Small Sample Size?

[clemkadiddle]

I can't comprehend using a prescribed sample size. I know a lot of die-hards...in their efforts to find ways to win...resort to accumulating a body of data and mining it for stats.

Personally, I started this attempt several years ago but found it to be a waste of time.

What I did do...was start developing a "tool" to measure the amount of work being performed by the horse during the running of the race. After 8 years of throwing "mathematical darts" at the situation, I seemed to have developed a plausible model that equates efforts occurring in 5 furlong races all the way to 12 furlong races.

I used Excel (with Excel's VBA language to write macros) to first calculate the track variant from both DRF (Beyer) and BRIS speed figures. I deal strictly in feet-per-second and find flaws with "adding a fifth of second for each length" and the theory of "parallel time" on which speed figures are based. (They are helpful though, with regard to track variant.)

Still using Excel, I kept throwing ideas at the situation. What I can tell you is that:

1. Parallel time charts are derived from the base-10 logarithms of the average feet per second, where the values of the logarithms differ by .0062 per furlong. Separate charts must be kept based on the number of turns navigated.

2. Horses expend energy exponentially; the faster they run, their energy becomes consumed at an increasingly greater rate. This was the reason behind parallel time and speed ratings, but the fact is that the final time and speed rating is the end result of the pace; that is why it is so important to derive one's own pace calculation tool.

I apologize for not divulging the entire knowledge base that I acquired (because that was 8 years of research and I doubt if anyone in my position would offer that up for free), but what I did provide should give you all a head start.

My background: Senior Programmer/Analyst for a global manufacturing company that provides components to support Oil and Gas, Transportation, and Power Generation. Thoroughbred handicapping has always been a hobby, but I wasn't interested in developing a "tool" until I actually questioned myself regarding my background, interest, having Excel available as the platform, and an opportunity to follow through...happy I did...

I just goes to show that the good things do not come easy. I know you stat folks and data miners feel that same way.

Good luck to everyone.

[Capper Al]

Speed is easy in a spreadsheet or in a program. Try making class figs like BRIS' RR and CR.

[whodoyoulike]

I can't comprehend using a prescribed sample size. I know a lot of die-hards...in their efforts to find ways to win...resort to accumulating a body of data and mining it for stats.

Personally, I started this attempt several years ago but found it to be a waste of time.

I guess we disagree right off.

What I did do...was start developing a "tool" to measure the amount of work being performed by the horse during the running of the race. After 8 years of throwing "mathematical darts" at the situation, I seemed to have developed a plausible model that equates efforts occurring in 5 furlong races all the way to 12 furlong races.

Is this similar to a pace calculation?

... I deal strictly in feet-per-second and find flaws with "adding a fifth of second for each length" and the theory of "parallel time" on which speed figures are based. (They are helpful though, with regard to track variant.)

I agree there is a flaw using "adding a fifth of second for each length" but I calculated this using a sample of Trakus info when they started publishing it at Dmr and I believe GP several years ago. I found it wasn't that far off. But, I use my findings.

... 2. Horses expend energy exponentially; the faster they run, their energy becomes consumed at an increasingly greater rate. This was the reason behind parallel time and speed ratings, but the fact is that the final time and speed rating is the end result of the pace; that is why it is so important to derive one's own pace calculation tool.

This is kind of my idea of pace handicapping.

I apologize for not divulging the entire knowledge base that I acquired (because that was 8 years of research and I doubt if anyone in my position would offer that up for free), but what I did provide should give you all a head start.

I understand your reasons to not provide details, others may not but, I wouldn't worry about it. I'm hoping you can contribute your insights and experiences. I think we're all attempting to better understand this thing we call horse handicapping.

Btw, I'm not a spokesperson for this site. I just enjoy discussing handicapping ideas.

And, good luck to you.

[clemkadiddle]

Thanks for your interest.

I do have several books and read them over and over again. One thing that I never wanted to do was read anything by Sartin or Brohammer. My reasons were simple:

1. I did not want to inherit someone else's mindset in seeding my thought processes. I wanted to let racing portray itself for what it was mathematically...without being influenced by someone else's opinion so that I could analyze it from a pure beginning.

2. If Sartin or Brohammer were really winning at the races with their methods, they would not be writing and publishing books.

Point #2 goes for most authors. However, my mentor...who I considered a genuine professional handicapper...used to say buy whatever book you can find because if there is one thing in that book that can save you the price of a bet it is worth the price of the book.

Some of the best books are the oldest. I don't have anything that is newer than 30 years old.

