Bris Prime Power -Any Software Use it?

[Flysofree]

With all the talk about this figure, I haven't seen any handicapping programs advertized that use it specifically .

[DeltaLover]

With all the talk about this figure, I haven't seen any handicapping programs advertized that use it specifically .

I do not know about commercial software but in my own algorithms I am using BPP a lot.

[Capper Al]

With all the talk about this figure, I haven't seen any handicapping programs advertized that use it specifically .

If they did use it, they wouldn't tell anyone. Some software claim to make their own prime with a similar hit ratios, but better ROI since it's private.

[DeltaLover]

If they did use it, they wouldn't tell anyone. Some software claim to make their own prime with a similar hit ratios, but better ROI since it's private.

Doable, but why complicate things when you have such a consistent figure as the BPP for minimal cost and for any track you like?

[Dave Schwartz]

I have looked at the BPP via someone else's database. It is comparable (perhaps a little weaker) to HDW's PSR.

My statistical experience is that both get lots of winners but neither has much true value to the handicapper because they correlate with the the tote board too closely.

Example: Top-ranked horse will be 1st or 2nd favorite around 83% of the time.

[DeltaLover]

I have looked at the BPP via someone else's database. It is comparable (perhaps a little weaker) to HDW's PSR.

My statistical experience is that both get lots of winners but neither has much true value to the handicapper because they correlate with the the tote board too closely.

Example: Top-ranked horse will be 1st or 2nd favorite around 83% of the time.

Sure, you cannot show a profit by blindly betting the top bpp, but having such a consistent and accurate figure can be useful in several aspects of building a model.

[Capper Al]

I have looked at the BPP via someone else's database. It is comparable (perhaps a little weaker) to HDW's PSR.

My statistical experience is that both get lots of winners but neither has much true value to the handicapper because they correlate with the the tote board too closely.

Example: Top-ranked horse will be 1st or 2nd favorite around 83% of the time.

Maybe 63% of the time. 83% sounds high.

[MitchS]

I do not know about commercial software but in my own algorithms I am using BPP a lot.


Absolutely!... And I'm sure there are commercial software applications that use BPP in conjunction with other numerical ratings. % of BPP + % of other fig equals +ROI. I could mention a couple, but then I'd have to kill you :D

[Capper Al]

Maybe 63% of the time. 83% sounds high.

My apology, Dave. You said it will be the favorite not won or place.

[Elliott Sidewater]

I don't have actual stats to back this up, but when I was playing a lot more often than I am now, the Prime Power figures performed worse in turf races than on dirt. I agree with Dave Schwartz's statement about correlation between PP rank and actual betting favorites and second choices, but when the top ranked PP horse (a big betting favorite) has a big PP score advantage over the second choice and is a negative or suspicious drop, and you're right in that assessment, the second and third PP horses have value.

[MJC922]

Anytime we're studying a ranking a rating or whatever it may be, if it's upwards of 30% wins it seems to me it would be a mathematical certainty that it would correlate strongly with the betting favorite. What matters more IMO is what it's a ranking of, i.e. if it's a 30% ranking which doesn't take the pace of today's race into consideration or the physicality, or any other sometimes relevant factor which appears after the horse has crossed the finish line of it's last race, then I think there's a lot of profit potential there.

My current thoughts on the matter are the data points that are known, let's say all of those which appear in the ink up until the finish of a horse's last race represent practically all of what is predictive, the rest of the factors have predictive value which is overall minor but this is only because it's situational. The 'value' is all concentrated in the situational, at the same time I believe you still need the synergies created from pairing with the predictive.

[Robert Goren]

At one time, I looked at running a multi correlation with PP as one of the factors. Like using the odds as factor in a multi correlation, it is very had to find anything that improves it much. But maybe you can.

[MJC922]

At one time, I looked at running a multi correlation with PP as one of the factors. Like using the odds as factor in a multi correlation, it is very had to find anything that improves it much. But maybe you can.


That makes sense because that last 5 percent or whatever is left to make this any more predictive is comprised of a bucket of many situational factors. I spent extensive time several years ago generating these types of composite ratings and I've found that once you get to about 31% you're not going to move the needle by much more than 1% no matter what else you throw into it. So for example you're at 31% and you add an early pace figure into the mix and the early pace figure has some predictive relevance sometimes so it will move the needle maybe .5-1%. However I tend to believe you reach a point where this becomes entirely counterproductive, because the value (if there is any in a pace figure) is when it points out abnormal pace scenarios. That is, it's more valuable in certain situations, unlike ability / class which is always going to be predictive and relevant.

