Sectional times come to at the races
- Thread starter paul
- Start date
Chesham
Sire
Hi Paul
I missed your post but have just posted on BB's Thread
Until they are available on every track, one way of using them is to look at Simon Rowlands method of adjusting some Speed Ratings based on their sectional Time performance. There a quite a few articles but from memory I think this was the first of them
https://betting.betfair.com/horse-r...onal-times-for-profitable-betting-160412.html
If they ever become available again for the AW Tracks then Brohamer style Figures are useful or a rating that Cary Fotias developed to measure when a horse had put in good performance and would one to watch out for next time out
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cary-Fotias/e/B001K8WHH0
Good Luck
Chesham
I missed your post but have just posted on BB's Thread
Until they are available on every track, one way of using them is to look at Simon Rowlands method of adjusting some Speed Ratings based on their sectional Time performance. There a quite a few articles but from memory I think this was the first of them
https://betting.betfair.com/horse-r...onal-times-for-profitable-betting-160412.html
If they ever become available again for the AW Tracks then Brohamer style Figures are useful or a rating that Cary Fotias developed to measure when a horse had put in good performance and would one to watch out for next time out
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cary-Fotias/e/B001K8WHH0
Good Luck
Chesham
Horseplayer
Gelding
Posted the following link on another thread
http://www.racingpost.com/news/hors...gfield/1605510/#newsArchiveTabs=last7DaysNews
Looks like they’ll make things awkward with up to 3 different providers
http://www.racingpost.com/news/hors...gfield/1605510/#newsArchiveTabs=last7DaysNews
Looks like they’ll make things awkward with up to 3 different providers
Chesham
Sire
I have dug out these articles
Handicapping Tips
Pace Handicapping with Brohamer Figures
(Part 4 of 4)
In Millennium Newsletters #17, #18 and #19, we published the first three parts of our series on handicapping using Brohamer figures. We decided to hold off for a while on part #4 until we introduced Millennium Version 9 which includes a new Brohamer Plus handicapping report. Well, Version 9 is now released, so here is Part #4 of the series which covers the subject of Turn-Time. Turn-Time, as you will see, is an extremely useful handicapping tool. You may want to go back and review the first three parts of the series. The newsletters are posted on our Web site at frandsen.com. Or, you can call us and we will send you the newsletters. We also repeat our recommendation that you read Tom Brohamer’s book “Modern Pace Handicapping” which is available from amazon.com.
In this article, we will explain the definition of Turn-Time and we will show you ways to use Turn-Time to evaluate a horse’s form, to evaluate a horse’s ability and to help handle certain race situations.
What is Turn-Time?
In the Brohamer/Sartin methodology, a race is divided into three segments called “internal fractions”.
In Sprints:
Fraction 1: gate to 2 furlongs
Fraction 2: 2 furlongs to 4 furlongs
Fraction 3: 4 furlongs to finish
In Routes:
Fraction 1: gate to 4 furlongs
Fraction 2: 4 furlongs to 6 furlongs
Fraction 3: 6 furlongs to finish
The feet-per-second velocity of each horse for each fraction is determined. The calculation for this is to divide the length of the fraction in feet by the horse’s time for the fraction. Here is a sample for a six furlong race.
Turn-Time
Fraction 1 2 3
Feet 1320 1320 1320
Horse’s Time 22.2 23.1 25.2
Velocity (FPS) 59.46 57.14 52.38
The first and third fractions are not a good indication of a horse’s form or overall ability. Late running, non- contending deep closers may well have the best 3rd fraction figures. On the front end, the first fraction is more of a positional issue and subject to the urging of the jockey. Just about any horse can run fast for that short distance. The middle fraction, however, is a different story. It is sometimes referred to as the “hidden fraction” because it is not readily apparent to the public. It is also called the Turn-Time fraction because, in most races, it is run around the closing turn coming into the stretch run.
Turn-Time in Millennium
Millennium software shows you the Turn-Time figures in two ways. First, it shows the Brohamer feet-per-second figures for all three fractions on the new Brohamer Plus Report in Version 9. Millennium software also shows you the Hall Pace figures for each fraction as shown below.
Hall C1 = First Fraction (new in version 9)
Hall Turn-Time = Second Fraction
Hall Final Fraction = Third Fraction
The Hall figures are also shown on the new Brohamer Plus Report as well as on the Pace Past Performance Report.
So, a Brohamer Turn-Time (2nd Fraction) may be something like 57.14 feet-per-second. The corresponding Hall Turn-Time figure may be something like 114. Some people may find it easier to work with a Hall rating figure instead of a Brohamer feet-per-second figure. This is because you can determine if a horse has demonstrated its ability to run to the Turn-Time Par for the race by comparing the Hall Rating to the Race Rating for the race. A horse with a Hall Turn-Time rating of 114 has demonstrated its ability to run to the Turn-Time Par for Race Ratings of 114 and below. Please refer to Newsletter #16 for a complete description of Hall pace and speed figures.
Handicapping Tips
Pace Handicapping with Brohamer Figures
(Part 4 of 4)
In Millennium Newsletters #17, #18 and #19, we published the first three parts of our series on handicapping using Brohamer figures. We decided to hold off for a while on part #4 until we introduced Millennium Version 9 which includes a new Brohamer Plus handicapping report. Well, Version 9 is now released, so here is Part #4 of the series which covers the subject of Turn-Time. Turn-Time, as you will see, is an extremely useful handicapping tool. You may want to go back and review the first three parts of the series. The newsletters are posted on our Web site at frandsen.com. Or, you can call us and we will send you the newsletters. We also repeat our recommendation that you read Tom Brohamer’s book “Modern Pace Handicapping” which is available from amazon.com.
In this article, we will explain the definition of Turn-Time and we will show you ways to use Turn-Time to evaluate a horse’s form, to evaluate a horse’s ability and to help handle certain race situations.
What is Turn-Time?
In the Brohamer/Sartin methodology, a race is divided into three segments called “internal fractions”.
In Sprints:
Fraction 1: gate to 2 furlongs
Fraction 2: 2 furlongs to 4 furlongs
Fraction 3: 4 furlongs to finish
In Routes:
Fraction 1: gate to 4 furlongs
Fraction 2: 4 furlongs to 6 furlongs
Fraction 3: 6 furlongs to finish
The feet-per-second velocity of each horse for each fraction is determined. The calculation for this is to divide the length of the fraction in feet by the horse’s time for the fraction. Here is a sample for a six furlong race.
