PDA

View Full Version : Elimination rules vs Pace figs


Capper Al
12-08-2015, 11:18 AM
Fortunately no one has to choose between elimination rules and pace figs. Both have their place and are valuable tools in a handicapper's arsenal. But if one had to choose between the two, what would you choose? Remember now- you still have class, speed and connection data whichever way you choose. But in this case, any elimination rule cannot include pace. I would choose elimination rules.

mrroyboy
12-08-2015, 01:47 PM
I choose elimination rules too.

thaskalos
12-08-2015, 02:02 PM
Fortunately no one has to choose between elimination rules and pace figs. Both have their place and are valuable tools in a handicapper's arsenal. But if one had to choose between the two, what would you choose? Remember now- you still have class, speed and connection data whichever way you choose. But in this case, any elimination rule cannot include pace. I would choose elimination rules.
Elimination rules are totally USELESS to me...and I laugh whenever I see these simplistic rules compared with the pace figures in terms of "handicapping effectiveness". The proper use of pace figures can negate the need for "elimination rules"...but the use of elimination rules can never replace the need for accurate pace figures...especially in sprints.

For many years, I have been reading that the handicapper should use "pace handicapping" on only the "contenders" of today's race...for fear that rating the NON-CONTENDERS may lead to a distorted pace picture of the race. It's been more than 30 years...and I still don't know what that means.

Sinner369
12-08-2015, 02:12 PM
Fortunately no one has to choose between elimination rules and pace figs. Both have their place and are valuable tools in a handicapper's arsenal. But if one had to choose between the two, what would you choose? Remember now- you still have class, speed and connection data whichever way you choose. But in this case, any elimination rule cannot include pace. I would choose elimination rules.

Al can you gave examples of elimination rules so as to clarify what exactly do you mean?

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 02:16 PM
Al can you gave examples of elimination rules so as to clarify what exactly do you mean?

Without giving away the farm, something like hasn't raced in over 180 days.

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 02:21 PM
Elimination rules are totally USELESS to me...and I laugh whenever I see these simplistic rules compared with the pace figures in terms of "handicapping effectiveness". The proper use of pace figures can negate the need for "elimination rules"...but the use of elimination rules can never replace the need for accurate pace figures...especially in sprints.

For many years, I have been reading that the handicapper should use "pace handicapping" on only the "contenders" of today's race...for fear that rating the NON-CONTENDERS may lead to a distorted pace picture of the race. It's been more than 30 years...and I still don't know what that means.

This is an interesting observation after I made a thread about my 13 weekend winning streak using only pace figures. But I still stand with elimination rules and go with narrow down the contenders first. Eliminations worked better over the long run.

thaskalos
12-08-2015, 02:23 PM
This is an interesting observation after I made a thread about my 13 weekend winning streak using only pace figures. But I still stand with elimination rules and go with narrow down the contenders first. Eliminations worked better over the long run.
What sort of "elimination rules"? Stuff like..."throw out any horse that hasn't raced in 30 days"...or, "eliminate any horse that hasn't finished at least in the money in its last three races"?

thaskalos
12-08-2015, 02:24 PM
Without giving away the farm, something like hasn't raced in over 180 days.
How many "eliminations" does this rule get you?

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 02:28 PM
How many "eliminations" does this rule get you?

I'm not qualifying on how one uses elimination rules or uses pace. I'm just asking what is more important in their handicapping.

thaskalos
12-08-2015, 02:30 PM
I'm not qualifying on how one uses elimination rules or uses pace. I'm just asking what is more important in their handicapping.
Al...do you think that the elimination rules and the pace figures perform the same handicapping function? Why did you pick the PACE figures to compare with the elimination rules in this thread?

cj
12-08-2015, 02:42 PM
In my opinion, elimination rules don't work. All they do is exclude potential winners. With rare exception, every horse has some chance to win. It is just a matter of if they offer value or not.

cutchemist42
12-08-2015, 02:45 PM
Any ML above 20/1 (even 15/1 really, can tell within 10 seconds if I skip the 15/1) has resulted in quick eliminations without ever regretting it.

thaskalos
12-08-2015, 02:54 PM
In my opinion, elimination rules don't work. All they do is exclude potential winners. With rare exception, every horse has some chance to win. It is just a matter of if they offer value or not.
I don't even know why the elimination rules are still around. They are a relic from a different, less sophisticated age. In the pencil-and-paper age...it made sense to lighten the handicapping workload by eliminating certain horses at the very start of the handicapping process. Exotics betting was a rarity then...and no real harm could be done by excluding the worst horses in the race from the very beginning.

But now the horseplayer is using advanced tools...and handicapping is no longer a time-consuming chore. Winning horseplayers have testified that they can handicap races effectively in mere SECONDS. And the exotics have evolved to a point where even the 4th-place finisher of a race has become a serious handicapping concern. What purpose do the elimination rules serve in today's "computer age"?

