Homemade Brohamer-espue database [Archive] - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

sealord

05-10-2005, 09:45 PM

Hello All-

Was hoping to employ some of you fellow Sartin/Brohamer fans out there. I'm still new to the pace handicapping game, and after reading Modern Pace Handicapping about 89 times, I've decided I'd like to create a homespun db to handle some of the calculations.
I'm not too skillful with database/spreadsheet applications, and am curious if you more advanced 'cappers out there have given it a go. I'm specifically interested in the program computing all fraction times, as well as early pace, average pace, sustained pace, and percent E.
I'm not too concerned about downloading online PPs into the 'base, since I really only play the horses occasionally. I guess I would just enter them into the computer and go from there.
While on the subject, didn't Beyer's 120 figure of Bellamy Rd. in the Wood seem a bit suspect? According to the Sartin/Brohamer methodology, his figure was superior, but not by astronomic proportions. I also tip my hat to the thousands of smart pace handicappers (such as myself) who gave Bellamy no chance. I also must give a bit of credit to my wife for putting at least a couple of bucks on Giacomo, although she just thought he was handsome, lol.

Thanks for your time, and I look forward to hearing back from you guys. I love this site, thanks to the intelligent posters.

Jeff

46zilzal

05-11-2005, 12:03 AM

at yahoogroups.com there are TWO groups that can help VDCMessengerService or Sartin ALums...but the datbase approach is just to time consuming...learn to be a holist (study races) not a reductionist (study the horse's records)

hurrikane

05-11-2005, 07:57 AM

richrosa

05-11-2005, 09:59 AM

The Sartin programs mentioned here are excellent and should be plenty to get you started. Speculator continues to improve, but is DOS based and does not assist you in analyzing the data any further than the programs functions allow.

As a fellow MPH-er, I can also endorse programming your own with many of the excellent free tools out there. There are many VisualBasic disciples (and some Excel, although I don't understand that) here on the boards, however I've been a strong advocate of PHP/MySQL which is FREE (as in beer), and gives you a web-based platform to create a program.

The major advantage in programming your own, is that you can tinker and change it as you see fit. I travel a lot in the US and overseas, so I "upgrade" my program on nearly every plane trip when I have a lot of time.

If you are familiar with PHP/MySQL and want some code to get you started, I probably can supply that for you.

hurrikane

05-11-2005, 03:26 PM

Hello All-

I'm not too skillful with database/spreadsheet applications, and am curious if you more advanced 'cappers out there have given it a go. I'm specifically interested in the program computing all fraction times, as well as early pace, average pace, sustained pace, and percent E.
I'm not too concerned about downloading online PPs into the 'base, since I really only play the horses occasionally. I guess I would just enter them into the computer and go from there.

Jeff

I might suggest that if you are not too savvy with db's then you should not use MySQL and PHP. It is rather advanced for a beginner. If you are familiar with db and programming then go for it.
It also seems you are not really talking about a db. You are not concerned with daily downloads or online pps? just enter them? If you are keeping a database for historical data analysis you need to have all the data in there, every race, every day, for what you play(turf, sprints, by tracks etc)
Not just the days you play. If you are just looking to perform calculations on the day you are going to the races that is a whole different animal and has nothing to with maintaining a database. YOu could do that with any number of spreadsheet programs or some simple basic programming.

Valuist

05-11-2005, 05:17 PM

I would say learn to be a 'whatever it takes to make the money' ist.

with a db you can churn 100s of thousands through the windows every year and not have to sit and look at every friggin race to do it.

just mo

I always figured that the non believers in track bias are the computer guys. The software worshippers think the computer can factor everything in. It can't; it won't, and it never will.

sealord

05-11-2005, 06:36 PM

Just wanted to thank everybody for their replies.

Jeff P

05-11-2005, 07:18 PM

The software worshippers think the computer can factor everything in. It can't; it won't, and it never will.
I submit to you that you may want to re-think that statement. A computer can do thousands of mistake free calculations in the blink of an eye and algorithms keep improving with the passage of time.