Turn-Time
Fraction 1 2 3
Feet 1320 1320 1320
Horse’s Time 22.2 23.1 25.2
Velocity (FPS) 59.46 57.14 52.38
The first and third fractions are not a good indication of a horse’s form or overall ability. Late running, non- contending deep closers may well have the best 3rd fraction figures. On the front end, the first fraction is more of a positional issue and subject to the urging of the jockey. Just about any horse can run fast for that short distance. The middle fraction, however, is a different story. It is sometimes referred to as the “hidden fraction” because it is not readily apparent to the public. It is also called the Turn-Time fraction because, in most races, it is run around the closing turn coming into the stretch run.
Turn-Time in Millennium
Millennium software shows you the Turn-Time figures in two ways. First, it shows the Brohamer feet-per-second figures for all three fractions on the new Brohamer Plus Report in Version 9. Millennium software also shows you the Hall Pace figures for each fraction as shown below.
Hall C1 = First Fraction (new in version 9)
Hall Turn-Time = Second Fraction
Hall Final Fraction = Third Fraction
The Hall figures are also shown on the new Brohamer Plus Report as well as on the Pace Past Performance Report.
So, a Brohamer Turn-Time (2nd Fraction) may be something like 57.14 feet-per-second. The corresponding Hall Turn-Time figure may be something like 114. Some people may find it easier to work with a Hall rating figure instead of a Brohamer feet-per-second figure. This is because you can determine if a horse has demonstrated its ability to run to the Turn-Time Par for the race by comparing the Hall Rating to the Race Rating for the race. A horse with a Hall Turn-Time rating of 114 has demonstrated its ability to run to the Turn-Time Par for Race Ratings of 114 and below. Please refer to Newsletter #16 for a complete description of Hall pace and speed figures.
Chesham
Sire
A Word of Caution
Turn-Time is NOT a good stand-alone handicapping factor. The highest Turn-Time figure in a race may well belong to a deep closer that has no hope of finishing in-the-money. So, when handicapping a race, Turn-Time should always be considered along with other pace figures and/or other handicapping information as we will discuss below.
Turn-Time: Evaluating Form
Quoting Tom Brohamer: “The ability to handle the turn in an efficient manner is a characteristic of a fit horse.”
There are three things to look for to evaluate a horse’s form.
1) Look for recent improvement in Turn-Time coupled with the running of a good race, which we define as an in-the-money finish or within 2 lengths of the winner in sprints or within 3 lengths in routes.
2) Look for recent improvement in Turn-Time coupled with an improved first fraction rating (Brohamer 1st Fraction FPS or Hall C1 Pace).
3) Look for recent improvement in Turn-Time coupled with an improved Early Pace (EP) rating. Early Pace is always measured from the gate to the 2nd call (4 furlongs in sprints and 6 furlongs in routes). The Brohamer EP, Hall EP and TSN EP ratings are all measured at the 2nd Call.
These indicators of improving form can be found in a number of areas of Millennium software. The Pace Past Performance report provides the information. The Weighted Moving Averages for Hall Turn-Time are on the Form by the Numbers report and are a good way to spot improving Turn-Time. In the Pro Edition, you can use the Form Graphs Report to graphically show each horse’s Turn-Time for each of its last 10 races. And, all horses are shown on one page making it particularly useful.
On the other side of the ledger, you should avoid horses with declining Turn-Time. A horse whose current form indicates an inability to maintain or improve its position around the turn is a poor candidate to run a good race.
Turn-Time is a dependable indicator of form at all class levels. It is particularly powerful and may well be the very best indicator of form at lower level tracks.
Turn-Time: Evaluating Ability
We will start this subject with a general “truth” about pace. Horses with a good pace figure in only one of the three fractions are poor candidates to do well in the race. You should look for horses that have good figures in at least two of the three fractions. Far more often than not, the two good pace fractions are contiguous. So, real contenders in a race will generally have one of the two situations shown below.
1st 2nd 3rd
Fraction Fraction Fraction
(Turn-Time)
Horse A good good ok
Horse B ok good good
Horse A is typical of a solid front running horse with a “E” or “EP” running style that is capable of sustaining its pace through the turn. Here is another Tom Brohamer quote: “I know of no better bet in racing than a solid front running type capable of dominating his rivals in the second fraction.”
Horse “B” above is typical for a solid late running horse with a “P” or “S” running style. It does not wait for the final fraction to make its move.
Another word of caution here. Be careful if you have to replace the “ok” with “bad” in the 3rd fraction for Horse A or the 1st fraction for Horse B. Horses with good 1st and 2nd fractions are good candidates to finish in-the-money provided they do not typically “crater” in the final fraction. Horses with good 2nd and 3rd fractions are good candidate to finish in-the-money provided they are within reasonable touch of the leaders at the end of the 2nd fraction. This requires an “ok” 1st fraction.
There are two ways to identify “good” figures. First, since pace is all about match-ups between horses in a race, “good” can simply mean the horse has pace figures in the top 2 to 4 figures for all horses in the race. The second way to define “good”, and our personal choice, is to compare the Hall figures to the Race Rating to see if the horse has demonstrated its ability to run to Par.
Turn-Time: Handling Race Situations
Let’s start with an example. Here are the Hall figures for 3 horses in a recent race at Belmont.
Call 1 Turn-Time Final Fraction
1st Frac 2nd Frac 3rd Frac
Horse A 112 114 116
Horse B 113 112 111
Horse C 106 110 121
Keep in mind that one Hall pace rating point represents about 1/2 length. These three horses were tied with the highest speed figure. The race had a 114.8 Race Rating. Horse A will have a short lead on Horse B at the 2nd Call (about 1/2 length) and a big lead on Horse C (about 5 lengths). However, Horse A is picking up momentum in the turn while Horse B is losing momentum. Horse C is too far off the pace and waits too long to make its run. Horse C would need a better Turn-Time to catch Horse A. As expected, Horse A won this race and paid $9.30 for the win.
Let’s look at evaluating pace setting “E” and “EP” horses. With multiple pacesetters, use Turn-Time to determine which of the early runners will be able to hold or improve their position in the turn and which will be losing their momentum against the other pace setters. Those that lose momentum in the turn will most likely not figure in the race. Turn-Time is a particularly powerful tool for separating two closely matched horses with “E” running styles. Here is another “truth”: An early runner that will face a lot of pace pressure had better have a solid Turn-Time rating or it will be eliminated before entering the stretch.
