Handicapping Method

[windoor]

Originally Posted by mountainman

No doubt impressive. But questions arise. Why just the one quarter's worth of results? And can your method be laid out in a (however complex) system of steps and guidelines? Or is it a work in progress as you tinker with different mixes and various pecking orders of certain handicapping factors? If it's the latter, would it be unreasonable to assume these results have been backfitted as part of your research? Or was there indeed a method settled on beforehand, in which case you actually wagered on these horses??

No insult intended, sir. You seem knowledgable, but I'm always skeptical when results are offered up after the fact. And your post raIses more questions than it answers. Apologies if some earlier post of yours has covered these points.

None taken:

I really need to stop posting this kind of stuff.

It is indeed a "back fit" but is based on my factor set that I have been using for many years.

I already had an esteem member of these boards explain to me how my methods are of little value, yet I continue to do well with them, for the most part.

My database is divided up into quarters as is my bankroll and type of play. This just happened to be the 1st quarter for MNR with all three months, so I grabbed that one and ran one of my factor sets through it.

I have always advocated the "divide by seven" rule. I have about 18 factors in all, divided up into "six key factors" , "six primary factors," and "six secondary factors". I Start with a key factor by itself and run in through my database to see if it "historically" does well at a particular track, distance, class level, etc.

Take it all with a grain of salt

Regards,

Windoor.

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by windoor

I really need to stop posting this kind of stuff.


I have about 18 factors in all, divided up into "six key factors" , "six primary factors," and "six secondary factors".

Regards,

Windoor.

No!, Please don't stop Windoor, please..

I enjoy your postings very much...

In fact, I think that this particular thread is a hoot.....In my mind this thread is the main reason what we all come to PA for....(at least for most of us, haha!)....I found it to be amusingly funny and entertaining, and quite insightful, as well....It is nice to hear from each and every one of the fans and players in this forum....What better place to spend time discussing the game that "we love so much"...

Me personally, I've come far in this game, and I know it, yet I know there is more, much more I believe...(the refining process)

This thread changed it's tangent in a strange little way when Dave Schwartz introduced some profound "psycholigical-nudity", for all of us to jaw on....I remember being alarmed at first, by Dave's comment to Cincy about his particular way of going....

When you've come far in the game, I believe that, you can get a pretty good handle on who, when they speak about horseracing, may be ahead of you, or perhaps hasn't come quite so far as you have come...One might call this the "Handicapper's Right of Passage".....(the knowing of where you are in the handicapping-pecking order, so to speak)

So, knowing this, when Dave talks, "I Listen", as I have him higher than me....Heck, to my way of thinking, the guy has left and "indelible" mark on this game by way of, his truly advanced-knowledge and his sincere desire and willingness to share his take on the game, with all of us.... Dave is always so accessible...Still, point on, Dave has a way of hitting you right between the eyes with his directness when addressing "a" point at hand....He causes me to think, and more than I care to sometimes....I mean, just when I think I am where I want to be in this game, and then, Dave comes along, and presents me with a reason to think "again".....At times such as these, I remind myself of; "I don't know, what I don't know"....And, I am convinced that, Dave knows some of those things, you know, the things that "I don't know" and "didn't know it", so then I have to think again, haha!....Dang you Dave !!!!

Perhaps this is what happened to others as well in this thread, when Dave opened up his big-yap, we had to think....I hate those knee jerk reactions, and yet I know that is how it goes if you are to move forward in your game, especially when hearing it from one who knows more than you....

There is no right or wrong here, and I don't take any sides when it comes to others and how they approach the game, no need to....We are all, at some specific point in time, in some degree of advancement and development in our game....Nothing wrong for someone to tell us how it is with them....No matter their degree of success.....I enjoy all of it....

best,

[thaskalos]

Handicapping can only be self-taught...it cannot be taught to us by anybody else.

We horseplayers are, by nature, very stubborn people...and this works both to our advantage, and to our detriment, at the same time.

It works to our advantage because, in this game, we need to value our opinions above anybody else's if we hope to survive. We need to travel the "road less traveled by", and to turn our back on the siren call of public opinion. This takes a certain amount of stubborness.

