Contender/paceline guidelines

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by mrhug

Thanks Lead and Mike. Along with reading and testing, your input has been very helpful. I am going to start another thread based on something I am really struggling with.
Thanks again
Melvin
From your previous post.
The next thing is, just how far back are you going to go for a line?
Suppose today's race is a sprint and the horse hasn't been in a sprint race in any of its' last 3 starts.
Suppose the last sprint race was 120 days, or more, ago? If you use that line is it really an indication of how the horse will perform today?
Worse yet, suppose that line isn't the best of last 3 dist/surf and you end up going back 6 months for that "best of last 3 dist/surf" line.

Do you not use a line if these two sceniaros are present?
ANSWER: No, I don't. It was never intended that every horse in the race was to be given a line, ONLY THE REAL CONTENDERS. I understand that "the modern" methodology starts with follow up #71, but you would do well to read the follow ups starting with Follow Up #1! IF you are going to learn the methodology, then learn it the way it was taught...FROM THE BEGINNING!
Suppose the horse's last race was a sprint and today's race is a sprint.
Suppose further, that the last race was a 2nd place finish, but there is a faster (based on speed rating) race where the horse finished 1st 5 lines down and about 5 months ago but still within the "best of last 3 dist/surf" guidelines. Which line do you think is more predictive of the horse's current form and condition?
This is where I am really having a problem. Deciding if the horse will be back in form to repeat this race.
ANSWER:
Allow me to be blunt.
How many people "really know" the answer to that question?
Of course you struggle with that decision. So does everyone else.
The most recent piece of information is the best answer.

Good Luck and Good Reading!

[mrhug]

I have another question about maiden line selection where there are 2 or less FTS. If a horse has only one race to show, do you use it for analysis in your program even if it does not qualify as a contender based on todays race (distance, track, surface,beaten lengths, etc.) I just ran across a race where a one race horse won a 6.5F race and his only race was a 5F where he was beaten 16 lengths. Same track and surface. When I went back and included him and 2 other one race horses, the other 2 did not qualify as being within 5 points of top CPR horse or were not 1 or 2 EPR,LPR. However, the one race horse who won was within 5 of top CPR horse, #1 EPR and was top TE horse.

[clore1030]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

Doc would burn and destroy the paceline manual if he felt best of the last three was
better than what Mike posted,But He used Best of the last three and his guidelines moved away from what is "RIGHT" to what worked for most people who knew not as much as guys like Mike or FTL. Please test for your self which ever way is best for you
Guys like Mike and FTL may approach how they wager, the amount they wager and how often they can wager very different than you
So you need to find what works best for you

GS
Bill

Truer words have yet to be spoken.

I started with the "best of the last three appropriate races" and the two-horse wagering plan. If I was lucky, I broke even. But I kept records of what I thought was the likelier horse of the two. I was right more often than not, so I decided to listen to my own inner voice and cut back to one wager per race.

I also reworked races, looking for commonalities for the price horses and it came down to one of those three races being in the horse's top three perceptor scores. So, I added that to my method, using a second or third ranked rating to allow me to go back even further to the top-rated perceptor score if it fell within four points of the initial race in speed rating.

I combine that procedure with my decision model and look for those indicators that achieve 40% or more winners. A 5/2 minimum odds acceptance further eliminates races in which to wager.

Right now, I can't find a winner in route races on the inner dirt track, the stats don't work in my favor. But for six furlong races for winners, age 3+, I'm doing quite nicely - just caught the first and second at AQU today. I don't complicate things with exotic wagers either, my focus is entirely on one race at a time and one winner at a time.

So, to the OP I say let the guidelines be just that. A guide. Look at it as a road map, there's more than one way to get to your destination, you have to sample the various routes before you find the one that pleases you the most.

[mrhug]

I agree. You found what you can win with. I am still trying to find my niche. I am progressing mainly because of this forum (and a lot of reading). I just hit the 6th at Aqua (betting 2 horses) because I learned how to look early and late here.

[mrhug]

Just bet and hit #3 to place/show at Aqua race7 because he was strong late on TPR E/L screen with great odds. 35/1

[clore1030]

Having a good day then, aren't you?

I'm possibly playing the 9 horse in the 8th race. It meets my criteria, but it may drop below 5/2 which means no wager. Right now it's the favorite at 3/1, but I don't expect that to last.

[mrhug]

Almost. I could not figure that one out.

[clore1030]

I stayed out of it, and the eventual winner was not one of my contenders.

I boil every race down to five horses, that's to keep my decision model uniform. With few exceptions, I use the total energy rankings to whittle the field down.

The winner of the eighth was horse number six in my contenders, so out he went.

The ninth race is too cheap for me. I rarely go below 20K claimers, the bottom levels are too inconsistent for me. My whole style of play is to eliminate as many risky situations as possible. I'll handicap every day but December saw me make only five wagers owing to inclement weather and the loss of a week's racing.

Two of them won and I had an ROIR of $1.96.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by mrhug

I am re-reading and going back and reading some of the older follow ups. There is many times that Doc says you cannot win consistently unless you follow my contender/paceline guidelines precisely. Does anyone know if these are stated in one of the follow ups or one of the manuals.
Thanks
Melvin

For anyone who thinks following “Doc’s” paceline guidelines isn't important OR…
That consistency in following his guidelines isn’t important….
READ THE FOLLOWING taken from the library.

As you read the below attachments, keep in mind that wherever “I” or “my” is used, it means “Doc” was speaking of himself.
I take this to mean, that if you asked “Doc” to answer your question, this is at least “a part” of his answer. This also goes hand in hand with the post from MIKESAL57 in this thread.

[mrhug]

I try to get down to 2-4 horses. I could not get race 8 below 5 and #1 was not in my top 5.
I had it down to 10,5, in race 9 but could not make up my mind to push the wager button.
Not sure how, but Bill and For the lead helped me a ton the last few days with early and late and I was able to bet 2 races and win 2 races at Aqua today. I guess I just needed a little confidence as this is the first bets I have made in months.

Originally Posted by clore1030

I stayed out of it, and the eventual winner was not one of my contenders.

I boil every race down to five horses, that's to keep my decision model uniform. With few exceptions, I use the total energy rankings to whittle the field down.

The winner of the eighth was horse number six in my contenders, so out he went.

The ninth race is too cheap for me. I rarely go below 20K claimers, the bottom levels are too inconsistent for me. My whole style of play is to eliminate as many risky situations as possible. I'll handicap every day but December saw me make only five wagers owing to inclement weather and the loss of a week's racing.

Two of them won and I had an ROIR of $1.96.

Appropriate time to add your comment FTL. I just read what you posted in the last couple days in one of the follow ups. Thanks again for all your help.