EXTEME PACE

[Doug]

Was checking out the old randyGiles.com website. Pretty interesting stuff.

One of the articles was about Extreme Pace Handicapping.

Anybody ever used this or use it now and has done some reseach or just some general opinions?

thanks

Doug

[Zaf]

Do you have the link ? I haven't been able to find his site lately.


ZAFONIC

[Doug]

ZAFRONIC,

Yes, I got the link from an old post (I think by game theory).

www.web.archive.org

I don't know if there is a dot between the web and archive, but I guess you can try it both ways.

Then type in RANDYGILES.COM in the search box.

It will take you to a page with a bunch of dates. Just pull up the last date and that will take you to the main page.

Doug

[KyRacer]

Now that is interesting. I guess nothing is ever lost on the internet. Things can still come back to haunt you. An old dog learned a new trick tonight. I think this is the link your looking for:

http://www.archive.org/

[GameTheory]

Does anyone know what happened to Randy? Did he just drop dead, or what?

[JimL]

Doug, I use pace pictures exclusively now to set up a race. One thing I dont do anymore is keep track profiles for I have found that if a race has a pace pressure of 30or up a presser or a sustained horse with a competitive speed figure will win. It does not matter what a track profile says.

[Doug]

JIM L.

Do you use competitive final time figs as recommended by Giles?

I agree with you about profiles. For the most part I think that priccipal thing applies to track bias.

Do you look at any pace figs or just go by running styles and pace pressure. I like pace pressure only.

Thanks

Doug

[delayjf]

Good site with lots of info. But man is it slow. I'm taking knaps inbetween threads on the forum. Anybody else have this problem.

[Doug]

DELAYJF,

Would have ansered sooner , but just woke up after hitting the articles button. Drives you nuts.

Doug

[Tom]

Originally posted by GameTheory
Does anyone know what happened to Randy? Did he just drop dead, or what?

I think he gave up pace handicapping and now just plays chinnese doubles <G> (Sorry...I just couldn't resist)

[JimL]

Doug, Derek wanted to know how I knew that 30 pace pressure was going to be there. Well we dont do we however ! have found that speed points are the best predictor of early pressure. Much better than velocity. I do look at pace ratings of early pressers, they are simply dangerous horses. Ialso look at pace ratings when looking for the optimal pace model another Giles original.

[GameTheory]

What you're looking at is not really Randy's site -- that is why it isn't all there, and that's why it is so slow -- the archive server has to sift through terabytes of data to retrieve the pages. It is best just to grab the .pdf versions of his articles for later printing...

[Doug]

JIM L.

I don't look at pace ratings except for the final fractions.

I feel that a 30x4 or whatever is telling enough and don't want to get any more confusion than there already is.

The reason I check out the final fraction is when I have a heavy pace pressure race and am going to play a closer, especially a deep closer I want that horse to have a better than par final fraction or a bomb type price.

Doug

[Tom]

Here is the OPM from his site...I find it worklld very well if I use the middle pace figure of the last three instead of the best, but this is the procedure:

1. Use only the last three races for each horse and exclude turf figures.
2. Circle each horse's best early pace figure out of the last three starts
3. Circle each horse's best late pace figure out of the last three starts
4. Rank the early and late pace figures of all the horses that were circled (see an example)
5. One-dimensional Es are Optimal Pace Model qualifiers if ranked 1 or 2 early and no more than 5
late
6. Two-dimensional Early Pace horses (E/P) are Optimal Pace Model qualifiers if ranked 1 or 2
early and no more than 4 late or no more than 4 early and no more than 2 late (The most talented
horses!)
7. One-dimensional Pressers (P>) are Optimal Pace Model qualifiers if ranked no more than 4 early
and no more than 2 late
8. Two-dimensional Late Pace horses (P/C) are Optimal Pace Model qualifiers if ranked no more
than 4 early and no more than 2 late

[JustMissed]

Thanks for the reference-great stuff.

I printed the Pace Pictures, OPM, Super Sprinter & Definitions.

Randy calls a two dimensional off pace runner a P/C(presser/closer).

I use TSN which classifies runners as E, E/P, P & S(sustainer/closer).

Can you or anyone else explain to me how to look at my P horses to determine if they are a one dimensional P or two dimensional P/S(P/C)?

Thanks,

JustMissed





:)

[Doug]

JUST MISSED

Sorry, at this time I do not know the dif. I will be working on it though. I am sure someone else can.

I started fooling with this concept on my racingpicks.com reports and it worked fairly well so thought I would do a little more research. Still kinda new at this stuff, but hopefully not for long. Trying to keep it as simple as possible which is why I kin of learn toward the EXTREME PACE HANDICAPPING idea.

Thanks,

Doug

[GR1@HTR]

Want a pace picture using Bris or TSN PP's?

Circle every E1/E2/LP fig on the PP that is above PAR in red ink. You will then have a "Pace Picture". A horse w/ a lot of red ink circles will give you the "fire" probablity of that horse. Look for horses that have red circles that the others don't...That should be your key horse...

I give my left nutt that doing the above will be much more effective than Randy Giles Pace Picture...

[JustMissed]

Thanks guys.

After more thought I'm not sure what good it would do me to know the difference between a Presser/Closer and a Presser anyway.

If I think a late runner could beat the front runner I just add the E2 & LP of each horse together to see if the late runner can pass the front runner in the stretch.

See ya,

JustMissed
:)

[andicap]

Originally posted by JustMissed
Thanks for the reference-great stuff.

I printed the Pace Pictures, OPM, Super Sprinter & Definitions.

Randy calls a two dimensional off pace runner a P/C(presser/closer).

I use TSN which classifies runners as E, E/P, P & S(sustainer/closer).

Can you or anyone else explain to me how to look at my P horses to determine if they are a one dimensional P or two dimensional P/S(P/C)?

A note of caution: Randy always warned -- and I agree -- that the TSN running style classifiers are often (well, not often, but enough to make a difference) incorrect. Since it is done by a computer algoritham and not by human judgement, that is inevitable.
Plus, BRIS does not include an S/P type of horse, one that is the most dangerous IMHO in a pressure race.
The way I differentiate a plain old "P" from an S/P (or P/S if he's usually a bit closer to the lead) is by just looking at where he comes from in his best races. If he's generally 1-3 lengths off the lead, I consider him a "P" But if he's shown the ability to close from further back AND stay close if the pace is slower he could be a P/S type.
I will usually consider (and everyone has their own methods) an S/P type to be more than 3-4 lengths back at the 2nd call (depending on size of field and the pace of course), but closer than say 6 lengths. Or he usually runs 4-6 lengths back, but has the ability to do well 1-3 lengths back if need be.






:)

[Zaf]

Thank you Doug & Kentucky Racer , I have searched for these pages several times and never had success.

It is quite slow !!

Thanks

ZAFONIC

[JustMissed]

That's. That was a good explanation.

I saw your handle on several of the old post at Randy's BB. Your were obviously a good student.

JustMissed


:)

[DBC]

This thread was my motivation for joining this forum. I first saw
Randy Giles' website a couple years ago and used extreme pace
with hot pace horses for awhile. Had some success with it but
then the website disappeared from the internet ( or so I thought).
I really appreciate the link to get back to the articles of his site,
and printed several of them out so I could get back in to it. Does
anyone know if Randy ever published pace multipliers for route
races. If not, I would be interested in any ideas on making them.
Shouldn't route races have multipliers for both the first and
second call? Just a thought.

