A slow time might be due to
- slow track
- slow pace
- fast pace but crappy runners

so measuring pace accurately is challenging.

But after that, the application of such measurements should be straightforward.

You could start by contrasting the top-rated early speed selection versus the late speed one. Which pick has better win strike rates, and POTs.

But I'm not convinced measuring is that easy,

Consider the free data from

http://www.sportscolour.com.au/

It shows that the standing start section loses ~3 seconds, so that it's best to discard that time.

But for sprints it appears that:

- The 1st "running" section is most often the fastest
- Most runners then seem to run each section slower than the preceeding one.


this is a different perspective to osulldj's one.

And such figures seem to mock the concept of sustained pace. Consistently going slower hardly appears "sustained".

Further ironies are that 3/4 pace (early) is actually faster than full pace (late). And why do jockeys take horses "off the bit" (i.e. stop restraining them) so they'll accelerate, when instead they only go slower?