[DeltaLover]

That makes sense because that last 5 percent or whatever is left to make this any more predictive is comprised of a bucket of many situational factors. I spent extensive time several years ago generating these types of composite ratings and I've found that once you get to about 31% you're not going to move the needle by much more than 1% no matter what else you throw into it. So for example you're at 31% and you add an early pace figure into the mix and the early pace figure has some predictive relevance sometimes so it will move the needle maybe .5-1%. However I tend to believe you reach a point where this becomes entirely counterproductive, because the value (if there is any in a pace figure) is when it points out abnormal pace scenarios. That is, it's more valuable in certain situations, unlike ability / class which is always going to be predictive and relevant.

It is absolutely possible to increase the predictability of the BPP. Doing so, is one of the cornerstones in my models.

[MJC922]

It is absolutely possible to increase the predictability of the BPP. Doing so, is one of the cornerstones in my models.

Making sure we're on the same page then, out of curiosity how much have you increased it and have you confirmed this holds when forward-tested? Back-tested let's not go there, we can fit phases of the moon using an evolutionary algorithm and probably bring it up to 35%.

[DeltaLover]

Making sure we're on the same page then, out of curiosity how much have you increased it and have you confirmed this holds when forward-tested? Back-tested let's not go there, we can fit phases of the moon using an evolutionary algorithm and probably bring it up to 35%.

Example from today's 7 race in Belmont. For this particular race, I expect the top bpp horse :5: to have 1.5 times the IV of the regular top PP (I do not use percentages but IV instead) and also this kind of a BPP has 1.37 better ROI than what is expected, something that translates to 1.18 ROI

http://i61.tinypic.com/358te7n.png

[MJC922]

Example from today's 7 race in Belmont. For this particular race, I expect the top bpp horse :5: to have 1.5 times the IV of the regular top PP (I do not use percentages but IV instead) and also this kind of a BPP has 1.37 better ROI than what is expected, something that translates to 1.18 ROI

http://i61.tinypic.com/358te7n.png

Very cool. I hope ROI holds up for you, you deserve it.

[DeltaLover]

Very cool. I hope ROI holds up for you, you deserve it.

thx :)

[raybo]

I have looked at the BPP via someone else's database. It is comparable (perhaps a little weaker) to HDW's PSR.

My statistical experience is that both get lots of winners but neither has much true value to the handicapper because they correlate with the the tote board too closely.

Example: Top-ranked horse will be 1st or 2nd favorite around 83% of the time.

As you must know, the value of BPP or PSR is in combination with other factors, and with variable weightings according to track/race/distance/class,(etc) specifics. Either one, used by itself, in the same way, is a long term loss, but then most if not all published factors, used in isolation, result in the same thing. But, any factor, played against all races, every day, that has a combined hit rate as high as either of those ratings, MUST have some added value, if used properly. ;)

[Dave Schwartz]

Raybo,

The problem is that if you create any type of iterative model weighting approach, and put a high-level, highly-correlated-with-tote-factor, finding subsequent factors is very difficult.

They all come in with such low weights because whatever punch they have is already including in the high-level factor.

[raybo]

Raybo,

The problem is that if you create any type of iterative model weighting approach, and put a high-level, highly-correlated-with-tote-factor, finding subsequent factors is very difficult.

They all come in with such low weights because whatever punch they have is already including in the high-level factor.

I think you're assuming that the highest BPP or PSR figure is also going to be the top ranked horse in a composite rating that includes that power rating. Not so, the actual top ranked composite rated horse could be ranked down the list without the power rating included, but when included it suddenly becomes jumps to the top. One of my best rankings methods is "PFV", meaning Power Form Velocities, which regularly has both the best hit rate and the best ROI of all my rankings methods.

[Capper Al]

Morning line and BRIS Prime are still good indicators of the likely favorite. This is nice info to have the night before the races, and is good info to have when watching the tote-board.

[Flysofree]

Morning line and BRIS Prime are still good indicators of the likely favorite. This is nice info to have the night before the races, and is good info to have when watching the tote-board.

What are the chances that whoever makes the morning line looks at the Bris prime power figures to make their line?

[Dave Schwartz]

FlySoFree,

What are the chances that whoever makes the morning line looks at the Bris prime power figures to make their line?

Unless I am way wrong about when BRIS files are available, considering when the ML goes to press versus I'd say, "Not much chance."


Dave

[Flysofree]

I can download Bris past performances (which include the PP) at least 2 days in advance. It may not have the program numbers but everything else,so normally I use only the night before. Just wondering.

[Dave Schwartz]

I think that is just after the time the programs go to be printed.

PA might now.

But consider that any BRIS report that contains the morning line must have been generated AFTER the ML was published.

