Color = surface: green (turf), brown (dirt), blue (synthetic)
Top number = finishing position; bottom number in parentheses = starting post position
Height above line = beaten lengths — closer means a smaller margin
Border = track conditions: green (FST/GD/FM), yellow (WF/SL/YLD), red (SY/MY/FRZ/SFT/HVY)
Connecting Line
Solid = good conditions; dashed = bad conditions
Line Symbol
▲ Triangle = sprint (7f or less); ● Circle = route (more than 7f)
Days Between Races
Small number above each bubble (e.g. 19d) = days since the previous race — helps spot freshness, layoffs, and tight scheduling.
Shaded Band (Bollinger)
Highlights volatility — a wider band means more variation in recent performance
Performance Trend
Straight line showing the overall performance direction — angled up = improving, angled down = declining
Dashed Reference Line
AI Opponent = AI analysis class-level par for the race
AI Model Score History
AI Model History Guide
Lines
Each solid line shows this horse’s model score over its last 10 races: blue = Mod1, green = Mod2, amber = Mod3.
Dashed Lines
Dashed lines represent the current race’s field average for each model — a score below the dashed line indicates the horse ranked below average in this model’s assessment.
Higher is Stronger
All three model scores are 0–100: a higher number means the model rates this horse more favorably among the field.
Example preview — subscribe to view AI Model Score HistorySubscribe now →
Example preview — upgrade to view AI Model Score BadgesUpgrade now →
Track Bias by Lane
Example preview — subscribe to view Track Bias by LaneSubscribe now →
Race Pace Bias
Example preview — subscribe to view Race Pace BiasSubscribe now →
Total Pace
Example preview — subscribe to view Total PaceSubscribe now →
E1 / E2 / LP Pace Positions
E1 — Early
E2 — Mid
LP — Stretch
Example preview — subscribe to view E1 / E2 / LP PositionsSubscribe now →
Performance vs. Peers
Performance vs. Peers Guide
Bars (per post)
Blue = avg career performance • Amber = avg last 3 races • Green = last race (improved vs. avg) • Red = last race (declined vs. avg)
Trend Line
Angled line above the bars: rising = improving form • falling = declining form.
Horizontal Line
Field average — the mean career performance of all horses in this race.
Color Circles
Standard post-position colors below each lane — same as the Total Pace chart.
Border
Thicker border = this horse’s post position.
Figure Comparison
Figure Comparison
Rating
The three Pick Pony algorithm ratings (Algo 1, Algo 2, Algo 3) that make up the overall PP AI Rating — higher is a stronger contender rating.
Speed
Career average speed, recent 3-race average, and last-race speed figure — spot horses in improving or declining form.
Pace
Average Early (E1), Mid (E2), and Stretch (LP) pace figures — reveals pace-setters vs. closers vs. all-the-way types.
This horse
The horse whose stats card is open is highlighted with a darker column background.
Winning Profiles
Winning Profiles
Axes
X: Win % from last 10 starts — Y: In-the-money % (top-3 finishes) from last 10 starts.
Quadrants
Consistent Winners (top-right): high win & ITM — reliable performers. Place Threats (top-left): boards often but doesn’t win often — good exacta/trifecta angles. Streaky (bottom-right): wins occasionally, misses the board often — all-or-nothing. Developing (bottom-left): still finding form — longshot territory.
Reference Lines
Dashed lines mark field averages. Dots to the right win more; dots higher board more.
This horse
Highlighted with a gold border and larger dot.
Example preview — subscribe to view Winning ProfilesSubscribe now →
AI Model Comparison
AI Model Comparison
Winner Models (green)
Mod1(W), Mod2(W), and Mod3(W) trained to predict race winners. Higher score = stronger contender.
Longshot Models (red)
Mod1-LS, Mod2-LS, and Mod3-LS trained to find high-value longshots. Higher score = stronger longshot candidate.
Form Model (blue)
Mod4 sequence model trained on recent form patterns. Higher score = stronger recent form profile.
This horse
Highlighted with a darker column background.
Example preview — subscribe to view AI Model ComparisonSubscribe now →
Race Pace Simulation
Race Pace Simulation Guide
Slider
Drag left→right to advance from gate to finish. Drag all the way back to reset the race.
Predicted Finish Order
Factors in contested pace burn, each horse’s effort curve (peaked-early vs. peaked-late), and wide trip cost from outside posts. Updated live when Track Bias changes.
Pace Scenario
Lone Speed: single E horse likely rates and holds. Contested: two E horses burn each other — closers benefit. Hot Pace: speed meltdown, deep closers thrive. Soft: no early speed, moderate fractions throughout.
