The power of Total Energy #1

[mikesal57]

good seeing this Charles....OHHH those long waits...PAYS OFF!!

[clore1030]

Thanks Ritchie.

You and I have already discussed my method of selecting pace lines, in fact I linked to it above in this thread. I've been doing nicely on the inner dirt with my spot plays, hitting at 28% for an ROIR of $2.88.

But I will keep track of the TE rankings from now on. Until now I've been tracking DCL, the seven factors that make up the Primary Line Score and BL/BL.

[clore1030]

Originally Posted by mikesal57

good seeing this Charles....OHHH those long waits...PAYS OFF!!

Thanks Mike.

I've only made 18 wagers since the inner dirt track opened.

It's sometimes difficult to sit them out, and sometimes I get angry with myself for NOT playing a 2/1 horse that looks like an easy winner and ends up romping home by daylight.

I've deliberately avoided getting an internet-based account, sometimes just the act of having to go into the other room to make the call is enough to keep me from wagering. I try to pretend the phone is a mile away and ask myself if it's worth the walk.

Besides, I'd hate to disturb the cat on my lap.

[mikesal57]

Originally Posted by clore1030

Thanks Mike.

I've only made 18 wagers since the inner dirt track opened.

It's sometimes difficult to sit them out, and sometimes I get angry with myself for NOT playing a 2/1 horse that looks like an easy winner and ends up romping home by daylight.

I've deliberately avoided getting an internet-based account, sometimes just the act of having to go into the other room to make the call is enough to keep me from wagering. I try to pretend the phone is a mile away and ask myself if it's worth the walk.

Besides, I'd hate to disturb the cat on my lap.

i'd wait too if i had a pussy on my lap

good going buddy

[chris]

Impressive bet yesterday at Aquduct, even more so, is betting only 18 races for the meet, and doing it by telephone no less. I enjoyed your rationale for using the telephone instead of the internet.

Many of us have developed our own routines for slowing the engine a little and letting our better selves into the game.

Regards,
Chris

[RichieP]

Originally Posted by chris

Impressive bet yesterday at Aquduct, even more so, is betting only 18 races for the meet, and doing it by telephone no less. I enjoyed your rationale for using the telephone instead of the internet.

Regards,
Chris

Yes I agree completely Chris! This man is out for the CASH and has a battle plan firmly in place. Plan your work and work your plan

You ain't doing so bad either btw!!

[clore1030]

Thanks Chris and Ritchie. I've been working hard at accentuating the positive as the song goes, and eliminating the negative.

Knowing where one is weak, or where data is less supportive helps a lot. That's why I avoid claimers running for less than 20K. Or races where there is too much guesswork - such as first time grassers or races taken off the turf.

I focus better that way.

[BJennet]

Originally Posted by clore1030

Thanks Ritchie.

You and I have already discussed my method of selecting pace lines, in fact I linked to it above in this thread. I've been doing nicely on the inner dirt with my spot plays, hitting at 28% for an ROIR of $2.88.

But I will keep track of the TE rankings from now on. Until now I've been tracking DCL, the seven factors that make up the Primary Line Score and BL/BL.

Hi Charles,

Excellent hit at AQU. Also had this as an early-bird bettor - you can see how it fits my pattern - and was surprised by the price. From what you say, it sounds like our style of play is very similar. That great ROI shows how effective it can be.

BTW, if you're going to be tracking TE, I would be very interested in knowing what kind of results you get. My own experience confirms what Doc Sartin pointed out many times for those trying to do this - all of these readouts, TE, BL/BL, PLS, and TPP have very highly correlated results, to the point of near redundancy. But while this is generally true, I found TE to have slighly higher ROI for reasons I couldn't determine. If you get to 200 races or so, I would be grateful if you could let us know whether the hit rates are in the ballpark of those I posted, or whether they need to be revised. The bigger the database we get on this, the more accurate we'll be.

Thanks for posting.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[clore1030]

Originally Posted by BJennet

Hi Charles,

BTW, if you're going to be tracking TE, I would be very interested in knowing what kind of results you get. My own experience confirms what Doc Sartin pointed out many times for those trying to do this - all of these readouts, TE, BL/BL, PLS, and TPP have very highly correlated results, to the point of near redundancy. But while this is generally true, I found TE to have slighly higher ROI for reasons I couldn't determine. If you get to 200 races or so, I would be grateful if you could let us know whether the hit rates are in the ballpark of those I posted, or whether they need to be revised. The bigger the database we get on this, the more accurate we'll be.

Thanks for posting.

Cheers,

B Jennet

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.

[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