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 05:10 PM
Al...do you think that the elimination rules and the pace figures perform the same handicapping function? Why did you pick the PACE figures to compare with the elimination rules in this thread?

Just happens to be where I'm at in my coding.

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 05:12 PM
In my opinion, elimination rules don't work. All they do is exclude potential winners. With rare exception, every horse has some chance to win. It is just a matter of if they offer value or not.

I demand two hits or more to make a horse not to win(NTW). I found using any one rule doesn't work.

jasperson
12-08-2015, 05:22 PM
What sort of "elimination rules"? Stuff like..."throw out any horse that hasn't raced in 30 days"...or, "eliminate any horse that hasn't finished at least in the money in its last three races"?
My race track crony has a list of 18. He download every track that is running and gets about 3 or 4 bets a day.
They include
no turf
no 2yr
no 5f or 5.5f
no 7f
no off tracks
no long lay offs
no early pace
no first time front bandages
And the list goes on.
He then handicaps what is left.

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 05:24 PM
I don't even know why the elimination rules are still around. They are a relic from a different, less sophisticated age. In the pencil-and-paper age...it made sense to lighten the handicapping workload by eliminating certain horses at the very start of the handicapping process. Exotics betting was a rarity then...and no real harm could be done by excluding the worst horses in the race from the very beginning.

But now the horseplayer is using advanced tools...and handicapping is no longer a time-consuming chore. Winning horseplayers have testified that they can handicap races effectively in mere SECONDS. And the exotics have evolved to a point where even the 4th-place finisher of a race has become a serious handicapping concern. What purpose do the elimination rules serve in today's "computer age"?

Handicapping is not an exact science. Numbers generated are estimations of reality and all mixed up with confounded elements within themselves and are not to be thought of as a formula of answers. Most have lost this insight in the computer age. The P&P handicapper had to deal with inaccuracy right up front. The computer handicapper mistakenly thinks it's a game of better numbers and, therefore, is blinded to the art of handicapping. Actually, in the end, elimination rules are handicapping and the generated numbers are only for separating contenders.

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 05:27 PM
Here's an excellent essay on elimination rules:

Netcapper Elimination Rules (link) (http://www.netcapper.com/TrackTractsArchive/TT010126.htm)

Sinner369
12-08-2015, 08:08 PM
In my opinion, elimination rules don't work. All they do is exclude potential winners. With rare exception, every horse has some chance to win. It is just a matter of if they offer value or not.


Any veteran handicapper knows that there are no such things as "hard and fast rules" when it comes to handicapping........they are just guidelines to help one reduce the number of horses.........there are always exceptions to the rule.

I was interested in seeing some new "rules" that I have not seen before but I guess Al was (is) not interested in sharing his "rules" (but he was the one who raised the question in the first place).

Capper Al
12-08-2015, 08:18 PM
Any veteran handicapper knows that there are no such things as "hard and fast rules" when it comes to handicapping........they are just guidelines to help one reduce the number of horses.........there are always exceptions to the rule.

I was interested in seeing some new "rules" that I have not seen before but I guess Al was (is) not interested in sharing his "rules" (but he was the one who raised the question in the first place).

Did you read post #18?

Netcapper Elimination Rules (link)

Sinner369
12-08-2015, 08:33 PM
Did you read post #18?

Netcapper Elimination Rules (link)


Al are you Netcapper?...........I said I was interested in "YOUR RULES" since you raised the question.

And yes I have seen Netcapper's rules before. I have a whole set of "rules" myself but they are for the harness horses only.

PICSIX
12-08-2015, 08:35 PM
Eliminate a horse that goes from juicer to non-juicer if not running back before the juice wears off :ThmbUp:

BELMONT 6-6-09
12-08-2015, 08:59 PM
In my opinion the only elimination rule of merit is to eliminate wagering on undervalued horses in the win pool...it is like getting your pocket picked in broad daylight!! ha ha

Sinner369
12-08-2015, 08:59 PM
My race track crony has a list of 18. He download every track that is running and gets about 3 or 4 bets a day.
They include
no turf
no 2yr
no 5f or 5.5f
no 7f
no off tracks
no long lay offs
no early pace
no first time front bandages
And the list goes on.
He then handicaps what is left.

jasperson....Can you list the other ten or so "rules" that your friend has .....the ones you listed are good but most I have seen before........I am interested in seeing ones that are new to me.

Thanks in advance!

classhandicapper
12-08-2015, 09:12 PM
Technically, I don't use elimination rules. But I do have categories of horses that I know lose significantly more than the track take as a group. I rarely bet one of them.

classhandicapper
12-08-2015, 09:16 PM
Eliminate a horse that goes from juicer to non-juicer if not running back before the juice wears off :ThmbUp:

That's a pretty good one.

