Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Craven
Sartin advised at one point considering keeping parallel Decision Models of before-hides and after-hides to accomplish the same thing.
Ted
|
I do not see the value in keeping two models, one with "hides" and one without "hides". In fact, other than to "trick" someone into looking at the other contenders in the race, such as "Doc" was attempting to do, ones time would be better spent "evaluating" those "hides" to see if they are vulnerable and can be beat. After all, horses that go off at odds of 5/2 and less win almost 60% of all races, so I feel it is important to try and find those low odds horses that ARE beatable.
Keeping a model with ALL contenders included should be sufficient. After all, what a model is telling you, is the various corollaries of the winner as it pertains to the other contenders in the race, NOT its' "odds" compared to the other contenders. If one wants to keep track of the "odds" (prices), then add the prices of the winners to the model.