The way I see it, everything we look at as players falls into one or more schools of handicapping thought. IMHO, they are, in no particular order of importance:

1. Ability - Demonstrated or potential - can include fig histories, class, breeding, and many other tidbits

2. Pace - includes ability to race on or near the lead, matchups between individual competitors, suitability of running style to track surface, and other misc tidbits

3. Current Form - can be measured effectively a number of different ways.

4. Connections - trainer intent, competency of rider to get the most out of a horse's preferred running style, etc

5. Playability - the amount of inherent chaos found in the race, factors the horse carries that either scare off or attract money.

Algorithms currently exist that can and do measure these things and combine them together in ways that bring profitable play within reach of the player.

There may be a handful of people out there somewhere along the lines of a handicapping idiot-savant. This would be someone with the innate ability to simply look at traditional past performances and make profitable wagering decisions. I don't have that ability. And I doubt many out there do.

Since I am not a handicapping idiot-savant, good database software is my tool of choice.

-jp

Houndog

05-11-2005, 07:50 PM

I have been working on a Excel spreadsheet which I may use for maintaining a track profile as in MPH by Brohamer. It can calculate 1st fraction in FPS, 2 fraction FPS, 3rd fraction FPS, EP, and Early Energy%. It also has columns for position and beaten lengths. It does require some manual entry and it could probably be adapted for handicapping races, but you would probably be better off with a regular program to do this. It is better than entering all of this in a calculator, but not as good as someone with programming skills.

You are welcome to a copy of this spreadsheet if you need any ideas. I have only completed 6 furlongs so far, but the other distances should fall in place with a few changes in formulas;etc.

Tom

05-11-2005, 10:48 PM

If you just want to calculate the figures, I have a simple Excel sheet that will do all the numbers from the book. I will try to attach it here - if Excel files can't be attached, email or PM me and I will send it to you. It is based on 10 feet per length, just like the book.

hcap

05-12-2005, 07:24 AM

Tom,

I normally don't use fps, but thought I thought I would try it out.
A few questions:

1-In your sheet column S, I only see values increasing by 1. No formulas. Is this correct?
2-Should factor x be used in routes? Don't remember the Sartin recomondations.
3-Will these fps calcs be correct for routes 1 1/4 miles and above?

Thanks

Zaf

05-12-2005, 07:28 AM

The X factor is only used in sprints.

ZAFONIC

hurrikane

05-12-2005, 08:24 AM

I always figured that the non believers in track bias are the computer guys. The software worshippers think the computer can factor everything in. It can't; it won't, and it never will.

I don't have to figure everything in. I can look at every race at every track, every day in 2 mins, looking for horses with a certain type of advantage that have proven out to be profitable over time. If the odds are right I play.

99% of the time I can't tell you the name of the horse, type of race, distance, surface, etc. Only date, track, race, pp, and odds to bet.

this works for me. If you want to spend hours pouring over an overpriced drf looking at maybe 2 or 3 tracks and 20 races have at it.

I did that for years and can do it with the best of them. I just don't find it useful or even much fun these days. Plus I get ink all over my hands.

I believe 50% of this 'stuff' you say the computer cannot understand is perception, 'old wives tales', bs, or just plain wrong.
No way you can know that without looking at hundreds and thousands of races. You can to that with a pile of drfs or a database.

What does a cpmputer have to do with believing in track bias?
The only way you can decipher the existance of a track bias is with a database. you have to have historical data to see if a bias exists. i dont' care if that data is on a piece of paper or on a computer.
And just where do you think all of that data printed in the DRF comes from....someone's head. A computer...duh.

your statement is one of ignorance my friend.

have fun, don't forget to wash your hands when your done.