I've never studied it, but it's an insight I incorporated into my own thinking based on observation and intuition. Naturally, I don't like a huge negative trainer change. But I have seen enough examples of horses that came back very quickly off the change that ran well for one race and then fell apart next out to be aware of it.

dasch
12-09-2015, 02:00 PM
I voted elimination rules but misunderstood what that implies. I thought I was voting on what would more accurately be described as elimination FACTORS. I don't EVER just throw a horse for any particular "rule". Heck, I would play a 12 year old off a 5 year layoff if the horse was with a decent trainer who did well with very long layoffs and the horse was training well.

I didn't see a way to change my vote as pace will always be more important to me than any rule.

Capper Al
12-09-2015, 03:53 PM
Using days since last raced in certain combinations still works in contrast to its being touted as not working anymore.

whodoyoulike
12-09-2015, 04:10 PM
... I don't EVER just throw a horse for any particular "rule". Heck, I would play a 12 year old off a 5 year layoff if the horse was with a decent trainer who did well with very long layoffs and the horse was training well.

I didn't see a way to change my vote as pace will always be more important to me than any rule.


You would???

Btw, I think I know what you're getting at.

But, just in case I'm wrong which tracks do you wager at?

DRIVEWAY
12-09-2015, 05:01 PM
Using days since last raced in certain combinations still works in contrast to its being touted as not working anymore.

An activity indicator which includes DSLR, Workouts and DSLR for race two/three back, will help identify horses in condition/contention. The greater the number of activities within 30/45/60 days versus the competition, the stronger a horse will contend. Splash a little value on top and you'll be resurrecting DSLR.

cj
12-09-2015, 05:07 PM
Using days since last raced in certain combinations still works in contrast to its being touted as not working anymore.

I consider things more like qualification rules than elimination rules. For example, betting top last race speed figure at certain odds works great for me...if the race is within a certain amount of days. Just different terminology I guess.

NorCalGreg
12-09-2015, 05:56 PM
An activity indicator which includes DSLR, Workouts and DSLR for race two/three back, will help identify horses in condition/contention. The greater the number of activities within 30/45/60 days versus the competition, the stronger a horse will contend. Splash a little value on top and you'll be resurrecting DSLR.

Thank you, DRIVEWAY. That was easy, wasn't it? We can make handicapping the most complex, complicated, mind-boggling exercise in futility, if we choose.
Of course no one uses hard and fast rules...amazing how every race is different, every track, every class, on and on.
I've been playing different angles for a long time...some loosely written down--some exist only in my head.
One day I got the brilliant idea of paying a programmer to put some of my best angles into a program--mainly to save me hours of scanning PP's for these various angles.

What I quickly found out was----programmers need rules! I thought I HAD rules...but when it came down to programming it--I found I had more "nuances" than rules.
For example...I play low-level claiming races...and MUST see recent activity (as Driveway noted) Now there's a myriad of activity than can be described as "activity"....races, works, races and works, a flurry of works--but not a flurry of bad races, unless there's unusual early speed, etc.
And this is just ONE PART of my Main Method. I hadn't really thought this out before contacting the soon-to-be-frustrated programmer (God Bless 'em)

So we can't be pinned down to any "rule" I think Capper Al wisely avoided this trap question.

mrroyboy
12-09-2015, 07:02 PM
My opinion is simple. If you eliminate the losers all you have left are the winners.
Of course, which one is another ball game.

DRIVEWAY
12-09-2015, 08:38 PM
What I quickly found out was----programmers need rules! I thought I HAD rules...but when it came down to programming it--I found I had more "nuances" than rules.
For example...I play low-level claiming races...and MUST see recent activity (as Driveway noted) Now there's a myriad of activity than can be described as "activity"....races, works, races and works, a flurry of works--but not a flurry of bad races, unless there's unusual early speed, etc.
And this is just ONE PART of my Main Method. I hadn't really thought this out before contacting the soon-to-be-frustrated programmer (God Bless 'em)


You present a good example of the need to think things out. In order to communicate to a programmer, you need to relate your ideas (rules, nuances, selection criteria etc.) in an orderly manner.

Did you ever define your term "Activity" successfully to the programmer?

cj
12-09-2015, 09:53 PM
The same thing goes for databases. I always tell people when building a database to include everything you can get your hands on, not everything you think you will need. You will always wind up wanting and needing information you left out originally. Storage isn't an issue any longer so just throw in every last thing you can get at the outset.

Tom
12-09-2015, 10:33 PM
I don't know how many times I have had to go back and re-create a db to add couple of items I found out I needed later on.

jasperson
12-09-2015, 10:53 PM
Thank you, DRIVEWAY. That was easy, wasn't it? We can make handicapping the most complex, complicated, mind-boggling exercise in futility, if we choose.
Of course no one uses hard and fast rules...amazing how every race is different, every track, every class, on and on.
I've been playing different angles for a long time...some loosely written down--some exist only in my head.
One day I got the brilliant idea of paying a programmer to put some of my best angles into a program--mainly to save me hours of scanning PP's for these various angles.

