Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board


Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Handicapping Discussion (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Bill Benter /Models and Overlays (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=160642)

MPRanger 09-25-2020 03:21 PM

Bill Benter /Models and Overlays
 
Been listening to The Perfect Bet on Audibel. It was interesting that the author said Bill Benter the Hong Kong horse racing expert found that betting overlays lost him money until he adjusted to a number between his model and the tote board.

Also that only a population of about a thousand horses raced between the two Hong Kong tracks and shippers are rare. Seems like a database could easily be maintained. Maybe that's why he could use a model vs handicapping with tried and true elements of handicapping.

All thru the book the author refers to top contestants in racing and sports as predictions. I don't see handicapping as making predictions but evaluations where price is the determining factor.

Great book though.

davew 09-25-2020 03:45 PM

Are you assuming his model DOES NOT include tried and true elements of handicapping.

MPRanger 09-25-2020 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davew (Post 2655915)
Are you assuming his model DOES NOT include tried and true elements of handicapping.

No, just that he uses a model for horse racing.

classhandicapper 09-25-2020 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MPRanger (Post 2655900)
Also that only a population of about a thousand horses raced between the two Hong Kong tracks and shippers are rare. Seems like a database could easily be maintained.

I didn't know that. That's a pretty significant point.

Following only a 1000 horses would allow you track every trip, every bias, every race flow, every figure, how every horse is coming out of every race much easier than playing horses in the US where the horse population is gigantic. Here, even if you follow one circuit very closely, you are constantly dealing with horses from other circuits whose races you haven't seen, that ran on days you know nothing about, at class levels you are less familiar with, whose cross circuit figures are less trustworthy, and whose drug policies may be different.

Nitro 09-25-2020 05:39 PM

Bill Benter and his accomplishments have been covered numerous times on the PA forum.

All the information you'll ever need is on the Hong Kong Jockey Club Web site (lots of informative Web links):
https://racing.hkjc.com/racing/infor.../RaceCard.aspx

It's one of many reasons I play HK and post the following each time in the Selection Forum (including this Sun morning)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitro (Post 2654272)
Good morning to everyone interested in the best racing product on the planet!

I’ll be posting my live selections for the early races & pre-race selections later on for this very competitive race card that looks to offer some decent value. There are 10 races at Sha Tin with 8 races on Turf & 2 on the Dirt:

Post Time Race #1 – 1:00 AM SUN EST


Ted Craven 09-25-2020 10:02 PM

1359 non-retired horses eligible to race as of today. Some with records clearly favouring one track or the other, one surface or the other (All Weather vs Turf), etc, etc.

https://racing.hkjc.com/racing/infor...ormerName.aspx

Ted

Dave Schwartz 09-26-2020 12:05 AM

This is from memory, but as I recall, they start each season with 1,200 + 200 alternates.

Other than "Invitational" races, it is a closed environment.

That's why the class structure works so well. Although done differently, somewhat akin to dog racing.

mountainman 09-26-2020 11:26 AM

1000 horses?? That sounds stagnant. And so many questions come to mind. Both as an official and as a horseplayer. At first blush, it sounds like a catch-22: campaign available stock with discretion and keep horses sound, but that should, in theory, lead to some short fields. How many days per week do they run?? And how many races?? And if they repopulate only with young horses, they must card lots of mdn races. I would guess they have stern regulations applied in an inflexible manner.

As far as charting every horse to death, are you guys sure that's not just to appease some need for control?? lol.. ( and that from a guy who prides himself on extreme familiarity with two tracks only). In my opinion, the sort of handicapper dedicated enough to pursue that degree of local knowledge would outstrip his peers, anyway, in assessing shippers-even by taking just a cursory look.

classhandicapper 09-26-2020 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656162)
As far as charting every horse to death, are you guys sure that's not just to appease some need for control?? lol.. ( and that from a guy who prides himself on extreme familiarity with two tracks only). In my opinion, the sort of handicapper dedicated enough to pursue that degree of local knowledge would outstrip his peers, anyway, in assessing shippers-even by taking just a cursory look.

I can only speak for myself, but when I have all my bias and trips notes laid out in the Formulator PPs and am familiar with all the horses and classes, I can quickly look at a race and focus in on who might be better or worse than they look on paper and provide a potential bet.

When the race is loaded with horses I don't know, I may take a quick look at the charts that day, the horses in the races they are coming out of, and perhaps watch a replay, but my opinions are never strong. That not good for me "personally" because I'm cautious before pulling the trigger.