[Dave Schwartz]

I think you're assuming that the highest BPP or PSR figure is also going to be the top ranked horse in a composite rating that includes that power rating. Not so, the actual top ranked composite rated horse could be ranked down the list without the power rating included, but when included it suddenly becomes jumps to the top. One of my best rankings methods is "PFV", meaning Power Form Velocities, which regularly has both the best hit rate and the best ROI of all my rankings methods.

I was referring to any very large sample approach that would lend itself to a iterative process. (Not actually my approach or belief.)

I believe in narrow models. (I think you do as well.) In such ,models, logically the "best of the land" is often not all that good. The statistically-minded generally poo-poo anything that resembles a "small" (i.e. not big enough) model as being worthless.

[Capper Al]

I don't know, but I believe the trackman has his numbers out before the BPP. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if some tracks just paid BRIS to make them a morning line.

[pandy]

The morning lines are often made off proofs that are missing important information such as recent line.

[raybo]

I believe in narrow models. (I think you do as well.) In such ,models, logically the "best of the land" is often not all that good. The statistically-minded generally poo-poo anything that resembles a "small" (i.e. not big enough) model as being worthless.

Yup, I agree wholeheartedly!

[Capper Al]

By narrow models, you mean subsets? Maybe by race type?

[Flysofree]

Does anyone have figures on Bris top Prime Power figures related to purse size?

[ldiatone]

With all the talk about this figure, I haven't seen any handicapping programs advertized that use it specifically .
the ALL-WAYS 4 software uses it

[deathandgravity]

EquiSim ROI stores Prime Power data.

Here is what I have in my limited DB:

Starts Hit% ROI%
686 33 -11.49 Graded Stakes
786 35 -11.74 Non Graded Stakes/HCP
3031 28 -28.08 Allowance
3903 30 -13.04 Claiming
2236 28 -16.22 MSW
2534 30 -15.05 MDN CLM

It runs fairly negative ROI across all distances & surface except for:
Turf Sprint Claiming

454 35 +8.45

Most of my data is from BEL, AQU, SAR, DMR, SA & HOL :mad:

[Capper Al]

EquiSim ROI stores Prime Power data.

Here is what I have in my limited DB:

Starts Hit% ROI%
686 33 -11.49 Graded Stakes
786 35 -11.74 Non Graded Stakes/HCP
3031 28 -28.08 Allowance
3903 30 -13.04 Claiming
2236 28 -16.22 MSW
2534 30 -15.05 MDN CLM
See
It runs fairly negative ROI across all distances & surface except for:
Turf Sprint Claiming

454 35 +8.45

Most of my data is from BEL, AQU, SAR, DMR, SA & HOL :mad:

Some surprising results. I would od never expected Allowance and MSW to out distance the rest of them. Thanks!

[Flysofree]

At one time I had the Prime Power results for over 3000 races... I don't recall the exact results for each class of race, but Graded Stakes were the lowest winning percentage by far. The others were close to each other within the 4% margin of error if that's still what's considered margin of error.

[HTRFGuy]

With all the talk about this figure, I haven't seen any handicapping programs advertized that use it specifically .

HTRF Pace Handicapper includes BRIS Prime Power in the output. You can compare BRIS Prime Power ranked with other factors. It is simply one aspect of the output, it supplements the major HTRF output.

[Speed Figure]

Prime Power is used in my program, but as a very small weight in my all over odds line.

[raybo]

I use HDW's "PSR" rating in my program, which has similar hit rates as the Bris PP, but over a large sample size produces a higher ROI than Bris' PP. I use it in conjunction with 2 other ratings in my program, "Form" and "Velocity" (my proprietary total velocity rating) to create my 'PFV' ratings (PowerFormVelocity). Almost invariably, this PFV rating's top ranked horse produces the highest hit rate of all my program's rankings methods, at most tracks, and coupled with record keeping sheet analysis, to eliminate days of the week, distances, surface conditions, and classes that underperform, usually produces healthy positive ROIs also.

Currently at Belmont, which I tested last year and the year before and then monitored the first few cards of this year's meet, I started betting this PFV top ranked selection on 5/7/2015, at any odds, and have produced through yesterday: 38.8% hit rate and 1.58 ROI from 85 played races so far.

Here are Friday's and Saturday's Belmont played races for the PFV method:

[raybo]

Here are more stats for that PFV top pick ("1stAndlast" is my only variable rankings method, and can be set to use several optional ratings, in this case the "PFV" rating):

[raybo]

Here are more stats for that PFV top pick ("1stAndlast" is my only variable rankings method, and can be set to use several optional ratings, in this case the "PFV" rating):

Even removing the $38 winner (outlier?) produced a 38.10% hit rate and a 1.37 ROI.