Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up - View Single Post

Bill Lyster · 08-04-2011, 03:12 PM

Use this link to see the file. It is too large to attach to this posting.

www.sartinmethodology.com/pubs/BLyster_NewPace_Study.rev.8.1.11.xls

Using the database of races from last year, provided by Ted, on this site, plus a few cards in 2011, I chose races from the US and Canada, regular dirt and synthetic, large track and some smaller (like Mountaineer).

In this test I did not record the NewPace data without any filters. See the notes at the bottom of the sheet for horses that I excluded. The filters or exclusions I made were because somewhere between 93 and 96% of all winners are found in the horses that I left in.

Ted provided me a way to evaluate NewPace information using the Trackmaster speedratings (TM SR), Adjusted SR, Total Energy and from Perceptor rankings. I discontinued recording any Perceptor info after about 150 races because it showed no where near the results of the other data sets.

I also recorded my original selections using the logic that was first put out in early beta (alpha?) releases from back in April. Like I said in my post about current Delmar results, I found that this early interpretation of the Schwartz info to be more predictive of winners and exacta outcomes, although the ROI of the winners is smaller than other data sets. (this data is shown on the summary as "Original EL Data"

Note this disclaimer: The "Win3$" info is a "what-if" scenario. I was curious to know how much the ROI might improve, if in some universe I could bet only 3 horses and not miss any of the winners contained in the "Win4$" data.

My personal opinion is that with some consistent handicapping a few favorites now included in the mix can be discarded as well as a few of the other remaining horses so that 3 horse betting would be profitable. You should research this yourself and get comfortable with the types of horses eliminated.

You will note that many races have negative win returns. That means that the winner paid less than 3:1 and that the total return on a $4 total bet was less than $4. One strategy, obviously, would be to pass races where the contenders odds suggested this result. That addition, by subtraction, would increase ROI. The same with exacta results with NEG returns.

I also think that selective use of this data in exactas and trifectas can be achieved if you open up the betting parameters beyond the place position in medium sized fields. For example, if you can win 50% of your exactas in an 8-9 horse field, you might be able to hit the third position more often, assuming the odds were right, by hitting the ALL or almost all button.

The higher the win percentage the more enticing are plays like rolling doubles and pick threes, etc. Just a thought.

There are lots of ways to use this data. Give it some thought and see how you can use it, or what parts of it you might not want to use, etc. I encourage some independent thought out there. Who knows which of the blind pigs will find an acorn or a truffle?

Good luck to you all,

Bill

08-04-2011, 03:12 PM	#1
Bill Lyster Grade 1 Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar" Posts: 2,499	NewPace 507 race Study Use this link to see the file. It is too large to attach to this posting. www.sartinmethodology.com/pubs/BLyster_NewPace_Study.rev.8.1.11.xls Using the database of races from last year, provided by Ted, on this site, plus a few cards in 2011, I chose races from the US and Canada, regular dirt and synthetic, large track and some smaller (like Mountaineer). In this test I did not record the NewPace data without any filters. See the notes at the bottom of the sheet for horses that I excluded. The filters or exclusions I made were because somewhere between 93 and 96% of all winners are found in the horses that I left in. Ted provided me a way to evaluate NewPace information using the Trackmaster speedratings (TM SR), Adjusted SR, Total Energy and from Perceptor rankings. I discontinued recording any Perceptor info after about 150 races because it showed no where near the results of the other data sets. I also recorded my original selections using the logic that was first put out in early beta (alpha?) releases from back in April. Like I said in my post about current Delmar results, I found that this early interpretation of the Schwartz info to be more predictive of winners and exacta outcomes, although the ROI of the winners is smaller than other data sets. (this data is shown on the summary as "Original EL Data" Note this disclaimer: The "Win3$" info is a "what-if" scenario. I was curious to know how much the ROI might improve, if in some universe I could bet only 3 horses and not miss any of the winners contained in the "Win4$" data. My personal opinion is that with some consistent handicapping a few favorites now included in the mix can be discarded as well as a few of the other remaining horses so that 3 horse betting would be profitable. You should research this yourself and get comfortable with the types of horses eliminated. You will note that many races have negative win returns. That means that the winner paid less than 3:1 and that the total return on a $4 total bet was less than $4. One strategy, obviously, would be to pass races where the contenders odds suggested this result. That addition, by subtraction, would increase ROI. The same with exacta results with NEG returns. I also think that selective use of this data in exactas and trifectas can be achieved if you open up the betting parameters beyond the place position in medium sized fields. For example, if you can win 50% of your exactas in an 8-9 horse field, you might be able to hit the third position more often, assuming the odds were right, by hitting the ALL or almost all button. The higher the win percentage the more enticing are plays like rolling doubles and pick threes, etc. Just a thought. There are lots of ways to use this data. Give it some thought and see how you can use it, or what parts of it you might not want to use, etc. I encourage some independent thought out there. Who knows which of the blind pigs will find an acorn or a truffle? Good luck to you all, Bill Last edited by Ted Craven; 08-04-2011 at 03:18 PM.