PDA

View Full Version : Separating Your Contenders


douglasw32
04-17-2005, 02:49 PM
Hi Everyone-

2nd Post Ever...Here what I am wondering.

If you are good at narrowing the race down to the top 2 or three (sometimes 4 in large fields) and coming up with the contenders... what does each person do at that point?

I.E. I handicap basically with Pace and Speed, like most you see a race just on that, and you have the winner Just about every time (bad luck nails a few) however I think that due to seeing the race through this one window to separate these contenders you need to look elsewhere, not through the same window.

I doubt I am explaining my question very well, Basically If you have 3 or 4 horses How do you take it down to 1 or two...what do you personally do at this point other than pray to the racing gods or use tarot cards (a joke)

It drives me nuts to pick three decide on 1 and watch the other two come in the exacta, when I knew all three had a shot.

I understand value and setting a line, but I would still like to narrow my top 3.

A side note, I am not a math person but I think...public handicappers succeed by narrowing it to three, I think anyone can narrow it to three using any system they understand. There must be a reason three is where you come to?

So what would be the best way to forget the rest of the horses and concentrate on those three?

Maybe handicapping them again is not the best way, maybe a very good elimination method to get rid of a few contenders that are objective by the method, subjectively.

Any opinions would be much appreciated and fun to hear.

kenwoodallpromos
04-17-2005, 11:18 PM
I assume public cappers use 3 because with the 3 lowest odds horses there is an over 50% chance 1 of those will win and they look good if you are not tracking ROI.
I used to handicap by narrowing the field down if I was intent on betting the race no matter what; now I use systems that either point to only 1 horse by % probability; point to longshots as the bet; or point to 1 horse by spot win method.
My serious direct answer to your question is if I cannot decide between 2 or 3 horses I put $2.00 on the tote favorite and cheer for whoever is in the lead.

douglasw32
04-17-2005, 11:44 PM
Thanks for responding :)

bobhilo
04-17-2005, 11:55 PM
narrow it down to three

then throw out the favorite (it loses 67% at most tracks)

dutch the two left

or pass

that is what doc sartin told us to do

today at santa anita there were good payoffs 16.80 14.40 25.60 13.80 the rest were chalk

do you keep records of what factors in your handicapping are winning?

second fraction? late fraction?

what types of races do you hit best?

which tracks work for you?

douglasw32
04-18-2005, 12:35 AM
So simple yet so "RIGHT ON".

Throw the favorite...hmm...now that is a thought.

What I have been using for some time (microsoft access and the single file drf from bris) Is to build a figure that looks at the par of e1 and e2 compared to the horses e1 and e2 gives me positive or negative, added into the speed figure and the turn time to come up with one final figure.

I have it pull the last race and one back in case the last has an excuse.

(found the last to be more predictive and easier, mainly easier than selecting pacelines)

then looking at the top 4, and quirins speed points and styles to narrow it to three.

Have no accurate records of how often or ROI but I love doing it this way and it puts me onto a ton of winners (I do not bet, accept on paper) I love handicapping but am a horrible gambler :( Hope to someday though.

I usaually do Finger Lakes (it's local) Mountaineer (It's after the day Job) and the Large Tracks and Large Races on the weekends.

As for races, Maiden Races with FTS's or limited info (turf races with limited turf info) and allowances races with conditions seem to all perform way to randomly.

All others work real well.

Basically it is like doing crossword puzzles for some, I handicap at least a race a day and run it through the database.

WJ47
04-25-2005, 02:16 AM
Basically, I handicap a race through process of elimination (when I'm in the mood to thoroughly handicap and not play stupid action bets). I go through each horse's record and see if I can find something that I don't like to see, such as in a maiden race, a horse that has had 37 tries and never made it to the winner's circle, a horse with an extremely low percentage jockey/trainer (less than 5% wins), a horse that went off at huge odds in all his starts and showed nothing, or a horse that is in terrible form. The horses that I find flaws in get crossed off (they earn the "black mark of hatred"). I will still consider a horse if he has a low percentage trainer, but is getting a good jockey, but not vice versa because I feel that a good trainer who has confidence in the horse would not put a bad jock on a ready to win horse.

The horses that are left are my contenders. These are the horses that have good speed/pace figures, good connections, potentially positive changes (better jock/first lasix/blinkers on), dropping in class after a good effort, returning to a level where they won before, or my favorite thing, switching to a jockey that won with the horse previously at the same distance/track.

It is a wonderful thing when there is only one or two horses left after the process of elimination (this happens more often at the smaller tracks). Then you bet to win or play the exacta/trifecta. But if there are too many contenders in one race, but only a few in the races before and after, it is a good idea to consider playing a DD, P3 or P4.

The problem is that in many races, there are too many contenders, so I understand the problem with that. I know it is easier said than done, as I enjoy going on gambling binges on the weekends where I think I must bet 50 races without thoroughly handicapping, but I think it is better to not bet races that are potentially contentious. It is horrible when you narrow it down to 2 horses and the one you didn't bet wins. I know some players that bet 2 or 3 horses in each race provided the prices are good enough to give a profit if one of them wins.