If you want to laugh, I'm never more confident about a bet than I am on mule races. There are around 40 mules on that fair circuit (even less in recent years). I know every single one them as well as possible because I have notes on every mule in every race for years, have seen every pan and head-on replay multiple times and have my own figures. I don't get many good prices, but I know them so well, sometimes I take 1-1 or 6/5 and know I'm stealing. I rarely take less than 5/2 or 3/1 on horses.

woodbinepmi 09-26-2020 12:34 PM

[QUOTE=mountainman;2656162]1000 horses?? That sounds stagnant. And so many questions come to mind. Both as an official and as a horseplayer. At first blush, it sounds like a catch-22: campaign available stock with discretion and keep horses sound, but that should, in theory, lead to some short fields. How many days per week do they run?? And how many races?? And if they repopulate only with young horses, they must card lots of mdn races. I would guess they have stern regulations applied in an inflexible manner.

They run twice a week, with 8 races on Wednesday with 12 horse fields and 10 to 11 on the weekend card with 12 to 14 in each race. 99% of the horses are geldings so they don't retire as quickly as they do here in north America, but they do have to keep a certain rating or they are forced to retire at the end of the year. Also, there are no maiden races, they do have what they call Griffin races which are for young runners who have no ratings but there are very few of those the entire year.

mountainman 09-26-2020 12:39 PM

[quote=woodbinepmi;2656185]
Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656162)
1000 horses?? That sounds stagnant. And so many questions come to mind. Both as an official and as a horseplayer. At first blush, it sounds like a catch-22: campaign available stock with discretion and keep horses sound, but that should, in theory, lead to some short fields. How many days per week do they run?? And how many races?? And if they repopulate only with young horses, they must card lots of mdn races. I would guess they have stern regulations applied in an inflexible manner.

They run twice a week, with 8 races on Wednesday with 12 horse fields and 10 to 11 on the weekend card with 12 to 14 in each race. 99% of the horses are geldings so they don't retire as quickly as they do here in north America, but they do have to keep a certain rating or they are forced to retire at the end of the year. Also, there are no maiden races, they do have what they call Griffin races which are for young runners who have no ratings but there are very few of those the entire year.

tx..twice a week explains a lot.

woodbinepmi 09-26-2020 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656162)
1000 horses?? That sounds stagnant. And so many questions come to mind. Both as an official and as a horseplayer. At first blush, it sounds like a catch-22: campaign available stock with discretion and keep horses sound, but that should, in theory, lead to some short fields. How many days per week do they run?? And how many races?? And if they repopulate only with young horses, they must card lots of mdn races. I would guess they have stern regulations applied in an inflexible manner.

As far as charting every horse to death, are you guys sure that's not just to appease some need for control?? lol.. ( and that from a guy who prides himself on extreme familiarity with two tracks only). In my opinion, the sort of handicapper dedicated enough to pursue that degree of local knowledge would outstrip his peers, anyway, in assessing shippers-even by taking just a cursory look.

They run twice a week, with 8 races on Wednesday with 12 horse fields and 10 to 11 on the weekend card with 12 to 14 in each race. 99% of the horses are geldings so they don't retire as quickly as they do here in north America, but they do have to keep a certain rating or they are forced to retire at the end of the year. Also, there are no maiden races, they do have what they call Griffin races which are for young runners who have no ratings but there are very few of those the entire year.

Onesome 09-26-2020 07:19 PM

[quote=woodbinepmi;2656185]
Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656162)
1000 horses?? That sounds stagnant. And so many questions come to mind. Both as an official and as a horseplayer. At first blush, it sounds like a catch-22: campaign available stock with discretion and keep horses sound, but that should, in theory, lead to some short fields. How many days per week do they run?? And how many races?? And if they repopulate only with young horses, they must card lots of mdn races. I would guess they have stern regulations applied in an inflexible manner.

They run twice a week, with 8 races on Wednesday with 12 horse fields and 10 to 11 on the weekend card with 12 to 14 in each race. 99% of the horses are geldings so they don't retire as quickly as they do here in north America, but they do have to keep a certain rating or they are forced to retire at the end of the year. Also, there are no maiden races, they do have what they call Griffin races which are for young runners who have no ratings but there are very few of those the entire year.

The safety limit at Happy Valley is 12, Sha Tin Dirt sprint 12 route 14 and Sha Tin Turf is 14.

The HKJC buys horses from the US and UK sales and they resell those to the HK owners, these are the majority of the new horses and the griffins you see. HK owners can also private purchase horses and they get imported under a new name.

Onesome 09-26-2020 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodbinepmi (Post 2656202)
They run twice a week, with 8 races on Wednesday with 12 horse fields and 10 to 11 on the weekend card with 12 to 14 in each race. 99% of the horses are geldings so they don't retire as quickly as they do here in north America, but they do have to keep a certain rating or they are forced to retire at the end of the year. Also, there are no maiden races, they do have what they call Griffin races which are for young runners who have no ratings but there are very few of those the entire year.

