View Full Version : possible problem with using pp's
acorn54
03-08-2005, 01:36 AM
was reading on a financial forum someone stating that trends are found in studying the past but the future is totally random.
in other words as the prospectus' in mutual funds states
"past performance is no guarantee of future results"
acorn
46zilzal
03-08-2005, 01:43 AM
MIGHT be true with $$$$ but not horse's and thier form cycles.
jorgie
03-08-2005, 02:17 AM
This applies to both racing and mutual funds, as it does with most things in life. The past is only an "indicator" of what "might" happen (or probably will happen) in the future but, as a prospectus reads, it does not "guarantee" anything. What usually happens is that the future ends up "resembling" the past - enough so that we can look back and say that analyzing the past gave us a "rough estimate" of what was to come.
The stock market goes in cycles that look similar to cycles of the past, but it's not guaranteed.
Horses run similar to what they did in the past, but no guarantee.
If you beat your wife, you will "probably" beat her again, but there is no guarantee.
Teenagers pay high car insurance rates because they have driven recklessly in the past, and they'll "probably" continue doing so, but no guarantee.
Fortunately for us humans, we think rationally (most of the time), so we can sometimes IMPROVE on our behavior and make our future results more desirable. The wifebeater might realize he's acting like an idiot and change his ways (get help, etc.), teenagers get into their 20's and 30's and begin to drive safe after realizing that tickets/accidents aren't cheap. That's where the "no guarantee" comes in.........things change!
Tote Master
03-08-2005, 03:53 AM
acorn54
was reading on a financial forum someone stating that trends are found in studying the past but the future is totally random.
in other words as the prospectus' in mutual funds states
"past performance is no guarantee of future results" Well, whoever suggested that won’t be found around here. Apparently the focus here is on the commodity and not what drives the entire game. Be it stocks, bonds or the ponies rest assured that there’s a lot of money involved, and the last time I looked the horses weren’t doing the betting.
PP’s will only provide insight into exactly that: Commodity Trends. Insignificant, things like current condition and possible improvement or decline are only assumptions made by those attempting to decipher all the variables imparted by the PP’s. Maybe that’s why 50% of the time the public’s top 2 choices lose. (or win which ever way you want look at it). Unfortunately it’s not a 50/50 game. Perhaps there’s something more? Like who’s controlling the commodity in order to get a price.
For example, the other day I noticed a jockey give his mount a quick reminder of who’s in charge. By giving it a swift strike with the whip before entering the starting gate, the horse had only one thing on its mind when the gate opened. It came out first and wired the field at a nice price. Other then maybe a stakes race, would an interpretation of the PP’s also provide an assumption for the intent to win? Personally, I prefer to ignore all these assumptions and just go with the flow of money. I have found it to be a bit more telling and a lot less complicated.
Best of Luck.
kenwoodallpromos
03-08-2005, 05:17 AM
Ok. I'll quote that when anyone asks how I won so they think it is luck!
JPinMaryland
03-08-2005, 04:35 PM
Well I want to come to Acorn's defense by giving a slightly different example but one that is also based upon a model.
The last couple of elections, the public has had the "fortune" of getting the election analysis of Prof. Allen Lichtman of American Univ. He wrote a book about predicting elections and it is based upon like 10 different factors and he has plugged these factors into the last x number of elections and low and behold! It predicts each election. Each past election.
Some of the factors are ones that seem well knows; are we at war? what is the economy doing? But some of the other ones seem to make less sense, they seem to be more or less pulled out of thin air.
But he used those odd factors because when he plugged the algorithm into the past results, the algo. predicted each past election.
I should also point out that his method does not quantify the voting, neither percentages or electoral votes, it merely picks a winner. A curious sign right there...
But if you think about it, the logic used in all this is quite dodgey. FOr instance, I bet I could come up with my own formula for finding the past election winners and not use any of LIchtmans. And I could use completely fanciful parameters: did the man have a mustache? what color was his wife's hair? how tall was his running mate? who won the superbowl that year? etc.
Given enough parameters one could plug in all sorts of quite ridiculous questions; and given enough trial and error you could make a system that would pick out the winners of all the PAST elections.
But would it have any validity to a furture election? probably not. I mean I could come up with an algorithm that uses 10 factors, none of the same as Lichtmans and still pick out the winners of the past. ANd someoone else could do the same thing w/ 10 other factors, none of them the same as Lichtman's or mine, and achieve the same result.
But surely there is a contradiction? All three models cant all be right, if they all use different factors? how could that be?
For the record Lichtman failed to predict the 2000 election. But what the hey, at least it gets him on tv every four years!
This is the best example of what I think acorn is saying. I do NOT believe the future is entirely random, I dont think it can be.
osophy_junkie
03-09-2005, 11:12 PM
Just because you haven't been hit by a bus in the past doesn't mean you won't get hit tomorrow, you still commute no? Things have a tendiency to repeat themselves and show patterns. I would even go as far as saying everything is deterministic, we just don't have the capacity to figure it out. If one can put restrictions on some of these unknown variables and find the viewable patterns, they have a good chance of making money. As with anything in life you need to weight the risks to rewards.
Ed
acorn54
03-10-2005, 02:38 AM
i think i can further my case by bringing into play analysis of the stock market
one can take past factors and use them one year and they will work but the very same factors used again the following year will not show a profit
such is the dynamics of past information on future results. there is just to much uncertainty in the future
acorn
BillW
03-10-2005, 03:22 AM
You have to realize though, that "uncertainity" is quite a bit different from "totally random" unless you are playing roulette of shooting crap.