Valuist

05-12-2005, 09:43 AM

Hurrikane-

What does computer/software have to do with biases (and not believing in them)? A lot of these computer and software types are new to the game (I'm talking about having played it for 5 years or less). They think because they can program, they can beat the game. Those that don't watch the races don't see what is going on. All they see are the result charts. The charts don't tell everything. I posted in a different thread about a day Hawthorne was biased; you really couldn't tell just by reading the Equibase charts; you had to watch the races to see the bias. You let me know when a computer can predict if a track will be a dead rail track or a 4 path track. I won't hold my breath because we'll all be long gone IF that ever happens. And just how is a computer going to judge a horse's appearance? The answer is simple: it can't. Until a computer can factor in those two variables, it will only give out part of the story. I don't know how many professional horse bettors you've talked to, or played alongside, but I know they would say you are the one that's ignorant, not me.

PaceAdvantage

05-12-2005, 10:14 AM

So, you get part of your story from a computer, and the other part from observation. Seems like a pretty cozy relationship to me. Isn't that the best of both worlds?

Why do people constantly diss using a computer to handicap? Nobody says it was any better or worse than any other method....only easier.

You can waste a couple of hours trying to come up with a track profile and homemade speed and pace figs by hand, or you can have the computer do it for you in seconds....which do you choose?

Less time spent in data preparation = more time to play more tracks = more $$ IF you have a positive expectation.

And it's funny when you said you thought it was mostly the computer guys who were non-believers in track bias. I've had just the opposite experience.

Valuist

05-12-2005, 10:31 AM

I would never waste a couple hours trying to come up with a "track profile". I may be interested in knowing how a track played the previous race day but what happened the first month of the meet can be irrevelant later on. Tracks change day to day; this is a game of specifics, not generalities. As for the speed and/or pace figs, I'll take doing them by hand. Beyer and Brown don't do their numbers by computer either. They do them with the ole pen and paper. Not all teletimers are 100% accurate. Those that do the figs by hand can spot questionable times.

PaceAdvantage

05-12-2005, 10:39 AM

To each his own. You won't find me criticizing those who handicap as you do, just as I expect people to respect the way I choose to get things done.....

Valuist

05-12-2005, 10:44 AM

My criticism wasn't directed at those who use software as a supplement to their handicapping. It was at those who never see a race and believe the world of handicapping begins and ends at the computer. I guess I'm old school.

SAL

05-12-2005, 10:49 AM

I agree with Valuist on the point that a surface bias can be hard to detect. Sometimes you do have to watch a few races to spot it. But these types rarely come up, not often enough to make me want to watch replays everyday.

But a running style bias is very easy to spot with a computer. I have recently started using a very good db program and have found that running style is only one of many types of biases that you can follow. I have always been resistant to db handicapping because I was afraid of the backfitting factor, but I have found that a db can be an invaluable timesaving tool for spotting trends.

Zaf

05-12-2005, 11:47 AM

I love using computers to do my scut work. I remember the old days in the race book with my TI-80 calculator :eek: I remember spending 20 minutes handicapping one race :eek: Now, with the push of a button, the computer can make thousands of calculations in 1 second, and present the results in a very concise manner. I find that very useful. Now I have time to look over the pp's for a minute :D

ZAFONIC

Houndog

05-12-2005, 01:23 PM

Tom's spreadsheet is way better than mine. It is really thought out well and organized much better. I was trying to figure out how to convert minutes to seconds so the spreadsheet can use them, and this spreadsheet does the job.

This is where the Sartin Methodology was years ago before the ENERGY! days. At the time Phase III was way ahead of what other people were doing.
Tom's spreadsheet is more user friendly than the Phase III program from DOS days. Again Tom nice work on your spreadsheet.

hurrikane

05-12-2005, 01:30 PM

you obviously know little about progamming and computers.

thousands of hours are spent finding factors that have value and algorithms to mine that data. Who says programmers or 'computer people' work in a vacume.
you do, that's all. and that my friend is the ignorance I speak of.

No, I can't see every horse or look at every race. But I dont' think you could win without the information you have accumulated or your racing form.

That is a trade off i make. I compensate for it by betting many many more races than you.

What in the world makes you think Beyer does not do his speed figs by computer?

