Databases can't win . . .

[Buckeye]

or can they?

tDAT tTRK nRAC tPRG tHOR
1/2/05 CRC 7 2 Greg's Syrah
1/2/05 HAW 8 3 Go Lionel Go
1/2/05 FG 6 11 Dukes Shawklit
1/2/05 HAW 2 9 Power Seeker
1/2/05 PHA 10 7 Kravets
1/2/05 PIM 5 8 Carneros
1/2/05 PHA 7 5 Our Niner

[Buckeye]

after all, they contain results from the past! How can we possibly predict the future with past results?
I don't know, but that's all we got! :eek: :cool: :rolleyes:
tTRK tDATE nRACE tPGM tHOR
AQU 1/2/05 2 2 Rhonda's Number
AQU 1/2/05 2 6 Losin Suzin
AQU 1/2/05 4 5 Bones Ferrone
AQU 1/2/05 4 6 Chastise
AQU 1/2/05 4 9 Sir Greeley
AQU 1/2/05 5 4 Greenjay
AQU 1/2/05 6 3 L'Argento
AQU 1/2/05 6 4 Breezy Way
AQU 1/2/05 7 2 Dorst
AQU 1/2/05 7 4 Cuba
AQU 1/2/05 7 8 Stalwart Bull
AQU 1/2/05 8 6 Dancin On Broadway
AQU 1/2/05 9 7 Kristy Dale
CT 1/2/05 1 2 Proud Statesman
CT 1/2/05 2 7 Ready for Love
CT 1/2/05 3 5 B Trick
CT 1/2/05 4 10 Mr. Bubbly
CT 1/2/05 5 6 Miss Lionel
CT 1/2/05 6 3 Wimauma Mama
CT 1/2/05 9 2 Luv Ya Big
CT 1/2/05 10 9 Lucky's Adam
PHA 1/2/05 5 3 Long Lane
PHA 1/2/05 10 4 Mills Road

[formula_2002]

after all, they contain results from the past! How can we possibly predict the future with past results?
I don't know, but that's all we Mills Road[/code]

My web site contains a report. "Odds Range"

Its quite clear that the win% for horses can be determined from their odds.
I would call that the best possible way to predicting the future.. It's not profitable, but it is accurate! :(

[Buckeye]

Are you saying that if I were to bet $1000 on each of these above, they would have a greater chance of winning?

Their odds would be lower . . .

I posted them, so any extra monies bet on them from others here as a result of this post has more to do with me than with the actual probability of the horses winning.

I bet them, though not for $1000 each, should I bet more or not? It can't possibly make any difference what I do, I'm just an innocent bystander. :)

[formula_2002]

Are you saying that if I were to bet $1000 on each of these above, they would have a greater chance of winning?



Nope.. Your bet would not determine the FINAL odds. If the public determines that your bet has lowered the odds
too much, they will bet other horses. Those bets will raise the odds on your horse to what the public thinks is realistic.

Gool luck with your picks

[Dave Schwartz]

Formula,

Actually, if you wager enough money (relative to the odds) to make a difference, they public will stampede towards. It is only after the odds go below even money that the public begins to back away and go against you.

If you doubt that, make a significant bet with about 10 minutes to post on a 50-1 horse into a small pool. As the horse suddenly drops to 12/1 (or whatever) watch how he continues to drop.


Dave Schwartz

[JackS]

Dave - I think I've actually seen this happen. At Cal Expo, some hcp'r bet a relatively large amount on a horse that had hardly no chance of winning.
This is noticable at small tracks with small pools when the ML might be 8-10/1 or above and the opening flash on the tote 8/5(example).
The theory of the person doing this is to flim-flam the public into a situation where many will take this as a sign that this horse is being bet by very smart money and that the printed data in the form can safely be disregarded.
Could be my imagination I guess but, that was my interpertation.

[formula_2002]

Formula,

If you doubt that, make a significant bet with about 10 minutes to post on a 50-1 horse into a small pool. As the horse suddenly drops to 12/1 (or whatever) watch how he continues to drop.


Dave Schwartz

And how often does that 12-1 win?
Perhaps the 12-1 or less was correct and the 50-1 was wrong..
The data says the 12-1 was correct.