DBC

[Fastracehorse]

I like to ask this question: "What does the Beyer measure?" - or any speed figure for that matter.

Answer: Speed figures are an amalgamation of a host of factors - pace included.

When we dissect speed figures - or a frog for example - we are really only tring to figure out how the speed figure works - or how the frog works.

But to catch overlays it is best to just use the speed figure - or in the frog's case: if you want to catch flys don't put pin him to the table.

That is as simple as I can make it.

Fastracehorse.

[Doug]

FFFASTT,

Little confused by the above post. (Happens to me quite frequently).

Extreme Pace does not involve disecting a final time fig.It is strictly a running style method. No final or fractional times involved, although some suggest a competitive final time before playing a horse with a running style (pace) advantage, I don't. Hard to catch the bombs that way.

If I were to adjust a Beyer (or other speed fig) I would add/subtract points on the pace shape of the race. A horse with early speed in a race lacking same as an example.

Doug

[andicap]

Originally posted by DBC
This thread was my motivation for joining this forum. I first saw
Randy Giles' website a couple years ago and used extreme pace
with hot pace horses for awhile. Had some success with it but
then the website disappeared from the internet ( or so I thought).
I really appreciate the link to get back to the articles of his site,
and printed several of them out so I could get back in to it. Does
anyone know if Randy ever published pace multipliers for route
races. If not, I would be interested in any ideas on making them.
Shouldn't route races have multipliers for both the first and
second call? Just a thought.

DBC

He never did get around to doing the routes......

[Fastracehorse]

So Doug,

Then extreme pace is just determining where every horse is sitting at the first pace call, etc??

Fast.

[Doug]

FFFASTT,

I confused you because I don't know what I'm talking about.
So Doug,

Then extreme pace is just determining where every horse is sitting at the first pace call, etc??

Fast.

Pretty much.

Is the horse an early speed type, a horse like runs close up just off the pace, a horse that lays a few lengths off the pace, but can close a little, or a pure closer.

Calculate some early speed points for the early runners to get a feel for how consistently they get the lead.

example: 7 horse field 2 early speed horses 2 pace horses and 3 closers. I would look at the early horses and check prices.

Now if there were 4 early speed horses 2 pace horses and 1 closer, I would take a hard look at the closer in the race as the PACE PRESSURE should be pretty heavy.

Basically you are looking for EXTREMES in the pace scenario. Only early speed in the race is my favorite. Closers will produce some bombs and that is the only time I will play them.

Doug

[Fastracehorse]

I do this:

1) Trainer intent.

2) Adjusted speed figures.

3) Where the horse will be placed tactically - ala Extreme Pace.

So my best bets are horses who will probably be on the lead, with the best adjd figs and, some trainer intent.

It is a beautiful thing when everything comes together.

In Aqu's 1st today the horse with the best adjd fig won!

But because I was confused by the trainer intent I didn't post the horse first. Paid $21.

For the above reason I bet p-3's because it allows for subjective error. There are many times when the race is contentious.

Look at this race I posted at FG's today:

3rd Race, Next Post 1:54 Off: 1:27


# Horse Jockey Weight Win Place Show
3 Cool Quip Lovato F Jr. 122 69.80 42.80 19.20
1 Lincoln Parish Romero J M 122 69.40 26.40
2 Saami Lanerie C J 122 5.40
Finish Time: 1:06 4/5

Scratched: None
$2 Exacta 3-1 Paid $1,014.00
$2 Quinella 1-3 Paid $359.40
$2 Trifecta 3-1-2 Paid $4,202.40

I posted: 3. 4/2/1/3

The 4 actually had the highest fig but had been off longer than a year - so because of the prices U could see how I might bet him even though he was 4th choice - all be it contentiously.

Fast.

[Doug]

FFFAST,

I try to use some trainer intent, but if the horse has an extreme pace advantage and is a super price I just ignore trainer.

Don't know how to adjust Beyers, but recently have been fooling with an idea where I rank the horses by speed figs and then make adjustements for track class, race class and trouble notes.

I believe you posted some ideas on trainer intent a while back and if I remember correctly I agreed 100% with what you posted.

Doug

[Fastracehorse]

Try it the next time you get beat.

Look to see if the horse did something different in his prepping - most times they do.

About not using a $ horse - I'm like you - if it warrants a bet it gets one.

Fast.

[Doug]

FFFASTT,

Doug, since U obviously don't buy in hard to trainer intent.


I bought into trainer intent some years ago and believe in it.

Its just that if I have an extreme pace horse and the price is real good I don't require that trainer intent.

On the other hand, if I spot a horse with trainer intent and the price is right I don't reqire that horse to have an extreme pace advantage.

Doug

[Tom]

Try these for Aqueduct Inner track.

6fur - 1 mi - 1m70 - 1m16 - 1m8
Route multipliers for both early calls.

23.20 46.60 71.50 -------- 0.6517
47.63 72.84 99.31 0.4796 0.7334
48.20 73.48 103.85 0.4642 0.7075
48.15 73.29 105.93 0.4545 0.6919
48.28 73.02 111.92 0.4314 0.6524

These times are the average times, fast tracks, obbtained by taking all races, fast tracks, at the distance, and then throwing out the fastest and slowest halves, using only the middle half of each sample. the multipliers were obtained from the resulting averages.
I never tried multipliers for the fisrt call, but it seems logical to do so.

[Fastracehorse]

Those #'s hurt my eyes.

I'm sure they work but I'm having trouble blinking.

fffastt

[DBC]

ANDICAP

Too bad Randy never got around to route races. Do you think
hot pace multipliers and extreme pace scenarios would be as
effective in routes? I saw your name in Randy's pace forum
quite often, and you seem very well versed in his methods.

DBC

[BIG HIT]

Hi guy's randy also said e\p horse's five or more length's behind were not as likely to win.Anybody ever check that out there may have been more to it going by memory.

[andicap]

Originally posted by DBC
ANDICAP

Too bad Randy never got around to route races. Do you think
hot pace multipliers and extreme pace scenarios would be as
effective in routes? I saw your name in Randy's pace forum
quite often, and you seem very well versed in his methods.

DBC


Actually I never tried his methods to much extent although I did study them for a while. I noticed it would hit a few longshots, but was too erratic for my tastes. I don't really like conventional pace handicapping -- lots of speed, a closer should win, little speed a front-runner should win -- although it is of course a factor in my overall decision, just not a dominant one. I've been burnt too many times -- going off a winner -- using these kind of pace methods.

[Larry Hamilton]

There is a very good reason why it is difficult (read impossible) to pull anything meaningful out of shape based on pace. The reason? Sample Size.

If you just use the the average number of horses per race (8) and the nomenclature of E, EP, P, S and NA, your number of possible combinations is 5 to the 8th power (nearly 400,000). That means that if your distribution is completely level, you could expect to see 2-3 exact combinations in your sample per year!


If you try this with Quirin instead of E, EP, P, S, and NA, your possible combinations is even wors, 9 to the 8th power. There is another option, that is to group some of the Quirin numbers to reduce the number. But this doesnt help that much.

Bottom line is every race pace is virtually unique and uncompareable to another race.

