The Handicapper's Cafe

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by traynor

I humbly suggest you seek professional counseling..... However, I do not presume to be qualified to offer such an observation, other than as a layman observer of what appears to be aberrant behavior.

A totally unfair comment, which adds nothing to this thread.
In fact it detracts from it.
Traynor, you've already said with respect to a request to handicap a race:
"Don't hold your breath."

There is nothing wrong with that.
But if you have an opinion that is inherently insults any member of this board there is a PM option to express it to that individual.
I find your comments, suggestion, and insult to another contributor to this thread downright repugnant.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

A totally unfair comment, which adds nothing to this thread.
In fact it detracts from it.
Traynor, you've already said with respect to a request to handicap a race:
"Don't hold your breath."

There is nothing wrong with that.
But if you have an opinion that is inherently insults any member of this board there is a PM option to express it to that individual.
I find your comments, suggestion, and insult to another contributor to this thread downright repugnant.

I find baiting repugnant, but that is just my personal opinion.

I find the following comment little more than baiting:
"If you were a Handicapper of expertise in this field you would know the answer to your above post."

I find the following comment little more than baiting (except possibly repugnant and personally insulting):
"Are you saying you are full of hot air ???"

I find the following comment little more than baiting:
"You just got led down the garden path Sunshine."

Actually, I thought I behaved with a good deal of restraint, and went out of my way to be civil. If I offended anyone, I apologize, because such was not my intent. However, when someone keeps dinging snarky comments, it seems--at least to my unqualified observation--that that person may have some kind of behavioral isues that might benefit from professional counseling. Just my opinion, and that is what I stated. It was meant to be helpful, not insulting. Again, my apologies if the comments offended anyone.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by traynor

Actually, I thought I behaved with a good deal of restraint, and went out of my way to be civil. If I offended anyone, I apologize, because such was not my intent. However, when someone keeps dinging snarky comments, it seems--at least to my unqualified observation--that that person may have some kind of behavioral isues that might benefit from professional counseling. Just my opinion, and that is what I stated. It was meant to be helpful, not insulting. Again, my apologies if the comments offended anyone.

I think you're dead-on here..and I commend you for taking the high road.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Come on now...why the false modesty?

I have been eagerly following your picks over at the selections forum...and I know for a fact that you don't need any handicapping lessons from me...

So he IS doing well? I was wondering, since he never seems to provide a recap at end of day.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

So he IS doing well? I was wondering, since he never seems to provide a recap at end of day.

I never stuck around to find out...

I couldn't work my way through all the excuses for his losing picks...

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I never stuck around to find out...

I couldn't work my way through all the excuses for his losing picks...

Like I said, it's just like being at Aqueduct back in the winter of 1992-1993...

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I think you're dead-on here..and I commend you for taking the high road.

I second that Boss !.... ...

[raybo]

Originally Posted by traynor

That seems a bit odd. Why would you not simply post the results (dollars out, dollars in) the same place you post the selections? I understand that one can discover the race results and odds with a bit of digging. The part I don't understand is why you would not simply post that information where you post the selections, rather than the order of finish numbers, which are relatively useless without the other information.

I post screenshots of the output of the program, including scratched horses, along with the resulting payouts, on my forum. I don't presently have the time to go back and post the odds for every contender, for every race.

How about I just post a screenshot of all program played races since July 12th, showing number of $2 bets and the payouts for for those bets And the the program's recap of all plays to date, from CrC since I started playing it in June:

I am such a novice that I don't know how to ask the question, but here goes...
Are there certain kinds of pace horses that generally win a certain kind of race? In other words, if you have a horse that is classified as an E1 horse, is it thought to have an advantage in a 7 furlong race, etc?

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by emmjaycee

I am such a novice that I don't know how to ask the question, but here goes...
Are there certain kinds of pace horses that generally win a certain kind of race? In other words, if you have a horse that is classified as an E1 horse, is it thought to have an advantage in a 7 furlong race, etc?

Lone early speed horses in any race are dangerous.
Early pace horses that are put under pace pressure can fold such as The Factor did yesterday at Del Mar.
The majority of winners , except in turf racing, are early and pressing runners.
Personally, I prefer runners who press from just behind the pace. They do not have to get involved in the battle in front of them. Then when the battling front runners falter, they can charge by.
Sustained runners can win and do. However, they often have traffic congestion problems to contend with.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by emmjaycee

I am such a novice that I don't know how to ask the question, but here goes...
Are there certain kinds of pace horses that generally win a certain kind of race? In other words, if you have a horse that is classified as an E1 horse, is it thought to have an advantage in a 7 furlong race, etc?

It depends on what the overall pace makeup of the race is, as to whether a particular running style is advantaged or not. Randy Giles' "Extreme Pace Handicapping" (I think that's the name of his book), is one of the best "pace pressure"/ running style / early speed points primers available.

As Greyfox said, a lone E horse, particularly if it has 5 or more early speed points and has the speed to get the lead in the first place, generally, is dangerous in almost any race or any distance.

