Quote:
Originally Posted by rmath
BJBennet,
You stated that New Pace did better than RDSS (sartin) but if you look at the top 4 Vdc and compare them to New Pace you get about the same results.
Vdc had 7 wins and 4 exactas
New Pace had 6 wins and 4 exactas.
I know that the results for one day do not really prove anything ,but I felt your statement was a little harsh regarding RDSS.
rmath
|
Hi rmath,
I was using the using BL/BL as the benchmark for comparison, since Ted has frequently described that as the key readout, and it offers the advantage of projecting probabilities. By this measure RDSS was 5/10 on wins, E/L 2.0 - 6/10. As far as exactas go, RDSS was 3/10, and E/L 2.0 -5/10.
If we're going to be continuing to be making these kind of comparisons, which I think is useful in identifying strengths and weaknesses, then I believe that VDC, which you used here, is questionable due to the high frequency of ties. If we look at the AP R. 3 here, which I assume you chalked up as a win for RDSS, we end up with 6 horses in the top three, including ties. Using 6 horses in a race with 7 betting interests, isn't really 'picking' a race. I assume the same reasoning applies to R.4, as well. If we're going to be picking the top 4 as a basis for comparison, I think VDC presents problems.
As far as being tough on RDSS, all I said was that, in my experience over the years, it has never as worked as well at AP as it does at other tracks. That's not much of a criticism of RDSS. That I didn't get any response from anyone who does well at this track (I think my question implied some long-range experience), may speak for itself.
Cheers,
B Jennet