Also worth noting if you bleed twice, you're done. The group placed Thanks Forever had to retire due to his 2nd bleeding attack during trackwork last week. Horse can still race elsewhere (obviously USA is the option they'll probably look to sell to).

Nitro 09-27-2020 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656162)
1000 horses?? That sounds stagnant. And so many questions come to mind. Both as an official and as a horseplayer. At first blush, it sounds like a catch-22: campaign available stock with discretion and keep horses sound, but that should, in theory, lead to some short fields. How many days per week do they run?? And how many races?? And if they repopulate only with young horses, they must card lots of mdn races. I would guess they have stern regulations applied in an inflexible manner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656187)
tx..twice a week explains a lot.

Ya know I could expect uninformed comments like this from those who have little knowledge or experience in the horse racing game. But I find comments made like this by someone who’s been in the game for such a long time very disappointing. Although I find them rather novice, you my friend apparently no idea what your assumptions signify.

I’ve been playing the HK circuit now going into my 6th year. I personally find it invigorating and refreshing especially when compared to State-side racing. Everything about it is as far as I’m concerned a horse player’s dream, come true. I’m not going reiterate all of the positive aspects of their product. It’s really unnecessary considering the handle that their patrons produce. In fact, I would wager that a typical single day’s 10 race card at Sha Tin would generate a larger handle than Mountaineer could produce in an entire year (even they raced every day of the week). Why does anyone suppose a guy like Benter would even venture into that sort of gambling environment to begin with?

I’ll just add a few facts to perhaps enlighten those who might be interested:
1) They very few Maiden (Griffin) type races
2) They have no Claiming or Allowance type races – mostly Handicaps
3) They don’t race for the purpose of breeding. They race for the sake of racing – period.
4) They do have very strict regulations and enforcement by offering transparency at every level.
5) They don’t permit the use of drugs on race day entries.
6) The stock has to prove themselves time and again in race trials before they’re permitted to compete.
7) Etc, Etc

mountainman 09-27-2020 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitro (Post 2656445)
Ya know I could expect uninformed comments like this from those who have little knowledge or experience in the horse racing game. But I find comments made like this by someone who’s been in the game for such a long time very disappointing. Although I find them rather novice, you my friend apparently no idea what your assumptions signify.

I’ve been playing the HK circuit now going into my 6th year. I personally find it invigorating and refreshing especially when compared to State-side racing. Everything about it is as far as I’m concerned a horse player’s dream, come true. I’m not going reiterate all of the positive aspects of their product. It’s really unnecessary considering the handle that their patrons produce. In fact, I would wager that a typical single day’s 10 race card at Sha Tin would generate a larger handle than Mountaineer could produce in an entire year (even they raced every day of the week). Why does anyone suppose a guy like Benter would even venture into that sort of gambling environment to begin with?

I’ll just add a few facts to perhaps enlighten those who might be interested:
1) They very few Maiden (Griffin) type races
2) They have no Claiming or Allowance type races – mostly Handicaps
3) They don’t race for the purpose of breeding. They race for the sake of racing – period.
4) They do have very strict regulations and enforcement by offering transparency at every level.
5) They don’t permit the use of drugs on race day entries.
6) The stock has to prove themselves time and again in race trials before they’re permitted to compete.
7) Etc, Etc

Not familiar with their racing. At all. And I certainly wasn't maligning it. But the size of their horse population did raise questions and pique my curiosity. And having served as a racing sec and ast racing sec for 30 years, the attrition rate and productivity of centralized horse populations is a topic that gets my attention and traces back to many factors

And the apparent absence of feeder-tracks makes it quite unique.

Tx for the response.

mountainman 09-27-2020 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classhandicapper (Post 2656183)
I can only speak for myself, but when I have all my bias and trips notes laid out in the Formulator PPs and am familiar with all the horses and classes, I can quickly look at a race and focus in on who might be better or worse than they look on paper and provide a potential bet.

When the race is loaded with horses I don't know, I may take a quick look at the charts that day, the horses in the races they are coming out of, and perhaps watch a replay, but my opinions are never strong. That not good for me "personally" because I'm cautious before pulling the trigger.

If you want to laugh, I'm never more confident about a bet than I am on mule races. There are around 40 mules on that fair circuit (even less in recent years). I know every single one them as well as possible because I have notes on every mule in every race for years, have seen every pan and head-on replay multiple times and have my own figures. I don't get many good prices, but I know them so well, sometimes I take 1-1 or 6/5 and know I'm stealing. I rarely take less than 5/2 or 3/1 on horses.

I'm a formulator user, as well. Trip notes, bias notes, race-notes..and other things that might be of interest to viewers. And I go that whole nine yards with both Mountaineer AND Mahoning. But no way do I desire a program with no shippers.

