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

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > Handicapping Library


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 08-18-2018, 10:26 AM   #31
CincyHorseplayer
Registered User
 
CincyHorseplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cincinnati,Ohio
Posts: 5,289
Feeding off of what Delta is saying when it comes to longshot examples, I am all ears but tracking odds on my contenders not all odds there is a futile reality in a pure longshot approach.

Of my AB contenders they represent 20% of the entries and win 56% of the races. But odds of 9-1 and up only win between 3-5% depending on the year. Unless you are extremely selective at a 5% clip you would have to have an average mutuel of $40 to break even.

Of the marginal C contenders it gets even more futile as they represent 28% of the entries and win 32% of the races. Longshots hovering in the 1% area.

This year I've noticed the $12-18 range eroding in win capacity too. But I also recognize that my database of my contenders tends to be clustered around big tracks because I like turf races. My longshot hunts are conducted mostly at small tracks like Mahoning Valley, Will Rogers, and Louisiana Downs.

Anyway while I've developed many angles over the years I don't follow value handicapping down the rabbit hole anymore.
CincyHorseplayer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 12:32 PM   #32
FakeNameChanged
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaLover View Post
What most horse bettors seem to forget is that 'even a broken clock is right twice a day'. For what you are saying here to gain some value, you will need to provide a relative large sample and do so before the race. Using a couple of occurrences after the race is over is BOTH USELESS AND DECEIVING.
No, I wouldn't have to provide anything. I didn't write the book. I only read it the day before my examples. No author even the revered Andy Beyer provided any large samples nor any examples before any race. Was his information useless and deceiving? I made no attempt to deceive anyone on here, and maybe it was useless to everyone on PA. My examples were purely anecdotal, and I'm not selling anything to anyone on here. I would never expect the red scan technique of which I am NOT the author to work all of the time, or even half the time, only that in a first time look in my case it worked somewhat well.
__________________
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
FakeNameChanged is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 12:42 PM   #33
coachv30
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Philadelphia area
Posts: 9,577
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whosonfirst View Post
No, I wouldn't have to provide anything. I didn't write the book. I only read it the day before my examples. No author even the revered Andy Beyer provided any large samples nor any examples before any race. Was his information useless and deceiving? I made no attempt to deceive anyone on here, and maybe it was useless to everyone on PA. My examples were purely anecdotal, and I'm not selling anything to anyone on here. I would never expect the red scan technique of which I am NOT the author to work all of the time, or even half the time, only that in a first time look in my case it worked somewhat well.
I include Jim's qualifying methods as a part of my handicapping to narrow down a field and find them to have much validity to them. Besides, they are a cut and dry way to narrow down a field of horses to whom you feel will contend today.
__________________
A wet track can cause handicapping havoc!!
coachv30 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 01:23 PM   #34
DeltaLover
Registered user
 
DeltaLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: FALIRIKON DELTA
Posts: 4,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whosonfirst View Post
No, I wouldn't have to provide anything. I didn't write the book. I only read it the day before my examples. No author even the revered Andy Beyer provided any large samples nor any examples before any race. Was his information useless and deceiving? I made no attempt to deceive anyone on here, and maybe it was useless to everyone on PA. My examples were purely anecdotal, and I'm not selling anything to anyone on here. I would never expect the red scan technique of which I am NOT the author to work all of the time, or even half the time, only that in a first time look in my case it worked somewhat well.
Obviously, I did not mean that you tried to deceive anyone; my comment applies to your approach which leads to deceiving conclusions without this meaning that this is your intention.
__________________
whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent
Ludwig Wittgenstein
DeltaLover is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 01:59 PM   #35
thaskalos
Rebel without applause
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 25,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whosonfirst View Post
No, I wouldn't have to provide anything. I didn't write the book. I only read it the day before my examples. No author even the revered Andy Beyer provided any large samples nor any examples before any race. Was his information useless and deceiving? I made no attempt to deceive anyone on here, and maybe it was useless to everyone on PA. My examples were purely anecdotal, and I'm not selling anything to anyone on here. I would never expect the red scan technique of which I am NOT the author to work all of the time, or even half the time, only that in a first time look in my case it worked somewhat well.
You took a first look at Lehane's "red scan" technique, and it impressed you with its performance. Will you now make it a permanent feature of your handicapping process? Is that how we should come up with our contenders when we handicap...either a horse fits the "red scan" criteria, or it gets eliminated from consideration at the very start of the handicapping process?