But this stubborness also hinders us...because it prevents us from really listening to what an expert handicapper might be trying to tell us.

We listen to a Dave Schwartz, but instead of really paying attention to his message...we try to determine if his opinions agree with ours. If his handicapping views are similar to ours...then we hail him as a great handicapper. If our opinions differ greatly from his, however...then we make up our minds that either he is wrong about some things, or that his approach is not suitable for us after all. In either case, it is OUR opinions that we hold in the highest regard...and not his.

Horseracing seems to be the only gambling game in existence where EVERY PLAYER considers himself an expert...whether he is a long-term winner or not. We count our near-misses as victories, because they sort of validate our handicapping opinions...and we stick with the same, old, losing handicapping and betting strategies that have been burying us for years.

Buddhists use the term "beginner's mind"...and proclaim that only in this state is "real" learning possible.

The old story goes that a very learned American scholar of religion went to the Himalayas to meet with a famous Buddhist Lama.

He sat at the table with him and inquired about the meaning of life, but, as the Lama started to speak, the American scholar soon found himself in philosophical disagreement with him...and engaged him in a debate. The Lama listened politely to his guest, and then offered him a cup of tea...which the scholar readily accepted.

The Lama started pouring the tea into the cup, but didn't stop when it reached the brim...and continued pouring until the tea started spilling all over the table and unto the floor.

"STOP!"...the American exclaimed..."The cup is full. Don't you see that there is no room for any more tea?"

"The cup is not the only thing that's full"...the Lama replied..."Your head is also full, and there is no more room there for my teaching. How can I teach you anything, if you won't empty your cup?"

If we horseplayers are satisfied with our results in this game...then we can continue with business as usual. But if we are not...then we have to "empty our cup".

Because in most cases, our game needs a complete overhaul...and not just a few pointers.

Remember...this is just one man's opinion. Ignore it if you so choose...

[raybo]

Thaskalos,

Your post is well written and quite valuable. Obviously there are contributors here, like Dave and yourself, among others, that are higher in the "pecking order" of players/handicappers. It behooves all of us, even Dave and the rest of those at the top of the pecking order, to "listen" attentively to those contributors who suggest alternatives to our "stubborn" beliefs, regarding whatever the subject happens to be.

We all, everyone of us, are still learning and evolving, it's a never ending process. Even if one doesn't believe or feel comfortable with opinions offered by others, we should still "listen" and respect those opinions. They might not be acceptable or of value for us, but they may well be acceptable and of value to others, higher or lower in the "pecking order".

We all have to evolve, and even if we get "side tracked" by a not-so-valuable piece of information, and we may lose some time following it, we will still learn from it, in one form or another, even if it's just that it's the wrong way to go. Knowing that it's the wrong way, is valuable in and of itself. This knowledge will, inevitably, shorten and enhance our learning curve somewhere down the line.

What is harmful, in these discussions, is the "blacklisting" that tends to go on in these forums. As long as we allow, respectful, disagreement, we allow others to learn and grow, and thus offer more valuable opinions in the future. Then we all gain.

I respect and appreciate all input in these forums, even when they make me angry, because "it's all good" in the end.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by raybo

Thaskalos,

Your post is well written and quite valuable. Obviously there are contributors here, like Dave and yourself, among others, that are higher in the "pecking order" of players/handicappers. It behooves all of us, even Dave and the rest of those at the top of the pecking order, to "listen" attentively to those contributors who suggest alternatives to our "stubborn" beliefs, regarding whatever the subject happens to be.

We all, everyone of us, are still learning and evolving, it's a never ending process. Even if one doesn't believe or feel comfortable with opinions offered by others, we should still "listen" and respect those opinions. They might not be acceptable or of value for us, but they may well be acceptable and of value to others, higher or lower in the "pecking order".

We all have to evolve, and even if we get "side tracked" by a not-so-valuable piece of information, and we may lose some time following it, we will still learn from it, in one form or another, even if it's just that it's the wrong way to go. Knowing that it's the wrong way, is valuable in and of itself. This knowledge will, inevitably, shorten and enhance our learning curve somewhere down the line.

