SLEW'S FAST HORSE RESULTS FOR SUNDAY 2/5

[MeSlew]

Hello All. Some nice ones on the list today including a rare single at Tampa! Hope you had at least one. More races on Tuesday for Wednesday at my site. Stay tuned!

http://www.slewsfasthorses.com/website3/2012-02-05r.jpg

[PaceAdvantage]

Why does this list look different than the one you posted before the races for Sunday?

[speed]

Quit asking good questions. Like you own/operate this site or something. :eek:

[HUSKER55]

you guys are a tough crowd.....what to do...what to do......SHOOT FROM THE HIP! :D

[PaceAdvantage]

Look, the guy has an apparently free site and is using this site to promote it. I have no problem with that...it's free...he doesn't even have any ads on the site or anything.

Now, he might very well be doing this to drum up business for when he eventually starts charging (happens all the time).

Here's how I see things. If you're going to publicly post about your product, whether it be free or not, you open yourself up to obvious questions and criticisms. That's just the way the game is played.

I thought my question was quite valid and worthy of an answer.

[MeSlew]

Ahh...paranoia strikes deep. I love it. The list is different. Right? U-bet.
Being an old programmer I'm always looking to remove the unnecessary data to lighten bandwidth. But, to answer your question:

The listing has two parts for each track. First are listed the races and those horses which are selected as "FAST". After all the races are listed, there is a second listing. That shows horses that have come out of races where horses have come back to win their next start.

I have taken to remove that second list because it has nothing to do with idfentifying the results of the horses actually listed as FAST horses. Unnecessary for the results listing. I just started doing that so I don't post unnecessary info. That, by the way, is in deference to PaceAdvantage.

Your welcome.

I also just started removing the SCRATCHED horses from the lists. Not necessary to have them as they did not run.

Other then that, the lists are exactly the same.

Now: ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE who thinks that I'm engaged in some funny stuff can ignore my posts. I absolutely do not care. And if at any time the management of this discussion group thinks the same, you are free to remove my login and be done with it.

I'm posting this stuff but you do not have to use it. Again, I don't care.
However, it has been quite gratifying to see total strangers writing me that this data is AWESOME and that they have been instantly successful with it.

That is so cool.

Done.

Slew

[MeSlew]

...and in all fairness, I should add that the question is a good one. However, a quick comparison of the lists reveal why they are different.

I should note that because I cannot get the formatting to hold within the message here on this forum, I have to link to a .jpg file on my site. On other forums where I post, the lists are simply pasted as is, into the messages. So while here, you are linked, there they are strictly on the record and cannot be altered.

Either way, they are exactly the same (I hope) !!! But thank you for bringing it up, because I didn't think to explain the change in the way they look. My fault.

And this is not a "tough crowd". Because you are not as tough as the field in any Derby! THAT...is a tough crowd!

[PaceAdvantage]

Either way, they are exactly the same (I hope) !!! But thank you for bringing it up, because I didn't think to explain the change in the way they look. My fault.Thanks for this pleasant explanation. I could have done without the "paranoia" thing earlier, but we'll let bygones be bygones.

I'm not paranoid...I'm just observant.

[Dahoss9698]

I'm the paranoid one....or so I've been told.

[MeSlew]

Dear Just Observant: Gave this discussion a little more thought. I assumed that you were referring to simply the layout and not the data. But let me be clear: I expect the data to be spot on, as it as always been. However, since it has been only my eyes viewing it for all these years, and I've not really checked it for errors in years, who knows! Please be sure, if you or anyone else spots anything that doesn't look correct, let me know immediately. Sometimes the information I get may be changed only slightly without documentation and that may cause a change in the output. Wrong horse winning, wrong payout, etc.

Also, do you think I should leave the scratches in instead of removing them? I'm leaning towards putting them back in, but since you noticed the change, give me some feedback if you can.

Thanks

[lamboguy]

Dear Just Observant: Gave this discussion a little more thought. I assumed that you were referring to simply the layout and not the data. But let me be clear: I expect the data to be spot on, as it as always been. However, since it has been only my eyes viewing it for all these years, and I've not really checked it for errors in years, who knows! Please be sure, if you or anyone else spots anything that doesn't look correct, let me know immediately. Sometimes the information I get may be changed only slightly without documentation and that may cause a change in the output. Wrong horse winning, wrong payout, etc.

Also, do you think I should leave the scratches in instead of removing them? I'm leaning towards putting them back in, but since you noticed the change, give me some feedback if you can.

Thanksthis is very worthy information. i am not a number's guy, and this information is right up my wheelhouse. i only wish you ran this data on racetracks that i play, such as penn national, charlestown, turfway, turf paradise.

[MeSlew]

Lamboguy: Thank you. It took me many years to make it worthy, and I believe it truly is. I have considered adding some tracks, and may someday do so. The problem is that it takes maybe two or so years to get a database sampling large enough to begin to have credible and useful data, and then quite a bit of monitoring and tinkering before the data is useful. Even then, I'm not sure the data hold up with tracks that run for smaller purses where the class tiers are tighter...if you know what I mean.

Tampa is an example: I began to monitor that track so that I could have horses that ran there show up as SHIPPERS to Gulfstream, Churchill and occasionally Saratoga. Using the data for Tampa itself doesn't seem to be as effective as for some other venues, although I've hit 2 or 3 really nice longshots in the last year. But I don't see the consistent winners there as I do some other tracks.

If interest continues however, I may start to include some more tracks including Turfway and Turf Paradise, amongst others. Not sure the Chucktown configuration would yield much although I could be wrong.

Thanks for the input. I appreciate it very much.

[lamboguy]

the tracks you are dealing with, new york, california, kentucky and florida are the highest takeout tracks after rebates. they have the highest signal fee's. i find in order to win at this game you have to pay less than a 10% takeout. as a bettor you are paying for quality.

thank you very much for posting your horses, i will follow them. personally without knowing anything other than the way you derive those horses, i am sure they will do well.

[MeSlew]

Lamboguy: You are welcome. You make a great point, and it certainly isn't lost on me. Since this was never to be a "business" proposition, and certainly was never to be made public, I simply accrued the data for the tracks I was most interested in, takeout notwithstanding.

Well, it still isn't a business proposition, but since it appears I'm going to lose the BET that started this whole thing going public (over Thanksgiving dinner I said no way anyone would be interested, they said "we betcha' you are dead wrong...") you have given me food for thought.

And always, thanks for the feedback.