Tote Master
03-10-2005, 02:10 PM
osophy junkie
Just because you haven't been hit by a bus in the past doesn't mean you won't get hit tomorrow, you still commute no? Things have a tendency to repeat themselves and show patterns. I would even go as far as saying everything is deterministic, we just don't have the capacity to figure it out. If one can put restrictions on some of these unknown variables and find the viewable patterns, they have a good chance of making money. As with anything in life you need to weight the risks to rewards. Our illustrious Weather Forecasters would love to read your analogy. They make money (at no risk) whether they’re right or wrong and apparently have absolutely no accountability for their predictions. Computer models using a host of variables generate many of their forecasts. They are also open for interpretation and of course many assumptions are made. In extreme situations, I would imagine that people weighing the potential life threatening dangers of serious weather conditions like hurricanes, tornadoes, and most recently that tidal wave are relying very much on these predictions. When their predictions are wrong they simply blame the computer.
thelyingthief
03-11-2005, 08:47 AM
i think you're right. please repeat the following phrase or something similar prior to every wager you make: nothing works, nothing works, nothing works.
how cliche
03-11-2005, 11:00 AM
I've said this on other threads. If you follow your favorite trainers closely and are exacting enough, you can find days to bet a horse when you aren't guessing or hoping he'll win. You EXPECT him to win and he does...at a big price too. PP's come to life and make sense in ways you'd never forseen.
A simple excersise can help you find these kinds of winners. It involves saving pp's, highlighting past winners at odds of 8-1 or higher from the same barn, and noting when the horse's sign of improvement was and how he was managed once he showed it. You begin to see how different horsemen put fitness, speed, and stamina into their charge. You see what led up to the win, in an exact and restrictive manner.
Anyone who is interested can learn the excersise.
JPinMaryland
03-11-2005, 01:39 PM
I'm sure that happens. Can you give us some real life examples of angles you have learned? or is this another secret?
Valuist
03-11-2005, 03:21 PM
So what is the alternative to pps? Tarot cards? Witchcraft?
So what is the alternative to pps? Tarot cards? Witchcraft?
LOL...I'm gonna hold out for fps...Future Performances. Remember that guy on TV that used to get the paper a day early? I knew that show was doomed when he didn't resort to a life of lottery and horse playing!
Valuist
03-11-2005, 03:34 PM
At least Micheal J. Fox got a hold of a sports almanac in Back to the Future. He never did get to make use of it.
garyoz
03-11-2005, 04:17 PM
was reading on a financial forum someone stating that trends are found in studying the past but the future is totally random.
in other words as the prospectus' in mutual funds states
"past performance is no guarantee of future results"
acorn
Academic studies clearly indicate the best predictor of a future stock price is the current stock price of the firm. There has been alot of debate about random walk theory--which has more to do with efficient market theory, not that the future is not "totally random." Also the legal language in a prospectus has to do more with guarantees rather than future results.
IMHO, except for performance enhancing drugs, form cycle based upon past performance of a horse is the best predictor of the next race performance.
I always think that analogies between the securities markets and horse racing never hold up very well.
how cliche
03-11-2005, 04:38 PM
I'll give you one JP. One trade secret.
There's a NoCal horseman named Len Kasmerski. He's a low profile guy. He has some older runners who naturally over time become slower and consequently drop in class. There was a horse named Cantil who I played $200 to win and he paid $38.00.
Here's his m.o.
A runner who in his younger days graduated from two of NoCal's three allowance levels and then was competitive in the higher claiming ranks has slowed with age. Where once he was winning 50k claimers he's now losing 40k and 25k claiming races by wide margins and showing no interest in any of them early or late.
Logically he lays the runner off and drops him some more to come back with $16k claimers. In the return race he again finshes near the back, but the vacation did him some good as shown by his flashing early speed , his sign of improvement, his only sign of life in ages.
21 days later he's given two 16kclm, 8.5f races 21 & 27 days apart from one another with no workouts between them. In the races he appears dull and listless.
Another 24 days goes by and for his 4th after the layoff he's entered in another 8.5f claimer, but this time it's for 12,500. Most handicappers think the drop is logical and he has a shot of winning. He does not, because he's not intended for this race. He does however run better and finishes 3rd by 5 lengths in a field of 10.
7 days later he's entered in an 11f alw12,500s(for 4yo and up who have started for a claiming price of $12,500 or less in the past year). This is the intended race. He was entered in the 12,500 claimer soley to make him eligible for the alw. He goes out to the front and never looks back to win easily at 18-1.
Quick synopsis...
Formerly classy youngster is now older/slower.
Is off form so he's laid off.
Comebacker/drop16k 8.5f-flashes early speed/stops-sign of improvement.
Given 2 more 16k, 8.5f preps 3 to 4 weeks apart from each other. Dull.
Final prep, 12,500, 8.5f. Well beaten but runs better, not close to winning.
GO-alw12,500s, 11f, 7 days-Made eligible by last prep. Frontrunning easy win at a price.
JPinMaryland
03-11-2005, 05:09 PM
nice. How often you get to play that angle...?
Forget that. Better question: how much time at the track did it take to spot that angle? months? years? inside tip? data crunching?
Tote Master
03-12-2005, 04:11 AM
how cliche
I've said this on other threads. If you follow your favorite trainers closely and are exacting enough, you can find days to bet a horse when you aren't guessing or hoping he'll win. You EXPECT him to win and he does...at a big price too. PP's come to life and makes sense in ways you'd never foreseen.
