I have been following a recent thread on the Pace Advantage forum entitled Identifying Early Leaders. This most informative thread addresses a question that all pace handicappers typically begin with. Ironically, it is the focus upon this question that I believe makes it difficult to show profit from pace handicapping today. Below is a direct link to that thread: http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80692
The emphasis in pace handicapping is typically focused on the early horses. One reason for this is that it is much easier to measure the early horses than it is the late ones because you’re measuring them all from the start of the race. That is they all have a common starting point. Late horses start their runs from different positions, making their measurement more difficult.
The reality is we are all looking for “value, that often hard to find commodity that ultimately determines whether we win or lose. Of course, value is not found in early or late, specifically, but on the tote board. Like many of you I have been handicapping for years with more than a little success. I always found that pace handicapping was the best way to determine who will likely win the race but that does not always translate into “value.”
In recent years I found that the early horses that looked like they were strong enough to win paid next to nothing. The early horses that appeared to “have a chance” but figured to fail would occasionally pay huge prices. In other words, the best of the early horses lost me money, while the worst of the early horses could have been profitable in the long term.
In looking at late horses – how do you define a “late horses” anyway? – Usually do not measure up on the numbers when compared to the early horses. Again, as with the early horses, it was the lates that did not figure in the race based upon pace numbers that ultimately produced the greatest return.
I have been a “modeler” for many years. Some races run as you expect and then you get $6 or less. Rarely do my “solid” plays produce anything that resembles the prices I got 20 years ago. The less “solid” the play is, the greater the likelihood of a big price. The time when good pace handicapping could produce profit on the top horses in the race is gone.
I have conceded that I really do not know which horse is going to win a given race except with the occasional very obvious horse (that usually pays next to nothing).
I have determined that my most profitable plays are the ones that produce serious doubt before the race, and most of them wind up losing! In the long run it is these “doubtful contenders at a price” that drive my profit model.
I have determined that I do better picking contenders with good pace handicapping and not attempting any form of “separation†between them. That is, I allow the tote board to select my plays for me. This is a significant difference from standard “Sartinian pace.”
Recall that conventional pace handicapping (i.e. Sartinian pace) is based on the following logical steps:
- select contenders
- select pacelines for those contenders
- consult a model to determine likely winners
In my approach to the game, I selected no contenders, no pacelines, and use no model.
Instead, I use running style to determine who the early and late horses will likely be, then use speed (in a unique way) to determine who the final contenders will be. The contenders odds are considered to decide which horses will likely produce value.
In other words, be pace analysis of the race determines the contenders rather than the other way around.
I encourage your comments and feedback to this post.
(Note: If you are not a member of PaceAdvantage.com you should be. It is the best horse players’ forum on the web.)
Rod Denton says
I’m with you Dave.I’m a converted Pace Picture player.But I still use pace figures to separate contenders from their own running style bracket.I use only E/P,L/P and an overall ability time with my own algorithms.Comparing horses with different running styles is apples to oranges,but within their own bracket it separates the contenders just fine.
Even so I’m finding that pace “Setups” are outperforming pace figures.And when those setups are put in isolation their hit % can be shockingly high,and with decent mutuels.I’ve been slow to utilize these in practice,as with any new tool.But I have been hitting hand picked races at a very high rate.I did a quick 100 race study from last year and the results on extreme pace horses only are too sick to mention.This way of handicapping is for real.And my perception of the races is forever altered.
Let’s not call it New Pace,but “Postmodern Pace Handicapping”!!
I like it.I’m living and breathing it.
Dave Schwartz says
I have found similar – that adding pace figures to the mix hurts the performance. And I am using the best pace figures I have ever seen -Jim Cramer’s from HDW (http://www.horsedata.com/). Like all pace figures seem to do, they put you on the obvious horses and you toss the less obvious ones – the ones with the true value.
Ray Baker says
By George, I think he’s got it! Good post Dave.
theertheswaran balasubramaniam says
My Dear Dave Schwartz
You really amaze me, for your undaunted research and findings.
i was convinced about the statistics, William L.Scott reported in his book, investing at the race track” that the first three favorites win around 66% of the races. You did more work on this topic and with authority voice you have said 90 % winners hail from first 5 favorite
the rest of favorites give way to 10% , i am really amazed and i wanted to check this in my country,India,
is this rule is universal or it applies to your wonderful country USA,
what ever the time you invested has certainly produced wonderful findings
i love racing and more interested in the money which can be generated by your new findings,
NEW PACE and your money management system.is your money management system is applicable every where ?
including India,
i really at loss since my country law does not permit me to open a betting account
though we have horse racing spread over right through the year , gambling is illegal in India
hence we indians are not permitted to have online account.
strange but true
i thank you for your enthusiastic work , i love the authority voice
i wish you abundance of peace and bliss
with respect
Easwaran
India
Dave Schwartz says
Thank you for the reply.
I have no idea if the same would hold true of the tote board in Indian racing or not.
Money management would work the same anywhere, anytime. It would work in horse racing, sports betting, even the stock or commodities market.
theertheswaran balasubramaniam says
Dear Dave Schwartz,
thanks for your quick response
it is a great feeling that some one really cares
yes it should work,
your money management guide
hope i buy some day
since the cost quite prohibitive
let me see
thanks
with respect and adoration
easwaran
India
Frank says
I could not agree more. Good column.
REYNALDO P. DIZON says
Dear Dave,
I am from the Philippines and I’m an avid fan of yours. My question is, how do you do your pace analysis? Do you sort out the E horses first and get a pace picture? How many E horses should be involved in the early pace before you decide that there will be a pace meltdown? How do you make a pace analysis that favors the pressers? I usually analyze closers using Speed Figures because they usually get into the pace picture at the finish line. Do you analyze closers in this manner?
I will be waiting for your thoughts on this matter…GOD BLESS !!!
REY DIZON
melvyn schreckinger says
Hi Dave I was wonder which mone mgt. system is mentioned in the above comments is it the horse market investing? which I have purchased.
Thanks Mel
Dave Schwartz says
Amazing… I missed this response for months!
I do not know that the questions you ask have definitive answers. That is why I do not attempt to split hairs.
These are all difficult questions to answer. NewPace makes most of this automatic.
Dave Schwartz says
Melvyn,
I do not think “money management” is actually mentioned in the post above. I think what you mean by that is more like “betting strategy.”
I advocate betting contenders from longest to shortest odds, stopping when you get to 3/1. If you “have room,” then select one of the 3/1 and below horses.
By “having room,” I mean that you have wagered less than 40 “odds points.” (i.e. 3/1= 25, 9/1=10, etc.)