I read your post about HAW.
I disagree with you assesment and I think you proved nothing.
BUT..you are entitled to your opinion.

I have played beside many many professionals over the last 35 years. I have never heard one of them speak with 'blinkers on'...as you do.

Every one of them had an open mind and was always looking for an edge. I am positive that if I tracked them all down right now every one of them would be using a computer for racing in some fashion.

Valuist

05-12-2005, 08:20 PM

Tom

05-12-2005, 11:07 PM

I always figured that the non believers in track bias are the computer guys. The software worshippers think the computer can factor everything in. It can't; it won't, and it never will.

Actually, the program makes it easier to spot trends. I have every track at my fingertips, and can spend a half hour Saturday morning looking for tracks that are offering strong trends and focus on those all afternoon. No way I could ever do that with a DRF and pencil. Heck,
When KEE opened this spring, I hit like a madman betting late paced horse on a track with a reputation for being early.

Misteranthropic

05-13-2005, 01:30 AM

And it's funny when you said you thought it was mostly the computer guys who were non-believers in track bias. I've had just the opposite experience.:ThmbUp:

Until I started using a db program I thought that track bias was WAY overblown and mostly existed in the minds of individuals. Being able to look at thousands of races at numerous tracks has proved to me that racetracks are as unique as the horses that run on them.

Jeff P.'s Jcapper is my software of choice and it's truly amazing to see how individual tracks play at various distances and surfaces. No way, no how would I EVER have been able to decipher by hand what Jcapper shows me in seconds.

05-13-2005, 02:56 AM

I know a bit about networking but absolutely zero about programming and have no intention of changing that. I took a programming class in college many years ago and it was incredibly boring.

Beyer has said he does the numbers by hand, along with his associates. Anyone who has tracked his numbers knows that he often uses projections, and you often may see two completely different speed figures for races on a given day even though the final times may be identical.

As for the debate on Haw's April 30 card, see my other post in the Handicapping Forum. DRF beat writer Marcus Hersh saw it the same way I did.

They definitely do use a computer to at the very least crank out the raw numbers, do a lot of the grunt work. But I would seriously doubt they are doing the variants by computer, with the exception of maybe the smaller tracks.

Perhaps The Little Guy could shed some light, I know Jerry Brown has indicated that Beyer is making the smaller tracks by computer with pars. As I can't recall the last time I've seen a "projection" figure at one of the small tracks, I tend to think he is right.

Valuist

05-13-2005, 10:51 AM

BillW

05-13-2005, 10:55 AM

There's also one other factor I neglected to mention: drugs. Maybe someday the software will be able to factor this in but since its all based on observation and no hard truth, I don't see how it could. If you could factor this in, you'd have a powerful tool.

Drugs are just another bias in the data. They may manifest in a trainer's pattern or a horses performance just as a track bias manifestsin track performance.

Bill

Valuist

05-13-2005, 11:00 AM

I guess the next question would be does it distinguish a trainer's performance from state to state? This could get very interesting, as some states are adopting tougher drug policies.

Jeff P

05-13-2005, 11:11 AM

I guess the next question would be does it distinguish a trainer's performance from state to state? This could get very interesting, as some states are adopting tougher drug policies. You can use software to set up models for individual trainers. One of the many parameters you can set up as part of a trainer specific model is track name. Do this, and you can run the model back through the database and see, in a manner of seconds, if the trainer named in the model is strong at Track A where perhaps there are no detention barns and weak at Track B where there are.

-jp

BillW

05-13-2005, 11:29 AM

There could be many influences on a trainers state to state performance. He could be more free to use the juice in one venue vs. another or it simply may be he has a higher quality (or more competitive) portion of his barn stabled in one place vs. another (track to track, state to state). Possibly a trainer is simply more comfortable in conducting his operation in one place vs another. Regardless of the cause this information can be gleaned with proper technique.

While I don't do this at present, I can see where tracking the ebb and flow of a trainers performance from circuit to circuit could be quite interesting.