If you pick horses exclusively by speed and pace figures, you may be able to narrow down your contenders by trying to find fault with some of the contenders, like a horse that may demonstrate a dislike for a certain track, distance, or surface or a horse getting a negative switch or a horse with seconditis (unless you are playing an exacta box!). :)

Good luck to you! :)

douglasw32
04-25-2005, 07:08 AM
Nice post :) Thanks for sharing the way you do it. I have been toying with that idea, I read little about finding very low ROI stats and using it as a list of earlt eliminators.

I have a freind who's guilty of the same action on weekends ;) My biggest downfall is making everything as mechanichal and methodical as I can, and missing out on good old gut feeling.

jotb
04-25-2005, 12:32 PM
Hello:


I usually narrow down the rest of the contenders by paddock and post parade inspection. A horses negative or postitive body language can often lead you in the right direction. I would suggest reading and video material to have a better understanding of this subject before using this tool to narrow down the contenders.

Good luck
Joe

JackS
04-25-2005, 01:31 PM
It often seems to me that on your list of contenders that only one or maybe two horses have a "hit the board" profile that the rest of the horses don't. This would not necessarily mean that this horses(s) has any better chance to win than any other horse but, he deservers to be used as a key.
Weather your play is straight or exotic, this horse should appear on all tickets purchased.
For straight bets ,W/P only, for Tri's- W/P and lightly to show, for Supers- W/P and lighty to Show and complete ommission in the 4th spot. After all, we've found our horse and have decided to live or die by this one horses proformance only.
This can't be used successfully in every race however because there are races in which we either can't completely (1). understand the conditions (2) The race is poor and that the one horse that seems to have a slight edge is bet down to unrreasonable odds.
Be selective and keep these simple rules of thumb in mind. Good Luck

shanta
04-25-2005, 01:54 PM
[QUOTE=douglasw32]Hi Everyone-

It drives me nuts to pick three decide on 1 and watch the other two come in the exacta, when I knew all three had a shot.

I understand value and setting a line, but I would still like to narrow my top 3.



Hi Doug,

Here are a couple of ideas:

1) Find a corrolary SEPERATE from your pace stuff. If you have 3 contenders maybe check to see if there are class or distance levels that each contender can or can NOT run to. Maybe one of your 3 can only run competitively when facing 10 claimers. If today is 15k and he has shown no ability BEFORE to be competitive ( 1st or 2nd, or within 3 lenghts of winner) in todays company you can throw him out and go to your other 2 with confidence.

2) If one of your 3 contenders shows an OPPOSITE running style ( energy distribution, esp, visual, speed points, etc) from your other 2 you might consider focusing on this guy either win/place and/or in exacta boxes with your other 2 contenders. Keeping records of how these "counter" guys run might really reveal something profitable to you.

I hope this helps and all the best to ya

Richie :)

douglasw32
04-25-2005, 02:09 PM
Richie-

"If one of your 3 contenders shows an OPPOSITE running style ( energy distribution, esp, visual, speed points, etc) from your other 2 you might consider focusing on this guy either win/place and/or in exacta boxes with your other 2 contenders. Keeping records of how these "counter" guys run might really reveal something profitable to you."



Hmmm...Can you explain this further, sounds interesting but I am not following.

I would really apreciate it this info is great to recieve from others, every one around me thinks it's a fools hobby ;)

shanta
04-25-2005, 03:32 PM
Hmmm...Can you explain this further, sounds interesting but I am not following.

Doug,
Ok I read your earlier post and saw this:

"What I have been using for some time (microsoft access and the single file drf from bris) Is to build a figure that looks at the par of e1 and e2 compared to the horses e1 and e2 gives me positive or negative, added into the speed figure and the turn time to come up with one final figure."


It looks like you are building a final fig adjusted by "early". I dont know this access and spreadsheet stuff so forgive me if my next idea is undoable.

Use the SAME method to narrow to final 3 or 4. Now is it possible to build a "late fig" using "e2 AND "e3" ? Don't worry about incorporating any kind of PAR in this number ok? Let it stand on just how fast the horse ran these 2 fractions Doug.

Write down each of your final contenders LATE FIG. Wait for races where ONE of your contenders has a STRONG advantage over all the other contenders.Defining "Strong" will be up to you. Looking at a few dozen races should show some patterns to that might help.

It is these strong late fig horses among your final contenders that I consider "counter" to the others.

A workup of 50 to 100 races where this "type" exists broken down by distance is my suggestion. Do they win enough to profit? How bout place? Key exacta horses? Keeping track will answer this for ya.


Richie :)

bettheoverlay
04-25-2005, 04:44 PM
I'd look at how the 3 contenders perform in serial bets, especially P3's. Throw out the favorite,(or the lowest odds horse of the 3) in the first leg, and its only a $18 bet, you get a piece of the others, and a chance at some juicy payoffs.

douglasw32
04-25-2005, 08:11 PM
Ahh Okay I got it now, and you are correct it is only adjusted by early...I will give it a go adn let you know what it turns up.

And to (bettheoverlay) series bets are a good idea also. Man I guess I should have asked questions long before this, LOTS of feedback. Thanks Again.

douglasw32
04-25-2005, 11:45 PM
This one is for SHANTA...

KUDOS :jump: on the idea, preliminary results are very encouraging...

the "counter" horse seems to be narrowing it to two better than I can "subjectivly"