What is harmful, in these discussions, is the "blacklisting" that tends to go on in these forums. As long as we allow, respectful, disagreement, we allow others to learn and grow, and thus offer more valuable opinions in the future. Then we all gain.

I respect and appreciate all input in these forums, even when they make me angry, because "it's all good" in the end.

It is not my intention to present myself as someone who is "higher-up in the pecking order"...

I learn daily while playing this game...and I have received more from this board than I could ever give.

It's just that it has occurred to me that we don't allow ourselves to really listen to what others are saying...because our own prejudices and opinions stand in the way.

I have found that the "beginner's mind" is a great ally...and I thought I would suggest it to this board.

Nothing more...

[raybo]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

It is not my intention to present myself as someone who is "higher-up in the pecking order"...

For some of us, it's relatively easy to ascertain another's placement in the "pecking order".

[mountainman]

[QUOTE=bob60566]

Originally Posted by shouldacoulda

I seam to do better with open claimers or non winners of X races lifetime. I don't do well with races where conditions are non winners of X races in a year or from a certain date. I don't know why, but I don't so I stay away from them.[[/b]/QUOTE]

In many cases at mnr, results hinge on how invaders perform, and it does vary in a predictable manner depending on race conditions. I wrote an article for horseplayer magazine exploring in depth how to deal with shippers at tracks mnr's size. If you'd like, I'll send you a copy. Being much more in my wheelhouse than my other efforts for HP, it's by far the most instructive of my articles.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Handicapping can only be self-taught...it cannot be taught to us by anybody else.

We horseplayers are, by nature, very stubborn people...and this works both to our advantage, and to our detriment, at the same time.

It works to our advantage because, in this game, we need to value our opinions above anybody else's if we hope to survive. We need to travel the "road less traveled by", and to turn our back on the siren call of public opinion. This takes a certain amount of stubborness.

But this stubborness also hinders us...because it prevents us from really listening to what an expert handicapper might be trying to tell us.

We listen to a Dave Schwartz, but instead of really paying attention to his message...we try to determine if his opinions agree with ours. If his handicapping views are similar to ours...then we hail him as a great handicapper. If our opinions differ greatly from his, however...then we make up our minds that either he is wrong about some things, or that his approach is not suitable for us after all. In either case, it is OUR opinions that we hold in the highest regard...and not his.

Horseracing seems to be the only gambling game in existence where EVERY PLAYER considers himself an expert...whether he is a long-term winner or not. We count our near-misses as victories, because they sort of validate our handicapping opinions...and we stick with the same, old, losing handicapping and betting strategies that have been burying us for years.

Buddhists use the term "beginner's mind"...and proclaim that only in this state is "real" learning possible.

The old story goes that a very learned American scholar of religion went to the Himalayas to meet with a famous Buddhist Lama.

He sat at the table with him and inquired about the meaning of life, but, as the Lama started to speak, the American scholar soon found himself in philosophical disagreement with him...and engaged him in a debate. The Lama listened politely to his guest, and then offered him a cup of tea...which the scholar readily accepted.

The Lama started pouring the tea into the cup, but didn't stop when it reached the brim...and continued pouring until the tea started spilling all over the table and unto the floor.

"STOP!"...the American exclaimed..."The cup is full. Don't you see that there is no room for any more tea?"

"The cup is not the only thing that's full"...the Lama replied..."Your head is also full, and there is no more room there for my teaching. How can I teach you anything, if you won't empty your cup?"

If we horseplayers are satisfied with our results in this game...then we can continue with business as usual. But if we are not...then we have to "empty our cup".

Because in most cases, our game needs a complete overhaul...and not just a few pointers.

Remember...this is just one man's opinion. Ignore it if you so choose...

I do like reading your posts, dude. What an eloquent expansion on a simple simon and garfunkel lyric: "All lies in jest 'til a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

Intelligence has been defined as an ability to entertain two conflicting notions at once, so perhaps the final frontier in handicapping would be to synthesize and apply discordant or even opposing methodologies.