If Lehane offered this technique as an additional factor to consider, then I would have no problem with it. But he offers it as the foundation of his contender-selection process...and as such, the method fails miserably...because its restrictive rules eliminate the most accomplished horses in the race from the very start.
__________________
"Μηδενα προ του τελους μακαριζε." -- Σολων
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 02:14 PM   #36
GaryG
Unreconstructed
 
GaryG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Appalachia
Posts: 6,344
I don't use Jim's methods as a primary tool, but as a way of separating contenders. One of my favorite angles in a big 3-4 wide move on the turn followed by an even finish. Especially if it the 1st or 2nd start of the current form cycle.
__________________
Freedom is not free, free men are not equal and equal men are not free.
GaryG is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 02:14 PM   #37
thaskalos
Rebel without applause
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 25,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaLover View Post
What most horse bettors seem to forget is that 'even a broken clock is right twice a day'. For what you are saying here to gain some value, you will need to provide a relative large sample and do so before the race. Using a couple of occurrences after the race is over is BOTH USELESS AND DECEIVING.
When I was 19 years old, I purchased something called the "System of the Century"...from a "great handicapper" named Mike Warren. I took the system to Sportsman's Park on a rainy Saturday...and I cashed 7 of the 8 win-bets that I placed...a few of them at great odds. It's been 37 years...and I still remember the excitement that I felt as I laid in bed that Saturday night. "The rest of the world has to work for a living...but that won't apply to me"...I thought as I drifted off to sleep. And I dreamed wonderful dreams...which soon turned into nightmares.

Strange things happen in this game.
__________________
"Μηδενα προ του τελους μακαριζε." -- Σολων
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 02:17 PM   #38
GaryG
Unreconstructed
 
GaryG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Appalachia
Posts: 6,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
And I dreamed wonderful dreams...which soon turned into nightmares.
I believe Mike Warren did that to a lot of people.
__________________
Freedom is not free, free men are not equal and equal men are not free.
GaryG is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 02:22 PM   #39
thaskalos
Rebel without applause
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 25,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryG View Post
I don't use Jim's methods as a primary tool, but as a way of separating contenders. One of my favorite angles in a big 3-4 wide move on the turn followed by an even finish. Especially if it the 1st or 2nd start of the current form cycle.


Who could argue with you? But when you rely on the "red scan" alone for contender selection, as Lehane does in his book...then you would quickly eliminate a horse who beat the same group of horses by 15 lengths in its last start, in a wire-to-wire effort...simply because the horse failed to gain ground in the stretch. And...where is the logic in that?
__________________
"Μηδενα προ του τελους μακαριζε." -- Σολων
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 03:24 PM   #40
FakeNameChanged
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
You took a first look at Lehane's "red scan" technique, and it impressed you with its performance. Will you now make it a permanent feature of your handicapping process? Is that how we should come up with our contenders when we handicap...either a horse fits the "red scan" criteria, or it gets eliminated from consideration at the very start of the handicapping process?