A simple exercise can help you find these kinds of winners. It involves saving pp's, highlighting past winners at odds of 8-1 or higher from the same barn, and noting when the horse's sign of improvement was and how he was managed once he showed it. You begin to see how different horsemen put fitness, speed, and stamina into their charge. You see what led up to the win, in an exact and restrictive manner.
Anyone who is interested can learn the exercise. It appears that you have a decent method to first of all only seek value. This is critical ingredient for any success at this game. If all you will accept is 8/1 or better, then you can certainly afford to lose (8) straight bets and still break even on the 9th. I’m not sure that most players could tolerate that type of losing streak. I’m also not sure how long you have to wait to find these 8/1 or higher propositions. If you are really that disciplined, more power to you, but you certainly don't represent the majority of players.
Your description of this method as being a simple exercise is also I believe a bit exaggerated. Your assumption of “signs of improvement” can be only that: Purely an assumption. Even if there were signs of improvement in one animal, it still has to measure up to its competition in the next race. Would that anticipated improvement be sufficient to beat its competition? Anyone of which might also be on the improve or perform better in the race conditions at hand. Can you really assume that just because an improvement is seen in a recent race that repetition is inevitable? Perhaps with the classier horse it’s more likely, but very doubtful with a typical claimer.
Valuist
So what is the alternative to pps? Tarot cards? Witchcraft?The alternative is to know the intent of the connections. As far as I’m concerned that is measured in one-way, and one-way only: Money. If you think for a minute that any sober member of that group is going to risk losing a lot of their money betting foolishly, then you’re greatly mistaken. I’m not talking about a $2, $10, or even $100 wager. These types of bets can be made by anyone. Those that know the ACTUAL condition of their charge, how it fits the race and its competition have a huge advantage over those who simply make assumptions based on PP’s. I’ll take the live activity of the tote board over any PP’s for any race on any day of the week. Not only can you measure intent, but also you can see value as plain as day. Put them together and you’ve got yourself a real chance to not only score, but also score more frequently.
CJ
LOL...I'm gonna hold out for fps...Future Performances. Remember that guy on TV that used to get the paper a day early? I knew that show was doomed when he didn't resort to a life of lottery and horse playing! You’re right, but don’t hold your breath waiting for a glimpse into the future! Those that claim to know the future are all charlatans. I doubt if anyone of them has predicted a single event of any major significance, or even minor events with any real consistency. The PP’s when interpreted properly can certainly show capability and possibly even potential. Anything beyond that is purely conjecture. Fortunately, the tote board provides “current” and “real” activity prior to a race. Understanding and deciphering that activity is the key to unlock any mysteries about this game. Actions simply speak louder than words, especially when it comes to money. And you can take that to the bank!
JPinMaryland
03-12-2005, 11:06 AM
IN fairness, he never said "inevitable." This sounds like a red herring, all horseplayers know or should know that nothing is inevitable.
SO I dont understand your criticism. All winning bets, no matter how much genius they appear, are still based on intuition to a degree.
He was just finding his intuition in a close study of a combination of horse, trainer, performance, race requirements, etc.
...Fortunately, the tote board provides “current” and “real” activity prior to a race. Understanding and deciphering that activity is the key to unlock any mysteries about this game. Actions simply speak louder than words, especially when it comes to money. And you can take that to the bank!
The only thing I'm taking to the bank is the money of the people trying to bet by deciphering tote board action.
raybo
03-12-2005, 04:17 PM
My 2 cents worth:
Come on guys, we're talking about living organisms here, athletes, real warm blooded, air breathing animals. Past performance is THE ONE viable predictor of future performance. Saying that past performance means nothing regarding horse races is, frankly, ******,(I won't say the word). Even in the market, past performance has merit. If a particular company was well managed and produced a good product that the public received well, and if nothing seriously negative has happened to change that and the market and economy as a whole are healthy, then you can probably expect that company, and it's stock, to perform as well, if not better, as in the past. In horse racing, the ability to determine past class, pace preferences, overall speed, track and surface preferences, etc., along with the ability to determine current "health" and physical conditioning, all give us an edge. That edge is acheived, in large part, by examining the past history of the horses involved. If we have done the job well and nothing seriously negative and unnatural happens during the running of the race, we can expect to be successful with our selections often enough to, if we have determined that the investment scenario is viable, expect to make a profit on our investments.
Tote Master
03-12-2005, 10:50 PM
JPinMaryland
IN fairness, he never said "inevitable." This sounds like a red herring, all horseplayers know or should know that nothing is inevitable.
Tote Master
Can you really assume that just because an improvement is seen in a recent race that repetition is inevitable? JP, I wasn’t referring to even a “Win” as being inevitable. I was simply questioning whether anyone can say for sure that just because an improvement in a recent race was noticed, that a repeat of that performance could actually be expected. The “exercise” that how cliché describes is very one dimensional. It focus' only on a single trainer’s move with his horse and its recent performances, while taking into consideration some back class. Unless this exercise also includes all the other entries as well, I personally could not give it much credence. But, to each his own.
how cliche
If you follow your favorite trainers closely and are exacting enough, you can find days to bet a horse when you aren't guessing or hoping he'll win. You EXPECT him to win and he does...at a big price too.
You begin to see how different horsemen put fitness, speed, and stamina into their charge. You see what led up to the win, in an exact and restrictive manner. If anything I will say that the above comments surely sound like someone is expecting something to happen with a great deal of certainty in mind. My only criticism comes in the form of completely relying on assumptions derived from just the PP’s.
JPinMaryland
SO I don’t understand your criticism. All winning bets, no matter how much genius they appear, are still based on intuition to a degree.