When evaluating a lone pacesetter, the question is simply whether the horse will be holding its advantage going into the stretch with a good Turn-Time performance or will it be giving up the advantage it gained in the first fraction. If it is giving it up, the horse can safely be eliminated. Let’s state this another way: A horse with a solid Early Pace advantage at the 2nd Call (the end of the 2nd fraction) should be dismissed if it has a substandard Turn-Time. This is because its high EP rating came primarily from a strong 1st fraction followed by a poor 2nd fraction. It has no momentum entering the stretch.
Turn-Time is very useful for evaluating late runners as well. This works best for turf races, long routes and at the few tracks that tend to favor late running horses. Turn-Time will show you which of these late runners start there move in the turn and have good momentum for the stretch drive. If these runners are in touch with the field at the 2nd Call (end of the 2nd fraction), they are solid horses to support at the window.
Let’s now look at some Spot Plays.
• Look for horses that have good 1st Fraction and Turn-Time figures and poor 3rd Fraction figures that are getting Lasix for the first time in today’s race.
• Look for horses that had a good 1st Fraction, poor Turn-Time and a good 3rd Fraction in their last race. These are the kinds of pace figures that are typical of “V” pattern horses. These are horses that did well early in the race, backed off in the turn and came on strong again in the final fraction. These “V” pattern horses are a favorite angle play of a lot of horseplayers.
• A horse taking a significant class rise today and that has a Turn-Time at or above Par is a good bet. It can probably handle the class rise. If the horse has a below Par Turn-Time you can generally expect it to have trouble at the higher class level.
• Turn-Time is a good handicapping factor to evaluate whether a horse coming off its maiden win in its last race will be competitive in today’s race. Again, if the horse’s Turn-Time is at or above Par, it will probable be competitive today.
Summary
Turn-Time, when used with other pace and/or other handicapping information is a very useful tool for assessing a horse’s current form, for identifying its capabilities and for evaluating its likely performance in today’s race. Perhaps most important, adding Turn-Time to your handicapping arsenal will help you find higher paying horses that the public misses. That is the power of the “hidden fraction”.
Turn-Time is NOT a good stand-alone handicapping factor. The highest Turn-Time figure in a race may well belong to a deep closer that has no hope of finishing in-the-money. So, when handicapping a race, Turn-Time should always be considered along with other pace figures and/or other handicapping information as we will discuss below.
Turn-Time: Evaluating Form
Quoting Tom Brohamer: “The ability to handle the turn in an efficient manner is a characteristic of a fit horse.”
There are three things to look for to evaluate a horse’s form.
1) Look for recent improvement in Turn-Time coupled with the running of a good race, which we define as an in-the-money finish or within 2 lengths of the winner in sprints or within 3 lengths in routes.
2) Look for recent improvement in Turn-Time coupled with an improved first fraction rating (Brohamer 1st Fraction FPS or Hall C1 Pace).
3) Look for recent improvement in Turn-Time coupled with an improved Early Pace (EP) rating. Early Pace is always measured from the gate to the 2nd call (4 furlongs in sprints and 6 furlongs in routes). The Brohamer EP, Hall EP and TSN EP ratings are all measured at the 2nd Call.
These indicators of improving form can be found in a number of areas of Millennium software. The Pace Past Performance report provides the information. The Weighted Moving Averages for Hall Turn-Time are on the Form by the Numbers report and are a good way to spot improving Turn-Time. In the Pro Edition, you can use the Form Graphs Report to graphically show each horse’s Turn-Time for each of its last 10 races. And, all horses are shown on one page making it particularly useful.
On the other side of the ledger, you should avoid horses with declining Turn-Time. A horse whose current form indicates an inability to maintain or improve its position around the turn is a poor candidate to run a good race.
Turn-Time is a dependable indicator of form at all class levels. It is particularly powerful and may well be the very best indicator of form at lower level tracks.
Turn-Time: Evaluating Ability
We will start this subject with a general “truth” about pace. Horses with a good pace figure in only one of the three fractions are poor candidates to do well in the race. You should look for horses that have good figures in at least two of the three fractions. Far more often than not, the two good pace fractions are contiguous. So, real contenders in a race will generally have one of the two situations shown below.
1st 2nd 3rd
Fraction Fraction Fraction
(Turn-Time)
Horse A good good ok
Horse B ok good good
Horse A is typical of a solid front running horse with a “E” or “EP” running style that is capable of sustaining its pace through the turn. Here is another Tom Brohamer quote: “I know of no better bet in racing than a solid front running type capable of dominating his rivals in the second fraction.”
Horse “B” above is typical for a solid late running horse with a “P” or “S” running style. It does not wait for the final fraction to make its move.
Another word of caution here. Be careful if you have to replace the “ok” with “bad” in the 3rd fraction for Horse A or the 1st fraction for Horse B. Horses with good 1st and 2nd fractions are good candidates to finish in-the-money provided they do not typically “crater” in the final fraction. Horses with good 2nd and 3rd fractions are good candidate to finish in-the-money provided they are within reasonable touch of the leaders at the end of the 2nd fraction. This requires an “ok” 1st fraction.
There are two ways to identify “good” figures. First, since pace is all about match-ups between horses in a race, “good” can simply mean the horse has pace figures in the top 2 to 4 figures for all horses in the race. The second way to define “good”, and our personal choice, is to compare the Hall figures to the Race Rating to see if the horse has demonstrated its ability to run to Par.
Turn-Time: Handling Race Situations
Let’s start with an example. Here are the Hall figures for 3 horses in a recent race at Belmont.
Call 1 Turn-Time Final Fraction
1st Frac 2nd Frac 3rd Frac
Horse A 112 114 116
Horse B 113 112 111
Horse C 106 110 121
Keep in mind that one Hall pace rating point represents about 1/2 length. These three horses were tied with the highest speed figure. The race had a 114.8 Race Rating. Horse A will have a short lead on Horse B at the 2nd Call (about 1/2 length) and a big lead on Horse C (about 5 lengths). However, Horse A is picking up momentum in the turn while Horse B is losing momentum. Horse C is too far off the pace and waits too long to make its run. Horse C would need a better Turn-Time to catch Horse A. As expected, Horse A won this race and paid $9.30 for the win.