True, a sharp player's confidence factor might soar when he is super-informed about the stock, but that's just one side of the equation. My point was sophisticated handicappers can widen their advantage even more (if just a bit) when less known commodities (invading horses) are added to the mix. A little uncertainty (in the form of semi-informed) speculation is not a bad thing when baked into the bottom line.

Admittedly, this opinion is partially based on the (increasing out-dated??) assumption that extreme familiarity with certain thoroughbreds does not follow them from track-to-track and well- inform their closing-odds.

But I do think that covid has made the American racing world just a bit smaller, if for no other reason than by giving handicappers more time to spread their focus, and that it's dicey, anyway, to assume that intimate knowledge of a field results in much more than a nominal edge these days.

mountainman 09-27-2020 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656454)
I'm a formulator user, as well. Trip notes, bias notes, race-notes..and other things that might be of interest to viewers. And I go that whole nine yards with both Mountaineer AND Mahoning. But no way do I desire a program with no shippers.

True, a sharp player's confidence factor might soar when he is super-informed about the stock, but that's just one side of the equation. My point was sophisticated handicappers can widen their advantage even more (if just a bit) when less known commodities (invading horses) are added to the mix. A little uncertainty (in the form of semi-informed) speculation is not a bad thing when baked into the bottom line.

Admittedly, this opinion is partially based on the (increasing out-dated??) assumption that extreme familiarity with certain thoroughbreds does not follow them from track-to-track and well- inform their closing-odds.

But I do think that covid has made the American racing world just a bit smaller, if for no other reason than by giving handicappers more time to spread their focus, and that it's dicey, anyway, to assume that intimate knowledge of a field results in much more than a nominal edge these days.

*increasingly

classhandicapper 09-27-2020 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656454)
True, a sharp player's confidence factor might soar when he is super-informed about the stock, but that's just one side of the equation. My point was sophisticated handicappers can widen their advantage even more (if just a bit) when less known commodities (invading horses) are added to the mix. A little uncertainty (in the form of semi-informed) speculation is not a bad thing when baked into the bottom line.

I agree, but within limits.

One of the reasons I've been looking at biases at multiple track for quite awhile now is that I'm hoping one the horses that ran against the grain will ship somewhere where the locals won't know about it. In fact, I used one yesterday that finished 2nd at 15-1. But that kind of stuff is wildly time consuming. There only so many race cards and replays you can look at. So I'm still stuck with loads of shippers I'm less sure how to evaluate than the horses I follow closely.

woodbinepmi 09-27-2020 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman (Post 2656454)
I'm a formulator user, as well. Trip notes, bias notes, race-notes..and other things that might be of interest to viewers. And I go that whole nine yards with both Mountaineer AND Mahoning. But no way do I desire a program with no shippers.

True, a sharp player's confidence factor might soar when he is super-informed about the stock, but that's just one side of the equation. My point was sophisticated handicappers can widen their advantage even more (if just a bit) when less known commodities (invading horses) are added to the mix. A little uncertainty (in the form of semi-informed) speculation is not a bad thing when baked into the bottom line.

Admittedly, this opinion is partially based on the (increasing out-dated??) assumption that extreme familiarity with certain thoroughbreds does not follow them from track-to-track and well- inform their closing-odds.

But I do think that covid has made the American racing world just a bit smaller, if for no other reason than by giving handicappers more time to spread their focus, and that it's dicey, anyway, to assume that intimate knowledge of a field results in much more than a nominal edge these days.

They do have shippers, the difference is they come from all over the world, mostly Australia, New Zealand, England and Ireland. The majority of the horses have started their career elsewhere.

mountainman 09-27-2020 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodbinepmi (Post 2656508)
They do have shippers, the difference is they come from all over the world, mostly Australia, New Zealand, England and Ireland. The majority of the horses have started their career elsewhere.

Is it usually a one-way trip when a horse ships in?? And they must have connections pre-established there?? Have lots of these invaders been sold since starting elsewhere??

woodbinepmi 09-27-2020 05:22 PM

Yes, unless it is a stakes race situation. Usually the HKJC purchases the horses overseas and then sells them privately or at auction in Hong Kong. It's done differently over there, some people like it some people don't, I personally do. The ONLY bad thing is the hours if you are here in North America, Wednesdays are not too bad, it's the weekend cards that last all night long which makes it tough. It is a trip handicappers paradise with the large fields and with the close scrutiny of the club there are no shenanigans going on.

Nitro 09-27-2020 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MPRanger (Post 2655900)
Been listening to The Perfect Bet on Audibel. It was interesting that the author said Bill Benter the Hong Kong horse racing expert found that betting overlays lost him money until he adjusted to a number between his model and the tote board.