What I quickly found out was----programmers need rules! I thought I HAD rules...but when it came down to programming it--I found I had more "nuances" than rules.
For example...I play low-level claiming races...and MUST see recent activity (as Driveway noted) Now there's a myriad of activity than can be described as "activity"....races, works, races and works, a flurry of works--but not a flurry of bad races, unless there's unusual early speed, etc.
And this is just ONE PART of my Main Method. I hadn't really thought this out before contacting the soon-to-be-frustrated programmer (God Bless 'em)

So we can't be pinned down to any "rule" I think Capper Al wisely avoided this trap question.
I have written my ow n program to handicap the horses.but it can't handle everything. Like a horse dropping from c20k to c6k ? I compensate for a maximum of 2 notches shift in claiming prices,but no more. I think a big drop is a trainer trying to sell the horse. My program can't handle this and never can I. Sometimes the horse wins. Maidens winner jumping up to stake races is another programming problem, and there are lots of others. Still my program is very good and helps me a lot in my handicapping. Also I know its weak points and that help too.

Robert Goren
12-10-2015, 09:11 AM
Elimination rules do not work very well because in a race everything is relative. It is not uncommon in the spring to find races in which every entrant has been off for at least 120 days. If eliminated horses that been off over 90 days as you might in the fall, you would have none left . I have seen races where no entrant has been in the money or been 5/1 or less for 6 starts. There are races that only have bad jockeys and bad trainers. Even worse, rules can produce what looks like a standout horse when in reality, the horse is no better than the rest of the field. This phenomenon happens quite often when you use speed ratings to get rid of horses. I have seen races where the top horse will have a number that is generally competitive in this type of race and no other horse has a SR within 10-15 points. How many times have you been sucked in on this type of horse at mid level or small tracks? Pace can suck you in too, but that is for a later post.

Capper Al
12-10-2015, 10:41 AM
Robert,

I rarely use absolute values like hasn't raced in 90 days. And I demand two elimination rules to make a horse not to win. Using relative values and demanding 2 red flags has worked well for me.

mrroyboy
12-10-2015, 05:28 PM
They are guidelines not rules. You still must use your commensense

whodoyoulike
12-10-2015, 06:33 PM
I've been getting the impression you don't like pace or you don't really appreciate the value of pace handicapping. I think your thread premise is incorrect. Seems you either want to first use elimination rules or pace for determining your contenders.

I think your handicapping sequencing is incorrect since most people use some elimination rules or angles whether they realize it or not. I actually do subconsciously and never thought about it except for this thread. Several mentioned that using elimination rules up front will most likely eliminate legit contenders. You should IMO identify the contenders first then use your rules. If every horse in the race is a contender in your opinion then pass the race.

thaskalos
12-10-2015, 06:36 PM
If you bet the vertical exotics...then, how many horses can you afford to "eliminate" at the start of the handicapping process?

Capper Al
12-10-2015, 07:13 PM
If you bet the vertical exotics...then, how many horses can you afford to "eliminate" at the start of the handicapping process?

That's why the are labeled 'not to win' leaving place and show open for them.

classhandicapper
12-11-2015, 12:43 PM
If you bet the vertical exotics...then, how many horses can you afford to "eliminate" at the start of the handicapping process?

I agree. Verticals are a completely different ballgame.

ultracapper
12-11-2015, 02:14 PM
I agree with the 3 or 4 most recent posts. The handicapper has to first ask the question "What am I trying to accomplish in this race?" before s/he can answer your question. Am I trying to find the isolated winner? Am I putting together a deep vertical ticket? Am I trying to put together a horizontal ticket? This will determine just how much elimination you'll want to do up front. I'm always looking for the winner. If I find a horse that I figure will be 4 lengths back at the 3/8ths pole and hasn't shown a lot of kick in the lane, I can drop that horse right now because I don't care if that horse some how sucks up for the bottom slots of the exotics. The horse can't win in my eyes, so the only use I have for it now is "will it's running in this race effect the way any of my win contenders will perform?" I'm now handicapping horses in this race in 2 ways. The contenders, "Can this horse win? The non-contenders, "How will this horse's running here effect the outcome?

I have no "open the form, eliminate the horse" rules. I also don't crunch numbers in any way. I put together the pace by watching replays and determining the intent of the horse in the first 20 seconds, and coupling that with the class it's been keeping, tells me where the horses will shuffle out by the 3/8ths pole.

Capper Al
12-13-2015, 12:34 PM
One good thing about elimination rules is eliminating False Favorites and, therefore, making higher value horses more pronounced prior to wagering.