Let’s look at evaluating pace setting “E” and “EP” horses. With multiple pacesetters, use Turn-Time to determine which of the early runners will be able to hold or improve their position in the turn and which will be losing their momentum against the other pace setters. Those that lose momentum in the turn will most likely not figure in the race. Turn-Time is a particularly powerful tool for separating two closely matched horses with “E” running styles. Here is another “truth”: An early runner that will face a lot of pace pressure had better have a solid Turn-Time rating or it will be eliminated before entering the stretch.
When evaluating a lone pacesetter, the question is simply whether the horse will be holding its advantage going into the stretch with a good Turn-Time performance or will it be giving up the advantage it gained in the first fraction. If it is giving it up, the horse can safely be eliminated. Let’s state this another way: A horse with a solid Early Pace advantage at the 2nd Call (the end of the 2nd fraction) should be dismissed if it has a substandard Turn-Time. This is because its high EP rating came primarily from a strong 1st fraction followed by a poor 2nd fraction. It has no momentum entering the stretch.
Turn-Time is very useful for evaluating late runners as well. This works best for turf races, long routes and at the few tracks that tend to favor late running horses. Turn-Time will show you which of these late runners start there move in the turn and have good momentum for the stretch drive. If these runners are in touch with the field at the 2nd Call (end of the 2nd fraction), they are solid horses to support at the window.
Let’s now look at some Spot Plays.
• Look for horses that have good 1st Fraction and Turn-Time figures and poor 3rd Fraction figures that are getting Lasix for the first time in today’s race.
• Look for horses that had a good 1st Fraction, poor Turn-Time and a good 3rd Fraction in their last race. These are the kinds of pace figures that are typical of “V” pattern horses. These are horses that did well early in the race, backed off in the turn and came on strong again in the final fraction. These “V” pattern horses are a favorite angle play of a lot of horseplayers.
• A horse taking a significant class rise today and that has a Turn-Time at or above Par is a good bet. It can probably handle the class rise. If the horse has a below Par Turn-Time you can generally expect it to have trouble at the higher class level.
• Turn-Time is a good handicapping factor to evaluate whether a horse coming off its maiden win in its last race will be competitive in today’s race. Again, if the horse’s Turn-Time is at or above Par, it will probable be competitive today.
Summary
Turn-Time, when used with other pace and/or other handicapping information is a very useful tool for assessing a horse’s current form, for identifying its capabilities and for evaluating its likely performance in today’s race. Perhaps most important, adding Turn-Time to your handicapping arsenal will help you find higher paying horses that the public misses. That is the power of the “hidden fraction”.
Chesham
Sire
HANDICAPPING TIPS
HANDICAPPING HONEST PACE RACES
In our October 1996 newsletter, we introduced the concept of categorizing races to be run into four different Race Pace Shapes. (If you do not have this newsletter, contact us and we will send it to you.) Three of these Pace Shapes, namely FAST EARLY, LONE EARLY and SLOW, lend themselves very nicely to pace oriented handicapping decisions.
Good closers often win FAST EARLY races. A LONE EARLY horse often runs away from the field. Late runners with the best early pace ratings often run away from the field in SLOW races.
This brings us to the fourth Race Pace Shape, namely HONEST races. These races are designated by Millennium software as “E-EP” or “EP-EP” races. “E-EP” races have one horse with an “E” running style and one or more horses with an “EP” running style. “EP-EP” races have no “E” runners and two or more horses with an “EP” running style. These are called HONEST Pace races because the pace match-up will not cause either a fast or slow pace to the second call.
Here are some important points to keep in mind about HONEST Pace races:
• The majority of races have a HONEST Pace Shape.
• “E” and “EP” runners generally have a slight edge, particularly in sprints. Honest Pace Shape races can be significantly influenced by a strong track bias.
• HONEST Pace races are the toughest races to handicap .... at least to handicap profitably. A significant percentage of HONEST Pace races should not be bet. They should be passed.
WOW! HONEST Pace races make up the majority of races, they are difficult to handicap and a substantial percentage of them should be passed. So why bother? Well, FAST EARLY, LONE EARLY and SLOW Pace races will present you with some very nice high paying horses. But, in our opinion, a key to consistent and long term profitable play is to learn how to handicap and play, or pass, HONEST Pace races. We are going to show you our favorite way of handicapping these races. We call it The Opposing Pace Gap Method.
The Opposing Pace Gap Method for playing HONEST Pace races
This method is simple and very fast to use. If it seems a little too simplistic to you as we explain the method, stick with it. It really is very effective.
Start by drawing two columns on a piece of paper. We usually do this either on the right side of the Contender Summary Report or on the bottom of the Paceline Report. One column is for early running horses (“E” and “EP” horses) and the other column is for late running horses (“P” and “S” horses).
Let’s first work on the early running horses. Write down the name of the best early running horse (say Horse “A”). It will generally be the early running horse rated the highest by Millennium software. Next write down the name of the next best early running horse (say Horse “B”). If these first two horses are very close in ability and you have a hard time choosing one or the other as your top pick, then write Horse B’s name directly under Horse A and go on and look for the third best early running horse (say Horse “C”). However, if Horse A is clearly superior to Horse B or is clearly better suited to the match-up of today’s race, then leave a blank line under Horse A before writing Horse B’s name down. This blank line is the Gap. The key here is to keep writing down the early running horses directly under each other until you identify a gap before the next horse. Then, if there are any early horses remaining, you write down the next horse after the Gap and move on to late running horses.
Now, just repeat the process for late running horses. Keep writing down late running horses until you identify the gap before the next horse. Then write down the next horse after the Gap.
There will be times when the early running horses are just plain not going to figure in the race at all. In this case, put the Gap at the top of the list and put the best early horse after the Gap. The same situation can also apply to the late running horses. However, it will not happen to both early and late running horses in the same race.
Of course, Millennium software will make this process pretty easy because it will identify the best horses and it will show you each horse’s running style.
Now, we are going to look at some examples. Before we do, however, it is important to understand the concept behind this approach. First and foremost, this is not intended to be a mechanical system of play. Instead, it is intended to be a method of organizing your thoughts when confronted with the often tough task of handicapping HONEST Pace races. The concept is simple. The race is going to be won by either the best early running horse or the best late running horse. And, very often the place horse will have a running style just the opposite of the running style of the winning horse.
Again, please remember that this is not a mechanical system. So, how you actually play each of these scenarios will depend on the specific circumstances and match-ups in the race. And, you would, of course, only make specific wagers if the probable payoffs indicate a value play.
