Fundamentals

[karlskorner]

Since Ed Bain is posting on another thread, I don't think he will mind is I post his article on Fundamentals. I especically like his comments on "pars" and run-up times (something I brought to the board a couple months back). Worth a read and a re-read.

http://www.edbain.com/archives.htm#Fundamentals

[cj]

A few observations:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a run up to the timer, and the distance for the run up varies from track to track and can be as much as 150 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This is supposed to be news? Any decent handicapper knows this, and accounts for it when making pars and figures. The problems arise when THE SAME TRACK varies the run up to the timer, but an astute handicapper will know this as well.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And by the way, all computer speed programs use the same set of pars irrelevant to the cost of the program.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Really? I don't know of any computer program that is using pars like mine, becuase I made them and calculate them differently than most people. I'm sure many others do the same thing. Where does he get this from, grabbed it from his hat by mistake instead of a rabbit?


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have never seen a set of statistics that prove speed in any form is a profitable approach to betting on the races
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I've never seen a set of statistics that prove ANY single factor is profitable. To argue decent speed figures aren't helpful is a little silly in my opinion.

Just a few for now. I do think there is some good information in the article. I'm sure I'll have more comments later when I have time to read more. Thanks for the link.

[cj]

Here is my favorite!

The proper measurement for success in racing is ROI (Return On Investment).

I don't think so Ed. The proper measurement for success at the races is HOW MUCH DID YOU WIN in dollars, not a percentage! A 10% ROI doesn't mean jack if you find a play once a month.

[karlskorner]

CJ

Yours: "Any decent handicapper knows this, and acounts for it when making pars and figures. The problems arise when THE SAME TRACK varies the run up to the the timer, an astute handicapper will know this as well ".

HOW ? It is beyond me how you living in Belgium, or others living throughout the States can tell if the gate is 20 ' or 120' from the light at AQU while looking at your monitor and make "ajustments", I have a difficult time with a pair of 10x50's looking down the 7f chute at CRC 10 min. before the horses are loaded. Or better yet, the 5 1/2f race that is started directly across from where I am sitting, your looking at the inner rail and out rail down poles at the same time (easy count them all and divide by 2). You have to agree that a 6f race starting at 20' and another starting at 120', there has to be a difference in the 1st and 2nd call par times.

I think Mr. Bains is yet another handicapper traveling an unpaved road that has yet to be paved.

[cj]

First off, the gate placement at MOST tracks is very consistent for each distance. However, if there is a 100 foot difference as you say, it is quite easy to see IF you are familiar with the track. If someone has a high speed connection and a serious computer, I think you are seriously underestimating the quality of video on the web these days. Live isn't always great, but replays later on are very easy to watch.

It's just a matter of counting poles.

[RXB]

I say: whatever works for you, works for you. Whatever doesn't, doesn't. If Ed Bain and Dick Mitchell want to have a pissing match about trainer stats vs. speed/pace, who cares?

Michael Jordan couldn't hit a baseball very well but he did alright for himself. Albert Pujols probably wouldn't win a jumpshooting contest but he's a nice guy to have at the plate with the bases loaded. Different people excel at different things, or at the same thing but via different techniques and styles.

Give me a 5.5 furlong sprint and I'm lost. Give me a turf route and I'm damn sharp.

[karlskorner]

CJ

How many tracks do you make "pars" for, or better yet, how many tracks do you make "pace" figures for ?

I didn't say it couldn't be done, it's just beyond me.

[First_Place]

There is a run up to the timer, and the distance for the run up varies from track to track and can be as much as 150 feet

That's just dandy. It's amazing that the racing industry does not set uniform distance standards to be used by EVERY track. These run-up distances (why not start the timers when the gates open?) and differences in run-up distances between tracks and different race distances are unacceptable. It's bad enough that they still use 1/5 of a second per length behind leader/winner to determine a given horse's time.

Excuse me, but we're only living in the 21st century. This is totally unacceptable especially since people are using these flawed and differing measurements to base their wagering decisions on.

It's time WAY OVERDUE for this to be corrected.