Also that only a population of about a thousand horses raced between the two Hong Kong tracks and shippers are rare. Seems like a database could easily be maintained. Maybe that's why he could use a model vs handicapping with tried and true elements of handicapping.

All thru the book the author refers to top contestants in racing and sports as predictions. I don't see handicapping as making predictions but evaluations where price is the determining factor.

Great book though.

Getting back on topic: You might also want to consider what Bill Benter has personally stated on this topic. If you don’t recognize the name here’s a link:
http://www.worlds-greatest-gamblers....illiam-benter/
I certainly respect his credibility, because of his obvious accomplishments and capabilities.
His comments (below) are without a doubt significant to anyone interested attacking this game:

Quote:

Excerpts from:
“Computer Based Horse Race Handicapping and Wagering Systems:”
A Report by William Benter

INTRODUCTION
The question of whether a fully mechanical system can ever "beat the races" has been widely discussed in both the academic and popular literature. Certain authors have convincingly demonstrated that profitable wagering systems do exist for the races. The most well documented of these have generally been of the technical variety, that is, they are concerned mainly with the public odds, and do not attempt to predict horse performance from fundamental factors. Technical systems for place and show betting, (Ziemba and Hausch, 1987) and exotic pool betting, (Ziemba and Hausch,1986) as well as the 'odds movement' system developed by Asch and Quandt (1986), fall into this category. A benefit of these systems is that they require relatively little preparatory effort, and can be effectively employed by the occasional race goer.

The complexity of predicting horse performance makes the specification of an elegant handicapping model quite difficult. Ideally, each independent variable would capture a unique aspect of the influences effecting horse performance. In the author's experience, the trial and error method of adding independent variables to increase the model's goodness-of-fit, results in the model tending to become a hodgepodge of highly correlated variables whose individual significance's are difficult to determine and often counter-intuitive.

Additionally, there will always be a significant amount of 'inside information' in horse racing that cannot be readily included in a statistical model. Trainer's and jockey's intentions, secret workouts, whether the horse ate its breakfast, and the like, will be available to certain parties who will no doubt take advantage of it. Their betting will be reflected in the odds. This presents an obstacle to the model developer with access to published information only. For a statistical model to compete in this environment, it must make full use of the advantages of computer modeling, namely, the ability to make complex calculations on large data sets.

The odds set by the public betting yield a sophisticated estimate of the horses' win probabilities.

It can be presumed that valid fundamental information exists which can not be systematically or practically incorporated into a statistical model. Therefore, any statistical model, however well developed, will always be incomplete. An extremely important step in model development, and one that the author believes has been generally overlooked in the literature, is the estimation of the relation of the model's probability estimates to the public's estimates, and the adjustment of the model's estimates to incorporate whatever information can be gleaned from the public's estimates. The public's implied probability estimates generally correspond well with the actual frequencies of winning.

BTW the last 2 sentences express exactly how Mr. Benter was able to achieve his success.

classhandicapper 09-28-2020 11:44 AM

Quote:

Additionally, there will always be a significant amount of 'inside information' in horse racing that cannot be readily included in a statistical model. Trainer's and jockey's intentions, secret workouts, whether the horse ate its breakfast, and the like, will be available to certain parties who will no doubt take advantage of it. Their betting will be reflected in the odds.
This is something I've known for a long time but not thought very clearly about.

Everyone sees it when it comes to first time starters and even some layoffs because the inside money will sometimes scream at you (or its absence indicates the horse is not ready). But the same thing is going on in other types of races. It's just harder to notice. You'll see some horse bet down or not take much money and wonder what everyone else sees that you don't. Sometimes you may be missing a trip, bias, trainer pattern, the figures you are looking at are different than the more influential TG/RAG sheets, but sometimes insiders know the horse is set for his "A" race or missed some time and is less than 100% and you don't.

MJC922 09-28-2020 07:29 PM

Mr. Benter deserves much credit as he's obviously a brilliant man. When you examine the circumstances however I do believe even he would admit those were ideal conditions. He clearly worked very hard to accomplish what he did in an environment that was ideal to operate in. I think back to the article I read where in the early days before he was given direct access to the tote he had time to walk across the street and place his bets at the off track betting shop across from his office.

You have to understand these were days when hardly anyone even had a computer, the crowd wasn't stupid but there was all kinds of money to be made and he found a way to make it bigtime. I can tell you for certain odds volatility was nothing like it is with for example US racing today. To make use of the tote odds in a model, process the bet sizes etc and then have time to walk across the street with a few minutes to post, and punch out tickets, it would be awfully hard to see that working out the same way today.

Would he find a way to win today? I wouldn't bet against him but IMO it wouldn't be anything close to what it was like back then.