What this means when we are discussing the pace of a horse within the race, we are overlooking most of the data. For instance, to say that two speed horses kill each other..how do you know, further, what happens if there are 3? 5? all? Any answer you give can only be partially correct as you are leaving out most of the other horses

[Doug]

LARRY HAMILTON WROTE,

Bottom line is every race pace is virtually unique and uncompareable to another race.

What this means when we are discussing the pace of a horse within the race, we are overlooking most of the data. For instance, to say that two speed horses kill each other..how do you know, further, what happens if there are 3? 5? all? Any answer you give can only be partially correct as you are leaving out most of the other horses

Heck Larry,

How do we KNOW what will unfold for any factor involved in handicapping. Speed figs, top trainer, class drop, etc.

If there is a pace scenario that seems to favor one horse or another and the price is right, Play! Even favorites lose 70% of the time and the prices are crap.

Doug

[hurrikane]

The 4 actually had the highest fig but had been off longer than a year - so because of the prices U could see how I might bet him even though he was 4th choice - all be it contentiously.


I didn't play FG Sun but went back and looked at this race. Maybe you mistyped. you say the 4 had the highest fig but was off for a year.
The 3 was off for a year. The 4 for 14 days. Did you mean the 3 had the highest fig and you might bet him?

Thanks

[Fastracehorse]

BTW,

If you are smart enough to figure me out can you keep it to yourself??

This is what I posted: 3. 4/2/1/3

Yes,

You are right - I meant I posted the 3 4th because he was off longer than a year and yes again, he had my highest fig.

This should be fun for you.

fffastt

[DBC]

Pace has been the controlling factor in my handicapping for quite
awhile now. I've tried Sartin's methods with some success, then
used Pizzolla's work most recently. It seems to me that the
pace factor works best in races with no standout. A dominant
horse often can overcome a negative pace scenario. No matter
what methods you like, the key to winning is always price.

[ranchwest]

The key to winning is picking a winner.

[Derek2U]

this is another item of contention. Yes, if you have a LARGE
sample, that's great, but caution. Let's suppose, like me, you
play only a few tracks ... NYRA circuit, BEL, SAR, AQU (inner & main). Let's also suppose that you have a SAMPLE of say, 100K
races. It's worth mentioning that if you want to generalize ONLY
to your 4 tracks, then your sample should contain ONLY those
tracks. In other words, having defined the POPULATION of races
as NYRA races, I cannot -- and should not -- include OTHER track
races. One additional point: Don't forget that statistics have
a very impressive set of test based on SMALL sample-sizes.

[Doug]

RANCHWEST,

Let me take you up on your offer to compare on some of todays races.

Fairgrounds 6th

The reports I use give me the #1 as an E (running style) and an 8 (quirin pts).

Gives the #2 an e/p (running style) and an 8 (quirin pts)

Other horses in race are either a P or an S (running style) with low Quirin pts.

#1 wins and pays $24 and change.

Thanks,

Doug

[Zaf]

Originally posted by DBC
Pace has been the controlling factor in my handicapping for quite
awhile now. I've tried Sartin's methods with some success, then
used Pizzolla's work most recently. It seems to me that the
pace factor works best in races with no standout. A dominant
horse often can overcome a negative pace scenario. No matter
what methods you like, the key to winning is always price.

What is your opinion on Pizzolla's work.

ZAFONIC

[Derek2U]

hey let me say i know noTHING about MP personally but I only
speak about some of his words bout racing... i think he is a good
salesman ... and in a way i am also a salesman (4 a living). But,
I simply dont think he's 85% honest. it has to do w/ all his
adjustments ... i think most adjs are ridicoulsly inane. that book,
pace makes thE raCE is the best example of backpedalling in
print ---- except the 99, 250,000 "financial-love-self help-military-
political-lookin-better---maybe only poetry is exempt. anyways ...
theres something thats 2 slick bout his BS that annoys me....
and exactly Y is he THE authority ... i think a few here, in this room, know like 65,000 more than MP does. hey its just my
feeiINs.

[GR1@HTR]

I ain't the pace guru but just about 90% of my capping involves pace...IMHO, you all are wasting your time on RS stuff unless there is a lone RS. Saying you have 3 E's 4 P's and 2 E/P's is going to drive you all nuts...The bottom line in pace capping is RS-POS, Fulcrum, and Sartin type pace capping...

But if your into RS stuff, here is something for you all to play with for tomorrow:

01/28/2003 PHA Race 01 7.0F Dirt 3yF M12 $9000 Par: 087 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 Belle Angel 4/1 06 *P 1 5 2 Alvarado 014 L **
4 Imperial Hun 2/1 04 P 3 3 3 Santagat 015 L *
2 Her Fling 20/1 02 S 0 0 8 Capanas 024 L
8 Toosie Town 15/1 08 S 0 0 5 Espindol 014 L
9 Angels Belie 15/1 09 S 0 0 6 Milian J 015
3 Flamante 8/1 03 S 2 6 4 Elliott 015 *
7 Grace the St 3/1 07 S 4 1 1 Rocco Jo 072 (L) bo ***
1 Amygotherway 10/1 01 S 5 4 7 Diaz Sun 014 L *
5 Its a Jet 20/1 05 S 6 2 9 Arroyo E 014

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 02 5.5F Dirt 4uF C04 $7500 Par: 089 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 Snoopbformar 5/2 07 *F 1 5 2 Ramos He 015 L ***
6 Tizfunnymage 12/1 06 E 2 7 3 Bocachic 009 L *
4 Anne's Choic 6/1 04 P 3 4 5 Fuentes 010 L
1 Western Glit 8/1 01 P 4 6 4 Rosado R 009 L *
2 Princess Cat 9/2 02 P 5 2 6 Alvarado 010 L
5 Precious Kar 8/5 05 P 6 1 1 Arroyo E 021 L ***
3 Finally 15/1 03 S 7 3 7 Salazar 088 L

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 03 5.5F Dirt 3yF M12 $9000 Par: 087 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Defendant 9/2 03 *P 2 6 3 Carmouch 015 L bo *
5 Lady Seaberr 12/1 05 P 3 4 7 Riquelme 014 L
6 Princess Pum 2/1 06 P 4 2 1 Elliott 014 L ***
7 Bo's a Ten 10/1 07 P 5 3 5 Rivera H 014
1 Forty Forth 8/1 01 P 7 5 6 Duarte, 014 L bo
4 Mickeys Wish 10/1 04 S 0 0 4 Rocco Jo FTS
8 Quantify 15/1 08 S 1 7 8 Prado An 008 L
2 Demashoot De 9/5 02 S 6 1 2 Black An 020 L ***

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 04 6.0F Dirt 4up C10 $10000 Par: 098 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 Swing Master 5/2 10 *E 1 6 1 Black An 059 L **
5 Baladi 12/1 05 E 2 7 9 Riquelme 017 L *
9 Romancer 12/1 09 E 4 3 3 Fongsue 011 L *
3 Pinkerton 8/1 03 E 6 5 6 Castillo 024 L
4 Bushy's Jay 5/1 04 E 8 4 7 Elliott 011 L
8 Gold Trick 20/1 08 E 9 9 9 Capanas 017 L
6 Klassy Knigh 12/1 06 P 3 8 5 Anderson 015 L
2 More Specifi 10/1 02 P 5 9 8 Glasser 011 L *
7 Satisfying W 7/2 07 S 7 2 2 Rosado R 025 L **
1 Gray Falcon 8/1 01 S 9 1 4 Santagat 014 L *

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 05 5.5F Dirt 3yF M12 $9000 Par: 087 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Miss T K O 8/1 01 *E 2 2 5 Rosario 015 L *
3 Gold Bluff 2/1 03 E 3 4 3 Flores J 037 *
6 Iron Pepper 8/1 06 P 0 0 4 Duarte, FTS (L)
2 Miss Communi 5/2 02 P 4 3 2 Black An 014 L **
5 Marcia's Wil 20/1 05 S 0 0 7 Ramos He 028 L
8 Ms. Annie Oa 12/1 08 S 1 6 8 Fuentes 028 L
7 No Matt's My 10/1 07 S 5 5 6 Santagat 049 L
4 Dedicated Ca 5/1 04 S 6 1 1 Covingto 041 L **

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.