FP

[JackS]

If you think about it, racing is a game designed to make track owners and the blue bloods who own the horses money and not the handicappers. Trainers, jockeys and the cappers are all secondary and necessary evils that these millionaires are forced to contend with.
Concessions only come when the game isn't producing in which case the track takes the heat.
I agree that using 1/5sec. as a standard is pretty antiquated but switching to 100ths' of a second as an expresson of time would in the long run be of little use to handicappers although, much more accurate. We would eventually be making numbers to adjust these times also which puts us back into the same position we are today. Personally, I can live with the present day system and hoping only for larger fields, a healthy and thriving industry and an even more honest game.

[cj]

Originally posted by First_Place

That's just dandy. It's amazing that the racing industry does not set uniform distance standards to be used by EVERY track. These run-up distances (why not start the timers when the gates open?) and differences in run-up distances between tracks and different race distances are unacceptable. It's bad enough that they still use 1/5 of a second per length behind leader/winner to determine a given horse's time.

Excuse me, but we're only living in the 21st century. This is totally unacceptable especially since people are using these flawed and differing measurements to base their wagering decisions on.

It's time WAY OVERDUE for this to be corrected.

FP

I hope they keep it just the way it is with runup. Your average Joe doesn't know that much about it, but a good handicapper does.

Placing the starting gate at the exact distance with no runup would be ideal, but we won't see it in our lifetime. All the track records were set with runups, and they wouldn't be broken for decades if they went to no runups, if ever.

[BillW]

Another note to this thread. They (Equibase) have been recording times to 1/100 sec. precision since I've been playing this game - about 10 years. I don't know what you guys are looking at but Equibase is the only source of this data.

Bill

[hurrikane]

Ok, 2 cents.

1 cent
I think Ed made a mistake saying no one can win using speed.
I don't think you are going to convince cj and his account of that statement.

2 cents
I play trainers just as hard as Ed does. Not exactly the way he does and I'm not convinced his 4+30 method is profitable as a stand alone spot play. However, if you are not taking the trainer into account in you play you are not maximizing you profits and reducing your risk. I dont' care how fast a horse looks..if the trainer can't get a horse ready to run he is not going to win. that is why 80% of the money in this game is take by 20% of the trainers.

2.5 cents.
Karl, I dont' believe Ed is traveling a road unpaved. I started tracking trainers in the 70's after reading Steve Davidowitz book betting thoroughbres. I don't know if he was the first but he was tracking trainers long before anyone heard of Ed Bain.

[karlskorner]

A lot of HC's follow Trainers in one form or another, including myself, each in our own manner. It's a "bumpy" road to travel and not as easy as Mr. Bain would imply.

[DonnieN]

I don't know Ed personally, but it sounds as if he has mastered use of trainer info.

Hurrikane: amen! on your second point! There is a nice explanation of how JonW uses the 4+30 method in the Library thread and it sounds very valid, but he is not just hinging it on one single stat, but the combination of "crossing" stats as they "filter" down. If it works for them, I am happy!
I still have to thank you for helping get my db rocking with the trainer info....you and MikeyDee....and helping get the modules written properly...I still use it to this day, and wouldn't go to the track without it! IF we ever meet up again, I owe you at least one long, tall one! Hopefully we'll both be in Vegas this January! That's definitely my plan! :D :cool:

BOL!

[hurrikane]

Donnie dude,
we will definately meet again. I've been out of the tourney circuit for a few months with all the hurricanes. But I'm back and chasing the holy grail.

Definately LV in Jan. By either hook or crook.
I don't want to buy into the HWC but I will if I have too.

3 more tournies for the NTRA. Hopefully one will be a pop.

As for the db...you guys have done a ton for me. And Mikee wrote the parser...it gives me headaches just thinking about it.

There has been a change though. I'll emial you personally.

Karl, you are right...it can be bumpy. But no question it is a keep piece of info...

[kenwoodallpromos]

I have found very little information including trainer info that does not have to be adjusted at some point for current circumstances.
I see handicapping as somewhat flowing and not exactly static, but a foundation in historical information is needed to give a reference point.
A trainer can lose part of his/her barn for some reason and need to rebuild, or may move the barn to a new track and adjustments needed for instance, IMO.

[CapperLou]

Hurricane:

Your 2 cents worth is right on the money!!! IMO

I'm not convinced at all that Ed Bairn's 4-30 can stand alone and be profitable either. I looked at it for carefully at one time--but--if it works for him---good luck to him.