Nitro
12-13-2015, 09:30 PM
Fortunately no one has to choose between elimination rules and pace figs. Both have their place and are valuable tools in a handicapper's arsenal. But if one had to choose between the two, what would you choose? Remember now- you still have class, speed and connection data whichever way you choose. But in this case, any elimination rule cannot include pace. I would choose elimination rules.
Well Al I can certainly agree with your opening sentence, but beyond that I personally would consider the entirety of the so-called handicapper’s arsenal as pure fiction. I’ve been fortunate enough to not only come to ignore those factors, but ALL traditional handicapping methods altogether (Other then of course Money Management). I know most on this forum don’t want to hear it, because of the inordinate amount of time and effort they’ve put into this game by trying to scrutinize every aspect and angle imaginable. As a result, you can actually sense their frustrations from many of the posts here (and on other threads as well).

I’ve learned that it’s just a Game as has to be treated as such. I’ve also come to accept that you can’t consistently rationalize or forecast the results of events in this game by using an exact science like Math. In the end, it forces the typical handicapper into making many subjective assertions because there are just too many variables to consider; some of which are completely unknown to players at all levels. As I’ve mentioned before when you come to the realization that you’re an outsider playing an insider’s game, it actually clarifies many of its idiosyncrasies and perhaps even explains why the vast majority of players are losers. Yes, that’s a fact. In spite of countless years of indoctrination to using handicapping methods (both old & new) that obviously don’t produce the desired result: Profits!

I expect that some may want to dispute my comments, but I feel the proof is in the pudding. As evidence of my game I’ll post selections. Until I see others who make all kinds of claims do the same and get similar results, the credibility of their commentary in my mind remains questionable.
.
.

Maximillion
12-13-2015, 09:53 PM
As evidence of my game I’ll post selections.
.
.

I would be interested in you giving us a sample of this....if in addition to your "selections" you tell us exactly how you are betting the races.

NorCalGreg
12-13-2015, 10:06 PM
I expect that some may want to dispute my comments, but I feel the proof is in the pudding. As evidence of my game I’ll post selections. Until I see others who make all kinds of claims do the same and get similar results, the credibility of their commentary in my mind remains questionable

Interesting you question anyone's credibility, Nitro. I have watched you...over and over, while you play HK, OZ, US tracks, announce your wagers such as

:3: :9: // :2: :4: :8: :11: okay so far

then you'll announce WINNER!!! $2 SUPERFECTA :11: - :2: - :9: - :3: $2,144 $2 TRI :11: - :2: - :9: $560 EXACTA :11: - :2: $98

Maybe I'm ignorant, but playing the 3,9 over 2,4,8,11 doesn't win you any 11,2,9,3 superfecta--what am I missing Nitro? And how much would that $2 "BOX" have cost, if in fact that's what you did?

On the HTW thread, we sort of have a tradition of posting our ADW printout line for the particular monster hit such as this one:

COMPLETED:b134d-b7af1 PRX #3 $5 Win 2none$5.00$298.00+$293.00

No one is asking you to show your winning ADW line---I'm just wondering if you actually have any. Tell me what I'm missing, because just saying you won, without plainly announcing your exact play---means nothing. If you have an explanation, and turns out I truly am ignorant---my apologies.

Nitro
12-14-2015, 04:45 AM
I would be interested in you giving us a sample of this....if in addition to your "selections" you tell us exactly how you are betting the races.
I will offer a couple of my recent “Selection” threads for reference:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=127727
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=127598

I find it interesting that both you and NoCalGreg question my betting. In fact, NoCalGreg doesn’t seem to recognize the difference between a posted selection and a play! My posted “selections” have never been announced as my wagers! How he arrived at that conclusion is beyond me! Perhaps the confusion is caused because I’m one of the few on the Selection forum who actually posts the results of my selections and what they potentially produce (Win or Lose !).

Unless I’m missing something, I was under the impression that this”Factor Elimination” thread was related to the selection process. After all, I think most would agree that no matter how you play the game, you can’t make a bet without first having one or more selections in mind. I also try to post my selections with ample time before the gate opens, so that anyone following along might be able to compare what I’m suggesting to their own ideas about the race.

But let’s not mince words! I’m going to call an ace an ace and say that there are those in the handicapping community who simply have varying levels of repulsion for the way players like me are able to “eliminate” the pretenders from the contenders. If you’re among those what can I say, except that we believe there’s a better means to reach a profitable end. I prefer to follow the money by using a sophisticated tote analysis to first and foremost determine which entries are viable for playability. These are what I post, but that doesn’t mean I make every possible bet that’s available or even play the race at all! So there’s no reason for an apology because I realize that sometimes there’s difficulty or even an unwillingness to assimilate certain concepts.

Most will agree that there are 2 sides to this game and personally I believe that the betting side is actually more significant. Why? Well because the selections made offer a specific value. If they don’t offer enough value then why take the risk of playing them? So from that perspective I will examine their immediate odds and determine if a play is worth the risk. I can’t say exactly what type of bet I’m going to make for each and every situation, but the idea is to try and make a profitable play no matter what type of bet it is.