[GR1@HTR]

01/28/2003 PHA Race 06 5.5F Dirt 3yr C10 $10500 Par: 094 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Special Drea 7/2 01 *E 2 3 3 Covingto 014 L *
5 Salt It Away 12/1 05 E 4 7 6 Rivera H 014 L
6 Casa Frio 5/2 06 E 5 5 2 Ramos He 018 L **
2 Pasture Boy 5/1 02 P 1 6 4 Elliott 018 L
7 Red Link 3/1 07 P 3 2 1 Madrigal 018 L ***
3 James 6/1 03 P 6 1 5 Diaz Sun 009 L *
4 Gold Temptat 12/1 04 R 7 4 7 Capanas 018 L

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 07 8.5F Dirt 4uF C10 $12000 Par: 094 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 S. S. Finess 4/1 05 *F 1 7 1 Ramos He 011 L **
2 Little Hero 2/1 02 P 2 3 3 Black An 027 L **
7 Mint Report 20/1 07 P 4 6 9 Rivera H 008 L
4 Eyelash Powe 8/1 04 P 5 8 4 Carmouch 038 L
9 Urban Angel 8/1 09 S 3 9 5 Elliott 011 L *
1 Summertime A 6/1 01 S 6 2 6 Santagat 038 L
6 Dance With R 9/2 06 S 7 1 2 Rodrigue 017 L **
8 Boss of the 15/1 08 S 8 5 8 Flores J 017 L
3 Sovran Ice 20/1 03 R 9 4 7 Covingto 011 L

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 08 8.5F Dirt 4up SHP $16000 Par: 096 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1A Binder 8/1 08 *F 1 7 4 Rosado R 016 L *
8 Blazing Colo 5/2 09 E 2 8 1 Alvarado [008] L ***
3 Confiance Mo 4/1 03 E 6 1 3 Elliott 014 L *
5 Mr. Gung Ho 20/1 05 E 9 9 9 Molina V 014 L
4 Entrepreneur 3/1 04 P 3 3 2 Flores J 011 L **
6 Holmdel 8/1 06 P 4 4 7 Rivera, 011 L
1 Poolman 8/1 01 P 5 5 6 Santagat 011 L
2 Party Chief 15/1 02 P 7 6 8 Flores L 014 L
7 Sun Cat 5/1 07 P 8 2 5 Munar Lu 014 L

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 09 6.5F Dirt 3yr NW1 $20000 Par: 097 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 Hypnos 2/1 07 *E 1 2 1 Elliott 025 L ***
8 Chance to Da 12/1 08 E 5 8 5 Rocco Jo 032 L
6 Always in th 8/1 06 E 7 7 7 Unsihuay 027 (L)
1 Little Mack 3/1 01 P 2 4 2 Carmouch 014 L **
3 Millenniummi 9/2 03 P 3 5 4 Prado An 014 L
5 Blue's Prosp 6/1 05 P 4 6 3 Santagat 016 L *
4 Technickle 12/1 04 S 6 1 6 Duarte, 011 *
2 Skier 12/1 02 S 8 3 8 Glasser 038 L

Note: horses are ranked by running style (RS), not in selection order.


01/28/2003 PHA Race 10 8.3F Dirt 4up NW1 $20000 Par: 099 PL: 1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn HORSE MLO PP RS E L (K) JOCKEY LAY Lx Bl Rated
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Truth in Tes 12/1 03 *E 1 9 9 Nieto Ca 017 L *
10 Conflagasion 12/1 10 E 3 9 9 Ramos He 015 L
1 Hello John 12/1 01 P 2 9 5 Prado An 023 L *
11 Degas Vu 6/1 11 P 4 8 2 Diaz Sun 018 L **
2 Space Age 10/1 02 P 7 7 8 Elliott 006 L *
4 Beaufort Wes 7/2 04 P 9 4 4 Potts Cl 033 L **
7 Nolovefortru 12/1 07 S 5 6 6 Covingto 006 L *
5 Alowmdah 8/1 05 S 6 9 7 Flores J 018 L
6 Doppler Rada 5/1 06 S 8 5 1 Rivera, 015 L **
8 Change of Id 10/1 08 S 9 1 9 Molina V 027 L *
9 Black Lagoon 6/1 09 S 9 3 3 Santagat 015 L *
12 Bucket o' Lu 12/1 12 S 9 2 9 Rocco Jo 011 L

[Tom]

Using nothing what GR1 has posted, I'll make these picks:

4-7
7-5
6-2
10-9
8-1 (LOVE those S1's in cheap races)

Box both in the exacta.
Play both to win, 60/40 split.

[GR1@HTR]

Cool, I'll play some quick pics utilizing "random method" and "RS Method"

Race Random Method RS Method
1 4 6
2 2 2
3 3 6
4 1 7 and 1
5 1 2
6 1 7
7 2 5
8 3 4
9 2 4 and 2
10 3 4

[Doug]

GRADE1 WROTE,

I ain't the pace guru but just about 90% of my capping involves pace...IMHO, you all are wasting your time on RS stuff unless there is a lone RS. Saying you have 3 E's 4 P's and 2 E/P's is going to drive you all nuts...The bottom line in pace capping is RS-POS, Fulcrum, and Sartin type pace capping...


That is exactly what EXTREME PACE handicapping is all about. Look for a running style that is in the extreme. Lone E's, lone s, a horse with 8 Quirin points.

Doug

[DBC]

I went to the recent Pizzolla seminar in Las Vegas. Suffice it to
say, he bets like a crazy man, but I saw him cash 16 signers
over that weekend. You need a huge bank to bet like he does.
As far as his software goes, I feel it takes away the personal
involvement in the handicapping, and makes the player more
of an information manager than a handicapper. I've decided
the software is not for me, because I feel better about betting
my money on my own selections, rather than making decisions.
My own methods are much slower, and I only get a couple plays
a day, but my results are much better that way.

[Zaf]

16 signers in a weekend ? He must of been betting like a crazy man.

ZAFONIC

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by Doug
RANCHWEST,

Let me take you up on your offer to compare on some of todays races.

Fairgrounds 6th

The reports I use give me the #1 as an E (running style) and an 8 (quirin pts).

Gives the #2 an e/p (running style) and an 8 (quirin pts)

Other horses in race are either a P or an S (running style) with low Quirin pts.

#1 wins and pays $24 and change.

Thanks,

Doug

My program shows:


1 8
2 8
3 2
4 1
5 1
6 3
7 4
8 5
9 3

[superfecta]

Originally posted by Tom
Using nothing what GR1 has posted, I'll make these picks:

4-7
7-5
6-2
10-9
8-1 (LOVE those S1's in cheap races)

Box both in the exacta.
Play both to win, 60/40 split.
$1 TRIS for me,$5 bucks apiece

Race
1 -4/63/371
2- 6/71/132
3- 6/27/714
4- 7/12/629
5- 3/21/178

We'll seeya tommorow nite...

[GR1@HTR]

15 signers sure is a butt load...Although I wasn't there, his betting methods in his book would lend himself to signers vs "smart betting". For example, in Handicapping Magic, he is flauting his Charasmatic Exacta box(signer) that he played on a $5 Ex Box ticket. He could of avoided the signer if he had played FIVE $1 ex boxes...But I guess he wasn't too concerned about the tax implications...

I have crunched numbers all over the place regarding pace, pressure and to an extend pace pictures. Today, regaringdhorses with the best early fraction: Horses that have 8qp points, 0 and 1 pt are the worst ROI bets. Reason being 0pts and 1qpt horses rarely are close enuf to take advantage of their potential early speed advantage and 8QPT horses show up on a PP like christmas lights....They are very easy for the public to spot cause the PP's look like 1 1 1 1 1 on all lines...

Doug,
Good hit on the #1 at FG. I had looked at that horse yesterday morning because the sire was producing 18% FTS on the turf (small sample). BTW, the horse ran off the pace and closed well for the win vs a wire to wire victory.

[hurrikane]

that was something that always stuck in my craw. Why did MP end up with signer? $1 exotics are like betting 101. always play $1 to avoid the signer.

Last tourney at DEL I sat beside a guy, real nice guy. Very good capper. Had 5 signers that day. Lost 1,000 bucks. Things are not always what they appear to be.

[Doug]

GRADE1

Looks like it was all jock to me. Couldn't get out with the #2 from the rail so jock (Sellers) just rated this guy and had something left late. Sounds like he won pretty easy.

Sellers, S.J.) 118 L b 1 3 5-1 5-1 1/2 5-2 1/2 5-2 1-1 1/2 11.40
8 Celtic Approval (LeBlanc, K.P.) 122 L 8 6 4-1 4-1 4-Head 3-Head 2-1 1/4 2.30*
3 Bud's Magic (Lanerie, C.J.) 118 L b 3 5 6-1 1/2 6-2 1/2 6-Head 6-1 3-1/2 5.60
9 El Providential (Albarado, R.) 118 L b 9 9 8-1 8-2 7-2 7-1 1/2 4-Neck 7.80
4 Crypt (Bourque, C.C.) 118 L f 4 2 3-1 1/2 3-2 1/2 3-2 1-Head 5-1 3/4 6.30
7 O'Malley (Melancon, G.) 118 L fb 7 4 2-1 2-1/2 2-1/2 4-1 6-Head 53.30
5 Fair Trade (Lovato, Jr., F.) 118 L fb 5 7 7-1 1/2 7-Head 8-1 1/2 9 7-2 1/4 10.90
6 Midnight Cognac (Borel, C.H.) 120 L 6 8 9 9 9 8-1/2 8-2 1/4 2.70
2 Full Speed Ahead (Melancon, L.) 118 L fb 2 1 1-2 1/2 1-2 1/2 1-2 2-1/2 9 15.00
Fractional Times: 25.53, 50.24, 1:16.84, 1:41.89

Winner: Classic Stag - Dark Bay or Brown Colt, April 09, 1999
Bred by Foxfield in KY
Pedigree: Always a Classic - Fruhlingshochzeit , by Blushing Groom (FR)


Pgm Horse Win Place Show Total WPS Pool: $187,300
1 Classic Stag 24.80 11.40 7.00
8 Celtic Approval 4.80 3.40
3 Bud's Magic 3.80


Wager Type Winning Numbers Payoff Pool Carryover
$2 Pick 3 2-8-1 456.20 19,165
$2 Exacta 1-8 160.40 170,214
$2 Quinella 1-8 59.00 19,154
$2 Superfecta 1-8-3-9 4,015.20 45,506
$2 Trifecta 1-8-3 1,016.60 143,017

Pgm Comment
1 Classic Stag: inside to drive, eased out, split foes, took over, going away
8 Celtic Approval: within striking distance, angled out 4-wide, out kicked to wire
3 Bud's Magic: reserved, late between foes
9 El Providential: devoid speed, circled foes, not enough late
4 Crypt: inside to drive, angled out, edge, faded
7 O'Malley: forward, bid, tired
5 Fair Trade: no speed, no threat
6 Midnight Cognac: trailed inside, eased out, lugged in drive
2 Full Speed Ahead: clear early, collared, stopped
Footnotes

Doug

[hurrikane]

ranch,

I would suggest to you that winning is 'betting' on winners. :D

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by hurrikane
ranch,

I would suggest to you that winning is 'betting' on winners. :D

I yield to the gentleman with the correct response.

My point was that if you have both the 1/2 winner and the 40/1 winner, then who is going to quibble over what the board said? Beating the board should be primarily a function of the selection process, not watching the tote board for your overlay.

[DBC]

I don't know what kind of profit Pizzolla made that weekend, but
a little more into his betting style is appropriate. He does make
use of multiple $1 exotic bets. Most of his signers were tris, a
couple of exatas and a couple of supers. His typical bet was
$50-$75 to win, then another $500 or so in various exotic pools.
He downloads every race in North America daily, and doesn't
pass all that many. I would estimate he was betting 4-5 races
per card using his Master Magician. I have no idea of his bottom
line, but he could, playing that many races, have 16 signers and
conceivably show a net loss for the weekend. On the other hand,
his business partner Eric Langjahr used the same Master Magician
program to handicap 10 cards that Saturday and only made two
win bets, cashing one at 7/2 to show a nice profit. His style
is a lot easier to emulate for the average guy.

DBC

[Doug]

GRADE 1

Could you help me in my pursuit of getting a little better grasp on rs/pace shape selections?

I am looking at the report you posted for the 10th race at philly.

There were only 2 E's listed on the report. Why, in your rs selections, didn't you play one of these two E's? Especially the #10 that paid $29?

I am not trying to comment on your handicapping, just trying to learn from any comments you may have regarding RS type handicapping.

Thanks,

Doug

[GR1@HTR]

Doug, I made those picks in about 2 minutes...But I prefer inside speed on a two turn route vs outside speed....At some tracks this is an advantage...at others it doesn't really matter

[Doug]

GRADE 1

Thanks,

Doug

[JustMissed]

Doug,

Do you know how many speed points thoses two E horses had in the 10th.

I read the quick chart and it said Conflagasion, #10, hugged the rail. If he moved over 9 lanes from the 10th hole that quick I'm guessing he had plenty of early speed.

I have just started to study Randy Giles stuff but doesn't he love two or three E's with 15 or less Quirin points?

Damn nice payoff huh?

JustMissed
:confused:

[Doug]

JUST MISSED,

Based on the report I get the #3 horse had 7 speed points and the #10 had 4. I am still studying how the speed points on the report I use compares with pen and paper calculations.

I most likely would have played both horses as the #3 went off at 43-1.

You may want to read the article at HTR that Hurricane posted.

Also the newsletter from HTR on April 2001 has some interesting thoughts about Q points. Similiar to Randy Giles.

