Sweep's Graded Handicap

[Dick Schmidt]

Does anyone know where to get the Sweep's Graded Handicap (the Racing Form's equivelent of the morning line) online??

Dick

[JimG]

Nowhere free that I am aware; however, I believe if you have an account at drf2000.com and the formulator software, you can download it as part of the past performance file.


Jim

[Dick Schmidt]

Thank you, Jim.

Anyone else have any leads?

Dick

[Rune]

It's copyrighted material, and the only place you can legally get it online is by paying for the race files and using Formulator to view it. It's one of the menu options.

Al

[Doug]

Has anybody ever run a test on the Sweep top 4 selections? I would be very interested to see the results. When I check them visually I get about 65-70% winners from the top 4 selections..
Seems to me if these % held up it would make an excellent contender selection tool. Notice some fairly nice prices in there too.

Any help much appreciated,

Doug

[Rick]

I played around for a while checking horses picked on top by only one selector in the consensus that also had morning line odds of 4-1 or better with good results. It was a very short sample, and I only tried it as a lazy way to select horses with no handicapping when I was just hanging out drinking beer and socializing.

Also, years ago I did a regression study of the effects of various factors on actual odds. Morning line odds and jockey win % were the biggest factors, but Sweeps odds also had a significant (but much smaller) influence. Consensus points and odds last race are other things that had a small influence as well. I'd guess that the DRF factors would have a smaller influence now because their circulation has slipped so much. You might find that some popular ratings like those from BRIS have a larger influence now.

Also, keep in mind that Sweep isn't just one guy, even at the same track. Brian Mulligan used to do it so much that the DRF handicappers gave him the nickname "Sweep", but he's gone now.


Marc at DRF,

Any chance of getting some of the current DRF handicappers to participate here?

[alyingthief]

i made a mistake in the average mutuel? i will check it out, i ran that simulation very early this morning. wouldnt that be hilarious?

[Rick]

alyingthief,

You're in the wrong forum, but I think your average mutuel should be more like $9.63. So, 9.63 * 0.54 / 4 = 1.30, at 30% ROI. No offense but I think you should double check things like these before you post because it doesn't tend to make you look too good. My guess is that you're pretty young. Please check my work too. I don't mind being wrong if I'm corrected, but I hate it if people just let me go ahead and make a mistake because they think I'll be embarassed. As far as the Kelly thing goes, I'll just assume that you're exaggerating to make a point. I can live with that.

[Doug]

Rick,

Thanks.

I know that different people do the sweep, but (and maybe you can help me here) do they actually handicap a race or do they keep charts or what? Based on what I see they don't do a half bad job. Not trying to be lazy (aw maybe a little). Thinking is might be a quick way to get contenders and then separate from there. Another little goodie I have noticed is something that someone a long time ago referred to as a "Dirty Shirt". A horse selected by one of the experts 1st, 2nd or 3rd that is not mentioned by any other handicapper. Some very nice prices here and there.

Hopefully some DRF guys can jump in with some insights.

Doug

[andicap]

I've heard about that play but using only the "Trackman." That is, if the Trackman mentions a horse -- anywhere, 1st, 2nd or 3rd -- the horse must have some merit, because the Trackman is actually on track, often the chart-caller.
I could be wrong, but I believe in NY, Jack Wilson was the chart-caller/Trackman for a long time and he was one sharp guy.

"Dirty shirt." Where the hell did THAT name come from?

[Dick Schmidt]

Andy,

Forget "Dirty Shirts", I wish I knew where this thread came from. I have no idea why I started it or what I was looking for. I think I was asking for a friend who wanted to do some sort or research, but whatever it was, or who it was for is gone. Ain't getting old wonderful?

Dick

[Rick]

Doug,

They handicap just like you and I do except that they don't have the benefit of knowing who the scratches are. When I asked the same question they were using a direct connection to BRIS which has more information available, and, of course, they also had an access to the DRF database. They also have just about every printed or CD ROM product you can think of, though probably not all of it is paid for by DRF.

[Doug]

Dick,

Why do you say"forget dirty shirts"?

Doug

[andicap]

I think Dick was talking figuratively, or jocularly in that how can he remember where "dirty shirts" cames from when he can't even remember why he started this thread.

The great thing about getting old, Dick, is that you meet new friends every day. (I'm only in my mid-40s so dont get any ideas)

:D

[Doug]

I happened to to be going thru some very old posts and spotted this thread. Used to visually track Sweep, "Dirty Shirts" (I have no clue why these particular selections were referred to as that, but have to call them something), experts top selections, etc. I have some interest in this and figuredmaybe I could get some feedback. If the experts are pretty good handicappers then why look at their opinion. Lots of ways to skin a cat. By the way I do like cats.

Doug

[Rick]

Doug,

I think you can do something like that if you carefully select your handicapper and make sure you get adequate odds. You can't use Sweeps or even Trackman because these could be different people at different times. The guy who does Churchill Downs, Steve Klein I think is his name, did pretty well when I checked a few years ago. Since I haven't even looked at DRF in the last year, I don't even know if I'd recognize most of the names any more.

[alyingthief]

andi: i recall a comment made by one or the other of the turf writers that trackman's top selections, if a horse that the other touts ignore, show a flat bet profit. it seems at first glance, on the basis of trackman's on site presence, as you say, to be reasonable.

george green provides a software program to track the public handicappers; it's cheap, and sounds interesting. mitchell talks of these guys having specialized skills, so that they may be successful, say, on turf, or with first time maidens; i believe he bet the recommendations of their expertise in the place and show pools. this might be a source for spot plays...

[andicap]

Yes, I recall Mitchell saying that, but he never said they maintained this profit over the long-term. I believe he was talking about the short-term, i.e. an entire meet.

What I want to know is if Litfin, Klein, Free et al are profitable in their own bets. What's their ROI? I wouldn't buy stock from a mutual fund without knowing its track record. (The ridiculous "buy" routines of Wall St. analysts has already been exposed, but at least the Wall St. Journal does an annual tally of the best analyst pickers so you have some record to go from.)

If a public handicapper isn't profitable in his own bets, why in the world would we listen to them? I would presume a handicapper would stick to his strengths in his own betting (OK, a silly assumption, he could be as stupid in his betting patterns as the rest of us, betting maidens when his ROI is -30% on them.)

Even know analysts who go on CNBC have to tell us if they own the stock. The least we could get from our public handicappers is if they backed the horse with their own money.

[Rick]

andicap,

Steve Klein used to give specific recommended bets and keep track of his bankroll over the meet. At the time I was monitoring him, he had shown a profit over several meets at Churchill Downs. I don't know if he's still doing that though because I rarely if ever buy a Racing Form these days.

[takeout]

Originally posted by andicap
That is, if the Trackman mentions a horse -- anywhere, 1st, 2nd or 3rd -- the horse must have some merit, because the Trackman is actually on track, often the chart-caller.
I don't think DRF has anyone on track anymore, do they? I've also noticed that they still have some trainer names wrong that have long since been corrected in the Equibase data. These names also remain wrong in their results charts. Go figure. It would appear that DRF is an "island" but how can this be, if, as stated in their own publication, "All entries, results, charts and related information provided by EQUIBASE company"? If that's the case, then how come some of their information varies from that of all the other resellers?

[BillW]

TakeOut,

My guess would be that each entity filters the data for referential integrity within their own database. If Trainer "A" has always been called A.B. Cdefg in the DRF database and it arrived from Equibase as Albert B. Cdefg, the DRF would want to change the name to match what is already in their database. Possibly during this translation process, some errors creep in. Possibly Marc At DRF can chime in here?

[takeout]

BillW,
That would certainly explain it but I would think that they would try and stay on the same page as far as basic things like trainers' names. In some cases they could be maintaining the integrity of stuff that has been wrong for a long time. At any rate, I occasionally notice examples of DRF & Equibase data maintaining two different sets of integrity. Of course I doubt that any corrections made anywhere are ever done retroactively.

Question: Would/could, this mess you up if you were querying a database by trainer names? For instance, if a certain trainer's name had been corrected, say 2 years ago, and you were doing a query on him, would you lose him after going back 2 years? How would that work?

[BillW]

Originally posted by takeout
BillW,

Question: Would/could, this mess you up if you were querying a database by trainer names? For instance, if a certain trainer's name had been corrected, say 2 years ago, and you were doing a query on him, would you lose him after going back 2 years? How would that work?

It depends on how complicated you make the query. If heuristics are added such that a trainer name with and without a middle initial are matched, you avoid one pitfall. I've seen first initial/first name spelled out, another one that can be caught. Of course you risk matching two different people also (is A. Bcdef really Albert Bcdef?).

On the flip side, if you are doing the much simpler character for character match, if they don't match exactly they are unique.

Now the short answer: yes it can get complicated.:)

When I answered above I was thinking more of the case where the DRF initially had a difference and didn't want to change the old name to the new form and cause a disparity, i.e. keeping backward compatability. Of course it could all just be silly errors caused by their data handling process. I've seen a lot in the BRIS files.

Bill

[ranchwest]

I believe there were once two jockeys named Larry Melancon. I think only one of them is still riding.

There's now Sylvester Carmouche, Jr. and Sylvester Carmouche III.

There's a lot of similar names.

[smf]

RW,

Yeah I noticed that "other" Larry Melancon at Hou this year. He also rode here for a bit this season. There *is* a difference in the level of ability of those 2.

[takeout]

BillW,
That's very interesting. Thanks.

The discrepancies that I've noticed so far mostly involve things like Jr., Sr. and initials or the lack thereof. One source will have will have Sr. and the other will just have the same trainer name without the Sr. Stuff like that. The good news (I guess) is that most of the time it's the same guy. However, I did stumble across one lately that I'm pretty sure was two different people. It was a Jr. & a Sr. and their records (generic stats) were too far apart to be attributed to the different updating times of the two sources/databases. I still haven't verified which one is correct but I could make a good guess.

It's a bit of an odd feeling to realize that there is the potential for people with PPs from the two different sources to be looking at a different trainer for the same horse.

[takeout]

Generally I'm happy with the TSN PPs but this is one area where they fall short. I don't know if this applies to all of the Equibase data or not but they often leave off the jocks' initials. So, if you have more than one jock with the same last name, you can't tell which one has been riding the horse from the running lines.

It seems to be a product of how many letters are in the last names. If their last name is short, then *one* initial will be there. (I don't think I've ever seen them use more than one.) But lots of times if it has 7 or 8 letters, instead of abbreviating the last name to leave room for the initial, they won't put any initial in there at all! Sometimes you have two jocks with the same last name and one is riding a hole in the wind while the other can't get arrested. With the TSN PPs there's no way to tell which one was riding a certain horse previously.

I actually have to throw DRF some credit on this one. Their PPs seem to have this handled properly with the use of "Jr." as well as *two* initials on many occasions and no apparent abbreviating.