A.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
gap
Horse B
Horse F
gap
Horse G
This is a one or two horse race. If “A” is clearly superior to “F” in this race, then you may want to bet “A” to win, an A/F straight Exacta and a A/F/BG Trifecta (a $4 bet for a $2 Trifecta). Just reverse “A” and “F” if the “F” horse is the superior horse. If “A” and “F” are close, then you may want to bet both A and F to win, an AF Exacta box and a AF/AF/BG Trifecta ($8).
B.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
gap
Horse B
Horse F
Horse G
gap
Horse H
This is the most common chart you will see, so we will spend a little more time on it. It shows a one, two or three horse race. These three different scenarios will be handled quite differently.
First, if “A” is clearly superior in this race, you may want to bet “A” to win, an A/FG Exacta and an A/FG/BFGH Trifecta ($12).
Second, if the “F” and “G” horses are superior to the “A” horse, then you may want to bet both “F” and “G” to win, a FG/AFG Exacta and a FG/AFG/ABFGH Trifecta ($24).
The third scenario is if horses “A”, “F” and “G” are all about equal. In this case, looking for value plays is crucial. Most likely, one of the horses will be an underlay and the other two will be overlays. You may want to bet both overlay horses to win. Avoid the temptation to play a three horse Exacta box. Instead, bet the individual combinations that are value plays. We would be inclined to not bet the Trifecta unless the crowd’s favorite figured to finish off-the-board or one of these horses was a long shot and we were very confident it would finish in-the-money. In this case, we would look to key either horse “A”, “F” or “G” in the win and place positions. The Trifecta wager might look something like this: A/FG/BFGH and FG/A/BFGH ($24). See the April and July 1997 newsletters for suggestions on how to bet the Trifecta.
C.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
Horse B
gap
Horse C
gap
Horse F
This is another two horse race. You may want to bet both “A” and “B” to win, an AB Exacta box and an AB/AB/CF Trifecta ($8).
D.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
Horse B
gap
Horse C
Horse F
Horse G
gap
Horse H
This is a two or four horse race. If “A” and “B” are clearly superior in this race to “F” and “G”, then you might bet “A” and “B” to win and an AB/ABFG Exacta. We would not play the Trifecta unless the crowd favorite figures to finish off-the-board or we are very confident a long shot will finish in-the-money and we could craft a Trifecta as we did in example B above. If all four of the top horses (A,B,F and G) are relatively equal in this race, we would pass the race. If we cannot narrow the probable winner down to three horses or less, we generally will not play the race.
E.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
gap
Horse B
Horse F
Horse G
Horse H
Horse I
Horse J
This is an interesting one. If “A” is the superior horse in this race, we would bet “A” to win and we would play selected combinations of A/FGHIJ Exacta tickets. We would play those with probable payoffs indicating good value. We would not play them all. We would most likely pass the Trifecta. If “A” is not superior in this race to the late runners, we would pass the race.
F.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
Horse B
Horse C
gap
Horse D
Horse F
Horse G
Horse H
gap
Horse I
This one is easy. Go get a hot dog and a Coke. Sit this one out.
Hopefully, this Opposing Pace Gap method will help you sort through HONEST Pace races. For sure, it will make it clear when you should pass an HONEST Pace race. Winning horseplayers do not play every race. Knowing when to pass a race is as important to profitable play as is picking winners.
HANDICAPPING HONEST PACE RACES
In our October 1996 newsletter, we introduced the concept of categorizing races to be run into four different Race Pace Shapes. (If you do not have this newsletter, contact us and we will send it to you.) Three of these Pace Shapes, namely FAST EARLY, LONE EARLY and SLOW, lend themselves very nicely to pace oriented handicapping decisions.
Good closers often win FAST EARLY races. A LONE EARLY horse often runs away from the field. Late runners with the best early pace ratings often run away from the field in SLOW races.
This brings us to the fourth Race Pace Shape, namely HONEST races. These races are designated by Millennium software as “E-EP” or “EP-EP” races. “E-EP” races have one horse with an “E” running style and one or more horses with an “EP” running style. “EP-EP” races have no “E” runners and two or more horses with an “EP” running style. These are called HONEST Pace races because the pace match-up will not cause either a fast or slow pace to the second call.
Here are some important points to keep in mind about HONEST Pace races:
• The majority of races have a HONEST Pace Shape.
• “E” and “EP” runners generally have a slight edge, particularly in sprints. Honest Pace Shape races can be significantly influenced by a strong track bias.
• HONEST Pace races are the toughest races to handicap .... at least to handicap profitably. A significant percentage of HONEST Pace races should not be bet. They should be passed.
WOW! HONEST Pace races make up the majority of races, they are difficult to handicap and a substantial percentage of them should be passed. So why bother? Well, FAST EARLY, LONE EARLY and SLOW Pace races will present you with some very nice high paying horses. But, in our opinion, a key to consistent and long term profitable play is to learn how to handicap and play, or pass, HONEST Pace races. We are going to show you our favorite way of handicapping these races. We call it The Opposing Pace Gap Method.
The Opposing Pace Gap Method for playing HONEST Pace races
This method is simple and very fast to use. If it seems a little too simplistic to you as we explain the method, stick with it. It really is very effective.
Start by drawing two columns on a piece of paper. We usually do this either on the right side of the Contender Summary Report or on the bottom of the Paceline Report. One column is for early running horses (“E” and “EP” horses) and the other column is for late running horses (“P” and “S” horses).
Let’s first work on the early running horses. Write down the name of the best early running horse (say Horse “A”). It will generally be the early running horse rated the highest by Millennium software. Next write down the name of the next best early running horse (say Horse “B”). If these first two horses are very close in ability and you have a hard time choosing one or the other as your top pick, then write Horse B’s name directly under Horse A and go on and look for the third best early running horse (say Horse “C”). However, if Horse A is clearly superior to Horse B or is clearly better suited to the match-up of today’s race, then leave a blank line under Horse A before writing Horse B’s name down. This blank line is the Gap. The key here is to keep writing down the early running horses directly under each other until you identify a gap before the next horse. Then, if there are any early horses remaining, you write down the next horse after the Gap and move on to late running horses.
Now, just repeat the process for late running horses. Keep writing down late running horses until you identify the gap before the next horse. Then write down the next horse after the Gap.
