selecting contenders

[Dorianmode]

re "contenders".....

For what it's worth, here is my (honest) method. I know it's not for anyone but myself, but here it is. I am very sensitive to loosing AT all, (I ABSOLUTELY HATE IT). So I want/need to win in the high 80 % range. I know that means sometimes my ROI will be a bit lower, but I NEED consistency, and will take that over high paying long shots any day. If you run the numbers in the Huey Mahl type spread sheets, (from the early Follow Ups), the increased number of races bet more than off-sets the lower mutuels. I just like to win.


1. I try to make the best "card" for the day I can. (I use races from mostly the West Coast tracks, (North and South), the Eastern, (New York), and the Florida circuit. I make the initial card by using the Custom Card feature in Brisnet, (which is free if you just use the search feature). (You can, obviously also use the "my races" tab in RDSS 2.0. I just find it easier in Brisnet, mostly out of habit). I only look at what I consider "quality"...quality races and quality situations. Statistically, high priced horses in sprint races are the most predictable, but do not necessarily provide the best wagering opportunity. There are many reasons I toss out "situations", (ex..races with "dangerous" horses which I feel are unpredictable..horses that have never run today's distance, who's odds do not permit an "insurance" bet of some sort). Usually the card ends up being WAY too large. The problem is not too few races to wager on. It's too many to get done in a day. (I often end up with about 30 from the search). You can set the parameters to search for distance, age, sex, surface, etc, etc. So whatever you know from your experience, and objective study is what you're good at, you can stick to that, (for wagering..and use others for learning, if you have time). I then put them in a pre-populated Excel spreadsheet, with pre-made columns for all the data I want to keep track of, (and eventually for copying and pasting into a much larger data base). I then sort the races by "time", and it puts them in order. I want to watch the race, so I can usually only do 1 race each 20 minutes or so. So I look at which races to keep, just by time possibility alone, and keep the best, (from my own studies...I know I do best in high priced West Coast sprints, so I keep them first, and work backwards from there...I also like the New York, and Florida circuits, because you can dump a few hundred dollars in the pools, and it won't affect the odds, AND they won't change a lot in the last few minutes, because the pools are large. Also the New York and Florida circuits have more reliable odds, and morning lines. (BTW, I am about to start a study of ALL the US tracks, and validate what I think I know about the ML's...if anyone has any parameters they want me to use for that study, let me know.)


2. I respect the work of others. I like to let all the other race fans and experts, and "locals" work for me. So I automatically keep, initially, the 5 top odds horses in todays race. Almost ALL the time, ONE of the top 5 odds horses will win. I look at all the others, and keep or throw out the rest as I see the race match-up.


3. Using New Pace, I do quick eliminations of one or two horses..(however NewPace has as one of it's assumptions that the 90% statistical paradigm, (using speed ratings), Schwartz espouses is one of the major determinants of a horse winning a race..with it's early and late ideas. I am still thinking about whether that paradigm is THE most predictive element in racing. Anyway, I use NP to throw out horses, if statistically they could not possibly win. (And actually when I have too many races, I flip through New Pace and use it to select "playable" races). Your eye can do that in about 5 seconds, (and I am a "visual" person, I like the graphs).


4. That usually leaves me with three or four horses. (My main problem is how to eliminate the last horse of the three). (Rarely I bet on one, if the odds are right, or the TE gap is big enough, or both). Anyway, I very carefully look at the last three, often using RDSS's feature of being able to look at more than one pace line for each horse, if I am uncertain. From my model, I know that either the top horse #1 in RDSS, or (in sprint races) #1 in DCL and LPR is going to win, or in route races, the top RDSS or #1 in EPR, (why that last thing is true I have no clue..but it works), is going to win. If I can't get the picture to "clear up' to my satisfaction with the last 3, I will pass the race, and rarely, (less and less actually...but it IS statistically sound if used properly), I use the Brisnet All Ways software, to see if I missed something obvious.