If Lehane offered this technique as an additional factor to consider, then I would have no problem with it. But he offers it as the foundation of his contender-selection process...and as such, the method fails miserably...because its restrictive rules eliminate the most accomplished horses in the race from the very start.
My memory must be getting fuzzy, because you forced me to reread what I'd written. I thought it was reported accurately what had transpired on the few races attended for CT, without having once said I was impressed, or wow, this is the ticket. To answer your question, no it will most likely not be a permanent feature of my handicapping. To be honest, I consider myself a contrarian when it comes to horses and stocks. Since Jim's technique seems to identify not-so-obvious contenders, it caught my attention. Haven't yet finished the pdf that was shared, but thought he also advised using the final fraction or 1/4 mile time with his angles including red scan, but I may be wrong on that note. Without double checking the pdf, it appears like he has four or five angles in addition to his red scan, so that would most likely not eliminate other serious contenders. I think this game has enough variety, that making a selection can done by an almost infinite number of methods. My selection process uses some angles, early speed, class, form, and a bigger emphasis on tote analysis of my own design.
__________________
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
FakeNameChanged is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 03:51 PM   #41
thaskalos
Rebel without applause
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 25,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whosonfirst View Post
My memory must be getting fuzzy, because you forced me to reread what I'd written. I thought it was reported accurately what had transpired on the few races attended for CT, without having once said I was impressed, or wow, this is the ticket. To answer your question, no it will most likely not be a permanent feature of my handicapping. To be honest, I consider myself a contrarian when it comes to horses and stocks. Since Jim's technique seems to identify not-so-obvious contenders, it caught my attention. Haven't yet finished the pdf that was shared, but thought he also advised using the final fraction or 1/4 mile time with his angles including red scan, but I may be wrong on that note. Without double checking the pdf, it appears like he has four or five angles in addition to his red scan, so that would most likely not eliminate other serious contenders. I think this game has enough variety, that making a selection can done by an almost infinite number of methods. My selection process uses some angles, early speed, class, form, and a bigger emphasis on tote analysis of my own design.
Where in his handicapping book does Lehane use "other methods" than the RED SCAN to pick his contenders? In the edition that I have, he raves about his "red scan" technique...and in the race that I used as an example in this thread, he used only the "red scan" to eliminate the other serious contenders in the race. ..and he didn't even use those other obvious contenders in his exotics bets in that race.

I'm not trying to tell people how to handicap, you understand...I just voice my opinion about books that I've read. And when I disagree with a book...I like to voice my disagreement, while stating the reasons behind it. I'm not trying to pick fights with anyone...or to pretend that I know everything. To each his own.
__________________
"Μηδενα προ του τελους μακαριζε." -- Σολων
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 04:36 PM   #42
FakeNameChanged
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
Where in his handicapping book does Lehane use "other methods" than the RED SCAN to pick his contenders? In the edition that I have, he raves about his "red scan" technique...and in the race that I used as an example in this thread, he used only the "red scan" to eliminate the other serious contenders in the race. ..and he didn't even use those other obvious contenders in his exotics bets in that race.

I'm not trying to tell people how to handicap, you understand...I just voice my opinion about books that I've read. And when I disagree with a book...I like to voice my disagreement, while stating the reasons behind it. I'm not trying to pick fights with anyone...or to pretend that I know everything. To each his own.
Gus, did you download the pdf that Ted Craven supplied, it's 132 pages long and title Calib. Hcping-The Next Level?
There's the T/M play-turn move(red scan), SRE play(stretch run extension), Wide out play, Profile play, WIR play?, Pattern play, Double play? and my favorite, the Hidden Beyers, He also covers turf races in three chapters. And has some qualifying rules or something to separate contenders using final fractions. He covers his version of speed of the speed, and assigning value lines. Just think how impressed I'll be when I get to read the whole thing. And just for the record, I have at least three Gus Thaskalos downloads on my computer, so your expertise is something I pay attention to.(edit) it's INvisible Beyers.
__________________
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.

Last edited by FakeNameChanged; 08-18-2018 at 04:38 PM.
FakeNameChanged is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 04:55 PM   #43
thaskalos
Rebel without applause
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 25,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whosonfirst View Post
Gus, did you download the pdf that Ted Craven supplied, it's 132 pages long and title Calib. Hcping-The Next Level?
There's the T/M play-turn move(red scan), SRE play(stretch run extension), Wide out play, Profile play, WIR play?, Pattern play, Double play? and my favorite, the Hidden Beyers, He also covers turf races in three chapters. And has some qualifying rules or something to separate contenders using final fractions. He covers his version of speed of the speed, and assigning value lines. Just think how impressed I'll be when I get to read the whole thing. And just for the record, I have at least three Gus Thaskalos downloads on my computer, so your expertise is something I pay attention to.(edit) it's INvisible Beyers.
I appreciate the fact that you've thought enough of my posts to download them on your computer...and I know that Lehane offers mere than the "red scan" to separate his contenders. I own copy of the book, that's why I was able to recount in detail the example race early in this thread, even BEFORE Ted Craven offered the book here. Even though Lehane offers other pattern plays in his book, he uses the "red scan" as the first step of the handicapping process...and that first step eliminates from the very start some obvious contenders who have no business being eliminated that early. Look at my post #13...and tell me what sane handicapper would eliminate Diablo's Caper and Battle Cat as non-contenders in that race...while considering Romancer as a prime contender? And yet, that's exactly what Lehane does, in pages 15 and 16 of his book.
__________________
"Μηδενα προ του τελους μακαριζε." -- Σολων
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-18-2018, 11:14 PM   #44
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 102,910
I think the idea is that he is looking for horses who have shown either the Red-Scan moves or interior moves to be the contenders because it "energizes" them.
He is not eliminating horse, he is including certain horses. He got the field of 10 down to 7 and then further refines it. On page 13, he outlines his whole procedure.

