the 4 + 30 method

[duckhunter3]

Has anyone every used Ed Bain's 4 + 30 method, and if so your opinion on its value and merit? thanks.

duckhunter3

[ryesteve]

Has anyone every used Ed Bain's 4 + 30 method, and if so your opinion on its value and merit? thanks.

duckhunter3
I tinkered with it, and found the results to be disastrous, most likely because trainers with excellent win rates are overbet, and the instances where you do get generous odds are the races that they don't win.

[timtam]

I think there are a few posts on Ed Bain in the search

Barry Meadows said that Ed Bain makes more money selling his information

than he does betting. I think he did a study of some kind. He has books

and updates for automatics etc but I couldn't stick with it. The data was

kind of expensive and not my cup of tea for handicapping.

[barn32]

Barry Meadows said that Ed Bain makes more money selling his information

than he does betting...I would be willing to wager that 95% of the people who have something to sell make more money selling their information than actually betting. (Might be more like 99%.)

[BIG HIT]

Who make more betting then selling their product's.?

[DanG]

I’ve found negative trainer information to be more powerful then the majority of positive stats.

In whatever category you deem relative a % of <1/3rd of their overall hit rate can be good indicator of potential weakness.

I.e.: 30% barn is <10%, 15% barn is <5% etc…assuming sample sizes are sufficient of course.

Overall in a general sense:

I feel trainer information has gotten more cappers in trouble then it has actually helped. It has become a move too early in the capping process, when it should come to as more of a tie breaker or the inclusion of an esoteric angle in exotics.

The only player I know personally who bases his entire game around trainer moves is light years beyond what the DRF contains. One has to go very deep to reap profits from an approach that by its statistical nature will (more often then not) regress to the mean.

[MONEY]

Times are hard for many people now. With unemployment going up and the stock market going down. People are desperately looking for some income. Unfortunately many of these people are going to search the web and find systems sellers like jjtuttle, Mohammed Ali, Derrick Tan, etc. These guys will make a fortune in the next couple of years selling false hope and promises that they probably can not keep. And their users will go even futher in to debt.

money

[Niko]

I don't know Derick Tan but I'd like to know how Mohamed Ali sells so many copies.....

I used Ed Bain's service a couple times. Not as easy as it sounds. All the picks he personally sent me lost a bit more than the track take but it was supposedly a bad time for the stats. Overall they were doing pretty poorly.

So I tried them again a bit later because the concept seemed good. I did find an approach that I may have been able to make a profit over time but the plays were few and far between, not worth it to me. So maybe you can but it'll take a little work and so many people have trainer stats it's harder.....anyone else win with them?

[Wickel]

Times are hard for many people now. With unemployment going up and the stock market going down. People are desperately looking for some income. Unfortunately many of these people are going to search the web and find systems sellers like jjtuttle, Mohammed Ali, Derrick Tan, etc. These guys will make a fortune in the next couple of years selling false hope and promises that they probably can not keep. And their users will go even futher in to debt.

money


You forgot about the illustrious Dan Pope, who makes his money the old-fashioned way: mail-order systems!!!

[Jake]

I’ve found negative trainer information to be more powerful then the majority of positive stats.

In whatever category you deem relative a % of <1/3rd of their overall hit rate can be good indicator of potential weakness.

I.e.: 30% barn is <10%, 15% barn is <5% etc…assuming sample sizes are sufficient of course.

Overall in a general sense:

I feel trainer information has gotten more cappers in trouble then it has actually helped. It has become a move too early in the capping process, when it should come to as more of a tie breaker or the inclusion of an esoteric angle in exotics.

The only player I know personally who bases his entire game around trainer moves is light years beyond what the DRF contains. One has to go very deep to reap profits from an approach that by its statistical nature will (more often then not) regress to the mean.

I think that you're absolutely correct about the negative information generally being more indicative than positive information. The exception may be with low percentage longshot trainers that tend to do the same things with their ready horses.

[JohnGalt1]

You have to decide what's relevant in what trainer stats are important.

Percentages for first time starters, turf starts blinkers off or on, starts after 90 or more days off, first of claim and other categories that are effective can be used because the number can't be manipulated.

Percentages on categories like turf to dirt, or route to sprint, etc. are random and almost worthless, especially, if like Bris, the trainer's pct. for turf to dirt is on a horse who last raced on the turf in September, sat out all winter, and is coming back in May of the following year. A pct. of 31% may be useful if after a recent race, but not after many months.

It would be worth something if they had a cut off of 30-45 days.

And if a horse is going from turf to dirt and the last race was 21 days ago, the data is flawed because it includes all the long lay off situations like the above example.

Another trainer ptc. I always ignore is beaten favorite, which is usually between 30-50% because it wouldn't surprise if that horse ran a good race just on it's ability.

But I never play a horse just because of a high trainer ptc., but may pass a race if the horse(s) I like is in a race with a trainer of another horse who has a high ptc. in a category relevant to this race.

[DanG]

The exception may be with low percentage longshot trainers that tend to do the same things with their ready horses.
Good point Jake:

In general if you’re using trainer data you look for negatives in short prices and isolated positives in bombs. We know the 20-1 animals from low profile barns will be littered with negative statistics; as you said; it’s the occasional “tell” for such an outfit that can land a score.

Having said that; you can have an effective game without ever knowing who’s training, riding, owning, grooming or hot walking the animal. Doc Sartin’s famous quote of (from memory) “I made an oath to God I would never look at who is training or riding my wager” is not just the Doc being the Doc; I know a great player who literally does just that as well as another who literally does only that.

I hope that made sense…I was out too late! :eek: