Ragozin (The Sheets) likes M D'O

[karlskorner]

www.thoroughbredtimes.com

[andicap]

Harlan's Holilday is more and more intriguing. If its wet he moves way up and his back figures under my formulas put him right there. If the public lets him get away I'll use him

[karlskorner]

Andicap;

Under selections I posted HH. Using the "tried and true method" of double letters.

Karl

[andicap]

So I take it you voted for Hubert Humphrey and read Horatio Hornblower. A long time ago you ate at Horn & Hardart's. And now you can order great bagels from H&H in NYC.

[karlskorner]

Andicap;

Are you old enough to remember the rice pudding at Horn & Hardarts ? Nothing better. It always impressed me as a child how the lady could throw you the right amount of nickels regardless of what you gave her.

Karl

[tanda]

Harlan's Holiday seems less intriguing now. Maybe it is because he just is not good enough.

Well, actually he is quite good as a money burner.

[boxcar]

Originally posted by tanda:

>>
Harlan's Holiday seems less intriguing now. Maybe it is because he just is not good enough.

Well, actually he is quite good as a money burner.
>>

Since you brought this up, permit to make a general observation about many of the "hot contenders" in this race, including HH. One of the reasons for my doing this is because I was really surprised to learn some months ago how many A+ users there are on this forum.

For starters, A+ ranked War Emblem the #2 horse in the race with a 5-1 line, while giving the #1 slot to Magic Weisner with a 4-1 line. Not bad.

As for the rest of the so called contenders, here is how A+ ranked them:

Proud Citizen: #5
Medaglia d'Oro: #8
Harlan's Holiday: #9
Booklet: #10

Equality and Easyfromthegitgo were both ranked #3, but neither of these horses, from a class standpoint, belonged in this race. In fact, Magic didn't belong here either for the same reason -- but one could make a case, I suppose, that this was a MD-bred who loved the circuit, enjoyed great form and had the Mig up on him yesterday. And the Mig does have a way of bringing in his fair share of longshots.

I mention these things not to "redboard", but because there are many A+ users out there, and I'd be curious to know how other programs ranked the contenders in this race. A+ has historically done quite well in these big races, providing the user includes as a viable contender worthy of further of consideration any horse whose price line is
<= the Random Odds of the race. For example, in this race the cutoff point would have been with Proud Citizen whose line was 12-1 in a 13-horse field.

Boxcar

[JimG]

Interesting regarding A+. Thier report is sold by Trackmaster and here is the print out of A+ as put out on the Trackmaster site:

War Emblem 7/2
Magdalia D'Oro 4/1
Proud Citizen 6/1
Harlen's Holiday 12/1
Magic Wiesner 14/1


Interesting Boxcar that their published report is different from what you posted with the software. Any idea what could account for the difference? Oh, by the way, here is the link to yesterday's A+ software report on the Trackmaster site

www.trackmaster.com/cgi-bin/tmf_link/download/pim0518ap.htm

Jim

[boxcar]

Jim G Wrote:

>>
Interesting regarding A+. Thier report is sold by Trackmaster and here is the print out of A+ as put out on the Trackmaster site:

War Emblem 7/2
Magdalia D'Oro 4/1
Proud Citizen 6/1
Harlen's Holiday 12/1
Magic Wiesner 14/1
>>

That is indeed, very interesting. It seems to me the only way to get to the bottom of the very wide divergences is to contact the author of A+ Mike, which I'll do since this info has truly piqued my curiosity.

The following is how how the horses ranked and what their A+ line was, according to A+ v7.0 (which is Mike's latest upgrade in a Windows platform):

Magic Weisner -- 4-1
War Emblem -- 5-1
Easyfromthegitgo -- 10-1
Equality -- 10-1
Proud Citizen -- 12-1
Crimson Hero -- 13-1
Menacing Dennis -- 13-1
Medaglia d'Oro -- 14-1
Harlan's Holiday -- 16-1
USS Tinosa -- 25-1
Booklet -- 26-1
Table Limit -- 27-1
Straight Gin -- 38-1

Am I suprised that MW, for example, was so highly ranked? Not at all! I can tell you that A+'s top 2 or 3 horses are very capable of producing very nice payoffs.