Still trying to decide whether to use just running styles (Pace Shape), running styles in combination with Q pts, or just Q pts.

BTW That #10 horse was picked right on top in power rating according to my reports. (not my reports, the one I subscribe to).

Anything you would like to share or discuss I would be more than happy to participate.

Doug

[GR1@HTR]

10-PHA Tue Jan 28, 2003 4:16PM 8.3D 4up NW1 $20000 Level 097 Vi=22 QT3=17 PL-5 10-PHA
FOR FOUR-YEAR-OLDS AND UPWARD WHICH HAVE NEVER WON A RACE OTHER THAN MAIDEN, CLAIMING OR STARTER . W
eight 122 lbs.; Non-winners of a race at one mile or over since December 28 allowed 3 lbs.; such a r
ace since November 28 5 lbs.; (Claiming races not considered).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pn PP Horse MLO Ag Ped-St Ch Lay Wks Jockey------rtg Trainer-----rtg Qp RS-Ev-Lv C90 K--rtg Prb Vbet Pn
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 01 Hello John 12/1 4c 371 NJ 023 #Prado Anib 209 Martin Ram 182 +4 P 2 9 072 6 090 08% 11.8 |1
2 02 Space Age 10/1 4c *781 KY 006 CF Elliott St 357** Sacco Greg 234 +4 S 4 6 077 5 090$ 11% 7.8 |2
3 03 Truth in Testam 12/1 6h *492 MD 017 Nieto Carl 245 West Benja 154 +7 *F 1 9 069 8 085 07% 12.7 |3
5 04 Alowmdah 8/1 5h *549 KY 018 Flores Jos 345* Lake Scott 382** +2 S 5 7 084! 1* 102$ *19% 4.2 |5
6 p05 Doppler Radar *5/1 4c *501 KY 015 Rivera, Jr 196 Ramos Faus 244 +0 S 7 4 071 4 091 09% 10.3 |6 2nd
7 06 Nolovefortrucks 12/1 4g 387 MD 006 #Covington 095 Ciresa Mar 274 +4 S 6 5 081 7 087 08% 11.1 |7
8 s07 Change of Ident 10/1 4c 430 KY 027 a #Molina Vic 252 Coletti, J 333** +5 R 9 1 068 9 080 08% 10.9 |8 3rd
9 08 Black Lagoon 6/1 4c 327 PA 015 B #Santagata 232 Cranfield 315 +3 S 9 3 071 3* 093 10% 8.9 |9
10 w09 Conflagasion 12/1 5h *504 KY 015 Ramos Hect 214 Ryan Derek 249 +4 E 3 8 080 2* 096$ 13% 6.5 |10 Won $29
12 10 Bucket o' Luck 12/1 5h *776 MD 011 D #Rocco Jose 188 Guerrero J 207 +5 S 8 2 070 9 084 05% 18.5 |12


10 Conflagasion 29.20 9.40 6.80
6 Doppler Radar 4.40 2.80
8 Change of Identity 4.40

Exacta 10-6 140.00
Trifecta 10-6-8 1994.00

Scratched 4 11

[Doug]

GRADE1

thanks,

I see the #10 horse was also rated 2 in the k rating. Isn't that supposed to be a pretty strong indicator?

Also, what is that $ next to the K rating?


Doug

[hurrikane]

doug,
the $ signals a longshot pick(by the software).
Any K rating less than 5 has to get a serious look. Especially at that price.
This would have definatly got the attention of an htr guy. hmm GR1?

[Tom]

K= 1,2,3, or 4
Four quarters of Horse Racing

K+4Q = ??

(This race was drooler -another made up word)

[zieglerjw]

what reports do you use that had that nice winner (#10) @ pha . 01/28/03 ?? thanks...

[formula_2002]

I'm getting in late on this posting, but I have read through some of them.

If you have specific questions about race shapes and Q points, which I assume you mean Quirin points I may be able to answer some of them. I have a considerable amount of data on both factors.

Keep the questions brief and limited to specifics.

Joe M

[Doug]

JOE M.

Any data on how many times an e horse wins based on different numbers of other e horses in the race?

Doug

[formula_2002]

Doug, I can answer that kind of question. I just have to re-arrange a fews things in the data base to work it out.

It may take a day to get back with a neat report.

Joe M

[Doug]

JOE M.

Thanks,

Doug

[Zaf]

Do you find a positive ROI when a E8, E7, or E6 has a 2 speed point edge on the rest of the field, BUT there may be other E runners in the field.

Ex. E8 E6 E5 EP 4 EP 4 P3 S2 S2


EX. E7 E5 E4 EP 5 EP 3 P 3 P2

Ex. E6 EP 4 EP 4 EP 4 P 3 P 3 S2 S2

In other words,is a 2 speed point advantage alone a significant edge ???

Thanks , ZAFONIC

[JustMissed]

Thanks for the heads up about the speed point stuff at the HRT site. That Ken Massa does a good job with his dbase presentation.

His stuffs seems to be consistent with the Randy Giles' stuff and it seems that the top three w/20 or more may be the significant factor.

Like most things I learn about handicapping, I tend to want to overcook whatever I have just learned. One of the first angles I learned was about E horses burning themselves out and after many torn up tickets I can tell you that is not always the case. You just don't know how may races I have lost with my E & E/Ps bunched up in the first flight and me waiting for them to fade and THEY DON'T, as you well know.

Anyway, this turned out to be a great tread.

Hang in there,

JustMissed

P.S. Looks like your Prime Power numbers are still working like a charm.

[GR1@HTR]

Q point advantage:

http://www.homebased2.com/km/pdf/HTRMonthlyReport-APR2001.pdf

[Zaf]

THANKS GR1 !!!

ZAFONIC

[Zaf]

Is Randy Giles OPM just meant for Sprint races ? Does it apply to routes also ?

ZAFONIC

[Doug]

ZAFRONIC,

I haven't gotten into the OPM much.

I would certainly assume that it would work equally well in routes.

I think the key to OPM is the form pattern of the horse. Times whether fractional or final just don't do that much for me. Do like a late pace rating that is way above par for closers in a speed laden field. I am adding a few indicators to the form pattern factors listed by Giles just to flag some horses that don't seem to have the right running style compared to the race shape. The no giveaway class drop is one of my favs. Say dropping from a nw2 to nw1. Owner cannot lose horse, but taking a big class drop. Dropping from open company to restricted, etc.

Doug

[Zaf]

Originally posted by Doug
ZAFRONIC,

I haven't gotten into the OPM much.

I would certainly assume that it would work equally well in routes.

I think the key to OPM is the form pattern of the horse. Times whether fractional or final just don't do that much for me. Do like a late pace rating that is way above par for closers in a speed laden field. I am adding a few indicators to the form pattern factors listed by Giles just to flag some horses that don't seem to have the right running style compared to the race shape. The no giveaway class drop is one of my favs. Say dropping from a nw2 to nw1. Owner cannot lose horse, but taking a big class drop. Dropping from open company to restricted, etc.

Doug

Doug

Thanks for your reply !!!
Did you create a software program to make the calculations ? I find it a bit tedious to circle the E1 & E3 and then rank them. Do you have a simple way of doing these calculations ?

THANKS , ZAFONIC

[Doug]

ZAFRONIC,

I can barely use a software program let alone program one.

