POSTED Jun 27, 2014
By
Derek Simon
To
celebrate the re-launch of my Web site (SimonSpeedRations.com)
and some of the great races taking place this weekend — the Grade I Gold Cup at
Santa Anita and a trio of Grade III events at Prairie Meadows just to name a
few — I decided to provide some free Pace Profile Reports for Saturday (see
links below)
In
addition, to help readers make better use of those Reports, I’m going to highlight
one of their more prominent features: the rankings section.
 |
| (Click on
image to enlarge) |
The rankings
section is where each horse’s speed figures, early speed rations (ESRs) and
late speed rations (LSRs) are compared to others in the field, providing a
quick and convenient way to assess its merits.
Of course,
this but begs the question: What do the rankings really mean?
Sure, one
can surmise that lower rankings — a series of 1’s, for example — are probably
better than higher rankings, but what exactly does “better” mean? Can one make
money simply by betting on the lowest-ranked, i.e. best, horse in every race?
Sorry, but
no.
My
database studies reveal that the sole lowest-ranked horse in a field (ties were
ignored) does, in fact, win far more often than random chance would suggest
(1.91 impact value), but, alas, such stalwart steeds are bet accordingly and
produce a negative 17.12 percent return on investment (ROI).
Still,
there is something to be said for the rankings, as they clearly do point out
the strongest — and weakest — contenders, as the data below confirms:
 |
(Click on
image to enlarge)
|
Note: To
be considered, a horse had to be ranked in all three categories — speed, ESRs
and LSRs. What's more, at least half the field needed to be ranked in all of
those categories as well.
Notice
that horses with a rankings sum of less than 15 win approximately 2/3 of the
races. Of course some of this is due to the effect of field size — it’s
obviously easier to achieve better (lower) rankings in a six-horse field than
it is in a 12-horse field — but the impact values (IV) and odds-based impact
values (OBIV) speak for themselves.
To show
how this type of quick and painless analysis can pay dividends, consider the
opening daily double at Santa Anita on June 26, 2014:
1st Race
 |
| (Click on
image to enlarge) |
2nd Race
 |
| (Click on
image to enlarge) |
In the
first race, the sum of rankings is as follows:
1. 9 ½
2. 15
3. 5
4. 11
5. 5 ½
6. 17
Clearly,
the top two contenders appear to be 3-TWO IS TO MANY, with 5 points and a dominant speed edge (noted by his “1+”
ranking in that category), and 5-DR WILLIAMS, with 5 ½ points. 1-COOK INLET (9 ½
points) ranks a distant third.
The result
couldn’t have been more perfect.
 |
| (Click on
image to enlarge) |
On to the second
race, where the sum of rankings looks like this:
1. 5
2. 7
3. 13
4. 11
5. 9
6. N/A
Here, we
have a clearer choice in 1-YARD LINE who, like Two Is to Many in the preceding
race, also has 5 points and a dominant speed edge. 2-SING WITH BLING is next
with 7 points, but his relatively low LSR ranking of 4 makes me think he could get
chewed up and spit out in a pace battle with Yard Line. 5-MISSING GROOM checks
in third with 9 points and also boasts the best last-race LSR (-8) in the field,
which should come in handy if the top two go at it early.
Again, the
results were right in line with the rankings:
 |
| (Click on
image to enlarge) |
Anyway, I
hope this helps a little. Obviously, it's not always this easy, but at least the rankings provide a starting point to one's handicapping journey.
FREE Pace Profile Reports (6/28/14)