[hurrikane]

joe,
you are making absolutely no sense here.
so if dave decides not to make the big bet and the horse stays at 50-1 then that was his chances. If he makes the bet then the horse goes to 12-1 then that is his chances.

It's all up to Dave.

It's becoming so very clear now.

And Dave, would the times you are going to bet or not bet be included in the HSH software?

[Dave Schwartz]

Hurrikane,

>>And Dave, would the times you are going to bet or not bet be included in the HSH software?<<

I am not sure what that means but I have a feeling that you are making a joke; that it means "Do you know who I play?" - as if that would matter. LOL

If I have misunderstood, please correct me.

Dave

PS: And as for Formula, he is becoming the handicapping equivelent of the left-winger that won't quit beating a dead horse. Because he has determined that he cannot win, he is bound and and determined to prove that nobody else can either (in spite of the fact that people are winning all around him).

[cj]

Formula doesn't get it, and I guess never will.

On a large series of races, the odds are the best predictor. There is no doubt about that. The good news for handicappers is that you don't have to bet all the races in the series, you can pick and choose. A winning player can figure out which races the odds give him an advantage, and which races are best unplayed. Formula isn't good enough to make this distinction, as he freely admits. I wish he'd put more money in the pools :(.

[formula_2002]

Formula doesn't get it, and I guess never will.

A winning player can figure out which races the odds give him an advantage, and which races are best unplayed. Formula isn't good enough to make this distinction, as he freely admits. I wish he'd put more money in the pools :(.

Well, you are right about not being "good enough". You'll will never get my money back into in the pool. That should cut down your profit a bit ;)

So along as the math of the game proves (and or can not be proven) that long term gains are impossible then I'll limit my action to "fun" only (perhpas twice a year), but my interest in the game does not end there.

The math of the game is this;
If the standard deviation in the final track odds = the standard deviation of "Natural" odds, then, because of track take-out, it is impossoble to show a long term profit.

Natural odds = actual # winners/ expected # of winners.

It has nothing to do with one's political beliefs Dave, it's simply math.

[hurrikane]

You'll will never get my money back into in the pool.


Damn, there goes 2 bucks.

Dave, you are correct my friend.

[Buckeye]

Damn, there goes 2 bucks.

Dave, you are correct my friend.

I'm awake and smellin the coffee! :)

[Buckeye]

Bell Shaped Curve

Where one is on the curve is the quesiton . . . :cool:

[sq764]

Formula, I am not going to address your statistical skills, as they seem solid and much better than mine. With that being said, do you think it's possible that you get so mathematically analytical that you overthink this game a bit?

I mean, maybe I simplify things too much for myself, but when I begin to overthink, I remind myself that I am consistently searching for a contender that is offering a price that is higher than I think he should be.. Again, maybe overly simplistic, but not to the point of overthinking..

[Buckeye]

I don't know much about statistics, other than it describes a group reality or a general or individual probability.

It may be correct to say that as a group, the members of PaceAdvantage Discussion Board lose money betting on horses, but this does not exclude, and in fact statistics will predict a certain number of winners in our group. :)

[cj]

How about factors not readily to the public, which you obviously don't use?

[formula_2002]

It may be correct to say that as a group, the members of PaceAdvantage Discussion Board lose money betting on horses, but this does not exclude, and in fact statistics will predict a certain number of winners in our group. :)

There will be enough winners (or very close to being winners) in any large group. That's one of the reasons people coming back to play.
Unfortunately, it’s not always the same people for any long length of time.

It's akin to the 80 or so factors I follow. At any given time there are a group of factors that show a profit. Again, unfortunately, they don’t repeat their winning ways with any confidence.
It's all in the math..no surprises.

[formula_2002]

How about factors not readily to the public, which you obviously don't use?

Oh I'm sure I have such private information. Unfortunately it is all based on past performance data that is available to anyone who takes the time to accumulate it.
And there is enough published past performance information that makes it impossible for anyone to overcome the take-out.

So if you are saying you have data that is based on unpublished pastperformance then I would say...the take-out may kill you slower then the rest of us..

But even that I find hard to accept.