MPRanger 10-01-2020 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitro (Post 2656717)
Getting back on topic: You might also want to consider what Bill Benter has personally stated on this topic. If you don’t recognize the name here’s a link:
http://www.worlds-greatest-gamblers....illiam-benter/
I certainly respect his credibility, because of his obvious accomplishments and capabilities.
His comments (below) are without a doubt significant to anyone interested attacking this game:


BTW the last 2 sentences express exactly how Mr. Benter was able to achieve his success.

Thanks Nitro. I appreciate all the info you shared.

MPRanger 10-01-2020 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitro (Post 2656717)
Getting back on topic: You might also want to consider what Bill Benter has personally stated on this topic. If you don’t recognize the name here’s a link:

Therefore, any statistical model, however well developed, will always be incomplete.

A model doesn't have to be complete. It only correlates data points.
If A happens so many times then R seems to happen this many times.
Im gonna read as much as I can about it and see what he does. Models
are fascinating.

classhandicapper 10-02-2020 09:07 AM

Here's another phenomenon in models and factors I've noticed on occasion.

If you test a factor on "all" cases you will typically find that you'll lose the track take or thereabouts and tend to discard it.

I've seen cases where a factor seems to have no value at very short prices (everyone else sees it too) and very long prices (the horse may have a positive going for it but it's simply not good enough to win in today's race) but have some value among contenders that are not big favorites.

So maybe a guy like Benter incorporated the live odds into his model, but it may make sense to incorporate odds ranges also.

mountainman 10-02-2020 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classhandicapper (Post 2658100)
Here's another phenomenon in models and factors I've noticed on occasion.

If you test a factor on "all" cases you will typically find that you'll lose the track take or thereabouts and tend to discard it.

I've seen cases where a factor seems to have no value at very short prices (everyone else sees it too) and very long prices (the horse may have a positive going for it but it's simply not good enough to win in today's race) but have some value among contenders that are not big favorites.

So maybe a guy like Benter incorporated the live odds into his model, but it may make sense to incorporate odds ranges also.

Good post. Just in the last year, or two, I've begun to realize that ROI as compared to win%, perhaps the most utilized means of attempting to estimate the odds range that a specific trainer's winners tend to fall into, leaves lots of blind-spots and variables. Nearly identical stats, incorporating both strike-rate and flat-bet return, can reflect very different tendencies.

But while many times the obvious conclusions are actually misleading, even a trap, I'm not so sure this gives computer programs an insurmountable edge.
Real time experience and expertise lead to strong and accurate opinions on the comparative skills of trainers, and intuitive understanding of their tendencies. An opinion and understanding that can transcend cold data and lead to good value when the stats don't jive with what you know.

pandy 10-03-2020 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitro (Post 2656445)
Ya know I could expect uninformed comments like this from those who have little knowledge or experience in the horse racing game. But I find comments made like this by someone who’s been in the game for such a long time very disappointing. Although I find them rather novice, you my friend apparently no idea what your assumptions signify.

I’ve been playing the HK circuit now going into my 6th year. I personally find it invigorating and refreshing especially when compared to State-side racing. Everything about it is as far as I’m concerned a horse player’s dream, come true. I’m not going reiterate all of the positive aspects of their product. It’s really unnecessary considering the handle that their patrons produce. In fact, I would wager that a typical single day’s 10 race card at Sha Tin would generate a larger handle than Mountaineer could produce in an entire year (even they raced every day of the week). Why does anyone suppose a guy like Benter would even venture into that sort of gambling environment to begin with?

I’ll just add a few facts to perhaps enlighten those who might be interested:
1) They very few Maiden (Griffin) type races
2) They have no Claiming or Allowance type races – mostly Handicaps
3) They don’t race for the purpose of breeding. They race for the sake of racing – period.
4) They do have very strict regulations and enforcement by offering transparency at every level.
5) They don’t permit the use of drugs on race day entries.
6) The stock has to prove themselves time and again in race trials before they’re permitted to compete.
7) Etc, Etc



Does Hong Kong pps have running lines? Give us an idea of how the past performances look.

woodbinepmi 10-03-2020 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pandy (Post 2658489)
Does Hong Kong pps have running lines? Give us an idea of how the past performances look.

https://racing.hkjc.com/racing/conte...starter_r1.pdf

pandy 10-03-2020 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodbinepmi (Post 2658533)

Thanks.

MPRanger 10-04-2020 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classhandicapper (Post 2658100)
Here's another phenomenon in models and factors I've noticed on occasion.

If you test a factor on "all" cases you will typically find that you'll lose the track take or thereabouts and tend to discard it.

I've seen cases where a factor seems to have no value at very short prices (everyone else sees it too) and very long prices (the horse may have a positive going for it but it's simply not good enough to win in today's race) but have some value among contenders that are not big favorites.