Am sure I forgot parts of my method, which is built from Doc's pace line selection, and 2 horse betting method. He used to say that the pace line would "loom" at you with enough experience, and I believe that is right on. Trust your instincts. When you start to "twitch" because there are too many unknowns...dump the race, and move on. There are thousands of other to do. There are lots of horse races, but only a few "wagering opportunities" on any given day.

Happy New Year, belatedly Ted, (and all). You can find me up in the stands either in Del Mar, or up at Santa Anita.

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by pktruckdriver

Still fascinated by the REDand BLUE Paceline thingies, awesome dude.

Patrick

Pat, I confess it was me! Next update to RDSS2 Beta (soon ...), shows positional moves, wide moves around the turn, beaten length gains (and forgivable losses) during critical race segments - all in an attempt to assess current form.

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

It should go without saying, but I will re-state what I have said many times before, you do an excellent job with your RDSS software.

In my post here, at no time did I make an attempt to compare the information within the Daily Racing Form publication to the information contained in your RDSS software.

FTL,

I appreciate your comments and clarifications of your thoughts above, and I do acknowledge and thank your for your ongoing positive comments regarding RDSS.

My primary concern was (and is) for the increasing number of newer RDSS uses or evaluators - those trying to get a handle on what to do with the Sartin Methodology, how is it different from their current approach or from mainstream tools. I talk and email with a lot of people who ask about 'best practices' (or at least my interpretation of them) and apparently the video tutorials and Follow Ups are not not enough ...

Sometimes they say that their visual assessment of a horse's performance leads them to omit a horse as a contender, then the horse runs well and provides the juicy exacta underneath an obvious favourite, or pads a trifecta or superfecta, or simply runs well enough versus other sore nags (or against equally middling form horses) and wins at decent odds. I acknowledge that visual assessment gives some good clues to fitness, but often not enough information to uncover the hidden potential - at the odds we need to succeed - which is often revealed by comparing horses' energy ratings, for which readouts we need to 'put them into the computer', or not take them out of the readout evaluations before observing what their potential is.

Clearly, some horses have not been at all competitive recently, and even if they ran middlingly against a good recent pace and rank well, they should not be regarded as win contenders today (perhaps for 2nd or 3rd or 4th). But too many people pass up opportunities to recognize horses who just don't look as good as the general public thinks they do - and use a tool like RDSS (for example) just like they would use the DRF or the raw TrackMaster/Equibase PPs, which is a shame.

Which is the basis of my concern about forming too quick a judgement over whether a horse is a contender (and contender for what: Win, Place, Show, 4th ?) by not putting it in the computer (aka running its pacelines through more detailed analysis).

I believe absolutely that people benefit by learning how folks like Tom Brohamer analysed contenders - and the audios and seminar books are great resources for that - but I suggest that there are also other ways to see non-obvious potentials in horses and not to overlook these in one's handicapping.

Ted

[JimG]

Dorian,

I enjoyed your post. I like to read different approaches and thinking outside the box. I applaud Ted for letting discussion occur that is not strictly classic Sartin Methodology.

I have been using RDSS a good bit for the last month, choosing pacelines primarily using perceptor rating.

Anyhow, my question is why not use all the horses as contenders in RDSS and, of course, concentrate on those at or near the top for win play? Using all the horses sometimes allows you to see a longshot that may rank good in a corallary that can be included at a price in the exotics.

I have gone ahead and "hid" down to top 5 using TE but I find the order is generally the same in the top 5 whether horses are hid or not. Occasionally, there may be some flip-flopping of order but not much of that from what I have seen. I appreciate feedback from current users and Ted on why hiding is necessary? Thanks.

Jim

[gl45]

"Using New Pace, I do quick eliminations of one or two horses..(however NewPace has as one of it's assumptions that the 90% statistical paradigm, (using speed ratings), Schwartz espouses is one of the major determinants of a horse winning a race..with it's early and late ideas."

wrong...... it is not who will win the race, but WHO CAN WIN THE RACE

[shoeless]

Alot of good posts here

Jim good luck with RDSS

[shoeless]

When I met Bill V at Laurel I was amazed at how well he did by just using
the best of the last 3 as Doc perscribed.I was sitting there looking at recency,class,trainer maneuvers and beating my head against the wall.