Dashed orange ring = horse is surrounded (rival ahead, rival behind, wall outside). In a real race this horse must find a clear path to run.
Running Styles
E/EE = early speed (rushes to rail). P = presser (stalks the pace). S = stalker. SS = slow starter / closer.
E1 — EarlyE2 — MidLP — Stretch
🏁 GateFinish 🏁
Track Bias◀ CloserSpeed ▶0
Stat
vs. Current Card
vs. All Horses
Averages
Career-average metrics across all AI race analysis. Performance and pace averages reflect estimated historical performance; trainer and jockey grades score in-the-money percentages.
Grading scale: A = elite • B = above average • C = average • D = below average • F = poor • — = no data
Pick Pony AI Rating
A
A
Pace Trip Longshot
—
—
Connections Longshot
—
—
Situational Longshot
—
—
Speed
A
C
Early Pace
B
C
Mid Pace
A
B
Late Pace
A
C
Finish Pos
C
D
Dirt Speed
A
A
Turf Speed
B
B
Distance Speed
A
A
Trainer Effectiveness
A
A
Jockey Effectiveness
B
D
3rd Party Ratings
A
C
Recent
Performance analysis from the horse's recent races, weighted to reflect current form. Sprint and Route FPS (Foot Per Second) measure pace efficiency over the horse's recent sprints and routes respectively.
Grading scale: A = elite • B = above average • C = average • D = below average • F = poor • — = no data
Speed
A
C
Early Pace
D
C
Mid Pace
C
C
Late Pace
B
C
Sprint FPS
C
C
Route FPS
D
D
Trainer Effectiveness
A
A
Jockey Effectiveness
B
D
3rd Party Ratings
A
C
Predictions
AI-generated projections for the upcoming race, derived from prior AI analysis for speed and pace trends, surface and distance suitability, and current conditions.
Grading scale: A = elite • B = above average • C = average • D = below average • F = poor • — = no data
Speed
A
D
Early Pace
C
C
Mid Pace
A
B
Late Pace
C
C
AI Model Score History
AI Model History Guide
Lines
Each solid line shows this horse’s model score over its last 10 races: blue = Mod1, green = Mod2, amber = Mod3.
Dashed Lines
Dashed lines represent the current race’s field average for each model — a score below the dashed line indicates the horse ranked below average in this model’s assessment.
Higher is Stronger
All three model scores are 0–100: a higher number means the model rates this horse more favorably among the field.
Example preview — subscribe to view AI Model Score HistorySubscribe now →
Example preview — upgrade to view AI Model Score BadgesUpgrade now →
Track Bias by Lane
Example preview — subscribe to view Track Bias by LaneSubscribe now →
Race Pace Bias
Example preview — subscribe to view Race Pace BiasSubscribe now →
Total Pace
Example preview — subscribe to view Total PaceSubscribe now →
E1 / E2 / LP Pace Positions
E1 — Early
E2 — Mid
LP — Stretch
Example preview — subscribe to view E1 / E2 / LP PositionsSubscribe now →
Figure Comparison
Figure Comparison
Rating
The three Pick Pony algorithm ratings (Algo 1, Algo 2, Algo 3) that make up the overall PP AI Rating — higher is a stronger contender rating.
Speed
Career average speed, recent 3-race average, and last-race speed figure — spot horses in improving or declining form.
Pace
Average Early (E1), Mid (E2), and Stretch (LP) pace figures — reveals pace-setters vs. closers vs. all-the-way types.
This horse
The horse whose stats card is open is highlighted with a darker column background.
Winning Profiles
Winning Profiles
Axes
X: Win % from last 10 starts — Y: In-the-money % (top-3 finishes) from last 10 starts.
Quadrants
Consistent Winners (top-right): high win & ITM — reliable performers. Place Threats (top-left): boards often but doesn’t win often — good exacta/trifecta angles. Streaky (bottom-right): wins occasionally, misses the board often — all-or-nothing. Developing (bottom-left): still finding form — longshot territory.
Reference Lines
Dashed lines mark field averages. Dots to the right win more; dots higher board more.
This horse
Highlighted with a gold border and larger dot.
Example preview — subscribe to view Winning ProfilesSubscribe now →
AI Model Comparison
AI Model Comparison
Winner Models (green)
Mod1(W), Mod2(W), and Mod3(W) trained to predict race winners. Higher score = stronger contender.
Longshot Models (red)
Mod1-LS, Mod2-LS, and Mod3-LS trained to find high-value longshots. Higher score = stronger longshot candidate.