Here are some of the best works:

Ray Talbot's "Thoroughbred Horseracing 'Playing for Profit'"
Bob Heyburn's "Fast and Fit Horses"
William Scott's "Investing at the Racetrack" and "How Will Your Horse Run Today?"
Andy Beyer's "Picking Winners" and "The Winning Horseplayer"

Get to know parallel time charts. Basically, find a way to reverse-engineer the final time where the 100 point score would have been awarded and look up the final time for that distance on a parallel time chart. Figure out the average feet-per-second for both. Divide the 100 point FPS by the parallel time chart's FPS and that gives you the track variant as a ratio. You can then use that inside the race on the fractional times (and corresponding FPS at each call) to derive some meaningful pace figures in terms of FPS. Don't resort to figuring averages as you analyze the race; try to pull each segment out separately so that you can truly see the horse speeding up and slowing down.

Don't worry about what was happening on the lead; concentrate on what the specific horse's performance is telling you.

The real magic occurs over time, as you analyze this series of numbers. You will see what I am talking about eventually. Again, it is very important to isolate each segment of the race.

[clemkadiddle]

BRIS figs dissolve in averages. One needs to isolate each specific segment of the race to see what is truly going on.

I am aware of these figures, but they are worthless. The only real figure is the final "speed" figure which allows me to calculate the track variant.

Both BRIS and DRF would love to have the model I developed...and it ain't in any software other than my little Excel spreadsheet.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by clemkadiddle

BRIS figs dissolve in averages. One needs to isolate each specific segment of the race to see what is truly going on.

I am aware of these figures, but they are worthless. The only real figure is the final "speed" figure which allows me to calculate the track variant.

Both BRIS and DRF would love to have the model I developed...and it ain't in any software other than my little Excel spreadsheet.

I do the same thing in Excel, segmentally, but don't have to resort to reverse engineering any figures. And, my segmental fps calcs are available, for free, in the AllData Project workbook. This is really no big secret. By the way, I haven't used 1/5 second, or any other static multiplier, for a beaten length in years, it's simply incorrect.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by clemkadiddle

Thanks for your interest.

I do have several books and read them over and over again. One thing that I never wanted to do was read anything by Sartin or Brohammer. My reasons were simple:

1. I did not want to inherit someone else's mindset in seeding my thought processes. I wanted to let racing portray itself for what it was mathematically...without being influenced by someone else's opinion so that I could analyze it from a pure beginning.

2. If Sartin or Brohammer were really winning at the races with their methods, they would not be writing and publishing books.

Point #2 goes for most authors. However, my mentor...who I considered a genuine professional handicapper...used to say buy whatever book you can find because if there is one thing in that book that can save you the price of a bet it is worth the price of the book.

Some of the best books are the oldest. I don't have anything that is newer than 30 years old.

Here are some of the best works:

Ray Talbot's "Thoroughbred Horseracing 'Playing for Profit'"
Bob Heyburn's "Fast and Fit Horses"
William Scott's "Investing at the Racetrack" and "How Will Your Horse Run Today?"
Andy Beyer's "Picking Winners" and "The Winning Horseplayer"

Get to know parallel time charts. Basically, find a way to reverse-engineer the final time where the 100 point score would have been awarded and look up the final time for that distance on a parallel time chart. Figure out the average feet-per-second for both. Divide the 100 point FPS by the parallel time chart's FPS and that gives you the track variant as a ratio. You can then use that inside the race on the fractional times (and corresponding FPS at each call) to derive some meaningful pace figures in terms of FPS. Don't resort to figuring averages as you analyze the race; try to pull each segment out separately so that you can truly see the horse speeding up and slowing down.

Don't worry about what was happening on the lead; concentrate on what the specific horse's performance is telling you.

The real magic occurs over time, as you analyze this series of numbers. You will see what I am talking about eventually. Again, it is very important to isolate each segment of the race.

Do the same with the fps of the horse divided by the fps of the leader at each call. What the Sartin advocates called Pace of Horse/Pace of Race (POH/POR). It generates a percentile relationship of each horse's speed at each segment of the race, compared to the leader. It is not rocket science, and no dogma is attached. It is just another set of numbers that one can use to interpret what actually happened in the race.

For one thing, it will point out the situations in which "early pace" and "late pace" are misinterpreted when only comparing fps values between entries, ignoring what they were doing in relation to the leader while earning those values. Basic pace analysis.

What did/do you really think of Heyburn?

I think Jay Hovdey was the first I heard of using the percentile for variants, way back. Works well. Especially when weighted by race segment.