He was just finding his intuition in a close study of a combination of horse, trainer, performance, race requirements, etc. I also doubt very much that the successful player is relying on just intuition when making selections. The intuitive process can be adversely affected by many emotions, especially fear (of losing). Those that have lost a race or two begin to question their playing abilities. This is true, especially if heavy wagers were involved and lost or if a horse appeared to be unbeatable also lost. On the other side of the fence, betting incorrectly and not getting a decent return, can also take its toll on the intuitive process, especially when the selections were correct.
cj
The only thing I'm taking to the bank is the money of the people trying to bet by deciphering tote board action. I don’t believe that those who have some real insight into the veracity of tote board activity have any trouble making or even winning their wagers. Fortunately, they make up only a very small portion of the overall player’s group. If you’re actually taking any money to the bank, I guarantee its not coming from the serious tote analyzers. You’re taking it from the traditional players who think the PP’s are the means to an end. When in fact, the “means” is actually based on their own interpretations and assumptions (and possibly even their intuitions) of the PP’s.
Raybo
Come on guys, we're talking about living organisms here, athletes, real warm blooded, air breathing animals. Past performance is THE ONE viable predictor of future performance. Saying that past performance means nothing regarding horse races is, frankly, ******,(I won't say the word)…………… Well you feel as strongly about the PP’s as I do about the tote board. I’ve had about 30 years of fighting the game with the information contained on those pages. The PP’s do not make any predictions or promises what-so-ever! They simply disclose information about the previous running lines. Those using them are trying to make evaluations and then predictions. No one said they have “no value”. In fact my comment was:
The PP’s when interpreted properly can certainly show capability and possibly even potential. Anything beyond that is purely conjecture.
Raybo
In horse racing, the ability to determine past class, pace preferences, overall speed, track and surface preferences, etc., along with the ability to determine current "health" and physical conditioning, all give us an edge. That edge is achieved, in large part, by examining the past history of the horses involved. If we have done the job well and nothing seriously negative and unnatural happens during the running of the race, we can expect to be successful with our selections often enough to, if we have determined that the investment scenario is viable, expect to make a profit on our investments. I’m not quite sure how you’re determining the horse’s health or physical condition, unless you have an inside track to the trainer/owner/jockey discussions. I’ve never seen any of that information provided in the PP’s. But even with that important information, the only key element that you left out was intent. I know it’s hard for many to believe, but every horse in a race may not be there in an attempt to win. Once you can accept that, then you might also be able to see how any effort to anticipate the running of a race becomes an exercise in futility.
The best example I can think of is when you have a group of say 10 entries. You’ve gone through all motions of identifying their speed, pace, and all the other race conditions, etc. based on PP’s. Now you take all of that data and attempt to predict how the race will play out. Once again making assumptions about where each entry might be during the race and how the pace will affect each one of them. Now say that you’re completely satisfied with your predictions. Later on you find out that 1 or 2 of the key entries are scratched. Very rarely can you assume that the race will be run as previously thought out. This same analogy applies even if all 10 run. If 1 or 2 are there for other reasons besides winning, the entire race scenario brakes down, because they do not run as predicted. Taking it a step further and trying to anticipate every scenario, no matter what happens during the course of the race many times becomes an impossible task. So, naturally most will accept what they believe to be the most plausible. In some instances they’re correct. The viability of making a profit then falls on the face value of the correct predictions versus those that are wrong and not exclusively on the methodology used to make those predictions.
Best of Luck at whatever method you use, but don’t accept anything less then value for all your efforts!
how cliche
03-12-2005, 11:01 PM
nice. How often you get to play that angle...?
Forget that. Better question: how much time at the track did it take to spot that angle? months? years? inside tip? data crunching?
I've been able to play it two times in 5 years.
The time at the track was normal. I saw a winner pop up and surprise me. I review upset winners as they happen to see if they make sense or if they're indecipherable. This is how I find the angles to begin with. Upon further review not one minute after it was declared official I noted what led up to the win and deemed it understandable. In this case it was a middle move as the sign of improvement in the comebacker followed by the series of preps that was identical to Cantil's except it came not in the comebacker but in the 2nd race following the freshening. I clipped out the pp profile and gave a page in my book for Kasmerski.
What took a lot of time was finding other runners who were managed the same way following their wake up. I save pp's. I reviewed the previous several months that I had stacked. I highlighted with a pen all long priced winners Kasmerski trained. Many of them appeared random to me, but I was able to isolate another runner who won under identical cirumstances. The real tipoff was the drop and the 7 day rush back into alw(s) stretching out where he was made eligible by the drop in the final prep. I clipped the profile, put it on Kasmerski's page. I then had 2 examples of a known and exacting trainer's pattern.
The first time I played the angle, nine months later, I played it modestly and the horse won, but more importantly I'd found a 3rd example and had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that if I saw it again it would win.
From there I waited. I waited a long time, over a year. I remember spotting Cantil early and becoming worried that he was going to reach his peak fitness right around the time my wife & I were scheduled to take a week off in Hawaii. I had no online account in those days. I read the chart to his final prep while on Kawaii. I then scanned the online condition book and thankfully found the alw(s) stretchout race was carded for the day after we returned to California. I thought, 'If he's entered, he wins.' A verry happy way to come home from paradise indeed.
There is a runner currently in training who I hope will follow this same path to victory. I'm keeping my fingers crossed. We shall see.
raybo
03-12-2005, 11:48 PM
Tote Master: "I’m not quite sure how you’re determining the horse’s health or physical condition, unless you have an inside track to the trainer/owner/jockey discussions. I’ve never seen any of that information provided in the PP’s. But even with that important information, the only key element that you left out was intent. I know it’s hard for many to believe, but every horse in a race may not be there in an attempt to win. Once you can accept that, then you might also be able to see how any effort to anticipate the running of a race becomes an exercise in futility."