Form Model (blue)
Mod4 sequence model trained on recent form patterns. Higher score = stronger recent form profile.
This horse
Highlighted with a darker column background.
Example preview — subscribe to view AI Model ComparisonSubscribe now →
Stat
vs. Current Card
vs. All Horses
Averages
Career-average metrics across all AI race analysis. Performance and pace averages reflect estimated historical performance; trainer and jockey grades score in-the-money percentages.
Grading scale: A = elite • B = above average • C = average • D = below average • F = poor • — = no data
Pick Pony AI Rating
C
F
Pace Trip Longshot
—
—
Connections Longshot
—
—
Situational Longshot
—
—
Speed
C
F
Early Pace
C
F
Mid Pace
C
F
Late Pace
C
F
Finish Pos
C
A
Dirt Speed
C
F
Turf Speed
C
D
Distance Speed
C
F
Trainer Effectiveness
D
D
Jockey Effectiveness
D
D
3rd Party Ratings
C
F
Recent
Performance analysis from the horse's recent races, weighted to reflect current form. Sprint and Route FPS (Foot Per Second) measure pace efficiency over the horse's recent sprints and routes respectively.
Grading scale: A = elite • B = above average • C = average • D = below average • F = poor • — = no data
Speed
C
F
Early Pace
C
F
Mid Pace
C
F
Late Pace
C
F
Sprint FPS
C
F
Route FPS
C
F
Trainer Effectiveness
D
D
Jockey Effectiveness
D
D
3rd Party Ratings
C
F
Predictions
AI-generated projections for the upcoming race, derived from prior AI analysis for speed and pace trends, surface and distance suitability, and current conditions.
Grading scale: A = elite • B = above average • C = average • D = below average • F = poor • — = no data
What a week to be a Pick Pony subscriber! Across 777 races covered — with 663–666 settled and roughly 30 still pending — our AI delivered top-pick win rates that consistently outpaced the morning-line favorite (chalk) baseline of 31.1%. Leading the pack, the Ai Exacta model posted a remarkable 37.9% win rate, topping the chalk by nearly seven full percentage points, while the Ensemble algorithm wasn't far behind at a stellar 36.3%. Even our supporting algorithms — Algo1 (31.6%), Algo1 Am (31.8%), and the Algo2/Algo3 family (27.6–28.1%) — demonstrated consistent edge, and every model delivered In-The-Money (ITM) rates ranging from a solid 63.3% all the way up to an outstanding 71.9% for Ai Exacta. With hundreds of exacta, trifecta, and boxed exotic hits piling up across the board, this was the kind of week that reminds us why data-driven handicapping is a game-changer.
Standout Wins
The highlight reel this week is packed with longshot gems that showcase our AI's ability to find hidden value where the public least expects it. Algo2 and Algo3 deserve a standing ovation for spotting ESSENCE L VEE (10-1) winning at Saratoga on August 20 — a true overlay that paid handsomely. The Algo2/Algo3 family also nailed PALACIO (8-1) at CTX on August 21 and AIR MASQUE (6-1) at Monmouth on August 23, proving these models thrive on finding undervalued horses at multiple tracks simultaneously. Meanwhile, Algo1 flexed its longshot muscle with GIRLS WEAR PEARLS (8-1) at Del Mar on August 22 and Tahaluf (6-1) at Indiana Downs on August 24 — the latter confirmed by multiple algorithms, a strong consensus signal. On the Ai Exacta side, CAMPAIGN PROMISES (6-1) opened the week with a bang at Indiana Downs on August 20, while KING OF GOSFORD (5-1) and JOKESTER (5-1) kept the momentum rolling through mid-week. The Ensemble model rounded out the highlights with a pair of sharp calls — CIARLATANO (4-1) at Ellis Park and Society Ball (4-1) at Parx — demonstrating that when our algorithms agree, the results speak for themselves.
Key Insights
Several clear patterns emerged from this week's results worth filing away for future play. First, when multiple algorithms converge on the same horse — as they did with TAHALUF, MAGI CAL NATION, and MISSOURI RIVER — the collective signal proved especially reliable, suggesting our consensus-of-models approach is a powerful betting filter. Second, the Ai Exacta model's dominant 71.9% ITM rate underscores its strength not just in picking winners outright, but in mapping out the full podium — a critical edge for exotic wagering. Third, mid-size meet tracks like Ellis Park (ELP), Indiana Downs (IND), and Mountaineer (MNR) were particularly productive hunting grounds this week, with multiple wins at each venue across algorithms, hinting that our AI's edge may be sharpest where public handicapping attention is thinnest. Finally, the boxed trifecta totals — 60 hits for Ai Exacta and 63 for the Ensemble — are a strong reminder that covering the field with smart combinations continues to reward patient, structured bettors.