Will be interesting to see what Mike D says about this.

Thanks, Jim, for pointing this out. Never occurred to me to check the A+ report on TM's site.

Boxcar

[JimG]

Boxcar,

I also checked the A+ website and they state they had War Emblem on top and Wiener in fifth. Have you tweaked your version of the program. I have been intrigued by the program in the past. Can you tell me a little more about the program. Are there printouts other than the graded analysis? Can you print a racing form from the software?

Appreciate any answers you can give me. Thanks.

Jim

[boxcar]

JimG wrote:

>>
I also checked the A+ website and they state they had War Emblem on top and Wiener in fifth. Have you tweaked your version of the program. I have been intrigued by the program in the past. Can you tell me a little more about the program. Are there printouts other than the graded analysis? Can you print a racing form from the software?

Appreciate any answers you can give me. Thanks.
>>

You know, I take certain things for granted sometimes and overlook the obvious. What must account for the big disparity is the fact that I have a program that converts ITS data into CSW format. My buddy, whose conversion program I use, and I might be the only two ITS users on the planet using ITS data files with the A+ software.
:)

I'm sure that Mike at A+ must be using TM's files in CSW format. I think TM calls these the "C" files, but, ironically, the files are prefixed with a "D".

It's a little disconcerting to see such a huge disparity between outputs, which I'd have to attribute largely to the speed ratings used within various data files. (A+ now processes BRIS files, also, but I can't tell you which files these are specifically, since I don't use BRIS.) I say this because A+ is first and foremost a speed-based program. It would make for an interesting study to analyze a large sampling of A+'s GAR outputs (Graded Analsysis Reports) processed from the three different data vendors -- although, I would tend to think that over a long period of time, no one data vendor's SRs would show any marked advantage over any of the others within the A+ program.

A user can modify the software's impact values, but Mike cautions users that the defaults were tested over a very large number of races (over 100,000, I believe), and that any changes made would probably radically affect the program's output. I have never bothered fooling around with the IVs, since I'm perfectly comfortable with the level of "kinkiness" with the current default setttings.

Also, a user can customize the GAR output to his taste. One can choose the order in which the data will appear and just precisely what data he wants to see. Right now, there are 18 data options from which to choose -- things such as Program Number, Post Position, Jockey, Horse, Trainer, Trainer Record, ML, etc., etc.

Since I use A+ in conjuction with other software, I'm only interested in the A+ Ratings (which my other program converts simply into rankings), and A+'s Price Line -- this A+ data being incorportated into my other software.

For MLs, you have the option of dl'g the free TSN Early Track Program files and incorporating the MLs into the GARs. I don't need to do this since my buddy's conversion progranm incorporates the MLs into his other program (that I also use) right from the ITS data files.

A+'s GAR is the only output you can print out.

How good is A+? Well, I've been using it now for nearly 3 years in conjuction with my buddy's other program which he has dubbed APE -- short for A Plus Enhanced. But how good A+ or even APE is depends largely on _how_ you use the data produced by these programs. But I can tell you this...as a handicapping tool, as an aid in the decision-making process, I find A+ to be quite good. What I like the most about the program is that on a regular basis, the program will point a user to high ranked winning horses at very decent odds -- winning mutuels at times as high as in the triple digits.

I have on a couple of occassions ran tests for several hundred races each time to see how the top four ranked horses fared. On one occassion, the top ranked horse actually showed a slight flat bet profit. On another occassion, the 2nd ranked horse showed a small flat bet profit.

To be honest, I forget exactly what the hit rate for the top ranked horse was, but I think it was in the 25% range or so.

I hope this answers most of your questions. If not, you can always vist the A+ website. Drop me an email and I'll send you the URL, if you want.

Regards,
Boxcar