You might have noticed from the Selection forum thread links (above) that the format for posting selections amounts to a very simple guideline: Determine the 2 most significant Key entries and use them if necessary with other preferences for any available exotic wagers. I may simply Dutch win bet the 2 Keys. But I do enjoy playing exotics and while it may seem expensive to those unfamiliar with the most effective ways of making an exotic wager with 1 or 2 Keys, I’m not going offer detailed instructions on how to structure every such wager.

I will say that with Hong Kong for instance that unfortunately there is no Super bet available right now through the stateside ADW’s. Without mentioning names, it’s apparent that some don’t even recognize the basic value of the Quinella bets there. I post 2 Keys and 4 others (from a 14 horse field) and immediately the uniformed are bewildered. In fact making such a bet is often very lucrative, especially when the 4 others show significant value. Keying 2 with 4 others amounts to just (9) $2 Quinella bets ($18 for those with math difficulties). Of course there’s nothing wrong with a $10 or $20 Quinellas either. So if you can determine that the value of your selections will produce a greater then a basic $18 return, then obviously there’s an excellent chance for profitability. I also like this bet because the likelihood of a “signer” is minimized. If the $2 Triple combinations are too rich for your blood then the $1 variety are also offered.

When I use Keys in Triple bets I may use the Keys as Win only, Win/Place only and sometimes even go 3 deep when there are significant odds available.
As a “Key Win only” there are only (40) combinations involved with 2 Keys on top. (1K w/5O x 4O = 20 combos x 2 Keys = 40 combos)
As a “Key Win/Place only” there are (80) combinations with 2 Keys in the top 2 spots, and if the Keys finish 1-2 the Triple is hit twice!

If this explanation is not satisfactory then I suggest reading a book on structuring exotic wagers when and only when there’s potential for a profitable return through the recognition of individual selection value.

BTW, in case anyone is interested, and perhaps silly enough to make $2 Quinella bets on ALL (10) races at HK Sunday morning without consideration for value and using my aforementioned format the return was $409 for $180 wagered. At Gulfstream a week ago Sat. I posted 8 races and again assuming all 8 were indiscriminately played as $2 Exacta boxes with the 2-Key format the return was $454.20 for $256 wagered. Statements like this may have little or no meaning to those who don’t understand what accountability or credibility means. I’ll leave it at that, but as far as I’m concerned if others who spew out all these handicapping techniques want to gain some credibility I think they ought to demonstrate their so-called handicapping prowess.
.
.

NorCalGreg
12-14-2015, 06:11 AM
"I find it interesting that both you and NoCalGreg question my betting. In fact, NoCalGreg doesn’t seem to recognize the difference between a posted selection and a play! My posted “selections” have never been announced as my wagers! How he arrived at that conclusion is beyond me! Perhaps the confusion is caused because I’m one of the few on the Selection forum who actually posts the results of my selections and what they potentially produce (Win or Lose !)"

This has to be the funniest line of your ridiculous post, Nitro. I know people like to go online and be something they aren't---in reality. You have chosen the role of big-time professional horse bettor, far superior to the silly regulars of this dump. Nothing to be ashamed of, it's common. I've seen others playing your role, that I'm surprised to find don't even have the financial smarts to have valid internet credit.

If you were or are, a winning horseplayer of the magnitude you claim...you would quietly go about your business, with little fanfare, not drawing much attention to yourself...and certainly not spending hours online on a forum such as this.
Does that describe you, Nitro? No? You come on here, typing in Giant Bold Ass letters, announcing every race...NEVER how much you bet, but ALWAYS how much the payoff was and on and on.

So Nitro....excuse me if I thought the numbers you put up IN BIG ASS BOLD TYPE was your selection.

BTW.....if you were going to sum up your nonsense with "go read a book on toteboard wagering" --save us all some time & just say that in the first place.

later
-NCG

Capper Al
12-14-2015, 08:18 AM
handicapper’s arsenal as pure fiction

It's always how you play your arsenal, and how you bet it that counts. My way is to use relative factors and more than just one from my arsenal.

Nitro
12-14-2015, 12:35 PM
It's always how you play your arsenal, and how you bet it that counts. My way is to use relative factors and more than just one from my arsenal.

Hey Al you’re right about that. No matter how you choose to play the game a full arsenal of mental weaponry has to be used. Mine just happens to include something that’s generally considered outside the box of the typical handicapper.

And talking about "Mental", I also wanted to apologize for taking your thread a bit off topic by even bothering to respond to the previous posts. As you can see the trash talk abounds and is coming from an obviously indignant and arrogant SOB. Fortunately there’s an “Ignore” list here, so I won’t be duped into responding to any more track manure.

GL no matter how you attack it!
.
.

Capper Al
12-14-2015, 01:01 PM
Hey Al you’re right about that. No matter how you choose to play the game a full arsenal of mental weaponry has to be used. Mine just happens to include something that’s generally considered outside the box of the typical handicapper.

And talking about "Mental", I also wanted to apologize for taking your thread a bit off topic by even bothering to respond to the previous posts. As you can see the trash talk abounds and is coming from an obviously indignant and arrogant SOB. Fortunately there’s an “Ignore” list here, so I won’t be duped into responding to any more track manure.

