Sunday. Used just race shapes and Form for Monmouth both days also. Excellent return and data was useful and form full-filling. Understanding the speed pacing depending on how a track is running can be very valuable. Suggest looking at Monmouth over the last two days. On a another subject I love all the complaining about Poly/dirt handicapping. I\'m not there yet but it give the good handicapper the same chance the Sheets and TG gave people 20 years + over the conventional Telegraph/Form handicappers. Thanks for your continued search for tools to help the handicapper cash flow his habit.By the way Chuckles \"Thoughts to start a weekend\" comment will be exposed in the racing form in the next 6 weeks. I promise to remind him when it happens. My comments on the race shapes are based on a very small sample
Miff,
My point is that running styles (which is what Quiren Points are actually getting at) and actual early speed (fractional times and Race Shapes) are really two different factors. There just happens to be a huge overlap because very fast horses tend to wind up on the lead and horses that like the lead tend to run as fast as they have to (or can) to get it.
If one horse has been running faster fractions lately because he\'s been stalking some real speed demons, he\'s liable to sit off the pace of a horse that loves to go to the lead even if that other horse has been running slower fractions lately. It depends on whether stalking is his preferred position or the slower horse is capable of running faster to get the lead if he has to. That\'s a running style issue that might best be determined by analyzing past running positions.
If two horses both love the lead, but one of them is clearly much faster, then the fractions will tell you what the running style information will not. It will tell you who is likely to outrun the other when they both try for the lead.
I have been using both in combination for decades, just never in a formula like Quiren speed points. I use subjective analysis that I believe is far superior to any formula to determine running style preferences and how I believe the race will develop. What Jerry is offering is very valuable from the opposite direction of Quiren Speed Points. It may just take some time for customers that are not familar with pace handicapping to find applications of the information and to realize the value. As a big advocate of pace handicapping with a real lot of experience using this kind of data, it gets a thumb up from me.
hi, why don\'t you do a simple test and take the top horse in jerry\'s race shapes for 100 races and see what percentage it is 1st, 2nd or 3rd at the first pace call?
hr
HR - sorry, I don\'t have that sort of information in a database. However, for the heck of it I have done a more extended study of QP results as somewhat of a starting point for comparison. Basically, I have looked at every sprint race run on fast tracks anywhere in the country since the first of the year. I got a total of 6,446 such races. Then I looked at the relationship between Quirin points and those horses that were within 1 length of the lead at the first call. The results of that study were:
QP8 = 902 races (14% of all races) had a horse that had 8 QP. Of those 902 horses, 624 (69%) were within 1 length of the lead at the first call.
QP7 = 50% of races had a horse with 7 QP and 59% were w/i 1 length at 1st call
QP6 = 53% of races had a horse with 6 QP and 50% were w/i 1 length at 1st call
QP5 = 70% of races had a horse with 5 QP and 44% were w/i 1 length at 1st call
QP4 = 59% of races had a horse with 4 QP and 33% were w/i 1 length at 1st call
QP3 = 75% of races had a horse with 3 QP and 29% were w/i 1 length at 1st call
QP2 = 64% of races had a horse with 2 QP and 19% were w/i 1 length at 1st call
QP1 = 53% of races had a horse with 1 QP and 13% were w/i 1 length at 1st call
HR-- if you were going to do a straight comparison, you would have to take whoever we had as the leader and whoever Quirin had with the most points, whether it was 8 or less.
I planned on using them this weekend. I needed some time off after Derby Week. I will use them at some of the smaller tracks and look forward to seeing how they play out.
I used them at Monmouth on Saturday, and the Race Shapes held up pretty good, even helping me hit one bomb in the 4th, where Little Cherokee was well over a full second faster than the rest of the field to the first call (and closer than two seconds faster than the two favorites). Sure enough, Little Cherokee was over 2 lengths in front at the 1/4 mark and 5 lengths clear of the 2 top TG fig horses in the 6F claimer. Monmouth was souped up for opening weekend, and Little Cherokee held on comfortably at 15-1 keying a $140 exacta over the second choice (most likely winner).
http://www.equibase.com/static/chart/pdf/MTH051008USA4.pdf
not to ask a stupid question, but I was unable to find a complete definition of everything on race shapes. Most of it to see is common sense but to use Friday PIM sheets as an example, what are the letters under the track name? Is it a simple grade? Also using R1 horse Magic Mountain, what are the two #\'s(4, 4) to the right of the class of last race. I\'m sure once I am given the answer it will be one of those duh moments, but thanks for an answer in advance.
Red
No, it won\'t be one of those duh moments, and we\'re changing some things. The letters referred to running style but are redundant with the bar graph, so they\'re coming out. The two numbers forget about, we\'re changing that as well. You\'ll have post position and position/lengths at the first quarter there.
Although I agree the letters aren\'t of much use if they are representing the same thing that the graph is, I think if you changed their purpose and used them more as running style predictor, they could be quite helpful. This would be similar to the quirin point thing, something that tells you the runner\'s style in addition to what the speed it has is. Here are 2 examples to clarify.
If a certain horse is showing 4 lenghts behind on your graph and is behind a few others, but has a 8 in QP (which we\'ll call a \"A\" on your new scale), that means he is going to try for the lead no matter what even though he is most likely badly outclassed. This would make this horse an easy throwout because you can be assured he is going to try to do way too much running early on.
Similarly, a horse may show to be 2-3 lenghts off on the graph, but generally sits way back 6-8 off the pace and only has 1 or 2 QP (an E on the scale). This horse is probably going to be a lot further back than the graph suggests.
Yes we could probably determine all this stuff for ourselves separately, but if you were able to include it, it makes it a better product IMO.