The first two races in the book were stripped down examples of the technique. In both races, I see that a horse who won last out with a top Beyer failed to hit the board at relatively low odds, so his idea of looking specific horse worked for him. In his newsletters, he covers other ideas and how he uses them, such as speed,fade. When he sees the other moves, he focuses on them and not the red-scan like he did here.

At CJ's old board, we had a guy who looked for all the red-scan horses every day and posted a list of them. I take his ideas and incorporate them into my own play, like I do with those of Randy Giles.

As far as the two horses he ignored, I think in maiden claimers, losing 4 in a row while losing ground in the stretch every time, and being the top two betting choices is a great idea. Would you seriously bet either of them at the odds they went off at? I am not sure I would ever bet the winner, unless his final fractions looked strong, but at least the race was opened up for a good price.

And, btw.....the winner was trained by Jason Servis.....

Oh, and the red-scan technique pointed out Accelerator in the Pacific Classic today.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?

Last edited by Tom; 08-18-2018 at 11:16 PM.
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-19-2018, 12:09 AM   #45
thaskalos
Rebel without applause
 
thaskalos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 25,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
I think the idea is that he is looking for horses who have shown either the Red-Scan moves or interior moves to be the contenders because it "energizes" them.
He is not eliminating horse, he is including certain horses. He got the field of 10 down to 7 and then further refines it. On page 13, he outlines his whole procedure.

The first two races in the book were stripped down examples of the technique. In both races, I see that a horse who won last out with a top Beyer failed to hit the board at relatively low odds, so his idea of looking specific horse worked for him. In his newsletters, he covers other ideas and how he uses them, such as speed,fade. When he sees the other moves, he focuses on them and not the red-scan like he did here.

At CJ's old board, we had a guy who looked for all the red-scan horses every day and posted a list of them. I take his ideas and incorporate them into my own play, like I do with those of Randy Giles.

As far as the two horses he ignored, I think in maiden claimers, losing 4 in a row while losing ground in the stretch every time, and being the top two betting choices is a great idea. Would you seriously bet either of them at the odds they went off at? I am not sure I would ever bet the winner, unless his final fractions looked strong, but at least the race was opened up for a good price.

And, btw.....the winner was trained by Jason Servis.....

Oh, and the red-scan technique pointed out Accelerator in the Pacific Classic today.
Whether or not I would bet on Diablo's Caper or Battle Cat at those odds isn't the point...that's a question for the latter stage of the handicapping process. You don't toss those horses out at first glance because you don't like their running lines...while you accept an obviously inferior horse like Romancer, who was trounced by Diablo's Caper in their last start. Yes...I know that he also writes "But if time permits, it is best to take our contender selection process a few steps further"...but later on he writes that "Red Scanning is a simple yet powerful technique for quick and accurate contender selection", and that's an obvious lie. On its own, the red scan technique is a freaking JOKE as a contender-selection method.

If time doesn't permit the horseplayer to do a thorough handicapping job, and he is looking for a "quick yet powerful" handicapping method to make money with, then he is terribly misguided, IMO...regardless of what these snake-oil salesmen write in the books that they peddle to the unsuspecting public..
__________________
"Μηδενα προ του τελους μακαριζε." -- Σολων

Last edited by thaskalos; 08-19-2018 at 12:22 AM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
How do you prefer your Coffee !?
Cream and Sugar - 28.57%
30 Votes
Cream only - 20.00%
21 Votes
Black - 41.90%
44 Votes
Decaf - 9.52%
10 Votes
Espresso - 12.38%
13 Votes
Starbucks etc... - 9.52%
10 Votes
Other - 23.81%
25 Votes
Total Votes: 105
This poll is closed.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2020 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved -- Best Viewed in a modern browser @ 1280x720 Resolution Or Higher
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.