Pace Projector Put to Test

The TimeformUS Pace Projector is a tool that allows the user to see instantly where each horse is most likely to be positioned in the early part of the race, “early” being defined as at the completion of the opening quarter mile of sprint races and the opening half mile of route races.   Click on this link to learn, in a matter of seconds, how to use the Pace Projector.

This post will draw on data from our just-completed study of the effectiveness of our Pace Projector. To provide the most meaningful results, we used a data set containing 10,000 races whenever possible. When lack of data made this goal impossible to meet, we used all available races.

In total, we found the results pleasingly unsurprising. After all, we have been using the Pace Projector for some time now and have grown accustomed to its accuracy. However, we did find areas of potential improvement, and we will be focusing, relentlessly, on improving in these areas. The complete results from this study are shown at the bottom of this post. But first, we will provide a brief summary of three results from the study, along with comments, in the hope of helping readers to get the best use out of a tool that we have grown to love.

1: The results show that the Pace Projector is more effective at identifying the early leaders in dirt races than in turf races (with synthetic races occupying a middle position). The results also show that the Pace Projector is slightly more effective at identifying the early leaders in sprints than in routes.

ppj-chart-2

Click to enlarge. See full data at the bottom of this post.

This was no surprise. Riders’ tactics are a more important pace factor in turf races and route races because the pace tends to be slower in these races, which leads to situations in which more horses have the potential to make the early lead if urged. This lowers the probability of accurately predicting the pace in a turf race or a route race. Considerably larger field sizes for turf races play a part as well.

on-lead2: The Pace Projector proved to be very effective overall when it designated races as “Favors horses on or near the early lead.” But this effectiveness was not distributed evenly. As one might expect, the results were a bit stronger for dirt sprints than for dirt routes, for example. And in general, the results were stronger for dirt races than for turf races or synthetic races. (More on this in point 3 below.)

What should one do with this information? The obvious answer seems to be the best one: Give slightly more weight to the Pace Projector in the types of races where it is strongest. In addition, it is important to remember that the designation “Favors horses on or near the early lead” is not a prediction about the race winner. Rather, it is a prediction about which types of running styles will be favored by the expected pace. To favor is not necessarily to crown. If a horse is very slow relative to his rivals, a pace advantage alone is exceedingly unlikely to get him to the wire first. Likewise, if a horse is significantly faster than his rivals, he will quite possibly prove capable of overcoming a pace disadvantage. But these are exceptions. As a rule, races are reasonably competitive, and, all things being equal, playing horses who figure to be favored by the pace, or at least not disadvantaged by it, gives bettors a stout advantage over their competition at the mutuel windows.

One of our favorite ways to employ the Pace Projector is as an “ordering device.” Say, for example, that the Pace Projector designates a race as “Favoring horses on or near the early lead.” We will then go through our handicapping routine in a front-to-back manner: starting with the horse that the Pace Projector puts on the early lead, and then proceeding backwards, moving on to handicap the horse that it puts second early, third early, and so on, a practice that is conducive to making comparisons between horses who have similar running styles. In this manner, we are also, in a sense, giving “pride of place” to horses who figured to be favored by the likely pace, while still insisting that they be up to snuff in other respects, such as speed figures, Race Ratings, Trainer Ratings, Pedigree Ratings, etc. Sometimes the horse that the Pace Projector puts on the early lead survives this entire process and becomes our selection. At other times, he is trumped almost instantly by the horse whom the Pace Projector puts second early, or trumped by the horse it puts third early, or fourth early, and so on. In any event, by proceeding in this manner, we are giving a little bow to the fact that a pace that is friendly to frontrunners is not limited to helping only the horses who are in front early. If none of the speed horses or stalkers is qualified to win the race, the projected slow pace can end up convincing us to favor a midpack runner over a deep closer.

fast-paceBy the same token, when the Pace Projector designates a race as “Fast Pace,” we will begin our handicapping by looking at horses whom the Pace Projector indicates will be safely off of this potentially destructive pace. What we will not do, however, is give special preference to horses who are projected to be in the very rear of the field early. Yes, their chances will improve in these situations, but so will the chances of horses who are projected to be mid-pack early, and we have found little advantage to splitting hairs in these situations. Far better to use this energy downgrading the chances of frontrunners and, to a slightly lesser extent, horses who are projected to be close to these frontrunners.

3: In races that the Pace Projector designates as “Favors horses on or near the lead” races, it has its lowest strike-rate in turf routes. What this means is that the horses that the Pace Projector predicts will be on or near the lead in turf routes “favoring speed” go on to win their races less often than do the predicted frontrunners in other types of “favoring speed” races.

This says something about the difficulty of winning turf routes on the lead, no doubt, and it also points us to an area that we believe contains ample room for us to improve. But we believe that it also says something else that is important: There is no substitute for comprehensive handicapping of horse races. Indeed, our study shows that the results above improve dramatically as soon as even very basic handicapping is added to the pace projection.

Final thought before we attach the statistics:

The motivation behind this study is perpetual improvement to our product. More studies, including one using return on investment, are planned for the Pace Projector. We plan on consistently and zealously refining all of our tools–in order to ensure that they remain as current as the modern horseplayer.

ppj-chart

ppj-table-2

This entry was posted in Data Analysis, Product Features. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Pace Projector Put to Test

  1. Interesting that turf sprints favor horses on or near the lead the least.

    Like

  2. Dr. Russ says:

    Naturally, this information is useless without correlating it with the Race Tracks being used.
    Being projected to be in the lead at Mountaineer has much different ramifications from being in the lead at Hollywood, or being in the lead at Aqueduct on a sloppy track.

    Furthermore, your stats would be more exciting if you filtered by whether the horse truly *was* in the lead.
    So, how often did your projected leader win when he DID get the lead?

    Brisnet provides more granular information by labeling the Early Speed types and telling you how often they actually win for each type of race at each track.

    So, if you want to sell me on your product, then provide comparative data with Brisnet Pace Designations showing me that your Pace Projections are A) more accurate regarding who will get the lead and B) more likely to win the races.

    Something like ROI is largely irrelevant, because it is up to individual goals whether “Value” is the prime consideration. For me, I want to know who is going to win the damned race – for purposes of Multi-race wagers like Pick Fours.

    For now, please help me evaluate the Horses – I will evaluate the Risk-Reward issues.

    Like

    • marcatrtr says:

      We’re looking into a study that delivers exactly what you’re asking, stay tuned. Thanks for the feedback!

      Like

      • Dr. Russ asked precisely the questions in different words that I have been thinking about as I peruse your site. I use BRISnet ultimate PPs because of their focus on pace and track profiles at specific distances, and because they so completely outclass DRF’s “classic” (more like “anachronistic”) format.

        Like

  3. Thanks for having a sincere interest in judging pace. In the last 25 years it is the single most important aspect of handicapping. You are least interested in your own effectiveness. My experience is you can’t go forward unless you examine what you have done in the past for clues to how to go forward in a positive way.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s