[mountainman]

By the way, is it just me, or does that horned vampire chick in the ad that appears when posting bear a noticeable-and somehow stimulating- resemblance to a slimmed- down Kirstie Alley?

[pondman]

Originally Posted by LottaKash

So, knowing this, when Dave talks, "I Listen", as I have him higher than me....Heck, to my way of thinking, the guy has left and "indelible" mark on this game by way of, his truly advanced-knowledge and his sincere desire and willingness to share his take on the game, with all of us,

But at the same time, he's methodology is the easiest of any to criticize for not being playable by most-- to many plays (1000s), not enough return. Personally, don't know anyone who could package it into gold.

Think most players would be more suited to several hundred consistent spot plays per year; Lifestyle will get most.

[windoor]

Lotta Kash:

Thank-you for the kind words.

It was my purpose in another thread to show an example of how an undisciplined player could lose all of his/her profits with just one errant play per day. It ended with me having to defend the example "spot" play I used to illustrate the point, instead.

Ok then, one more. Do you want to see the whole year with this factor set, at all playable tracks? Do I need my flame suit? I have it back from the cleaners, but it still has some burn holes in it. I may need to invest in a new one.

For those that need a lot of action. This one generated 3088 plays for the year. Would you have the nerve to play this one? Long run-outs and a low hit rate, but an awesome average odd. It is data mining like this that keeps me interested, and I can occasionally find some nuggets from time to time.

This is for just one Key Factor, (the same one I used for MNR) my Form Cycle Test and a few negative expectation filters. Nothing fancy. I can get the average win percent up quite a bit with other filters, but lose nearly half of the profits in doing so.

Is it viable? I have no idea, but with over 3 thousand consecutive races, I am intrigued to say the least. I "back fit" the 1st quarter, then ran it through the rest of the year. Only the tracks changed from start to finish. I think it may be worth watching.

Based on a $200 to win flat bet. (see maximum bet

1st quarter 2011:

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 2639.30 1953.00 1679.40
Bet -1734.00 -1734.00 -1734.00
Gain 905.30 219.00 -54.60

Wins 163 284 390
Plays 867 867 867
PCT .1880 .3276 .4498

ROI 1.5221 1.1263 0.9685
Avg Mut 16.19 6.88 4.31


Ending BankRoll: $100,530.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $101,530.00
Low BankRoll: $7,500.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00

2nd quarter 2011:


Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 1918.60 1386.60 1237.60
Bet -1180.00 -1180.00 -1180.00
Gain 738.60 206.60 57.60

Wins 141 217 294
Plays 590 590 590
PCT .2390 .3678 .4983

ROI 1.6259 1.1751 1.0488
Avg Mut 13.61 6.39 4.21



Ending BankRoll: $83,860.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $85,260.00
Low BankRoll: $8,430.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00


Third quarter 2011:

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 3146.50 2639.40 2179.10
Bet -2272.00 -2272.00 -2272.00
Gain 874.50 367.40 -92.90

Wins 208 401 540
Plays 1136 1136 1136
PCT .1831 .3530 .4754

ROI 1.3849 1.1617 0.9591
Avg Mut 15.13 6.58 4.04




Ending BankRoll: $95,990.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $97,590.00
Low BankRoll: $10,000.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00


4th quarter 2011:

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 1526.20 1069.80 934.20
Bet -990.00 -990.00 -990.00
Gain 536.20 79.80 -55.80

Wins 106 171 232
Plays 495 495 495
PCT .2141 .3455 .4687

ROI 1.5416 1.0806 0.9436
Avg Mut 14.40 6.26 4.03




Ending BankRoll: $63,020.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $65,360.00
Low BankRoll: $9,800.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00


A little over 300K profit, not including pool dilution. If I ever get the nerve to play such a low hit rate and get anywhere near these results, I will retire to a south sea Island

Regards,

Windoor

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by windoor

Lotta Kash:

Thank-you for the kind words.

Windoor

Cool, I meant as much....I enjoy you sharing "your way of going" with us....

best,

[bob60566]

Originally Posted by windoor

Lotta Kash:

Thank-you for the kind words.