There will be times when the early running horses are just plain not going to figure in the race at all. In this case, put the Gap at the top of the list and put the best early horse after the Gap. The same situation can also apply to the late running horses. However, it will not happen to both early and late running horses in the same race.
Of course, Millennium software will make this process pretty easy because it will identify the best horses and it will show you each horse’s running style.
Now, we are going to look at some examples. Before we do, however, it is important to understand the concept behind this approach. First and foremost, this is not intended to be a mechanical system of play. Instead, it is intended to be a method of organizing your thoughts when confronted with the often tough task of handicapping HONEST Pace races. The concept is simple. The race is going to be won by either the best early running horse or the best late running horse. And, very often the place horse will have a running style just the opposite of the running style of the winning horse.
Again, please remember that this is not a mechanical system. So, how you actually play each of these scenarios will depend on the specific circumstances and match-ups in the race. And, you would, of course, only make specific wagers if the probable payoffs indicate a value play.
A.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
gap
Horse B
Horse F
gap
Horse G
This is a one or two horse race. If “A” is clearly superior to “F” in this race, then you may want to bet “A” to win, an A/F straight Exacta and a A/F/BG Trifecta (a $4 bet for a $2 Trifecta). Just reverse “A” and “F” if the “F” horse is the superior horse. If “A” and “F” are close, then you may want to bet both A and F to win, an AF Exacta box and a AF/AF/BG Trifecta ($8).
B.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
gap
Horse B
Horse F
Horse G
gap
Horse H
This is the most common chart you will see, so we will spend a little more time on it. It shows a one, two or three horse race. These three different scenarios will be handled quite differently.
First, if “A” is clearly superior in this race, you may want to bet “A” to win, an A/FG Exacta and an A/FG/BFGH Trifecta ($12).
Second, if the “F” and “G” horses are superior to the “A” horse, then you may want to bet both “F” and “G” to win, a FG/AFG Exacta and a FG/AFG/ABFGH Trifecta ($24).
The third scenario is if horses “A”, “F” and “G” are all about equal. In this case, looking for value plays is crucial. Most likely, one of the horses will be an underlay and the other two will be overlays. You may want to bet both overlay horses to win. Avoid the temptation to play a three horse Exacta box. Instead, bet the individual combinations that are value plays. We would be inclined to not bet the Trifecta unless the crowd’s favorite figured to finish off-the-board or one of these horses was a long shot and we were very confident it would finish in-the-money. In this case, we would look to key either horse “A”, “F” or “G” in the win and place positions. The Trifecta wager might look something like this: A/FG/BFGH and FG/A/BFGH ($24). See the April and July 1997 newsletters for suggestions on how to bet the Trifecta.
C.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
Horse B
gap
Horse C
gap
Horse F
This is another two horse race. You may want to bet both “A” and “B” to win, an AB Exacta box and an AB/AB/CF Trifecta ($8).
D.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
Horse B
gap
Horse C
Horse F
Horse G
gap
Horse H
This is a two or four horse race. If “A” and “B” are clearly superior in this race to “F” and “G”, then you might bet “A” and “B” to win and an AB/ABFG Exacta. We would not play the Trifecta unless the crowd favorite figures to finish off-the-board or we are very confident a long shot will finish in-the-money and we could craft a Trifecta as we did in example B above. If all four of the top horses (A,B,F and G) are relatively equal in this race, we would pass the race. If we cannot narrow the probable winner down to three horses or less, we generally will not play the race.
E.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
gap
Horse B
Horse F
Horse G
Horse H
Horse I
Horse J
This is an interesting one. If “A” is the superior horse in this race, we would bet “A” to win and we would play selected combinations of A/FGHIJ Exacta tickets. We would play those with probable payoffs indicating good value. We would not play them all. We would most likely pass the Trifecta. If “A” is not superior in this race to the late runners, we would pass the race.
F.
Early Runners
Late Runners
Horse A
Horse B
Horse C
gap
Horse D
Horse F
Horse G
Horse H
gap
Horse I
This one is easy. Go get a hot dog and a Coke. Sit this one out.
Hopefully, this Opposing Pace Gap method will help you sort through HONEST Pace races. For sure, it will make it clear when you should pass an HONEST Pace race. Winning horseplayers do not play every race. Knowing when to pass a race is as important to profitable play as is picking winners.
Chesham
Sire
Trainers, Speed Figures and Class
Most persons capable of thinking will agree that ignorance is the most costly element in human existence. Since this truth does not submit to argument, it is clear that no matter what type of work we do it is of vital importance that we know what we are doing, and that we do it well.
Handicapping-that is, the making of good racing selections-is not a science nor in the strict meaning of the term an art. Handicapping is a trade.
Surely no one will argue against the fact that one must learn a given trade before he can logically hope to practice it effectively. Certainly, the reader would not assume that he can become a master plumber by merely reading a few articles or books on that subject.
The beginning selector frequently finds himself struggling with what appear to be insoluble problems, when in reality these problems could be solved easily, if one had a reasonable knowledge of the facts of racing. First, horse racing is a business, not a sport. Most men who own and race horses do so for the purpose of making money. No trainer in his right mind ever purposely wastes a sharp horse. He can't afford to if he wants to stay in business.
The trainer, so to speak, is the middle man in racing. With few exceptions his livelihood depends upon winning purse money. Never forget that a trainer can be fired if he fails to produce. A second fact that should never be overlooked is that all horses do not respond to identical methods of training. Thus, we encounter different methods of procedure which we sometimes call racing angles. Therefore, one must familiarize oneself with what a trainer has done in the recent past and what he is doing today. And more important-why he is doing it. We believe every reader will agree that he could improve his winning margin if he knew that every selection he backs is a fit horse, well-meant, and properly placed.
Let's look briefly at a type of move which tells us what the trainer is up to. A horse turns in a fair effort over a six-furlong distance. Next start the trainer enters this horse in a route race, and gives it an easy conditioning race. Today he has again entered him in a sprint race.
What does this trainer move tell a selector? It tells him that after the horse turned in a fair sprint effort its trainer decided it needed more stamina. Therefore, he entered it in a route race in order to leg his horse up a bit. Today he has entered his horse in a sprint race, which means he believes his horse is now ready and he is going to try. If the horse is a figure contender, the selector knows it is a real threat-it figures well and the trainer has practically told us he is going to crack down.