So maybe a guy like Benter incorporated the live odds into his model, but it may make sense to incorporate odds ranges also.



To account for multiple dependent variables;

Is it better to run a single multi linear regression
or multiple single regressions? Or is either way OK?

classhandicapper 10-04-2020 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MPRanger (Post 2658965)
To account for multiple dependent variables;

Is it better to run a single multi linear regression
or multiple single regressions? Or is either way OK?

That's a notch over my pay grade. ;)

I'm doing simpler things.

I tend to test single handicapping ideas in my database to see if they have any betting value (for example showed speed against a closer bias). Then I start breaking them down into smaller and smaller categories (sprint, route, dirt, turf, stakes, claiming, favorites, longshots, turf routes, dirt sprints, projected to get loose today etc..)

If I find something negative or positive (in terms of ROI relative to the take) that doesn't look like it's due to a couple of fluky results, I create a permanent query that brings up all the horses that fit that category that are running today.

I have a bunch of queries like that to go along with my handicapping information.

I try to refine the queries over time and also try combining different factors. I also keep testing them to stay current and make sure they've been working well recently.

What I like best is when I find both a negative and positive inside the same race and the positive is a serious contender and the negative is the favorite. If the positive is probably not good enough to win, I'll see if I can construct something that makes sense where all he has to do is hit the board.

It's very hard to find sustainably positive stuff. I had one that was close to break even with no handicapping at all for a few years. Then it suddenly collapsed for over a year. I recently checked it again it's doing great in 2020 so far. So you can get whipsawed by some of this.

Poindexter 10-04-2020 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classhandicapper (Post 2658972)
That's a notch over my pay grade. ;)

I'm doing simpler things.

I tend to test single handicapping ideas in my database to see if they have any betting value (for example showed speed against a closer bias). Then I start breaking them down into smaller and smaller categories (sprint, route, dirt, turf, stakes, claiming, favorites, longshots, turf routes, dirt sprints, projected to get loose today etc..)

If I find something negative or positive (in terms of ROI relative to the take) that doesn't look like it's due to a couple of fluky results, I create a permanent query that brings up all the horses that fit that category that are running today.

I have a bunch of queries like that to go along with my handicapping information.

I try to refine the queries over time and also try combining different factors. I also keep testing them to stay current and make sure they've been working well recently.

What I like best is when I find both a negative and positive inside the same race and the positive is a serious contender and the negative is the favorite. If the positive is probably not good enough to win, I'll see if I can construct something that makes sense where all he has to do is hit the board.

It's very hard to find sustainably positive stuff. I had one that was close to break even with no handicapping at all for a few years. Then it suddenly collapsed for over a year. I recently checked it again it's doing great in 2020 so far. So you can get whipsawed by some of this.


IMO, every angle should approach losing the track take. Not claiming the market is totally efficient, but just because a horse has an angle going for him that is "hidden gold" doesn't mean the horse is going to be under bet. Most horses are over bet to some degree. Say hypothetically you have a magical computer that has the ability to give with 100% accuracy the chances of each horse winning a race. It would go something like this

computer chances, final odds

1) 3-1, 4-1
2) 5/2, 7/5
3) 6-1, 5-1
4) 6-1, 6-1
5) 7-2, 2-1

Now you multiply this type of activity by 1000s of races and the majority of horses will be bet too much, no matter what factors they have going for them. In the hypothetical race only 1 horse is has a positive roi and whether he has the "magical angle" that you are looking for is pretty random.

Let's say my magical angle is that horses that finish well beaten in last 3 races but all of a sudden show speed to the first call in their last race and are dropping significantly in class, that sounds to me like a very solid angle. The increased early speed a sign the horse is sharper (maybe even a sign the the barn is getting the horse ready so they can make a betting score), the fact he is well beaten in last 3 races so he appears off form to most, but at the same time for any number of reasons he can be over bet in this upcoming race despite having what is likely a positive angle going for him.

I have never done the angle hunting thing via computer(so I am speaking only using logic not with any experience in doing so), but I do think in general you are looking for angles that lose significantly below the track take (maybe 50% to 60% of it) or significantly above the track take(maybe 50% above), but imo these are not to make money to bet blindly but positive/negative factors that you would use to incorporate a more accurate estimation of each horses chances today (or a better odd line for those of us who believe that there is a purpose for making our own odds line).

classhandicapper 10-05-2020 08:24 AM

The way I see it, you looking for fundamental handicapping factors that are not fully appreciated on the odds board these days.

That could be anything from a new and improved way of calculating speed and pace figures, to a specific trainer angle that is not in the publicly available stats, to a very specific track bias situation or trip, to better pace projections, and so on etc..