It was my purpose in another thread to show an example of how an undisciplined player could lose all of his/her profits with just one errant play per day. It ended with me having to defend the example "spot" play I used to illustrate the point, instead.

Ok then, one more. Do you want to see the whole year with this factor set, at all playable tracks? Do I need my flame suit? I have it back from the cleaners, but it still has some burn holes in it. I may need to invest in a new one.

For those that need a lot of action. This one generated 3088 plays for the year. Would you have the nerve to play this one? Long run-outs and a low hit rate, but an awesome average odd. It is data mining like this that keeps me interested, and I can occasionally find some nuggets from time to time.

This is for just one Key Factor, (the same one I used for MNR) my Form Cycle Test and a few negative expectation filters. Nothing fancy. I can get the average win percent up quite a bit with other filters, but lose nearly half of the profits in doing so.

Is it viable? I have no idea, but with over 3 thousand consecutive races, I am intrigued to say the least. I "back fit" the 1st quarter, then ran it through the rest of the year. Only the tracks changed from start to finish. I think it may be worth watching.

Based on a $200 to win flat bet. (see maximum bet

1st quarter 2011:

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 2639.30 1953.00 1679.40
Bet -1734.00 -1734.00 -1734.00
Gain 905.30 219.00 -54.60

Wins 163 284 390
Plays 867 867 867
PCT .1880 .3276 .4498

ROI 1.5221 1.1263 0.9685
Avg Mut 16.19 6.88 4.31


Ending BankRoll: $100,530.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $101,530.00
Low BankRoll: $7,500.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00

2nd quarter 2011:


Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 1918.60 1386.60 1237.60
Bet -1180.00 -1180.00 -1180.00
Gain 738.60 206.60 57.60

Wins 141 217 294
Plays 590 590 590
PCT .2390 .3678 .4983

ROI 1.6259 1.1751 1.0488
Avg Mut 13.61 6.39 4.21



Ending BankRoll: $83,860.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $85,260.00
Low BankRoll: $8,430.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00


Third quarter 2011:

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 3146.50 2639.40 2179.10
Bet -2272.00 -2272.00 -2272.00
Gain 874.50 367.40 -92.90

Wins 208 401 540
Plays 1136 1136 1136
PCT .1831 .3530 .4754

ROI 1.3849 1.1617 0.9591
Avg Mut 15.13 6.58 4.04




Ending BankRoll: $95,990.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $97,590.00
Low BankRoll: $10,000.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00


4th quarter 2011:

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 1526.20 1069.80 934.20
Bet -990.00 -990.00 -990.00
Gain 536.20 79.80 -55.80

Wins 106 171 232
Plays 495 495 495
PCT .2141 .3455 .4687

ROI 1.5416 1.0806 0.9436
Avg Mut 14.40 6.26 4.03




Ending BankRoll: $63,020.00
Starting BankRoll: $10,000.00
High BankRoll: $65,360.00
Low BankRoll: $9,800.00
Bet Percentage: 0.0500
Max Bet: 200.00


A little over 300K profit, not including pool dilution. If I ever get the nerve to play such a low hit rate and get anywhere near these results, I will retire to a south sea Island

Regards,

Windoor

Win
Are you going to post selections on above at Mountineer next month for the meet duration,
Mac

[windoor]

Yes, it is time to put up or shut up.

Don't know if I will post for all of it, but I will for the 1st month or so.

I just hope I don't hit one of my many losing streaks to start. The racing Gods have a way of punishing me, when I start to brag on how well I am doing.

Regards,

Windoor

[CincyHorseplayer]

As Mountain said to an extent,the capability of being influenced while simultaneously trusting your own opinion is a defining duality.I am always open to new avenues and ideas and I do listen but I also know my strength even early on as a player was that I trusted my opinion even if it flyed in the face of what then were about only half a dozen handicapping books I had read.All of us have to follow our own vision to whatever ends,successes,and blind alleys they lead.This place has been a great resource and influence,and even in disagreement at times I respect everyone's opinion.