There are three kinds of racing angles that help the selector in his work: trainer angles, performance angles, and a combination of the two. The trainer angles reveal the method the conditioner has employed to get his horse ready for the race. The performance angle reveals the condition of the horse through the manner in which it has recently performed. When we have both trainer and performance angles present in the chart we have a strong combination angle.
A third fact that should be remembered and accepted is a two-part fact:
1) Sharp condition contributes more toward a winning effort than any other single factor.
2) There is no such thing as a sure thing in horse racing.
Any horse in the field may win or lose. This fact, if remembered, should prevent the common mistake of going overboard on a horse that looks like an extra good selection. In short, it is bad business to bet two dollars on one selection and ten dollars on another.
When the effectiveness of a sharp current condition is mentioned many fans ask: "What about horses that win when there was no evidence in their chart to indicate sharpness?"
First, the horse won, therefore it ran faster than any other horse in the field, so it was fit and ready. And now to the key question: Was there any evidence that the trainer believed his horse was fit and ready despite its poor public form?
No one can answer that question unless he is familiar with all of the good trainer angles. We can tell you, however, that in many instances such angles are present, and if you knew about them you could pick up many an extra good priced winner. Here are the top two races of a horse that was cleverly prepped by its trainer:
$3,000
1-1/4 Clm 3500 45 921 923 925 30.90
6f Clm 3599 59 59 421/2 99 6.30
Note that this horse was beaten by 25 lengths last time out and nine lengths in its previous race. To the casual observer the horse appears in no way ready to win a race. But let us look at how the horse was handled by the trainer. The penultimate race appears dull until we see that the horse was allowed to run in one burst of speed from the half-mile pole to the eight pole, making up 6-1/2 lengths on the leader.
Its "race within a race" shows us that the horse was sharp. Sharp enough for the trainer? No. Perhaps the jockey told him the horse had flattened out.
Accordingly the trainer next entered him in a race of 1-1/4 miles where he could employ the race workout and distance switch angles. Was this the time for the horse to try for such a win after its six furlong speed sharpener? No, the horse received some backing in its next-to-last race but next time out it went off at 30-1. After being close to the pace for half a mile the horse was allowed to amble along behind its field.
What did the trainer achieve? He gave the horse a workout both for speed and endurance. Further by now he has shaken off about 90 percent of the novice racetrack handicappers. But how can we tell if the trainer is really trying in today's sprint contest? We get a pretty good tip-off in the fact that he has chosen a race where he must drop the horse $500 in value. This horse won returning $87.40.
Drops in claiming prices do not always signify that a trainer is trying. But when you get 40-1 odds you can afford to make a few mistakes. Bear in mind that if you can beat the price you can beat the races.
We wonder how many of our readers know that slightly more than 50 percent of the races won during the past 20 years were won by horses that finished in-the-money in one of their last two starts? And that when horses that finished fourth, beaten no more than 1-1/2 lengths, are included the percentage climbs higher. Isn't this fact of racing important to the selector's work? We think so. How many readers know what percentages of races are won by horses that have previously won 35 percent of their starts? We can tell you it is surprisingly high, although the prices on some are too short for profitable speculation.
Another fact that every racing fan should accept is that:
"Every race a horse runs either contributes to the furtherance of sharp conditions or tends to dull whatever degree of sharpness the horse enjoyed at that time."
This is why speed ratings are not always a true indication of the degree of current sharpness. In some instances the speed rating will reveal the sharpest horse in the field, in other instances it will not. We must first consider the probable effect of the last race upon the horse's condition before we can accurately judge the true value of a speed rating. Let's look at an example that will make this clear. Examine the running line of the two following races:
Horse A 54 33 22 21 speed 95
Horse B 11/2 11/2 1nk 1 no speed 95
It is clear that Horse B had a very hard race, one in which it was under severe pressure from the first call to the finish. Horse A, on the other hand, was never under hard pressure and, as a result might improve today, while Horse B will almost certainly tail off. The problem becomes even more complicated when the two races were run over different distances, or when the two horses earned their respective speed ratings over different tracks. Speed ratings, which include the beaten lengths, if any, are a factor that are usable in certain conditions, but to accept the figure blindly at face value in every instance is a dangerous procedure.
Most persons capable of thinking will agree that ignorance is the most costly element in human existence. Since this truth does not submit to argument, it is clear that no matter what type of work we do it is of vital importance that we know what we are doing, and that we do it well.
Handicapping-that is, the making of good racing selections-is not a science nor in the strict meaning of the term an art. Handicapping is a trade.
Surely no one will argue against the fact that one must learn a given trade before he can logically hope to practice it effectively. Certainly, the reader would not assume that he can become a master plumber by merely reading a few articles or books on that subject.
The beginning selector frequently finds himself struggling with what appear to be insoluble problems, when in reality these problems could be solved easily, if one had a reasonable knowledge of the facts of racing. First, horse racing is a business, not a sport. Most men who own and race horses do so for the purpose of making money. No trainer in his right mind ever purposely wastes a sharp horse. He can't afford to if he wants to stay in business.
The trainer, so to speak, is the middle man in racing. With few exceptions his livelihood depends upon winning purse money. Never forget that a trainer can be fired if he fails to produce. A second fact that should never be overlooked is that all horses do not respond to identical methods of training. Thus, we encounter different methods of procedure which we sometimes call racing angles. Therefore, one must familiarize oneself with what a trainer has done in the recent past and what he is doing today. And more important-why he is doing it. We believe every reader will agree that he could improve his winning margin if he knew that every selection he backs is a fit horse, well-meant, and properly placed.
Let's look briefly at a type of move which tells us what the trainer is up to. A horse turns in a fair effort over a six-furlong distance. Next start the trainer enters this horse in a route race, and gives it an easy conditioning race. Today he has again entered him in a sprint race.
What does this trainer move tell a selector? It tells him that after the horse turned in a fair sprint effort its trainer decided it needed more stamina. Therefore, he entered it in a route race in order to leg his horse up a bit. Today he has entered his horse in a sprint race, which means he believes his horse is now ready and he is going to try. If the horse is a figure contender, the selector knows it is a real threat-it figures well and the trainer has practically told us he is going to crack down.
There are three kinds of racing angles that help the selector in his work: trainer angles, performance angles, and a combination of the two. The trainer angles reveal the method the conditioner has employed to get his horse ready for the race. The performance angle reveals the condition of the horse through the manner in which it has recently performed. When we have both trainer and performance angles present in the chart we have a strong combination angle.