Don't mean to come on too strong but you've just about got me on tilt here, and I apologize to the other readers of this board. You really need to give us a break. We already know you're hustling your program (good luck), and will argue with a brick wall about the tote baord and the magical information you claim to get from it. I agree that the tote is part of the process, knowing, or hoping that you know where the money is coming from. That is old news that's been around for many years. I've personally been a tote board watcher most of my handicapping career, but intent is not always found there. More often it's found in the data. That's why we all spend so much time developing our particular analysis methods, to find out this kind of information. Now, just because you failed in whatever attempts you may have made toward gaining valuable information from racing data doesn't make it any less viable. Intent can indeed be determined by analyzing the racing and training patterns of horses. And physical condition can also be determined in the same way. If you can't do it, I'm sorry, but don't condemn the rest of us who don't have that problem. Handicapping successfully is a multi-faceted operation that requires us to have many skills, only one of which is, tote board analysis.
how cliche
03-13-2005, 01:23 AM
It appears that you have a decent method to first of all only seek value. This is critical ingredient for any success at this game. If all you will accept is 8/1 or better, then you can certainly afford to lose (8) straight bets and still break even on the 9th. I’m not sure that most players could tolerate that type of losing streak. I’m also not sure how long you have to wait to find these 8/1 or higher propositions. If you are really that disciplined, more power to you, but you certainly don't represent the majority of players.
Your description of this method as being a simple exercise is also I believe a bit exaggerated. Your assumption of “signs of improvement” can be only that: Purely an assumption. Even if there were signs of improvement in one animal, it still has to measure up to its competition in the next race. Would that anticipated improvement be sufficient to beat its competition? Anyone of which might also be on the improve or perform better in the race conditions at hand. Can you really assume that just because an improvement is seen in a recent race that repetition is inevitable? Perhaps with the classier horse it’s more likely, but very doubtful with a typical claimer.
The alternative is to know the intent of the connections.
I'm not so disciplined as to only play these kinds of runners. I'd hardly ever bet if that were the case. I typically will play one to three horses in a day at 20 to 60 a pop. For example today I played 2 for 20. One a winner the other ran towards the back. I try not to play runners at less than 4-1 with these "entertainment picks", because I'm wrong a lot. 78% of the time. These plays are for fun and provide mild profit or loss between the occasional prime plays.
The excersise to practice at sniffing out trainer intent is in fact rather simple. It won't provide you with the specifics to develop a prime play, but it gets you used to looking at trainers who race their horses into shape and why they put their charges where they do. It involves your business card covering running lines, but leaving everything else exposed, and uncovering one line at a time. If anyone wants to know how to practice it, they can pm me.
It's not the sign of improvement which sells me on a prime horse. It's the exact handling of the horse after it that matters. This can be a several race process. You alluded to sizing up the competition. When a runner has followed a proven m.o. and is entered in the race I've figured he should to win, I don't buy pp's for that day. There's no need. He's been primed for this one race. Everyone else is running for second. This goes against all principals of handicapping I've ever read about, because I'm not handicapping the race. I have the horse and looking at the rest of the field would only create doubt in my mind, because other runners would naturally appear better on paper. I haven't missed with a runner like this in over 5 years of playing this game. 9 for 9. I might miss one day, but as exacting and restrictive as I am, it won't be often.
You mention knowing the connection's intent as being the alternative. That's exactly what these prime plays achieve. I'm playing the same day the horse's connections are hell bent on winning. It's proven beyond a reasonable doubt by past examples.
how cliche
03-13-2005, 02:42 AM
In this case it was a middle move as the sign of improvement in the comebacker followed by the series of preps that was identical to Cantil's except it came not in the comebacker but in the 2nd race following the freshening.
I need to clear this up. The sign of improvement was not in the comebacker but the second after a layoff. I tried to edit, but the post alread stuck.
Tote Master
03-13-2005, 03:24 AM
Raybo
Don't mean to come on too strong but you've just about got me on tilt here, and I apologize to the other readers of this board. You really need to give us a break. We already know you're hustling your program (good luck), and will argue with a brick wall about the tote board and the magical information you claim to get from it. I agree that the tote is part of the process, knowing, or hoping that you know where the money is coming from. That is old news that's been around for many years. I've personally been a tote board watcher most of my handicapping career, but intent is not always found there. More often it's found in the data. That's why we all spend so much time developing our particular analysis methods, to find out this kind of information. Now, just because you failed in whatever attempts you may have made toward gaining valuable information from racing data doesn't make it any less viable. Intent can indeed be determined by analyzing the racing and training patterns of horses. And physical condition can also be determined in the same way. If you can't do it, I'm sorry, but don't condemn the rest of us who don't have that problem. Handicapping successfully is a multi-faceted operation that requires us to have many skills, only one of which is, tote board analysis. If you interpret the PP’s (and make those assumptions) the way you interpret my comments or their intent, then I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to say. If you want a break or are upset with something, then just ignore my comments altogether. This is an open forum with discussions on many topics about things that I’m interested in. I didn’t start this thread, but perhaps there are those who are still exploring different ways to enjoy this game. I’m simply expressing an alternative approach, which I believe is just as valid as any traditional handicapping method. I’m certainly not hustling a program (another assumption). The majority of traditional handicappers will also argue about which approach they believe is best. This is the same as them having varying opinions on their predictions for the outcome of any given race.
