Quote:
Originally Posted by BJennet
It's interesting to read through these beta-tests of this form feature, which I assume is based on D. Schwartz's 'Improve or Decline'. Please correct me if I'm wrong. If someone could interpret and explain these figures and the theory behind them in greater detail, I would be grateful.
One of the things that struck me here, was Ernie's comments about the high degree of correlation between these new indicators and the Sartin primary factors. To me this is the key problem that affects all the experimentation with assigning weights that surrounds the Methodology - almost everything can be too easily correlated with the primary factors, TE, BL/BL etc.. It seems to be that for any new factor, the most important aspect to test for and determine would be its independence from the primary factors - how much it actually adds to their well-established ROI. As far as I know now, the only other truly independent factor is E/L.
Any feedback appreciated.
Cheers,
B.Jennet
|
It is more properly taken from Dave's Early-Late work, which I highly recommend. You can find his product page at
http://thehorsehandicappingauthority.com/products-page/
Dave starts with a statistical math concept that anything can be measured to a certain degree, to a certain probability. The source is cited in his material.
With this concept in mind he set out to determine which horses ran closest to the pace of their races no matter what the actual time. He ultimately has two concerns. What are the likely lowest and highest raw speed ratings for each horse and whether the horse will be in the early or late half of the field. The two best early and two best late horses usually are the horses that you have seen in the beta testing posts so far.
There are certain aspects of this method that have been part of the Sartin Methology for a long time, like the best early and best late (opposing styles) often showing up in exacta play. The fact that ALL races in the past performance are looked at, no matter when they happened, strikes familiarly with how Jim Bradshaw looked at horses.
The number parameters developed throughout the years of the Methodology cant be found in Dave's method. I would venture a guess that other published works that evaluated speed with points might have been the beginnings of Dave's ideas, but since I haven't read all of that stuff I couldn't say.
As a black box tool without any changes it is a remarkable evaluator of races. I think that RDSS has several tools that might enhance some of the grey areas that have to come up with the number of different race types that are to be encountered.
Once you understand the basic theory of what is being offered I am sure that there will be several ways to tweak what already is a usable product.
All the best,
Bill