And---YES Folks----this game is all about money---

And that means TRAINERS !!!!!!!

I've won a lot more money following trainer patterns than anything else in past few years.

All the best,

CapperLou

[CapperLou]

Today at AQU in the 6th race was a good example of following verg good trainers at certain things.

I'm sure you all know about how well Mr Violette Jr has been doing this past summer and more with two year olds and first time starters!!!

How in the world did the public let his horse #12 Qualified Opinion go off at 24.50-1 and win at first asking at 51.00?

It's because the public "is all wet and all wrong in certain situations and you just have to wait for it to happen.

Richard is one of the able and talented trainers who I follow when he has a horse entered in certain situations and this one today fit those requirements.

Can you imagine Pletcher getting a 51.00 mutuel??--well how did Violette get it---folks--it's about taking advantage of the public being very very wrong sometimes and pouncing on their mistake!!!
Hurricane and some others here----I'll bet you had something on this one today!!!!

All the best,

CapperLou

P.S. This is another example of this game being about PEOPLE and MONEY----not horse past performance lines!!!! JMO

[keilan]

Try posting them before they run.

[CapperLou]

keilan:

I think you took the post out of context---it is meant to point out what happened etc.

But, you are entitled to your opinion!!!

I will say no more.

[keilan]

Fair enough -- If I took your post out of context then I apologize.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by CapperLou
keilan:

I think you took the post out of context---it is meant to point out what happened etc.

But, you are entitled to your opinion!!!

I will say no more.

Tell us Lou..........Did you crush it?????

[CapperLou]

Just Ralph:

I wish I had---but at those odds and with my stats it was a 1/4 of normal wager play.

If you just check your EQ database and no others--you will find that Richard has been very profitable at SAR and more specifically even at AQU this past year. Gosh, he did not know how to lose at SAR.

I'm just finding that trainer patterns are working very well for me the past few years. I am leaning more and more in this direction vs regular handicapping. As you know, I do like very much some of the stuff I can do with EQ---but I am in that group of players who thinks very highly of trainer and trainer/jockey patterns and combos.

Hey--I like your new avatar---really sharp!!!

All the best,

CapperLou

[cj]

I think the "Fundamentals", knowing which factor is most important in any particular race is the key to winning.

I'm a speed and pace guy mostly, but I'm not blind. In the 5th at Aqueduct, you had the 5 horse with seemingly the best numbers on almost anyone's figures. But, that alone is not enough. The horse is a 3yo, so horses running the types of numbers this one has are showing stakes potential. Does it make sense to lay the horse off for two months and return in a claimer for the first time ever? Of course not.

Now, you get to the bottom of the PPs and see a horse first off the claim for Dutrow. He of 32% winners first off the claim, and 10 for 26 at the current meet. He scratched the other half of the entry. The horse is 9-1! What else do you need to know? Figures in this case were irrelevant.

The key is, you have to know when to bet trainers, when to bet figures, when to bet trips, etc, etc. They all can be the key to a race.

[BIG HIT]

I agree 1000% cj. Your right sure would be nice if a program could do that.

[wes]

Some programs do list that type of information.



Trainer Angles
2 Stacie's Ballado layoff45 32.
6 Fire Hero Trn-Jck 30.
1AA Star of Trieste rt-sp 33. dt-dt-dt 36.
1A Tale of Woe claim1 42. 3d-purse 40.



Tale of Woe claim1 42. 3d-purse 40.

claim1=1st after a claim 42 win %
3d-purse=3rd after 20% Drop in purse, still in same purse range.



wes

[keenang]

IT JUST AMAZES ME HOW GOOD SOME OF THESE FOLKS ARE AFTER THE RACE HAS BEEN RUN.
GENE

[CapperLou]

CJ:

I like your post a lot--you have great speed and pace figures--and what you pointed out there is just about the way I look at any race I'm considering playing. Obviously, Dutrow is one of the guys I follow--but you have to wait these days for a price because almost everyone is on to him the past year and change.

All the best,

CapperLou

P.S. I was out hitting some golf balls and missed the above race. I put some plays in early and went out for awhile to play a little golf--it's great exercise and gets my mind off the horses and the concentration required when I'm playing.