Yes, the para-mutual board has been around for a while. From what I understand it was welcome change from its chalk-board predecessors. In the same respect, there’s certainly a big difference between a tote watcher and a tote analyzer. So I’m not really sure where you’re coming from in that regard. You’d have to be a bit more specific about what you’re watching. If its just the odds, then I can certainly appreciate you’re attitude. Many skeptics that don’t completely understand something will simply down play its value. I know that first hand, because I was once in the very same position.
Did I say anywhere that I failed using the PP’s? (I guess that was an assumption too?) As far as I know, fighting does not denote failure, but quite possibly a struggle with frustration that more profits could not be gained in a more efficient way. To express a bit of where I’m coming from, I know that while many of the players today were just getting there feet wet in this game, I had already written my first 2 programs in the early 80’s. One was used for analyzing speed, pace, and energy consumption. The other was used for maintaining Par speed values and establishing a daily track variant. I was importing data directly from the DRF PP’s with the aid of an $1800 Microtek scanner and a trained OCR (Optical Character Recognition) program. Parsing this data, error checking and formatting it for a Random Access database was all done in Basic. Why did I go to all this trouble? Because the DRF refused to allow direct access to their database (via modem – that’s all we had then, Al Gore hadn’t invented the internet yet), their belief was that I was going to create my own PP tabloid. I must admit that my original error in approaching this game was to view it more as a scientific process. When in fact it is and always has been just a game.
So please don’t think that I was any less intent on finding the best approach for success. Speaking about intentions, I for one would love to hear the specifics on how you or any else can measure the true intentions of a horse’s connections (other then for perhaps a stakes race). Or, of determining an animal’s actual physical condition by reading or interpreting the PP’s. That’s not to say you might not read about how a needle in the haystack prevented one of the great one’s from becoming a Triple Crown legend. No one is condemning anyone for their approach to this game. But making statements like that are about as lucid as calling my approach “magical”. Using any successful approach to this game does not require a multitude of skills. It simply requires a discipline to accept only value in return and not an ego-boosting pat on the back for simply picking a winner now and then.
Best of Luck.
raybo
03-13-2005, 02:20 PM
Tote Master:
You can check my previous posts if you want info on my methods. I stand by my assessments concerning your reasons for posting.
how cliche
03-13-2005, 02:29 PM
Forgive me folks if I'm putting incorrect words in your mouths.
Tote Master, I think posters here are frustrated with you because you are very quick to give criticism, but not constructive criticism.
It's easy to downgrade other player's methods. I'd like to see you show examples of how to utilize your money watching methods. It's not enough to criticize the use of pp's and to commercially promote your method of picking winners at the same time. It is an open forum as you said. You can't achieve intelligent discourse without disclosing positive elements of your methodology.
You have proclaimed pp's nearly useless. Show us how you do it. If you don't do that, there will be enmity towards you, because all you're doing is belittling other posters without putting your technique on the line. This can't be an ongoing advertisement for your website, can it?
Give us some examples of how you pick winners please. It's not fair to us to keep us in the dark.
NoDayJob
03-13-2005, 07:24 PM
Forgive me folks if I'm putting incorrect words in your mouths.
Tote Master, I think posters here are frustrated with you because you are very quick to give criticism, but not constructive criticism.
You have proclaimed pp's nearly useless.
Give us some examples of how you pick winners please. It's not fair to us to keep us in the dark.
:lol: I'm turning blue from holding my breath---hurry, hurry, please! :lol:
NDJ
Tote Master
03-14-2005, 04:55 AM
how cliché
Tote Master, I think posters here are frustrated with you because you are very quick to give criticism, but not constructive criticism.
It's easy to downgrade other player's methods. I'd like to see you show examples of how to utilize your money watching methods. It's not enough to criticize the use of pp's and to commercially promote your method of picking winners at the same time. It is an open forum as you said. You can't achieve intelligent discourse without disclosing positive elements of your methodology.
You have proclaimed pp's nearly useless. Show us how you do it. If you don't do that, there will be enmity towards you, because all you're doing is belittling other posters without putting your technique on the line. This can't be an ongoing advertisement for your website, can it?
Give us some examples of how you pick winners please. It's not fair to us to keep us in the dark. Well, after all isn’t the title of this thread “possible problem with using PP's”! I only criticize the assumptions that are derived from using the PP’s as a sole means of predicting the outcome of a race, not those who are using them. Its not that I haven’t used them myself, so I know first hand what a traditional handicapper must do for a meaningful evaluation its information.
You’re right is it easy relegating the traditional approach, because it has many shortcomings. That’s why it’s so difficult for some to maintain an overall profit margin. Some might make all kinds of claims about how well they do using the PP’s, and if that’s true fantastic! If its not, then they’re only kidding themselves.
I would love to take you up on providing examples of what’s involved in analyzing the tote board, but my previous commentary on this forum offering even the slightest descriptions of what I’m doing has been met with all kinds of skepticism and sometimes even personal attack. I’m afraid that any examples that I could provide would in fact be a commercial endorsement. I am not promoting my site, I’m simply advancing another approach to this game. If some people are open-minded and know how to make decisions for themselves, they certainly have a choice of what they might want to do next. The tote board is public domain, and all the information it provides is free. I personally find that pretty ironic, because I believe it contains the most valuable information, if you know how to decipher it and make it useable.
I will simply say this, that in order to understand how the tote board works, you first have to understand human psychology. Then you have to ask yourself why you’re playing this game. Is it to build your ego, or your bank account. If it’s the latter, then you should decide which approach or approaches best suits your game plan. Some methods are just more effective and efficient at producing the desired result. Take making a small hole through a piece of metal for example. Would you attempt this simple task with a nail and hammer, or a power drill.