To me the game is a bunch of different cookies in a jar. Everyone has the same chance of picking the same cookie..



Let me ask you a question. Take the odds range between >=2.5 and <=3.4 to 1. What is the % of your winning picks and the total number of plays.

Take any tote board odds range you want (use your most accomplished results) just tell me the odds range, # win and number of plays.. I would just like to understand what you feel you have accomplished....

[hurrikane]

joe,

I'm afraid my friend you just can't see the forest because of all the frigging trees.

What you are meaning to say is that you have not found any way for you to beat this game. That is all. You. Just you and your 80 pieces of data that you track. Please don't think for one minute we are all lemmings and you are the king cliff jumper. It just isn't so. End of story.

I'm curious why you waste your time coming up here if you have given up on this endevor. Surely you can find other meaningless ways to waste your time.

[formula_2002]

joe,


I'm curious why you waste your time coming up here if you have given up on this endevor. Surely you can find other meaningless ways to waste your time.

Hurr, it's not a waste for me.

Of course it would be wonderful if someone could prove that winning is possible in terms beyond bluster and put in some mathematical effort.
I'm sure it would be possible, if indeed winning was possible.

[Dave Schwartz]

Formula,

>>Hurr, it's not a waste for me.

Of course it would be wonderful if someone could prove that winning is possible in terms beyond bluster and put in some mathematical effort.
I'm sure it would be possible, if indeed winning was possible.<<

What do you deem "proof?" I personally know at least a half-dozen serious, long-term winners. Have I ever asked them for "proof?" Well, a couple of them who made huge claims and wanted me to be part of it, yes. (And they produced IRS forms, but that is an expectation of a business relationship, not a casual one.)

Do you believe that all the people who say they are long-term winners are lying? (I don't mean this argumentatively - like you are publicaly calling them liars.) I mean do you believe that they are (perhaps) lying to themselves?

Let me share a story with you...

I have knowledge of a former client from the SF Bay area who has not had a job since I met him 14 years ago. He makes only around $100k per year from wagering on horse races. How do I know this? Well, he told me so but his lifestyle backs it up. His children are now grown and he and his wife travel a little more than they used to.

How would you suggest that this man really makes his living? Do you suggest that he may have a secret business that he runs? Drug dealer?

What I mean is, are you able to accept that someone, anyone wins? Or do you have the need to deny that he might be really doing it?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[cj]

The 11 horse in the 2d at Aqueduct today, January 5th, is proof that this game can be beaten. What in the world had this horse ever done to go off at EVEN money from the 9 post in a two turn route on the inner dirt?

[sq764]

I am starting to wonder if Formula has the mentality of "If I can't win at this game then no one can"

[formula_2002]

Formula,

What do you deem "proof?" Dave Schwartz

Its a mathematical thing Dave..Few words and lots of numbers ;)

[formula_2002]

The 11 horse in the 2d at Aqueduct today, January 5th, is proof that this game can be beaten. What in the world had this horse ever done to go off at EVEN money from the 9 post in a two turn route on the inner dirt?

Proof? I think not.

Conditions: 1 1/16M Dirt. INNER DIRT (UP TO $3,230 NYSBFOA) FOR MAIDENS, FOUR YEAR OLDS AND UPWARD. Weight, 123 lbs. Claiming Price $35,000, For Each $5,000 To $25,000 2 lbs.


I have 2510 races in my AQU inner track data base. 2 of those races were a 1 1/16 mile or greater maiden on an off track
(pehaps NYSBFOA). Hardly enough data for making any claim.

So in perhaps 2/2510 races you see a lock.

Let me know when you think the favorite is over bet for the most popular race condtions;

CLAIMING
DIRT
SPRINT
FAST TRACK

Then we can throw some large numbers around.

[cj]

You don't have to play those races, and what happened in them doesn't really matter much today anyway. A good horseplayer knew the 11 was a horrible bet, maybe some guy studying a database did not.

[formula_2002]

You don't have to play those races, and what happened in them doesn't really matter much today anyway. A good horseplayer knew the 11 was a horrible bet, maybe some guy studying a database did not.


CJ I noticed that you had the beast at 3-1 on your web site
before the scratches and a book that added up to 1.25.