I use a report service that is very inexpensive, but pretty accurate on speed points. Leaves a little to be desired as far as running styles though. I think HTR is real good at running styles, calculates Q pts and ranks them by early and late. See post by GR1 above for a printout. I don't think HTR uses best early or best late from the last 3 as suggested by Giles. Think they are both from the same paceline. I basically choose the EXTREME PACE way of handicapping. Simple,to the point and produces some pretty good shots here and there.


Doug

[formula_2002]

Doug, I posted a "speed horse report" on my web page.

Basically here is what happens to the speed (E) horse.

Looking at 8143 horses in 5822 races;

lone speed cost it's backers 22% of their wagered dollar.

betting both speed horses in an EE races ONLY cost its backers -14%

betting all speed horses in an EEE races cost 16%.

betting the E in a E EP race cost but 12%.

there goes the theory about lone speed .

do you know of any simliar studies that came up with different results.



Good Luck
Joe M

[BillW]

Joe,

I don't understand how that refutes the lone speed theory. Very few parameters can produce a positive ROI in a vacuum. (i.e. most if not all parameters can be proven as bogus using that criterion).

BTW, of the 100 or so parameters I watch, lone speed combined with a rail post position produces the only positive ROI (0.01) across all (24691) non-maiden dirt races which speaks a lot for the parameter.

Bill

[GameTheory]

The "lone speed theory" is that lone speed horses have an advantage (increased chance) in winning the race, not that "backing all lone speed horses will make you money".

Using your database as you are, you can pretty much check off every single factor there is, as Bill noted.

First you need to find the factors that help horses win races, and THEN find the situations in which you can profitably bet on combinations of those factors.

[formula_2002]

Bill, the "theory" I was referring to was the general expression about the success of lone speed horses vs the two speed horses that beat themselves.

It's given (as of today anyway) that no one one single factor can beat the take-out.

Some do better then others.

[formula_2002]

Originally posted by GameTheory
The "lone speed theory" is that lone speed horses have an advantage (increased chance) in winning the race, not that "backing all lone speed horses will make you money".

Using your database as you are, you can pretty much check off every single factor there is, as Bill noted.

First you need to find the factors that help horses win races, and THEN find the situations in which you can profitably bet on combinations of those factors.

GT, I have those factors, but here I was talking about the betting of the general public....not me!!

[GameTheory]

Well, you gave ROI stats, not IV stats. ROI stats don't tell me if the lone speed horse has an advantage over a speed horse that has to duel another for the lead, only that it will cost me more if I bet on them all (the lone speed horses). So I'm not sure how that refutes any theory, when the theory has to do with performance, not ROI.

[formula_2002]

GT I only look at profits (your roi), because like Willt Sutton said "Thats where the money is"

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by formula_2002
GT I only look at profits (your roi), because like Willt Sutton said "Thats where the money is"

That's fine, but then you can't (or shouldn't) claim to refute theories that have nothing to do with profit & loss, but only with winning/not-winning (of the horses, not the bettors).

[formula_2002]

GT If you have some hard facts countering something I have looked into deeply and reported on, please post your reference.

Lets eliminate my comment about the "lone speed theory ",
Its trite, meaning less and without any hard documentation, unless you can provide some.

I shoud not interpert the facts for you by referring to something like "lone speed theory " which I, for one , have no documention on . It's more track talk reference then anything else. A lighter moment if you will.
Unless of course you care to offer some valued facts about it.

Joe M

[Doug]

IMPACT VALUE

With the lone E horse there were 830 races. Lets assume 9 horses per race average. 7470 horses total. There were 831 horses which gives us roughly 11% percent of horses. Win% was 23%. So I.V. should be around 2.0,which is pretty damn according to what very little I know about the subject.

Hope my calcs and the way of calculating I.V. are correct.

Doug

[formula_2002]

Doug, you are correct about the IV calculation.
I know i'm in the vast miniority, but IV's ratings have no application in anything I do.

I guess Quirin might have promoted this concept for horse race handicapping.

I fail to find the value in knowing that a disproportunate number of winning horses are able to show a loss..

11% of the horses win 23% of the races for a 22% loss.
How do you take that to the bank?

Joe M

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by formula_2002
Doug, you are correct about the IV calculation.
I know i'm in the vast miniority, but IV's ratings have no application in anything I do.

I guess Quirin might have promoted this concept for horse race handicapping.

I fail to find the value in knowing that a disproportunate number of winning horses are able to show a loss..

11% of the horses win 23% of the races for a 22% loss.
How do you take that to the bank?

Joe M

A patient person might find a lot of ways.

First, continue to monitor both the IV and the ROI.

Monitoring the IV tells us if the style of winners is changing, which could be very enlightening. New training methods? New drugs? More drugs? Less drugs? Who knows why, the important thing is whether there is a change.

Is the ROI changing? Is the public's handicapping methodology changing?

Can I combine this strong force to tell me what causes those 23% to win twice as often as basic arithmetic says they should?

Can I combine with other factors to understand why the other 77% lose? Tossing losers is at least as good as finding winners.

Can I think? Can I delve deeper than anyone else? Can I consider the possibility that there isn't always a number for everything?

[Doug]

I really don't like either one. Again its a place to start.

RANCHWEST- Very well said.
Doug

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by formula_2002
I fail to find the value in knowing that a disproportunate number of winning horses are able to show a loss.


Then why do you keep reporting that very fact? "...are able to show a loss" has nothing to with IV's; you threw that in there. I guarantee you that all of your overlays, if they really make money, have factors with high IV's as well. (You really are using IVs by the way, but you're using them in relation the the actual odds, which is valuable, but it isn't everything.)

My problem with your methodology is not that it is "wrong", but that it not "deep" as you imply -- it is superficial. You could probably be making quite a bit more than your stated 6% positive using the same factors as you are now. You have all this data, but are cutting yourself off from the information it contains. Why?

Actually, I take that back because I'm unclear on your exact methods of combining factors, etc. (How do you arrive at your final odds line, btw?) But listening to the things you say, that's what it sounds like -- as if you already know everything and you've got nothing to learn. If that were the case, you'd be getting much more than 6% on your overlays, believe me.

My intention is not to jump all over you or kick the messenger or whatever, but I don't like these pronoucements based on a simplistic database query as if they represent some deep analysis of the problem. I've got a database at least as big as yours and I could do that all day. You may be presenting facts, but you're not presenting information or insight. (This all sounds quite a bit more harsh than I wish it to, so please understand this I'm trying to be constructive.)

[Fastracehorse]

He's presenting meaningless hogwash not facts.

fffastt

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by Fastracehorse
He's presenting meaningless hogwash not facts.

fffastt


Whatever it is he presents, it is a million times more valuable than the total time-wasting BS you spew 100% of the time.

[hurrikane]

GT,
I would agree with your statement that everyone, even if it's subconciously, uses IV.

let's take lone speed. So you have 11% horses winning 23% of the races. Pehaps it's a loss because your betting all races with lone Es. What if you only bet odds of 5-1 or more or races with fields >6 where lone speed really plays a part. You can find a pos ROI looking there. But, the reason you started looking there is because you noticed a lone 'e' horse were winning more races than their share.
So you say it's ROI. But without the pos IV on the lone 'e' you would not have the positive ROI. If you don't believe that try running the same query with the lone 'S' horse. That will tell you if you are really using IV or not.

[anotherdave]

I'm actually a statistician, so I feel the need to chime in here, but more intuitively.