[Dave Schwartz]

Dave,

This isn't how I remember you on this topic. Wasn't a 1000 races too small before?

I am not saying that 1,000 races is "enough." He asked about Z-tables starting at sample of 30. I was simply saying that 30 winners in a category was required to get a z-score on that category.

Think of it like this: I have 30 bets at 30/1. If I have 2 winners out of 30 should I be excited? Probably not. However, if I had 30 winners out of 450 bets that is time for some degree of excitement.

30 starts in that category is pretty worthless.

[Billnewman]

[QUOTE=clemkadiddle]BRIS figs dissolve in averages. One needs to isolate each specific segment of the race to see what is truly going on.

I am aware of these figures, but they are worthless. The only real figure is the final "speed" figure which allows me to calculate the track variant.

Both BRIS and DRF would love to have the model I developed...and it ain't in any software other than my little Excel spreadsheet.[/QUOTE

I don't understand why you would say bris figures are worthless if you're using their variant? Making that daily variant is the single most difficult part of figure handicapping. Just because you're using a different set of formulas to spit that variant through you are basically using the same numbers as everyone else that uses bris. Unless you change the distance of a beaten length for deceleration as the race progresses. That is what I'd guess you are hinting at.

[traynor]

[QUOTE=Billnewman]

Originally Posted by clemkadiddle

BRIS figs dissolve in averages. One needs to isolate each specific segment of the race to see what is truly going on.

I am aware of these figures, but they are worthless. The only real figure is the final "speed" figure which allows me to calculate the track variant.

Both BRIS and DRF would love to have the model I developed...and it ain't in any software other than my little Excel spreadsheet.[/QUOTE

I don't understand why you would say bris figures are worthless if you're using their variant? Making that daily variant is the single most difficult part of figure handicapping. Just because you're using a different set of formulas to spit that variant through you are basically using the same numbers as everyone else that uses bris. Unless you change the distance of a beaten length for deceleration as the race progresses. That is what I'd guess you are hinting at.

Only until one has refined his or her methodology, and eliminated the indecision that causes one to believe that "artistic interpretations" of the data are required. They are not.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Billnewman

Making that daily variant is the single most difficult part of figure handicapping.

I disagree.

The reason lies in the evaluation of a specific TV estimation algorithm..

Think about...

How you are going to decide that one algorithm is better than the other? Do you have any ideas?

[Billnewman]

I guess I don't understand what you are doing. When I make a variant i don't use a algorithm. Mine is made by what I believe to be reality. It might change midway through a card by if the jockeys say they are adding to much water, or if the wind dies out. I thought you use algorithms for trainer moves. Like drop 2 class levels or distance change.

[clemkadiddle]

I don't use THEIR variant...I reverse-engineer based on their final speed figure and comparing it to standard parallel time charts.

[clemkadiddle]

I trust my own work. When I have the same horse running different distances...or even the same distance for that matter in the current form cycle and the speed ratings vary...my calculations ironically put these efforts within a point.

Not that I am really calculating pace, BECAUSE I DON'T. I use pace to calculate THE AMOUNT OF WORK BEING PERFORMED IN THE COURSE OF THE RACE.

That is the only true measurement...because distance becomes taken out of the equation and the confusion that varying distance poses to handicapping also disappears.

For instance, how would anyone liked to have had Danza in the Arkansas Derby? I didn't have him, I admit...but I used that race in my research and now I have a tool that puts him right in the midst. In fact, his prior race as a 2YO at 6.5 furlongs killed anything in that field. You can bet the next time an opportunity like this presents itself I will get my hooks into it.

I also used Chitu's 6 furlong effort prior to the Robert B. Lewis as part of my research, in order to validate my calculations on Danza.

At this point I would be tempted to divulge the foundation behind this algorithm. For the moment, think about the point where a horse starts to expend racing energy rather than gallop. That's the point where one needs to start their research.

Well...gotta go for now. I have several races to review for Saturday and the data entry task awaits.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by clemkadiddle

I trust my own work....
At this point I would be tempted to divulge the foundation behind this algorithm. For the moment, think about the point where a horse starts to expend racing energy rather than gallop. That's the point where one needs to start their research.

Well...gotta go for now. I have several races to review for Saturday and the data entry task awaits.

FYI, you'll notice that you start off with a 400 vCash amount. I understand that each time you divulge or provide helpful info, you're awarded an addional 25 vCash. If it happens to be incorrect there's an 11 vCash reduction, disregard my totals because I was testing the program.