We capped about 6 races and using RDSS Bill V had the winner in the top 2 VDC
every race as well as the exacta in the top 3.He used a few other screens
too and was trying to teach an old dog new tricks(me).Despite his valiant
efforts it was to no avail.I think I was intimidated by the program due to all
of the screens available.This was no fault of the program just the fault of
the incompetant user.(me again)

[JimG]

Originally Posted by shoeless

Alot of good posts here

Jim good luck with RDSS

Thanks Jeff. I am in the early stages with it and I am sure making my share of stupid mistakes. But mostly I am observing and practicing. Not playing much this time of year so it is a good time for me to test drive, although I am providing support for a friend of mine at the NHC this weekend. A million to the winner, maybe I will get a cut.

Jim

[rmath]

Read your post, enjoyed it very much.
You mentioned that in sprints the #1 DCL and LPR , along with #1 rdss produces most of the winners. My question is does the horse have to be #1 on both OR do you accept the horse as a contender if it only has a #1 rating in one or the other.
From your post , it appears you are trying to separate your top3 down to two,which is what I am also attempting to do by a slightly different approach.
Would appreciate any feed back.
rmath

[Dorianmode]

Hi kids.

Jim : "why not use all the horses as contenders in RDSS and, of course, concentrate on those at or near the top for win play? Using all the horses sometimes allows you to see a longshot that may rank good in a corallary that can be included at a price in the exotics."

JimG : Thank you ! That is a very good question. I think mostly, the answer is that I get confused by "too much information", if I put in all the horses. Some I know I can just throw out, from experience. The "picture" for me does not "clear up", with more than 4 horses. If I saw, for example, a #1 DCL in the 6th horse, then what do I do ? Your point about the exotics is a very good one, but...this is my problem. Depending on how many races I'm doing, I have to wait until fairly close to race time, (to determine the actual top 5 odds horses), to do my final checks and make my final selections, and prepare the dutch. When I DO play the exotics, I have to look carefully at the possible payoffs, and it's usually too much to do, in that short a time. I know I am leaving all kinds of money on the floor, but I know I will win more often in the win pool than any other pool, so I stick mostly to that. I DO keep thinking how much money I leave by not using all the daily doubles, pick 4's, pick 6's, trifectas..but by doing as many races in my card as I do, it just limits the time available for the exotics.

rmath : Thank you ! What I meant to say by saying "the #1 RDSS horse" is the top of the heap, in the readout, no matter what it's component numbers are. Often the #1 DCL/LPR is NOT that horse, but THAT horse, (#1 DCL/LPR IS my "other" horse is for my betting dutch, (in a sprint). For some reason, the #1 LPR and DCL usually IS the same horse. But actually that is a good question...ie, I will look at the totals in my spread sheet totals this weekend, (which I have worked out into formulas for "impact values" statistically, and let you know which has more weight, in the case where #1LPR/#1DCL is NOT the same hossy. VERY good question. I have not really looked at my big data base spread sheets for a while.

A few people have emailed me asking what dutching program I use. There is one at :

http://www.bettinggenius.com/betting...ng-calculator/

It is from Britain, so it reads in pounds-sterling, but numbers are numbers, so no conversion is necessary, (except to decimal form). This program will accept any number of horses. I use it when I am looking at a 3 way dutch. Mostly I use my own, which I wrote into a Google spreadsheet, for 2 way dutches. I will set up an address and post the address and password this weekend. I will make it into a "read only", (just so if you happen to enter something you didn't mean to, it won't screw up the program). It's pretty basic, and has a small conversion to decimal table. Anyone who wants it can then go get it, in the Google Spreadsheet and save it. (If anyone wants to alter it, email me here, and I will give you another name and password, for a "non-read only" version). I need to clean it up a bit, and add in a feature for entry of the track "take out" for the track which you are at.