GL no matter how you attack it!
.
.

You stayed on the topic. That mental magic is what both Pittsburgh Phil and Andy Beyer both have talked about. It's being in the zone and seeing the wagers. It's amazing. the same data day in and day out, and on some days we can sparkle and others days we flop.

thaskalos
12-14-2015, 03:00 PM
You stayed on the topic. That mental magic is what both Pittsburgh Phil and Andy Beyer both have talked about. It's being in the zone and seeing the wagers. It's amazing. the same data day in and day out, and on some days we can sparkle and others days we flop.

It's called VARIANCE, Al...and there is nothing "amazing" about it. They call it "gambling", for a reason. :)

Capper Al
12-14-2015, 04:08 PM
It's called VARIANCE, Al...and there is nothing "amazing" about it. They call it "gambling", for a reason. :)

That's right! Hopefully, when we sparkle we get odds.

PaceAdvantage
12-14-2015, 06:23 PM
"I find it interesting that both you and NoCalGreg question my betting. In fact, NoCalGreg doesn’t seem to recognize the difference between a posted selection and a play! My posted “selections” have never been announced as my wagers! How he arrived at that conclusion is beyond me! Perhaps the confusion is caused because I’m one of the few on the Selection forum who actually posts the results of my selections and what they potentially produce (Win or Lose !)"

This has to be the funniest line of your ridiculous post, Nitro. I know people like to go online and be something they aren't---in reality. You have chosen the role of big-time professional horse bettor, far superior to the silly regulars of this dump. Nothing to be ashamed of, it's common. I've seen others playing your role, that I'm surprised to find don't even have the financial smarts to have valid internet credit.

If you were or are, a winning horseplayer of the magnitude you claim...you would quietly go about your business, with little fanfare, not drawing much attention to yourself...and certainly not spending hours online on a forum such as this.
Does that describe you, Nitro? No? You come on here, typing in Giant Bold Ass letters, announcing every race...NEVER how much you bet, but ALWAYS how much the payoff was and on and on.

So Nitro....excuse me if I thought the numbers you put up IN BIG ASS BOLD TYPE was your selection.

BTW.....if you were going to sum up your nonsense with "go read a book on toteboard wagering" --save us all some time & just say that in the first place.

later
-NCGThis was quite an unwarranted reply considering what Nitro wrote. Don't bother arguing this point with me.

mrroyboy
12-14-2015, 08:39 PM
I do post my selections in the harness forum. No tricks or ulterior motives. Just hope some people will make some money with them.

Capper Al
12-16-2015, 08:45 PM
Mystery voters without comments?

NorCalGreg
12-17-2015, 02:26 PM
Mystery voters without comments?

I was the "mystery voter" Al...I commented earlier w/out voting so, was just completing the process.

Capper Al
12-18-2015, 01:50 PM
This poll reminds me of voting in Chicago or Florida. Vote early, vote often.

ultracapper
12-18-2015, 03:18 PM
"I find it interesting that both you and NoCalGreg question my betting. In fact, NoCalGreg doesn’t seem to recognize the difference between a posted selection and a play! My posted “selections” have never been announced as my wagers! How he arrived at that conclusion is beyond me! Perhaps the confusion is caused because I’m one of the few on the Selection forum who actually posts the results of my selections and what they potentially produce (Win or Lose !)"

This has to be the funniest line of your ridiculous post, Nitro. I know people like to go online and be something they aren't---in reality. You have chosen the role of big-time professional horse bettor, far superior to the silly regulars of this dump. Nothing to be ashamed of, it's common. I've seen others playing your role, that I'm surprised to find don't even have the financial smarts to have valid internet credit.

If you were or are, a winning horseplayer of the magnitude you claim...you would quietly go about your business, with little fanfare, not drawing much attention to yourself...and certainly not spending hours online on a forum such as this.
Does that describe you, Nitro? No? You come on here, typing in Giant Bold Ass letters, announcing every race...NEVER how much you bet, but ALWAYS how much the payoff was and on and on.

So Nitro....excuse me if I thought the numbers you put up IN BIG ASS BOLD TYPE was your selection.

BTW.....if you were going to sum up your nonsense with "go read a book on toteboard wagering" --save us all some time & just say that in the first place.

later
-NCG


They are his selections. They may not necessarily be his wagers.

I've followed along with Nitro some of those nights when the insomniac in me wins the battle, and he definitely has his moments. No idea what his handicapping method is because he just posts his selections with no commentary, but his method of betting is very apparent by the way he posts his selections. It's obvious he's approaching the race with a double key and secondary selections to complete vertical exotics.