Looking Ahead
With roughly 30 races still pending across all models, there may be even more winners quietly waiting to be confirmed — so keep an eye on those final results as they roll in! Next week, we'll be watching closely to see if our algorithms continue to dominate at the mid-level meets and whether that longshot radar stays sharp as summer racing enters its final stretch. Stay with Pick Pony — the data is working for you! 🏇
Weekly Performance Summary
Ai Exacta Winner
Pick Pony's AI Winner models rank every horse in each race using a weighted combination of speed figures, pace analysis, trainer/jockey statistics, track bias, and dozens of other handicapping factors. Each algorithm uses a different set of optimized weights to capture different angles on the same race data. Top Pick Wins measures how often the model's #1 ranked horse won the race outright. Places and Shows count 2nd and 3rd place finishes respectively. ITM (In The Money) is the combined total of Win + Place + Show. Rates are calculated against settled races only (pending results excluded). The Exotic Wager Hits table shows how often the model's top 3 picks finished in the correct order (Exacta/Trifecta) or in any order within the top positions (Boxed Exacta/Boxed Trifecta).
Metric
Count
Rate
Total Races
777
Top Pick Wins (1st)
251
37.9%
Top Pick Places (2nd)
127
19.2%
Top Pick Shows (3rd)
99
14.9%
Top Pick ITM
477
71.9%
Pending
30
Exotic Wager Hits (Ai Exacta Winner)
Wager Type
Hits
Description
Exacta
75
Picks 1 & 2 finished 1st & 2nd in exact order
Boxed Exacta
33
Picks 1 & 2 both finished in top 2, reversed order
Trifecta
29
Picks 1, 2 & 3 finished 1st, 2nd & 3rd in exact order
Picks 1 & 2 both finished in top 2, reversed order
Trifecta
17
Picks 1, 2 & 3 finished 1st, 2nd & 3rd in exact order
Boxed Trifecta
51
Picks 1, 2 & 3 all finished in top 3, any order
Algorithm Ensemble Winner
Metric
Count
Rate
Total Races
777
Top Pick Wins (1st)
241
36.3%
Top Pick Places (2nd)
123
18.5%
Top Pick Shows (3rd)
92
13.9%
Top Pick ITM
456
68.7%
Pending
30
Exotic Wager Hits (Algorithm Ensemble Winner)
Wager Type
Hits
Description
Exacta
69
Picks 1 & 2 finished 1st & 2nd in exact order
Boxed Exacta
45
Picks 1 & 2 both finished in top 2, reversed order
Trifecta
22
Picks 1, 2 & 3 finished 1st, 2nd & 3rd in exact order
Boxed Trifecta
63
Picks 1, 2 & 3 all finished in top 3, any order
AI Longshot Picks
Longshot picks are individual horses flagged at publication time: their morning-line odds were 8-1 or greater — prices the betting public considers unlikely to win — and the model's calibrated win probability said the price overpaid. Unlike the winner models above, a longshot is not a race's top-ranked horse, so these tables count selections, not races: every flagged horse is one bet, graded on its own finish, and a single race can contribute more than one. (For the same reason there is no exotic-hits table here — an exacta or trifecta needs a ranked 1-2-3 ticket, which a set of longshot flags does not define.) There is also one longshot table rather than one per algorithm: the flag depends only on the horse's price and its calibrated edge, never on where an algorithm ranked it, so all three models publish exactly the same longshot list. Because longshots win far less frequently by definition, win rates in this section are expected to be substantially lower than the winner models above. That is normal and by design — even a modest longshot win rate of 5-10% can be highly profitable because the payoffs are dramatically larger. A $2 win bet on an 8-1 longshot returns $18. Focus on ITM rate and on the realised ROI in the Longshot Betting Strategy Simulator below rather than on raw win percentage when evaluating longshot model performance.
Metric
Count
Rate
Longshot Selections
47
Races Covered
37
Wins (1st)
3
8.1%
Places (2nd)
4
10.8%
Shows (3rd)
7
18.9%
ITM
14
37.8%
Pending
2
Trifecta Structure Plays
Each AI Predictions post suggests one trifecta structure per race: the Algo 3 top pick to win, with its next three ranked horses boxed for 2nd and 3rd (6 combinations). Races our race-shape model rates most favorable are tagged ⭐ Best Bet in the post. This table grades last week's published plays against the actual trifecta payoffs at each track's real wager minimum — no assumptions, no hindsight.
