Wipe-Outs

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by tfm

TRAKUS is an electronic tracking system in use at KEE, DMR, and WO, that provides ACCURATE times, beaten lengths and ground covered. This is HUGE step up from the other tracks, where this data is provided by the chartmaker.

I generate the charts. They're simply a graph of the results charts. Isn't it puzzling, with all the different approaches to this game that NO ONE has actually taken the time to identify the different types of races and what they 'look like'? All the focus is on TIME, either final or splits, and on the INDIVIDUAL horse, rather than the WHOLE race. You'd think after identifying the different types of running styles for the horses, someone might move on to the race. Or better yet, START with the race and work to the horse.

I suppose, THIS abstraction (the graph) is just not as useful as a NUMERIC one (figures).

It sounds like you are saying that you take the “actual chart” from the WIPE OUT horses’ winning race and “graph chart” it with your graph chart and this is how you make the determination as to whether or not the winner was a WIPE OUT horse. Is this correct?
The determination IS NOT MADE from today’s racing form. Is that correct?
Would you say that what you mean by “race type” equates to a “race shape”?
If the answer to the former is ‘yes’, how would you reach a determination as to whether or not today’s “race type” matches the “race type” from the WIPE OUT horses’ winning race?

[classhandicapper]

It has been well known for a long time that sloppy and some other off tracks produce margins between horses in excess of the average on fast tracks. The best figure handicappers have been trying to cope with that for a long time because it makes calculating the daily track variant more difficult. You either have to give the winners very big figures or the losers very sub par figures (or somewhere in between).

I have a technique I have been using for about 25 years that is helpful, but it is far from perfect. It falls into the category of "I'd rather be approximately right than precisely wrong".

I would "guess" you would be better off discounting some of the wipe out wins on sloppy tracks. You'll certainly lose some of the subsequent winners that way (maybe even some big prices), but that is true of every exclusion process that is trying to increase the quality and value of the selections.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by tfm

TRAKUS is an electronic tracking system in use at KEE, DMR, and WO, that provides ACCURATE times, beaten lengths and ground covered. This is HUGE step up from the other tracks, where this data is provided by the chartmaker.

I generate the charts. They're simply a graph of the results charts. Isn't it puzzling, with all the different approaches to this game that NO ONE has actually taken the time to identify the different types of races and what they 'look like'? All the focus is on TIME, either final or splits, and on the INDIVIDUAL horse, rather than the WHOLE race. You'd think after identifying the different types of running styles for the horses, someone might move on to the race. Or better yet, START with the race and work to the horse.

I suppose, THIS abstraction (the graph) is just not as useful as a NUMERIC one (figures).

You are mistaken in your assumption.

As far as I know, your charting software is original (and excellent). However, many class and trip handicappers study charts (and replays) looking for horses with similar trips within the same race in order to make quality of performance appraisals in the same way you charting software identifies them visually.

For example:

If there was a duel between 3 sharp horses suited to the class and distance and one of them put the other 2 away and went on to win or finish gamely while the others were very well beaten, comparative handicappers would immediately suspect that the duel was very taxing and the better horse ran a very good race for that class.

If all three survived the duel and several in form closers didn't gain much in the stretch, that would tell them something else.

If the rail was dead and the horse on the inside put away the horse on the outside that would tell them something else.

The list of examples like this is endless.

The trick is to know the quality of the horses going in and finding at least reasonably similar trips in order to make comparisons. Even when they don't have similar trips to compare, sophisticated class handicappers are always looking at the quality of the individual horses in the race, the depth of the field, how horses are coming out of the race to run afterward etc... to measure performance.

As strong as this method is, the problem with this approach is that form sometimes changes sharply. So several horses within the same race could have improved sharply (or vice versa) and it might not be clear from the charts or replay. At other times, you are dealing with such lightly raced horses it's not clear how good the horses were to begin with.

In situations like these, pace and speed figures often tell you what the quality of the horses was and what happened in a race in very clear terms. You simply can't see time as well as a clock can measure it and time matters a lot.

Of course, there are all sorts of accuracy issues to deal with when using fractions and final times (the impact of wind, run up changes, changing track speed, track maintenance between races, the impact of pace on time, bias issues etc..).

So on the flip side, comparative class handicapping tends to help identify those highly suspect pace and speed figures that occasionally mislead numbers oriented handicappers.

That's why I believe it's a wise handicapper that understands and admits the limitations and weaknesses of his own methods and then tries to use other methods to fill the gaps. That's the best way to limit errors and find real value instead of mistaken value.

I am mostly a class and comparative trip handicapper, but I also always look at pace and speed figures to answer difficult analytical questions and to make sure the horses ran as well as my subjective analysis indicated.

[xtb]

tfm, thank you for sharing a fresh idea, it is appreciated.

[classhandicapper]

Deleted (dupe post)

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by xtb

tfm, thank you for sharing a fresh idea, it is appreciated.

The major strength of his software is that it allows you to see the race development from the chart way better than you can see it by just looking at it in its standard form. The extreme collapses and races where all the front runners hold on well are pretty clear in the charts. However, sometimes horses make major moves within a race without changing running position very much and you can see that way better with his race flow charts. (This also includes his wipe out winners that are 1st but drawing off).

I think this is a sellable software because like I said, looking at race flows and using comparative trip analysis like this is not unqiue. What's unique is a tool that makes it easier and more accurate.

"Would you say that what you mean by “race type” equates to a “race shape”?"

I believe that's what he is doing.

That's why I said this type of analysis is not unique. Many handicappers try to determine "race" shapes using pace and speed figures figures, by watching races, and looking at charts. That kind of thing has been in a variety of handicapping books.

What is unique is the superiority of his software for creating a visual presentation of the race and enabling the handicapper to identify horses that ran especially well against the grain of the race.

[classhandicapper]

Check out the chart and fractions for this race.

http://www.drf.com/displayChart.do?f...2009081608.pdf

It certainly seems like this was a fast pace that favored the closers.

For replay: http://www.drf.com/stakeresults/drfStakeResults.jsp

[tfm]

Just a quick note. I'm not going to continue with this thread, as, it appears, there are MANY others doing the same things, and probably doing them better than I am. It's beyond contention at this point that there's ANYONE out there who knows LESS than me about anything that has to do with handicapping.

I DEFER to the more knowledgeable and encourage them to continue on with this topic (and others like it) and enlighten the very few who are not aware of this very, very obvious and quite banal way of handicapping.

Clearly, I have better things to do with my time and very little of it, as it is.

[Tim Y]

bye

[classhandicapper]

TFM,

The only one that thinks he knows everything, is the only one looking at various types important of information, and has nothing to learn from others is you.

As I said to you privately, you are a very good handicapper that many of us (including me) could learn a few things from, but the arrogance and disrespect you show towards others privately and sometimes even publicly is not attractive. I thought we had a mutual respect and potentially beneficial association, but you think everyone else is an idiot (again including me) that has never thought about some of the things and techniques you use. Well, many people have...for decades.

(I apologize to the host for this little scuffle, but a private matter spilled over here. I'll let it go and I hope you accept my apologies. I'm not a disruptive person etc...).