Pick 'em Charlie
12-31-2015, 08:05 AM
Elimination rules are handicapping. Everything else is stats. Generally, using just stats, gets one about 25% to 35% of the winners. But handicapping gets one the long shots. With little difference between figures over the long run for speed, class, etc -- I'd take elimination rules. One can use anyone's figs. These figs are available to the public. The know how is in the elimination rules.

pandy
12-31-2015, 08:37 AM
I'm not a fan of elimination rules because there are a lot of horses that don't look good on paper for various reasons but are actually good bets because the odds are so high.

Several years ago on my Meadowlands harness selections (which are published free on ustrotting.com), I picked a longshot that was coming off a layoff. The horse did nothing. A gentleman emailed me and chastised me, saying, "Pandy, you should know better, in harness racing, you never bet horses coming off layoffs. I eliminate all layoff horses."

I explained to this guy that I don't believe in rules like that because even though the win percentage of harness horses coming off layoffs is low, there are situations when they can be a very good bet. (And I know three professional harness bettors I can think of who agree with me and bet horses off layoffs when the situation is right).

Just a few days later I picked, and bet, a horse at the Meadowlands that was coming off a similar layoff and it won and paid over $40. I made a nice score on it.

Capper Al
12-31-2015, 10:38 AM
Pansy,

In your example, I would agree with you because you are using a single factor to eliminate. Had the trainer's win percentage been under 7% with returning horses from a layoff then I might consider eliminating him. Single factors don't make it in my R&D. And if in doubt, don't eliminate or demand a third factor.

biggestal99
12-31-2015, 11:29 AM
Given the choice, ill take elimination rules

I have some favorite ones that i use

I would hate to give those up in favor of pace only.

Allan

Capper Al
12-31-2015, 01:35 PM
Given the choice, ill take elimination rules

I have some favorite ones that i use

I would hate to give those up in favor of pace only.

Allan

Thanks for your input. I agree with you. There's nothing like eliminating a favorite.

Capper Al
01-01-2016, 09:59 AM
Pansy,

In your example, I would agree with you because you are using a single factor to eliminate. Had the trainer's win percentage been under 7% with returning horses from a layoff then I might consider eliminating him. Single factors don't make it in my R&D. And if in doubt, don't eliminate or demand a third factor.

Sorry Pandy. I just caught the typo with your name.

Capper Al
01-01-2016, 02:49 PM
How many "eliminations" does this rule get you?

Like I have said, I do need to hit on more than one rule for a horse to eliminate them. In my research for an elimination rule to last, it minimally needs a success rate of 85% or better when combined with other elimination rules. Most of my rules are in the 90 to 95% range. A couple of them are at 98%, but these don't occur too frequently.

Dark Horse
01-24-2016, 12:12 PM
Fortunately no one has to choose between elimination rules and pace figs. Both have their place and are valuable tools in a handicapper's arsenal. But if one had to choose between the two, what would you choose? Remember now- you still have class, speed and connection data whichever way you choose. But in this case, any elimination rule cannot include pace. I would choose elimination rules.

Everything should be included; but that does require a streamlined program, because without computer power there is too much to remember, and not enough time to do indepth calculations. I have a toss-out feature that allows for auto-tosses as well as manual tosses, based on values in a trip projector (that itself includes a number of separate key values). Tossing out horses determines if you're looking at a positive or negative playing field. It's an extremely valuable skill. If you can trim down the field to three horses, for instance, there can be tremendous value on the table. For 10 bucks, or multiples thereof, you can then play: 1-2/1-2-3 with 1-2-3/1-2 with 1/2-3/2-3. An effective program should include overlays, so you could limit your bets to big overlays, producing very high payouts.

Pace is a separate issue. The pace is set up, but not set, by the most forwardly placed favorite (odds 2/1 or lower), who serves as the ‘weight’ for the field to gravitate towards. The pace is then set by the manner in which the speed horses, or in their absence stalkers, react to that most forwardly placed favorite. I verified this with my mentor, and he concurred. This theory correctly identifies three extreme pace scenarios, that will determine the outcome of a race. Other pace scenarios are not too important.

What are the extreme speed scenarios? Speed Duel, Solo Speed (walk the dog), and Severely Slowed. Everyone will be familiar with the speed duel. If a big favorite is among the speeds, there's much greater incentive to put pressure on him early. There's no point betting on him, but plenty of value is instantly created if he's tossed out; he'll often win the duel, but lose the war and finish off the board. A solo speed is exactly that, and the field will tend to let him go as long as he's a longshot, because they expect him to come back. When he doesn't, the value is already build in. Severely Slowed pace is created by speed horses that slow things down to a crawl, and can do so because the favorite is a closer. The stalkers have no interest in pressing the speeds, because the closer's chances are reduced significantly with a slow pace. The speed duel favors the closers, the solo speed favors the solo speed, and the severely slowed pace favors the speeds who can save all their energy. So when my program identifies one of these three, I have to go outside of the normal approach and make that the first consideration. Of course, the lesson was learned the hard way. ;)

Capper Al
01-24-2016, 06:20 PM
The vast majority of lessons are learned the hard way in this game.