Program that makes an accurate final odds line

[midnight]

I'm looking for a program that makes a fairly accurate final odds line, in other words a line that's close to what the off odds are. I know no program can factor in things like public whim, touts, inside info, etc., but if it was fairly close most of the time, it would be a big plus. The morning line isn't bad, but there are a lot of holes in that (e.g. the 12-1 shots often go off at half of that or three times as much, the 2-1 shots might go off as low as 3/5 or as high as 4-1, etc.).

Any

[BillW]

Originally posted by midnight
I'm looking for a program that makes a fairly accurate final odds line, in other words a line that's close to what the off odds are.



Midnight,

I think you are looking for software that generates an accurate Morning line.

[lousycapper]

Originally posted by midnight
The morning line isn't bad, but there are a lot of holes in that (e.g. the 12-1 shots often go off at half of that or three times as much, the 2-1 shots might go off as low as 3/5 or as high as 4-1, etc.).

Any

:D If you ever find that program there would be a lot of track price makers out of work.:D

[mhrussell]

I know the Master Magician software has its "contention" factor , which attempts to predict how the race will be bet by the public. There are likely many other software packages that have something like this.

In my personal Excel software application I developed, I have come up with something simple that works very well: a section of what I called "Soft Focus" (Described in Handicapping Magic). It is simply four columns : Speed, Form, Class and Connections. I assign a score of 0 to 5 points for each of these four factors that the public, by and large, only consider when betting.

What horse has the best Speed Figure; who has been winning or in the money recently (Form) ; who is the "Class" (dropping or rising today) and how popular is the trainer/jockey (Connections). I also enter the track take % on Win wagers and let the spreadsheet determine a morning line (usually 115-120% line). Then I use a simple ratio of points for each horse in each category to the total, and then calculate the expected post time odds for each horse. It's amazing how much better this in predicting the post time odds than is the ML!
With practice, it doesn't take long to go quickly scan the pp's for these factors and assign the scores. The benefit is that often you will get keener insight into the race as far as who will be the real favorites, the mid-price horses and the longshots. You will KNOW what price to expect on your horse and that is important information.

Sorry to make this so long, but this simple approach has really helped me and has been quite amazing in besting the morning line makers at the tracks I play.

[GameTheory]

Don't apologize for making informative & intelligent posts. We can always use more of them.

Your soft focus approach to predicting the public is exactly what I favor, although I have yet to really systematize it as you have. Another benefit of doing it for me: I find that if my predictions for how the public will bet are way off, then my handicapping of the race probably is too and I should skip the race. Have you noticed this?

[andicap]

Matt,
that's a real breakthough IMHO in automating the soft focus technique that Pizzolla teaches.


One question: do you then act on those expected lines by dismissing overlays who look too good to be true? That is, are "false overlays" because their board odds are say, 8-1 when their expected odds based on your "soft focus" technique say 3-1?

[Dozier]

You might want to look at www. track-judge.com. He offers samples and some freebies. It's the best I've seen if not to many scratches in the race.

[mhrussell]

Andicap-

Yes, I have often not bet on a large overlay because of this "too good to be true" idea. Pizzolla mentions that in his book as well. If the public SHOULD be betting a horse at say 4-1, and he is 20-1; I do not care what true odds I have on my line, I will stay away from that horse like the plague!

The converse situation is more difficult for me. If a horse is getting BET DOWN from what I figure he should be, then it can get difficult. Pizzolla teaches that any horse going off over his Value Tech ratio, is still a good value bet. No need to demand 50% to 100% overlay criteria (like I did before going to this approach). But still, I often find it difficult to take too short a price even if in theory, it is a good value bet. Bob Harris's rule of thumb is 4-1 or over on win bets... I try to sitck to that rule too. Too many things can happen in a race to take a short price. Funny thing is now I am finding I am betting almost stictly 10-1 shots or higher.. not planned that way, it's just what is happening now in my game.

Game Theory-

And yes, to answer your question, the third situation is when the public betting is way wacko compared to my expected line. I can't define it exactly, but when these situations arise, I will throw up my hands and admit I don't know what's going on and will pass the race. And of course my top horse will win those races...

That is the hardest thing. To pass races where the price is too short, or the race is really too confusing, and to see your top horses run in the money. Friends will ask me, "Why didn't you bet that race! You had the winner and the exacta!"
(And it paid nothing too most of the time.. that escapes them)
Of course , they don't understand value betting concepts and it just seems strange and dumb to them to pass up races that you handicapped well.

[andicap]

Matt,
I find 3-1 is my minimum. At 4-1, I'm passing off too many winners. It's not that I win 25% of the time so I can take 3-1, but my 3-1 shots win more than 25% of the time.
(I love these "expert" handicapping writers who say if you're win % is 33%, you can bet anything over 2-1. That's silly. My win % at 3-1 is much higher than my win % at 6-1.)

I try to adhere to Pizzolla's "false overlay" theory, but like you, end up passing up top figure longshot horses who win the race Example: War Emblem in last year's Derby -- tricky because in a soft focus he had the best Beyer last race and a huge win: his big negative to most fans was class -- the Ilinois Derby which no one respected at the time. Wise guys avoided him because of pace, but I don't think most bettors focused heavily on that.

This year I decided Funny Cide wasn't a false overlay because people were falling for all the EM hype. Still, I pulled my punches and only played him in the exacta because I was in love with Ten Most Wanted (who I read got hurt in that race)