The entire process of deciphering the tote board is an effort to discover any bias that may exist during a given betting cycle. It can be equated to finding a speed favoring rail bias that gives perhaps an unfair advantage to a horse that takes that course to victory. In either case, the bettor also has an advantage because he knows it exists, and as long as it does, it will continue to produce obvious results.
I took the following quote from something that jorgie posted on another thread. I hope he doesn’t mind, but it is very apropos to my comments. jorgie.......The professor that has taught me the most about "life" and not just books, would love this one. He gives his example of "where economics meets spirituality" speech and it goes something like this: If a man asks you for money on the street, and you have the money with you, then give it to him right there! From a spiritual standpoint, the other man and yourself came to be in the same place at that moment for a reason. From an economics standpoint, money is "currency" - it is meant to move, to flow from person to person, and to be ALIVE. Money that is invested or used to purchase/pay for things is in motion and alive. The physical money in your pocket is not doing ANYTHING, and therefore, is not "currency". It's dead like a light-switch being off. If this scenario is as true as I believe it to be, then you can draw only one conclusion about the tote board. It derives its existence from people’s motivations to win money from other people. Understanding how those motives translate into intent are based on how the money flows into all of the various betting pools. I’ve mentioned this a number of times before in previous comments. Beyond that, making actual selections is done by examining the results of the formulas used to analyze the money flow and understanding the betting patterns at each track.
By the way, while I admit to not using the PP’s as you mentioned, I did notice something rather extraordinary in your comments.
how cliché
It's not the sign of improvement which sells me on a prime horse. It's the exact handling of the horse after it that matters. This can be a several race process. You alluded to sizing up the competition. When a runner has followed a proven m.o. and is entered in the race I've figured he should to win, I don't buy pp's for that day. There's no need. He's been primed for this one race. Everyone else is running for second. This goes against all principals of handicapping I've ever read about, because I'm not handicapping the race. I have the horse and looking at the rest of the field would only create doubt in my mind, because other runners would naturally appear better on paper. So correct me if I’m wrong. You use the PP’s to find an undoubtedly proven trainer’s m.o. because its demonstrated good results, but then “proclaim them useless” on race day because using them will only create doubt in your mind. If you’re knowingly going against all principals of traditional handicapping, but still getting positive results, then perhaps there are other non-traditional approaches to this game that provide similar results.
Continued Success at whatever approach is used.
Valuist
03-14-2005, 09:38 AM
First off, the pps are only a start. Many players supplement the pps with their own information, which could include subjective judgements on whether or not a horse is well meant. As for reading the tote, there may be a few instances you can catch a "live" horse but what about the times you could get off a 7-1 shot you like and go with the 7-2 layoff horse who's taking all the steam and ends up running 8th?? And with so much money coming in late, tote analysis means a lot less than it used to in the old days.
JPinMaryland
03-14-2005, 03:50 PM
How Cliche's follow up to the Kasmerski story was even better. Fun to read this. Thx.
osophy_junkie
03-15-2005, 01:15 AM
Our illustrious Weather Forecasters would love to read your analogy. They make money (at no risk) whether they’re right or wrong and apparently have absolutely no accountability for their predictions. Computer models using a host of variables generate many of their forecasts. They are also open for interpretation and of course many assumptions are made. In extreme situations, I would imagine that people weighing the potential life threatening dangers of serious weather conditions like hurricanes, tornadoes, and most recently that tidal wave are relying very much on these predictions. When their predictions are wrong they simply blame the computer.
Your example of weather forecasting only shows your ignorance of the subject. Weather forcasting is incredible precise, what happens when hot and cold air meets, forces wind generates, etc.. all follow various formulas. Add to that the large amount of data that satellites and land based measurment sites record; no assumptions are made. Predictions are continiously updated until the current moment, technically they are never wrong, they only increase in precision.
Even if you statement was true, horse racing and weather prediction are two completely different studies. One concerns itself with continously redefining a dynamic state in a never ending time series, where as the other is a fixed state with an eventually known outcome.
Ed
Tote Master
03-15-2005, 03:47 AM
If this is a joke osophy_junkie, then you got me! If its not......
I have to be perfectly honest with you, and please don’t take this personally, but your statements about meteorology are about as correct as the accuracy of a weatherman’s predictions. Perhaps if you live in an area where the climate never changes, there might be a different impression. Their predictions are certainly updated continuously, but when that moment finally occurs (when the weather arrives) its no longer a prediction. You can just stick your head out of the window and make a claim as to what the weather actually is. Unfortunately here in the Northeast, what it actually "is" and what was predicted are very often dissimilar. In fact, I’ve seen up to the minute weather reports that contradict what was actually taking place. I’ve also seen as I’m sure others have too, contradicting weather reports being generated by different sources at the same time. So take your pick.
The next time you view the storm track of a hurricane and wonder why its projected movement is 300 miles (or more) wide, you might want to reconsider your views about just how precise all their technology really is. The only thing that’s consistent about the weather and its reports is that you know it’s going to change.
In actuality all forms of prediction (be it stocks, ponies or the weather) based on human intellect employ some form of analytical thinking . (Unless of course you’re relying on some sort of metaphysical or spiritual approach, or even just your own intuition) While the weather may be more variable, horses are certainly dynamic entities and affected by a variety of things as well, including wind, rain and temperature change. When the weather arrives (as predicted or not), its much the same as when a race is over. They both have a known outcome and a finality. Sure the weather continues to move and change, but does the animal suddenly stop breathing?
Lets hope the sun keeps shining!
how cliche
03-15-2005, 07:30 PM
I will simply say this, that in order to understand how the tote board works, you first have to understand human psychology. Then you have to ask yourself why you’re playing this game. Is it to build your ego, or your bank account.
So correct me if I’m wrong. You use the PP’s to find an undoubtedly proven trainer’s m.o. because its demonstrated good results, but then “proclaim them useless” on race day because using them will only create doubt in your mind. If you’re knowingly going against all principals of traditional handicapping, but still getting positive results, then perhaps there are other non-traditional approaches to this game that provide similar results.
Continued Success at whatever approach is used.
I hope there are reasons we play this game beyond what you mentioned. I find it kind of interesting that the only ones mentioned were ego and money. I say this because I've been known to fall head over heels in love with runners & I root like crazy for them throughout their careers. Tiznow is a popular horse that every player might remember, and the most famous horse of that ilk. But I love every claiming or allowance horse who makes it all the way through the preps and rewards me at the end too. We're in it together. Call me corny. I don't care.
I'd never proclaim past performances useless, because another player might ferret out the same things I do, but they like to play exotic wagers. I personally don't use them that day, because I'm a win guy. But how is an exotics guy supposed to fill out his ticket w/o pp's?
What I do won't provide a prime play as often as your money watching strategy might be able to. It takes a lot of patience and hard work. I'm able to find them just once or twice a year. So I don't know if the results are similar. It's a labor of love.
The most difficult part of being a prep & go sleuth is the fragile nature of the athlete. So many times a runner will begin the preps, go through a couple of them, moving forward and gaining fitness. Suddenly I see him regress, lose everything his trainer is trying to put in him, or he'll be injured and put on vaction for a time. It's heartbreaking.
I received a new kind of dissapointment a couple of weeks ago. I had been watching a runner for a few months and he was progressing beautifully. He made it through the final prep and I had two possible races for him to enter & win next out. I must've missed the announcer's call between races. I got home, read the chart, only to learn this horse was claimed by a conditioner who had no idea he just acquired a next out winner who needed to be entered quickly in one of these races or the lustre would wear off his shine. The entry dates have now come and gone and his name was nowhere to be found. This too was heartbreaking, but in a different way.
Tote Master
03-20-2005, 02:23 AM
Valulist
First off, the PP’s are only a start. Many players supplement the PP’s with their own information, which could include subjective judgments on whether or not a horse is well meant. As for reading the tote, there may be a few instances you can catch a "live" horse but what about the times you could get off a 7-1 shot you like and go with the 7-2 layoff horse who's taking all the steam and ends up running 8th?? And with so much money coming in late, tote analysis means a lot less than it used to in the old daysYes, agree that there is “other” information that should be used to supplement the PP’s. Traditionally, these factors include trips, current track conditions, jockey changes, and estimates as to how the running of a race might shape up. But, I for one would like to hear about these “subjective judgments” as related to the connection’s intentions. Your assessment of “reading” the tote board is simply worlds apart from a true tote analysis. It would be like comparing a view of listed race entries with a M/L and using an elaborate software package to analyze the PP’s. There’s no discrimination at all between an entry at 7/2 or a 50/1 shot. A good analysis considers every entry as being “live” when the money flows properly into each of the betting pools. It’s the wagering bias that’s created that makes them live, not the odds.
From what I’ve seen, late money only dilutes the analysis. Think about it. If you were a heavy hitter and knew for a fact (especially in advance) that that a horse had a REAL chance at winning, would you wait until 5 mins to post to get your bet in. Or how about the guy who’s acting on behalf of someone else? Do you think for a minute he’s going to risk not getting the bet in by procrastinating?
In the old days there were no personal computers to do any analysis. Remember even hand-held calculators weren’t popular until the mid-seventies. So any type of so-called tote reading that’s being referred to as happening in the old days must have predated that. Again looking at just the odds is not a tote analysis. In my opinion, the odds should only be used as a barometer for betting value, not an indicator of intentions.
Have a nice weekend!
raybo
03-20-2005, 03:12 PM
"From what I’ve seen, late money only dilutes the analysis. Think about it. If you were a heavy hitter and knew for a fact (especially in advance) that that a horse had a REAL chance at winning, would you wait until 5 mins to post to get your bet in. Or how about the guy who’s acting on behalf of someone else? Do you think for a minute he’s going to risk not getting the bet in by procrastinating?"
Personally, I never place a wager prior to 5 minutes to post and I have never been shut out while wagering at more than 1 minute before post. The old days of waiting in line to make a wager are over, in case you haven't noticed.
The only advantage to placing money early is to enable you to make multiple wagers and therefore, not showing your hand to the public, however, the earlier you wager the more your wager affects the odds and tips off the public. Wagering early cannot be done discretely if wagering a sizeable amount. You would have to wager several times in order to get a large wager placed if you began early. However, if you wait you can place a much larger bet without affecting the odds and tipping the public. And at the same time garnering valuable knowledge about the true value of the proposed wager. Wagering early guarantees no odds edge. You give up your largest ally, the overlay.
Well intentioned horses are hard to hide from skilled handicappers, analyzing the horse's history, unless the horse has been layed off and even then, there may be history that would prevent that being hidden, also. Among your tote analysis money is all the public's money and trying to determine if the connections are betting is iffy, at best, no matter what you say.
You can keep pounding your drum and trying to make a case for your own program to the people here and elsewhere, but the reason you get so much negative response here is that most of us have been in the game far too long to fall for your ploy. We know that a thorough analysis of history and assessments as to how the races shape up are the only proven strategies for investing in this game and making a profit consistently.
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.