Plays graded
394
Trifectas hit
50 (12.7%)
Total staked
$1,447.20
Total returned
$1,318.60
Profit / loss
−$128.60 (-8.9% ROI)
⭐ Best Bet races only
13 plays, 2 hit (15.4%), −$25.00 (-57.9% ROI)
353 race(s) skipped for scratches inside the top four; 28 skipped where the track's trifecta minimum wasn't recorded. Per-race wager minimums have been captured since July 4, 2026, so this ledger grows more complete each week.
Benchmark: The Morning-Line Favorite
The simplest possible strategy is to always bet the morning-line favorite — the “chalk.” This table shows how that baseline performed across the same thoroughbred races this week, so you can judge the AI's win rates against what the public's top choice delivered. Beating the chalk consistently is the real test of any handicapping model.
Metric
Count
Rate
Settled Races
618
Favorite Wins (1st)
192
31.1%
Favorite Places (2nd)
124
20.1%
Favorite Shows (3rd)
104
16.8%
Favorite ITM
420
68.0%
Consensus Expert Picks
Consensus Expert Picks are derived from multiple independent handicapping sources. Each source submits their top picks per race, and the consensus ranking is built by scoring each horse: 4 points for a 1st-place pick, 3 for 2nd, 2 for 3rd, and 1 for 4th. The horse with the highest total score becomes the consensus top pick. Agreement % measures what share of experts included a horse in their picks — higher agreement signals stronger conviction across sources. The Win/Place/Show/ITM and Exotic stats below measure how the consensus top pick actually performed on race day.
Picks 1 & 2 both finished in top 2, reversed order
Trifecta
12
Picks 1, 2 & 3 finished 1st, 2nd & 3rd in exact order
Boxed Trifecta
56
Picks 1, 2 & 3 all finished in top 3, any order
Performance by Breed
Top-pick win rates vary dramatically by breed. Thoroughbred (TB) racing is the most form-driven and predictable, while Quarter Horse (QH) and Arabian (AR) sprints are decided in a few hundred yards and are far more chaotic — they naturally produce lower win rates. Because the summary above blends all breeds together, this table separates them so each breed's true performance is visible. W/P/S are wins, places (2nd), and shows (3rd), with the percentage of settled races in parentheses. ITM is the In-The-Money total (Win + Place + Show). EX/BEX/TRI/BTRI are exacta, boxed-exacta, trifecta, and boxed-trifecta hits on the top picks. Longshot rows count individual flagged selections rather than races (a race can contribute more than one), and show dashes for the exotic columns because those wagers need a ranked 1-2-3 ticket.
Thoroughbred
Source
Races
W
P
S
ITM
EX
BEX
TRI
BTRI
Algo 1 Winner
777
210 (32%)
125 (19%)
97 (15%)
432 (65%)
66
37
22
49
Algo 2 Winner
777
187 (28%)
133 (20%)
103 (15%)
423 (64%)
48
49
18
52
Algo 3 Winner
777
184 (28%)
138 (21%)
100 (15%)
422 (63%)
46
45
17
51
AI Longshot
47
3 (8%)
4 (11%)
7 (19%)
14 (38%)
—
—
—
—
Performance by Track
The tables below break down each pick source's performance at individual tracks. W/P/S show the number of wins, places (2nd), and shows (3rd) with the percentage of settled races in parentheses. ITM is the combined In The Money total (Win + Place + Show). EX (Exacta) counts races where the top 2 picks finished 1st and 2nd in exact order. BEX (Boxed Exacta) counts races where the top 2 picks both finished in the top 2 in either order. TRI (Trifecta) and BTRI (Boxed Trifecta) apply the same logic to the top 3 picks finishing in the top 3 positions. Longshot rows count individual flagged selections rather than races (a race can contribute more than one) and show dashes in the exotic columns, because those wagers need a ranked 1-2-3 ticket that a per-horse longshot flag does not define. Each algorithm (Algo 1, 2, 3) uses different optimized weights, so their performance varies by track — comparing across algorithms at a specific track helps identify which model is strongest for that venue. The ML Favorite (chalk) row shows how the morning-line favorite performed in that track's thoroughbred races — the baseline any pick source needs to beat to be adding value at that venue.
Mod1(W): 82 (1/8) Mod2(W): 75 (2/8) Mod3(W): 79 (3/8) Mod1-LS: 55 (6/8) Win Prob: 18.4% Value Score: 1.35 ★