slow pace #'s

[Alydar in California]

I need to clarify my last sentence. The issue is moot in regard to cutting the race loose. There is still a decision to be made about giving a \"pace\" symbol. One of the problems here is that horses in the same race will run different fractions. A slow pace will probably help a frontrunner and hurt a closer. Thus, if a frontrunner wins a race that had a slow pace, it might be a good idea to be skeptical about his fast figure.

[TGJB]

Alydar in California wrote:
>
> One more thing:
>
> You wrote: \"It means the pace was so slow that the final time
> was compromised. I treat those races as if I didn\'t have
> final time, just using the horses.\"
>
>      In these cases, you don\'t use the final time. Again,
> subtract from what?

This is an important semantic distinction to you? No-one seemed confused. The hangover remedy works--stop putting rum in the Gatorade. Now that you\'ve taken a vacation, you need a vacation. Agree with you about the jockey ROI being more useful than other jockey stats, but I still don\'t think it\'s that useful.

[Michael D.]

OK, I will be the guinea pig and post a few picks tomorrow using jockey angles as a factor.

[Alydar in California]

It is important, yes. When a race has a slow pace, you don\'t adjust the figures for the slow pace. You adjust by cutting the race loose, making the figures in the same manner you would if there was only one dirt route all day and its pace was normal. Your explanation was misleading, and this is no less of a sin because I happen to agree with the way you handle a slow pace.

I\'m tempted to stop putting Gatorade in the rum.

[Alydar in California]

JB wrote: \"Agree with you about the jockey ROI being more useful than other jockey stats, but I still don\'t think it\'s that useful.\"

  The best way to judge a jockey is to watch him ride. They are like relief pitchers in this regard: There isn\'t a great way to judge them statistically. But HP makes the perfect the enemy of the decent when he calls jockey stats worthless.

[TGJB]

The pace designation only appears  if I cut the race loose (to use your term).

[TGJB]

The stat I like for all pitchers is baserunners (hits plus walks) per inning. it ain\'t perfect, but it\'s pretty damn good. For hitters,the one the Village Voice used to run --on base percentage plus slugging percentage.

[dpatent]

For those of us in Roto leagues, predicting player performance has taken on an air of horse handicapping with all the the \'juice\' out there.  It would be nice to have a notation by each player -- \'S\' for steroids, \'C\' for creatine, \'A\' for andro, etc.

BTW, what is Scott Lake\'s record at the current Saratoga meet now that his stable is under lock and key?

[HP]

This may have as much to do with the increased level of competition as it does with Lake\'s medicine cabinet. HP

[HP]

Aly,

You are eager to say I am an \'enemy of the decent.\' That may be a crown I would wear with great joy, but again, I would have to clarify before my coronation.

I never said \"jockey stats were worthless\". I said jockey/ROI stats were worthless. I can see other stats bearing on jockeys that I think would have more value. Do they have a pronounced edge in results in sprints vs. routes, on turf, on a particular course, with certain trainers? - this kind of thing. As with trainers, I think it\'s valuable (as a side dish) to know what a jockey does best. Jockey/ROI is something anybody with a racing form or a daily newspaper with jockey standings for a meet can estimate for comparative purposes. How can you emphasize an angle based on what everybody else knows? This is why I started using sheets in the first place. I heard enough of that \'Cordero is on the six\' crap to last me a lifetime.

How much weight you put on jockeys in your handicapping? For me it\'s less than 10%. I\'m more interested in the trainer angles and of course, my crazy preoccupation, the actual horse itself. Reading Michael\'s posts, I guess there\'s a world where Rudy Rodriguez would have turned Secretariat into a high-priced claimer. Conversely, Bailey can actually speed horses up, and bring Jacques Who in first for a change.

If you tell me you lean on jock/ROI, tell me how you make money on it. If you don\'t lean on it, why are you arguing this point (asides from your obvious joy in casting me as some kind of villian)?

Finally, if you think this stat is so valuable, let me know what you\'re willing to pay for it. My guess? Not much. It\'s probably not even the fifth or sixth thing you look at in the TG data. I also find it hard to believe that this will inspire as much passion as the ever-popular \'most important length\' debate. Heh. HP

[Alydar in California]

JB wrote: \"The stat I like for all pitchers is baserunners (hits plus walks) per inning. it ain\'t perfect, but it\'s pretty damn good.\"

Oh yeah. That\'s great. Let\'s add up how many times they have sex. Who cares if they get pregnant?

\"For hitters,the one the Village Voice used to run --on base percentage plus slugging percentage.\"

The VV has sucked since Cockburn left. I couldn\'t agree more on judging hitters, but I want you to learn the difference between a percentage and an average.

[Alydar in California]

JB wrote: \"The pace designation only appears if I cut the race loose (to use your term).\"

The term comes from Ragozin. If you don\'t like it, take it up with him.

I\'m beginning to think you\'re doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. Why not tell us every time you cut a race loose?

[magicnight]

On the pitching stats I\'d agree with Alydar. Stats for relief pitchers - specifically closers - can be awfully misleading. Perhaps the most important quality in a closer is resiliancy. How many days in a row can you pitch before you need a day off? However dominant a flamethrower may be, if he can only pitch 3 or 4 times a week, is he as valuable as a rubber-armed sinker-slider type (think Sparky Lyle) who can pitch almost every day?

For starting pitchers, no stat is more important than ERA. Any other stat can be misleading, but over the course of a season, ERA is as meaningful as statistics come.

For hitters, on-base average and slugging percentage combined is good, but isn\'t that mixing qualities that are rarely found in the same package? Yes, that stat will tell you how great The Kid and George Brett and their ilk were. But most players will fall into either the table-setter category (where OB% is everything) or the power hitter category (where slugging pct rules). Only the rarest birds will excel at both. I\'d rather look at the two components individually, according to the type of player being evaluated.

[Alydar in California]

HP: Unless you\'re quoting inside a quote, leave the single quotation marks in Britain--where they belong.

Arguing this with you will be as frustrating as trying to convince you that a length is more important at shorter distances. This type of thing is not your bag. Suffice it to say that you are misusing what Cramer calls wager value.

[HP]

Thanks for the go round in the grammar rodeo. Makes your point. This is one thing I\'ll be happy to leave as your \'bag\'. You\'ve answered nothing. HP