Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fastracehorse@DRF
..........but you don't say how. You go on to a narrative of racing subtleties that can lead to winners but you don't say how to numerically quantify it.
I disagree with you; you cannot program a computer to deal with the myriad of handicapping subtleties.
Yah, I numerically quantify a horse based on prior or projected ability - it's an important part of the game.
And then I make my selections based on a host of factors: like pace scenario and form evaluation.
It takes time to do a race. It takes time to do a card. I write my selections in order; betting on a few selections with conviction.
I know if the public will like my horse or not - when do I have the time to make a M/L? Why would I want 2? Why would I want a computer to do it? Why would I try and convert a feeling into a number via a PC?
fffastt
|
Maybe my post wasn't quite clear enough. Okay. Let me expand a bit.
You say you make your determination based on a host of different factors. Fine. Presumably you know what these factors are and they are not simply absorbed into your consciousness by an unknown cosmic force of some sort.
So you engage in the process of handicapping, which (correct me if I'm wrong) is sort of a non-verbal assimilation of different facts regarding the past performances of the horses in question. During this process, plusses and minuses strike you about each horse. As you continue the process, the race as a whole begins to take shape; that is, the interactions of these horses with their attributes and shortcomings, fall into a picture in your mind as to how the race will unfold. As this process becomes more clear, you consult the odds' board to see if and how your handicapping opinion can be exploited through some sort of overlay- a flaw in the crowd's thinking that offers you a porthole to profit.
This, you (rightfully) feel is
art. Reliant on science, of course, but pure art nonetheless. How in the world could anyone in their right mind think that this elegant intellectual process of the human mind might be broken down into numbers, such that a cold, insensitive machine could possibly reproduce what's going on here?
Well? I do... and here's why. If you slow down your handicapping process, I mean way down, you will see something interesting. At every juncture, with each variable you consider, you are making a decision; at the least, you are forming an opinion. And this opinion is based upon the knowledge (garnered from years of experience I'd guess) that resides in your memory. Furthermore, the decision is based on the opinion that some attribute or another is better than another attribute
and importantly by some discernable
margin. But if you think about it, what you are doing is the following: Knowing that factor A is good (+), factor B is bad (-), etc. and that the
degree of these factors 0-10 or 0-100 or 0-1000 (it doesn't matter the scale of range) is relevant and important.
The essential point is that the mind is
measuring and measurements are a function of numbers at their essence. So these non-verbal thoughts which occur during the handicapping process
can be accurately described as numbers. In fact they can be
more accurately described as numbers than as either verbal or non-verbal thought. The struggle of understanding verbal measurements was something I addressed in my earilier post. How much is "a little bit; a lot; a great deal; a smidgen; a pinch; a tad; a medium-lot; a whole-lot"?
The fact is, if you dissected your handicapping and assigned numerical values to all the variables you consider, you would become a much better handicapper in the long run. Why? Because you would create a record of the measurements in which you are engaged and a subsequent tweaking might reveal areas where improvement can be achieved.
Measurement-based decisions occur when the conglomeration of measurements reach some tipping point. Since numbers can accurately describe the measurements, they can also accurately describe the tipping points which create decisions.
And so, all of this
can be done. I didn't say it was easy. In fact, I characterized it as a "struggle." In this struggle, you will need to deconstruct your process, step by step. But even if you do this not with the intention of converting your handicapping into computer software, you should get a nice benefit from the exercise. As far as making a betting line, I agree with you that this is unnecessary. However, I think it's hard to dispute the counter-argument that any measurement of value and what may constitue a trigger-point for a wager has merit. At the least, it gives you a historic record which you may then assess as you continue the quest for profits in a very tough game.