Did you know that betting gray horses to win produces a net loss?

Guess I won't bet any more gray horses.

Be very careful what you do with statistics. that is why the need for impact values and not looking at one statistic in a vacuum.

AD

[formula_2002]

Dave, how would you use impact values.?

If you can refer some writtings on the subject beyond Quirin, I'd apprecate it.

All-Ways software has a white paper on the subject. So skip that one also.

I guess I'm from the school that deals in ;
win%,
% profit,
actual wins vs expected wins
review of all the above by small incremental odds ranges.
statical testing based on the incremental odds, staying away from grouping every thing into "average" odds.

Joe M

[hurrikane]

formula, correct me if I"m wrong. Impact Value is exactly 'actual wins vs expected wins'.

[anotherdave]

Originally posted by formula_2002
Dave, how would you use impact values.?

If you can refer some writtings on the subject beyond Quirin, I'd apprecate it.


Perecentages and Probabilities by Davis predates Quirin by a few years. All I am saying is don't discount a factor because it loses money. Almost every (if not every) factor loses money. Look for factors that win more often than they should and also check the ROI. When Quirin reported his IVs, he gave IVs and ROI. Either one without the other can be misleading. That's what I would prefer to see.

AD

[formula_2002]

hurrikane

No way is a/e =iv

loosly;
e= 1/(odds+1)
a= actual winners

iv= % winning horses / (those winning horses/total horses in the polulation)

example : 20% of the winning horses are but 10% of the population=an iv of 2

agree?

[hurrikane]

ok...misunderstood your use of a/e. you are speaking probability.

I was thinking..
40% of population are 'e' horses. you would 'expect' them to win 40% of the races.
they 'actually' win 80% of the races.

[formula_2002]

Dave, I do not discount a single factor because it returns a loss.

I try to establish what the loss is.

Everyone of the 100 factors I track show a loss, when considered alone.

Hope fully there is a mix of losing factors that will yield positive results.

Now what do you think the chances of that happening over the long term is ?

[David McKenzie]

You piqued my curiosity. So, I crunched a short run on horses with the best Early Speed. Note, this is not based on Quirin's speed points. Also, this does not isolate sole front runners. Only one factor was analyzed, the horse with the number one Early Speed rating. Period.

From my database of the most recent races run in North America (all types of tracks, from Mountaineer to Santa Anita) filtering only by non-maiden, fast track, dirt sprints, the horse rated #1 in Early Speed won 1,549 times from 7,572 starts.

That's a 20.5% Win rate with a $Net of $1.73 (amount returned for every two dollars wagered). IV was 1.58, PIV (Pool Impact Value) of 1.03 with a mean average payout of $8.48 (odds of 3.2 to 1).

There were 979.69 Expected Winners as opposed to 1,497.85 Pool Expected Winners. Which means any way you slice it, early speed won more bread than it *should* have.

*Note- horses ranked second in Early Speed had a $Net of $1.68, IV of 1.58 and PIV of 0.99

For a single stand alone factor, you have to admit that's darn impressive, even if not profitable all by its lonesome.

[formula_2002]

Dave

"That's a 20.5% Win rate with a $Net of $1.73 "

I got pratically the same results in 5025 races.

19% winner, 12% loss (net of $1.76).

The impressive thing here is that the betting public made some inroads on the take-out, and in two seperate studies, the results were close.

But the result was not based on one factor. It was based on;
race type
surface
condition
and early speed.

your number of starters added to mine is 12,597.

I'll run those conditions with every other single factor I have.

I'll give you the result sin the morning.

Joe M

[DBC]

In the Randy Giles OPM article Randy developed a small database
of 390 horses from I believe over 250 races. Two dimensional
early speed horses (E/P) with 5 or more speed points who fit
the OPM rules won over 40% in this study. I don't know what
the prices were but even at an average of 5/2 or so the profits
would be phenomenal. I have been using his OPM horses
recently with good success. E/P horses who fit the OPM rules
have done very well for me lately if the race has less than 20
speed points. At 21 or more speed points two dimensional
closers (P/C) or (S/P) who fit the OPM rules do very well,
especially if they are lone horses with the running style in the
race. Horses who fit Giles' super sprinter study are winning at
an even higher percentage. Like any other factor, early speed
is only good when used in the right situation, and cannot stand
alone. Lone early means nothing if the horse's early pace rating
ranks only 3rd or 4th in the race, and even with the higher early
pace rating, an extremely poor ranking in late pace will probably
beat a lone E.

[tcat]

David, I find it interesting you are able to get such good results. It must be based on the definition of "what is early speed". What are you using for a definition of early speed?

[Tom]

Once you know an IV for a particualr factor, how do you use it?
the way I do is to pick a few factors that do not overlap - ie, Early speed (QSP%), Class, Speed, recency, or form (number good races in last 30 day works well in routes). I multiple the IV's of each factor and give each horse a ratings based on this. So if a horse has IV's of 1.58, .87, 1.12, 1.33, his rating is 2.0476. I can make an odds line based on each horses total rating, but usually I am too lazy and just look for gaps in the numbers. What I think this does for me is to even out the good and bad things in a horses record. Like a horse with the top Beyer is a good predictor of winners, but what if the top fig horse has no early speed? I could get an IV for topf fig horse with 0 speed horses and use that, but at some point you have to make bets not querrys. Do I know if all my IV's are really truly correct. Nope. but I use them consistently.

[Larry Hamilton]

Tom,

Once you have gone to the trouble of assigning an IV to several independent (?) variables, you can then test the variables with the Null Hypothesis. The outcome of this is to test if the IV is a false alarm (insignificant).

Then you can compare the expected with the actual and get a number called the "critical number". With this number you can determine the confidence interval of your selection and the "Z-Score" which can be used as a weighing factor.

The result would be something like this:

I am 90% certain this horse's 1st call beaten lengths has a IV of 2.1 and its weighted value is ___.

I may be a little rusty at this as its been a while since I tried to explain it. By the way, I have all this done in access/excel on the side if I wish to turn it on.

There is a problem which I had to jury-rig to make it all work. It comes about during the multiplication. What if the horses var has a value of 0? So, you need a default value of 1.

Anyways, it's a fun exercise, though, I am not sure of its value to us. I concluded this as I tried this many different ways and what I became good at was identifying the favorite.

[Derek2U]

I am VERY keen on your post on Early Speed. I am not DL races,
and I have a given data-base of maybe 40K races. Before I
murky up my DB I'b be most happy if you would Email me with
some hints on how you measure the early speed. Derek

[David McKenzie]

Originally posted by tcat
David, I find it interesting you are able to get such good results. It must be based on the definition of "what is early speed". What are you using for a definition of early speed?

tcat and Derek,

I press a button.

That may not be the erudite answer you anticipated <G>.

But seriously, folks, I press a button on the HSH software and *wallah* there's the answer.

Perhaps Dave Schwartz would care to venture an explanation about his [proprietary?] algorithm. I can't speak for him. I only know it works amazingly well.

If he doesn't want to give away specific information he may be able to provide a positive suggestion or two if you ask him nicely (or bribe him).

As to how to incorporate this information into something that will produce profits....in sailor talk, "Aye, there's the rub."

You can see ideas about this on the HSH bulletin board under Handicapping Theory.


(http://www.horsestreet.com/index.html)