It's going to be tough to find anything that's profitable on it's own. But there will be specific situations where you dislike the favorite for some reason and another horse has some hidden merit. If your information is well researched, that race is probably fertile ground for finding an actual overlay as opposed to some subjective opinion based on what could be a flawed handicapping and a flawed odds line.

Poindexter 10-05-2020 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classhandicapper (Post 2659174)
The way I see it, you looking for fundamental handicapping factors that are not fully appreciated on the odds board these days.

That could be anything from a new and improved way of calculating speed and pace figures, to a specific trainer angle that is not in the publicly available stats, to a very specific track bias situation or trip, to better pace projections, and so on etc..

It's going to be tough to find anything that's profitable on it's own. But there will be specific situations where you dislike the favorite for some reason and another horse has some hidden merit. If your information is well researched, that race is probably fertile ground for finding an actual overlay as opposed to some subjective opinion based on what could be a flawed handicapping and a flawed odds line.

You and I approach this game differently. My subjective opinion is all that matter to me. My flawed odds line is just putting my subjective opinion as a estimated probability for each horses chance of winning. My ultimate goal is to learn how to adjust (blend) my odds line so that it can be profitable, much like Benter did years ago. I am making big strides in that department and am confident I am heading in the right direction. Will I get to where I want to get too, time will tell. If I don't, I am having a great time trying, so it is all good. Worse case scenario is I can hold my own in Harness racing. I can tell you this, due to my very busy life, I don't line nearly as many races as I would like to, but I can tell you that time and time again when I do line races, I feel I gain a perspective that makes it well worth the effort. To me every race, every double, every pick 3, every pick 4, every pick 5, every exacta, every tri, every super may be a potential opportunity. Also, the scores (or too often the scores you fail to execute properly on) often come up when you least expect it. Imo as a horse bettor you have a full arsenal of weapons to really beat this game up, but if you don't put forth the effort to hone your line making skills, and do the research to figure out how to use value as a tool, I feel you just will never reach your full potential in this game. Doesn't mean you won't win, I just believe there is always room for improvement, especially in this game.

classhandicapper 10-05-2020 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poindexter (Post 2659190)
You and I approach this game differently. My subjective opinion is all that matter to me. My flawed odds line is just putting my subjective opinion as a estimated probability for each horses chance of winning. My ultimate goal is to learn how to adjust (blend) my odds line so that it can be profitable, much like Benter did years ago. I am making big strides in that department and am confident I am heading in the right direction. Will I get to where I want to get too, time will tell. If I don't, I am having a great time trying, so it is all good. Worse case scenario is I can hold my own in Harness racing. I can tell you this, due to my very busy life, I don't line nearly as many races as I would like to, but I can tell you that time and time again when I do line races, I feel I gain a perspective that makes it well worth the effort. To me every race, every double, every pick 3, every pick 4, every pick 5, every exacta, every tri, every super may be a potential opportunity. Also, the scores (or too often the scores you fail to execute properly on) often come up when you least expect it. Imo as a horse bettor you have a full arsenal of weapons to really beat this game up, but if you don't put forth the effort to hone your line making skills, and do the research to figure out how to use value as a tool, I feel you just will never reach your full potential in this game. Doesn't mean you won't win, I just believe there is always room for improvement, especially in this game.

I have no problem with any approach that gets you to the promised land. :ThmbUp:

I tried making odds lines. I tried ranking horses in order of preference. I tried just going by feel when the odds looked way off compared to what my handicapping suggested. I had some success with all. The reason I've been changing is that I know there is information being built into the prices of some horses that I don't have access to and sometimes I simply don't understand a horse or situation well and am wrong. So I'm trying to eliminate some of that by focusing on situations I have studied and believe still have value. That's where most of my overlays used to come from when I was assigning an odds line to every horse anyway.

MPRanger 10-07-2020 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by classhandicapper (Post 2659252)
I have no problem with any approach that gets you to the promised land. :ThmbUp:

So I'm trying to eliminate some of that by focusing on situations I have studied and believe still have value. That's where most of my overlays used to come from when I was assigning an odds line to every horse anyway.


Maybe the handicapping factors still work as before but the overlay you find is being bet down to an underlay at the last second by some group who is getting a kick back on volume. Still an overlay to them but not to you.

classhandicapper 10-07-2020 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MPRanger (Post 2659755)
Maybe the handicapping factors still work as before but the overlay you find is being bet down to an underlay at the last second by some group who is getting a kick back on volume. Still an overlay to them but not to you.

I suspect one of the problems is that major players come and go or do research and change their own betting patterns. So we are dealing with a moving target in terms of where the value is located.

That's the scarier part of the way I play now. Something can work for quite awhile but other players may be slowly chipping away at any value that exists.

When you are going bad is it some random negative distribution or has something changed?

It's hard to know.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.