[raybo]

Each race is different, and you must first decide/calculate what type of pace makeup the entire field provides. Only then can you decide if a particular running style/early speed point horse is advantaged or disadvantaged, in any type race, or any distance.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by raybo

I post screenshots of the output of the program, including scratched horses, along with the resulting payouts, on my forum. I don't presently have the time to go back and post the odds for every contender, for every race.

How about I just post a screenshot of all program played races since July 12th, showing number of $2 bets and the payouts for for those bets And the the program's recap of all plays to date, from CrC since I started playing it in June:

I understand completely how much hassle it is to track results by hand. What I was suggesting is that you might consider writing a function/method that automates the process--in essence keeping a running tally of results--that would make it easier to post such in the future. If you would be interested in doing such, I would be more than happy to send you the Visual Basic psedocode and/or function that could probably be spliced in to your Excel app easily to monitor the results for you. It is a really simple function/process, and saves a lot of work by automating the record keeping.

I think you have a great idea, but I have looked at many great ideas before and found that many had "holes" or "blind spots" that their developers either ignored or did not discover. I see the Calder results for a specific period. I also see that $53.40 win mutuel that I mentioned previously I thought deceptive. To an outside observer, it seems that mutuel may in fact be the reason for the impressive ROI, while being simultaneousy unrepresentative or atypical.

It is just a suggestion, but you may benefit from showing extended results that do not depend on one (or two or whatever) specific mutuels to show a profit. That is as much for your programming benefit and wagering benefit as it is for credibility. I lost a great deal of money some years ago chasing what I thought was a "sure profit model" that looked almost identical to your Calder results. When I finally realized what kind of aberration one or two unusual mutuels can cause, I also realized what areas of my programming endeavors needed additional work (rather than believing I had The Answer) and that realization was of great benefit.

I understand we have discussed this before, and your response was that the $53.40 mutuel in a bit over 100 races was not unusual, and was in fact low. I am not challenging your claims. I think that it would be interesting to see how extended play using your method pans out in other situations. Automating the record keeping process to monitor (and publish) the cost of the number of wagers required compared to the return from wins and ROI would make what seems to be a very interesting application even more interesting. It would also diminish the perception that you are filtering results to only show the upside, while ignoring the downside.

[traynor]

I just realized that you must already have such a function in your application to display the ROI figures as indicated on the screenhshots. It would be interesting to see the figures from more generic samples, or, even better, from current selections.

I think many of the people on this forum (as well as most racing fans in general) tend to dismiss representative samplings as only representative samplings. My interest is in what it will do in the future, rather than what it did in restricted samples from the past. Probably the result of too much time spent reading the latest, greatest systems and methods in Phillips Racing Newsletter and the American Turf Monthly, and way too much time spent at handicapping seminars.

Again, I think you may really be on to something with your application, and I would like to see how it works on extended sets of races from other tracks.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by traynor

I understand completely how much hassle it is to track results by hand. What I was suggesting is that you might consider writing a function/method that automates the process--in essence keeping a running tally of results--that would make it easier to post such in the future. If you would be interested in doing such, I would be more than happy to send you the Visual Basic psedocode and/or function that could probably be spliced in to your Excel app easily to monitor the results for you. It is a really simple function/process, and saves a lot of work by automating the record keeping.

I think you have a great idea, but I have looked at many great ideas before and found that many had "holes" or "blind spots" that their developers either ignored or did not discover. I see the Calder results for a specific period. I also see that $53.40 win mutuel that I mentioned previously I thought deceptive. To an outside observer, it seems that mutuel may in fact be the reason for the impressive ROI, while being simultaneousy unrepresentative or atypical.

It is just a suggestion, but you may benefit from showing extended results that do not depend on one (or two or whatever) specific mutuels to show a profit. That is as much for your programming benefit and wagering benefit as it is for credibility. I lost a great deal of money some years ago chasing what I thought was a "sure profit model" that looked almost identical to your Calder results. When I finally realized what kind of aberration one or two unusual mutuels can cause, I also realized what areas of my programming endeavors needed additional work (rather than believing I had The Answer) and that realization was of great benefit.

I understand we have discussed this before, and your response was that the $53.40 mutuel in a bit over 100 races was not unusual, and was in fact low. I am not challenging your claims. I think that it would be interesting to see how extended play using your method pans out in other situations. Automating the record keeping process to monitor (and publish) the cost of the number of wagers required compared to the return from wins and ROI would make what seems to be a very interesting application even more interesting. It would also diminish the perception that you are filtering results to only show the upside, while ignoring the downside.

As I have said before, I posted complete meets for a few tracks that ran this winter and spring. You're more than welcome to visit the site and look at those screenshots, showing the summary reports for those meets. The high payout, low payout, average payout, and median payout are shown for all 3 picks for the primary black box method.

If people choose to not believe what I post here, so be it. But, I would challenge them to find one lie I have ever posted on this forum, or any other.