What odds do you make the horse after scratches and a book of 1.18?

Thanks

[cj]

I think the 6 is a very poor bet in the upcoming 8th at Aqu, 8-5 ML fave, currently 2-1 favorite in the pool. Tell me why I'm wrong before the race.

[formula_2002]

You don't have to play those races, and what happened in them doesn't really matter much today anyway. A good horseplayer knew the 11 was a horrible bet, maybe some guy studying a database did not.


CJ I noticed that you had the beast at 3-1 on your web site
before the scratches and a book that added up to 1.25.

What odds do you make the horse after scratches and a book of 1.18?

Thanks

[cj]

That's the ML, not my line.

[formula_2002]

I think the 6 is a very poor bet in the upcoming 8th at Aqu, 8-5 ML fave, currently 2-1 favorite in the pool. Tell me why I'm wrong before the race.

I can only tell you that I think the finals odds will be more representive of the horse's ability to win then any single bettor.
What odds do you make it to be... ?

[formula_2002]

That's the ML, not my line.


Yep, I just figured that out..
Did you make an odds line for the 11 in the 2nd?

[cj]

4-1 at best, much higher than the 8-5 offered by the public here in the 8th. Doesn't mean the horse can't win, but a definite play against for me.

Nice non-answer, by the way.

[formula_2002]

Nice non-answer, by the way.

CJ
That is a very viable answer..Unfortunately, after so much of my time,money, and research, it's the best I can offer.

[cj]

For all your data, you can't give an answer?

The 6 did win, but at underlaid odds. In this case, I didn't bet, but only because the other horses I was interested in were also below 4-1. The public was wrong in the percentages, but not by enough to create any overlays worth betting, at least for me. There will be more oppurtunities.

Name a day and track, we can both post an odds line for a race card and see how it turns out.

[formula_2002]

For all your data, you can't give an answer?

The 6 did win, but at underlaid odds. In this case, I didn't bet, but only because the other horses I was interested in were also below 4-1. The public was wrong in the percentages, but not by enough to create any overlays worth betting, at least for me. There will be more oppurtunities.

Name a day and track, we can both post an odds line for a race card and see how it turns out.

If your odds line on the favorite was accurate at 4-1, you can make a whole lot of money dutching the entire field (less the favorite of course)..

You dont get it, my odds line is the same as the final odds.
I wish there was a bookmaker that disputed that fact, then I would make a whole lot of money!!

[formula_2002]

If your odds line on the favorite was accurate at 4-1, you can make a whole lot of money dutching the entire field (less the favorite of course)..

You dont get it, my odds line is the same as the final odds.
I wish there was a bookmaker that disputed that fact, then I would make a whole lot of money!!

You dont get it, my odds line is the same as the final odds.
adjusted for take-out!!!

(1/(((odds+1))/(sum(1/odds+1))))-1

[cj]

If your odds line on the favorite was accurate at 4-1, you can make a whole lot of money dutching the entire field (less the favorite of course)..

You dont get it, my odds line is the same as the final odds.
I wish there was a bookmaker that disputed that fact, then I would make a whole lot of money!!

I would never dutch the whole field, I don't think I'm right often enough to make it worthwhile. I am right often enough that when I like someone I think is overlaid, I can turn a profit. It is also why I ask for a premium on my odds line.

Example, in the 8th, I had the 2, 3, and 6 at about 25% to win the race. I gave the 1 and 4 10% between the two of them, and would never bet either. I gave the 5 the rest, which was about 15%. Convert those to odds, and you get 3-1, 3-1, 3-1, and 6-1. None was worth a play. No big deal, they'll run about 200 more races tomorrow. (To bet a 3-1, I need 9-2, a 6-1, I need 9-1.)

Like I said, I'm not right all the time. The good news is, I don't have to be.

[cj]

I do get it, that is why you can't win.

ps...why did you quote yourself? That is a little odd...

[formula_2002]

I do get it, that is why you can't win.

ps...why did you quote yourself? That is a little odd...


made the following correction;

"You dont get it, my odds line is the same as the final odds.
adjusted for take-out!!!

(1/(((odds+1))/(sum(1/odds+1))))-1"
__________________