The power of Total Energy #1

[BJennet]

Originally Posted by clore1030

I'll be glad to.

I do my tracking manually, and it's broken out into distances. When we hit the next two-day "dark" period, I'll go back and add the TE rankings for previously handicapped races.

Why by hand when I can export data from RDSS? Simple, the very process of inputting is more than one of just transposing figures from A to B, I'm making mental notations while doing so.

One good thing about the Inner Dirt track is that there are limitations on the number of distances. It's mostly 6F, 1M, 1M-70 and 1 1/16M. Since there's no turf racing, one gets to acquire data quicker. Races at 1 mile are relatively new, they must have gone 20 years before ever scheduling one at that distance. I had the first ever winner on the IDT, a legendary claimer named Rare Joel.

But I confine my tracking to the types of races that I play. I don't use lightly raced horses or cheap claimers. I also don't "retrofit" - sometimes in whittling a field down to five contenders from ten or more, one is bound to toss out a winner.

It would be easy to go back and toss one out to fit the winner into the mix of five (and I always reduce down to five), but I don't second guess myself. Sometimes one is just plain wrong or anyone of a thousand variables could have changed the outcome. I may make an observation that will pay off in the future, but my whole approach is to try to eliminate "guess work."

That's why I don't hide favorites - if they figure too strongly, I just pass the race, that's all. If I see a 6/5 shot with a 25% edge on BL over the next horse, I don't try to beat it. Experience has shown me that such an edge in that ranking is too much of an advantage.

Charles,

Again, your approach sounds similar to my own, although re the TE stats I mentioned, they were not broken into subsets by distance. Although I started doing this in an informal manner, I found the results so homogenous that I didn't bother to continue, but I would be very interested in what you learn.

Just to be clear, when I was compiling the TE numbers, this was separate from my own play, although I used the same races. This was after I had begin to notice what seemed to be improved TE performance, and I wanted to use it as a benchmark. What I learned is that, assuming the filters I cited, it was difficult to beat as a paceline selector in roughly 80% of races. For the other 20%, which are essentially comprised by horses running at short sprints (5f, e.g.) or at tracks with an 'early' bias, and are best judged by the Velocity screen, as well as turf horses running to a very 'late' bias, and are best evaluated by DCL, I made my own judgement, noting whenever this was the case.

Agree also with your comments on not 'hiding', preferring to use my own judgement. I think this must have worked well when Doc Sartin first came up with the idea, and probably for a decade or so afterward, but the assumption that there will always be a sufficient supply of horses at long enough odds to offset losses on low-priced favorites no longer applies in today's much tougher mutuel price environment. Being selective really is crucial.

Best of luck with your research and parimutuel investments, although I think you hardly need it.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[clore1030]

Originally Posted by BJennet

Charles,



Agree also with your comments on not 'hiding', preferring to use my own judgement. I think this must have worked well when Doc Sartin first came up with the idea, and probably for a decade or so afterward, but the assumption that there will always be a sufficient supply of horses at long enough odds to offset losses on low-priced favorites no longer applies in today's much tougher mutuel price environment. Being selective really is crucial.

Best of luck with your research and parimutuel investments, although I think you hardly need it.

Cheers,

B Jennet

Thank you for the compliment, but I must tip my hat back to you as you've given me much to chew on.

My reason for keeping the favorites in was to "legitimize"the results.

For example, I show FW as the strongest factor on the IDT at 6 furlongs this season. 45% of the winners I have charted ranked first in this factor.

While there are a number at $5.00 or less, there is also quite a number of them paying $8.00 or better.

EP is the second highest, producing 39% winners at 6 furlongs. So, when I come across a horse that is top ranked in both, I can presume it's a legit candidate to have its picture taken. All I need is for the odds to be satisfactory. Even an 8/5 horse can be an overlay if the rankings match up well with my tracking., but generally I look for 5/2 or better.

Sure, I can go a couple of days without wagering, but it's a winning feeling to not watch my bankroll erode.

I go through the rankings looking for strong combos, and will now add TE to the list. I'll start compiling that on Tuesday and Wednesday, the dark days this week.