A third fact that should be remembered and accepted is a two-part fact:
1) Sharp condition contributes more toward a winning effort than any other single factor.
2) There is no such thing as a sure thing in horse racing.
Any horse in the field may win or lose. This fact, if remembered, should prevent the common mistake of going overboard on a horse that looks like an extra good selection. In short, it is bad business to bet two dollars on one selection and ten dollars on another.
When the effectiveness of a sharp current condition is mentioned many fans ask: "What about horses that win when there was no evidence in their chart to indicate sharpness?"
First, the horse won, therefore it ran faster than any other horse in the field, so it was fit and ready. And now to the key question: Was there any evidence that the trainer believed his horse was fit and ready despite its poor public form?
No one can answer that question unless he is familiar with all of the good trainer angles. We can tell you, however, that in many instances such angles are present, and if you knew about them you could pick up many an extra good priced winner. Here are the top two races of a horse that was cleverly prepped by its trainer:
$3,000
1-1/4 Clm 3500 45 921 923 925 30.90
6f Clm 3599 59 59 421/2 99 6.30
Note that this horse was beaten by 25 lengths last time out and nine lengths in its previous race. To the casual observer the horse appears in no way ready to win a race. But let us look at how the horse was handled by the trainer. The penultimate race appears dull until we see that the horse was allowed to run in one burst of speed from the half-mile pole to the eight pole, making up 6-1/2 lengths on the leader.
Its "race within a race" shows us that the horse was sharp. Sharp enough for the trainer? No. Perhaps the jockey told him the horse had flattened out.
Accordingly the trainer next entered him in a race of 1-1/4 miles where he could employ the race workout and distance switch angles. Was this the time for the horse to try for such a win after its six furlong speed sharpener? No, the horse received some backing in its next-to-last race but next time out it went off at 30-1. After being close to the pace for half a mile the horse was allowed to amble along behind its field.
What did the trainer achieve? He gave the horse a workout both for speed and endurance. Further by now he has shaken off about 90 percent of the novice racetrack handicappers. But how can we tell if the trainer is really trying in today's sprint contest? We get a pretty good tip-off in the fact that he has chosen a race where he must drop the horse $500 in value. This horse won returning $87.40.
Drops in claiming prices do not always signify that a trainer is trying. But when you get 40-1 odds you can afford to make a few mistakes. Bear in mind that if you can beat the price you can beat the races.
We wonder how many of our readers know that slightly more than 50 percent of the races won during the past 20 years were won by horses that finished in-the-money in one of their last two starts? And that when horses that finished fourth, beaten no more than 1-1/2 lengths, are included the percentage climbs higher. Isn't this fact of racing important to the selector's work? We think so. How many readers know what percentages of races are won by horses that have previously won 35 percent of their starts? We can tell you it is surprisingly high, although the prices on some are too short for profitable speculation.
Another fact that every racing fan should accept is that:
"Every race a horse runs either contributes to the furtherance of sharp conditions or tends to dull whatever degree of sharpness the horse enjoyed at that time."
This is why speed ratings are not always a true indication of the degree of current sharpness. In some instances the speed rating will reveal the sharpest horse in the field, in other instances it will not. We must first consider the probable effect of the last race upon the horse's condition before we can accurately judge the true value of a speed rating. Let's look at an example that will make this clear. Examine the running line of the two following races:
Horse A 54 33 22 21 speed 95
Horse B 11/2 11/2 1nk 1 no speed 95
It is clear that Horse B had a very hard race, one in which it was under severe pressure from the first call to the finish. Horse A, on the other hand, was never under hard pressure and, as a result might improve today, while Horse B will almost certainly tail off. The problem becomes even more complicated when the two races were run over different distances, or when the two horses earned their respective speed ratings over different tracks. Speed ratings, which include the beaten lengths, if any, are a factor that are usable in certain conditions, but to accept the figure blindly at face value in every instance is a dangerous procedure.
oddsfellow
Yearling
Chesham is like the oracle and always has loads of info no matter what the subject.
Can remember when Turftrax first came to prominence over a decade ago. Cannot believe a decade later sectional timing does still not exist. Cost is often cited as the reason racecourses choose not to use it yet every course in the states seems able to afford a system??
Can remember when Turftrax first came to prominence over a decade ago. Cannot believe a decade later sectional timing does still not exist. Cost is often cited as the reason racecourses choose not to use it yet every course in the states seems able to afford a system??
Chesham
Sire
Hi Odds
When Turftrax provided Sectional Times for all AW Track, Ardnehue and myself were about the only ones on the Forums that we frequented that actually bothered to pay the small sum of around £5 for the data. The problem was that the UK was not really ready for Sectional Times and did not how best to use the information. In my opinion Turftax itself did not know how present the information so that its customer base could catch on to its importance. What was stopping Turftrax presenting the information as below, it is only following Brohamer methodology. They could also have had a download in Excel style format and that would have made life simpler.
Only Today on the Flatstats Forum (The part that I can view) I see that the owner of that site has indicated that he thinks it is only useful for wolverhampton as he considers it a feature less course and that the AW tracks cannot be compared.
Sectional times can be used is so many ways, you don't need to compare one course to another as Secctional Times can reveal if the horse is improving, is he being given too much speed in the mid part or early part of the race to stop him from winning, which may mean that the race is being used as training exercise ad the more is coming to the boil. One way is to look at a horse who posting an improved Turn time.
Other ways of using Pace Ratings is too look for a horse that has indicated a good set of ratings and is then up in distance where he race within a race i.e. burn speed in the mid part of the race until it runs out of fuel and can then coast home looking a beaten horse. Next time over his correct distance, saves fuel and uses the energy up that he burnt up last time for the final furlong
Last edited:
oddsfellow
Yearling
Hi Chesham
Thanks for the reply. I love reading the american horse racing literature and Modern Pace Handicapping is right up there as a gem. Also like Pace Makes The Race. The fact that so few people in the UK do not use the available data may mean a bit of an edge for those that do? One things for sure sectional timings beats scraping words from sporting life or racing post race descriptions and manufacturing your own pace ratings.
Thanks for the reply. I love reading the american horse racing literature and Modern Pace Handicapping is right up there as a gem. Also like Pace Makes The Race. The fact that so few people in the UK do not use the available data may mean a bit of an edge for those that do? One things for sure sectional timings beats scraping words from sporting life or racing post race descriptions and manufacturing your own pace ratings.
