Dave S: Celebrating 28 Years

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by headhawg

Yes, I understood thanks. I was thinking of something more specific but I should have been clearer in my post. I was wanting to know the reason(s) for the differences between the factors that make up the 1-2-3 objects (like PSR1) and the list of FT Best Scores in P&P. Was it due to a change in data (the more recent set being significantly different from the P&P set) or was the change in preferred factors due to the statistical method? (I believe you used step-wise regression in 1-2-3.) Perhaps the answer is covered later on in the seminar but I am only in Lesson 2.

The reason is that when I look at a subset of races - such as horses that actually were within 1 length at the 1st call, I found that the important factors are far different than when looks at the totality of all horses.

That's a mouthful. Sorry.

Another way to say it through an example and with a few breaths in the sentence...

We know that the best jockeys win the most races because we can see it in the statistics for jockey standings.

However, if we looked at only (say) horses that were within one length a furlong from the wire...

... we'd probably find that "Jockey Win Pct" was not the big factor it is in the overall stats.

It was the idea of "subset studies" that drove me to develop the 1-2-3.

IMHO, that is where the edge is to be found.

I should do a video on what I've come to call "Segments and Subsets."

While I do not do it graphically as they do, this video provides some insight into the value of breaking data down into segments.

Ayasdi's English Premiere League 2:31

.

If you are not a soccer fan (as I am not), perhaps you'd make more sense of their

13 Positions of Basketball video 14:39

.

There is a longer, better version of the

13 Positions of Basketball video 33:15

.

Dave

[appistappis]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

The reason is that when I look at a subset of races - such as horses that actually were within 1 length at the 1st call, I found that the important factors are far different than when looks at the totality of all horses.

That's a mouthful. Sorry.

Another way to say it through an example and with a few breaths in the sentence...

We know that the best jockeys win the most races because we can see it in the statistics for jockey standings.

However, if we looked at only (say) horses that were within one length a furlong from the wire...

... we'd probably find that "Jockey Win Pct" was not the big factor it is in the overall stats.

It was the idea of "subset studies" that drove me to develop the 1-2-3.

IMHO, that is where the edge is to be found.

I should do a video on what I've come to call "Segments and Subsets."

While I do not do it graphically as they do, this video provides some insight into the value of breaking data down into segments. Ayasdi's English Premiere League 2:31.

If you are not a soccer fan (as I am not), perhaps you'd make more sense of their 13 Positions of Basketball video 14:39.

There is a longer, better version of the 13 Positions of Basketball video 33:15.

Dave

p
congrats from one old craps dealer to one former one......thanks for percentages and probabilities and thanks for sending me to tarks.

[headhawg]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

The reason is that when I look at a subset of races - such as horses that actually were within 1 length at the 1st call, I found that the important factors are far different than when looks at the totality of all horses.

As soon as I read this I realized that you mentioned that in one of the videos but it didn't stick in my head. Thanks for reiterating. Not a soccer fan either so I will watch the basketball video. The title seems familiar so I may have watched it before although I am not sure what prompted me to do so.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by appistappis

p
congrats from one old craps dealer to one former one......thanks for percentages and probabilities and thanks for sending me to tarks.

Ah, yes... Tark's Clam Stand.

I really liked it better when it had the 12 stools, but still a treat.

Wait... One OLD craps dealer to one former one? What are you selling here? Like you're still 25 years old? LOL

[FakeNameChanged]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

The reason is that when I look at a subset of races - such as horses that actually were within 1 length at the 1st call, I found that the important factors are far different than when looks at the totality of all horses.

That's a mouthful. Sorry.

Another way to say it through an example and with a few breaths in the sentence...

We know that the best jockeys win the most races because we can see it in the statistics for jockey standings.

However, if we looked at only (say) horses that were within one length a furlong from the wire...

... we'd probably find that "Jockey Win Pct" was not the big factor it is in the overall stats.

It was the idea of "subset studies" that drove me to develop the 1-2-3.

IMHO, that is where the edge is to be found.

I should do a video on what I've come to call "Segments and Subsets."



Dave

Dave, Are you saying that horses within 1 length of the lead at the first call is not predictive of horses who will be 1 length of the lead at 1 furlong from the wire, and hence the win? Or just that it may or may not be an important subset of data? Interesting subject.

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by Whosonfirst

Dave, Are you saying that horses within 1 length of the lead at the first call is not predictive of horses who will be 1 length of the lead at 1 furlong from the wire, and hence the win? Or just that it may or may not be an important subset of data? Interesting subject.

The 37% off anniversary sale will be extended through the end of the month.


No, sorry if I was confusing.

Here's what I did:

1. I created 4 models, all based upon the lengths behind at the 1st call.

Specifically...
A. Within 1 length (inclusive)
B. Within 3 lengths (inclusive)
C. Outside of 3 lengths
D. Outside of 6 lengths.

Yes, I realize that A was a subset of B and C was a subset of C. But I was using the factors that were readily available in my system.

2. I queried the system of each subset, asking, "Which factors produce the most winners in the #1 rank?"

IOW, "Of the horses on the lead at the 1st call, which factors best predict that the horse will win?"

Note I also tried other approaches such as top 2, top 3, etc.

The answers I got were pretty astonishing.

For example, only rarely did factors that we'd normally call "important" get into the top 3 of "best factors."

3. As you can expect, the best overall subset to begin with was Subset "A" - those horses within 1 length at the 1st call. Quirin spoke strongly of this in his 1979 book, Winning at the Races.

He basically said that if you could predict who would be on the lead at the 1st call, you would be profitable.

Well, I continued to slice-and-dice.

BTW, I tried the more conventional positional approach... creating subsets from "at which call did the horse 1st challenge for the lead?"

The results were extremely inferior. One problem there was that there had to be 5 subsets: one for each call and one for "Never challenged." Of course, the "never challenged" group were zero-for-everything because it is difficult to win if you never come within 1 length of the lead.

4. The really interesting part was when I built data SEGMENTS above the A-B-C-D. Huh?

The data was segmented based upon the amount of pace pressure in the race, which was a simple approach which I outlined in my Understanding Early Speed seminar.

Basically, there are 4 SEGMENTS - 0,1,2,3+ - representing the number of front-running horses in the race, based upon Early Speed Points.

5. So, it looks like this (still looking at lengths behind at the 1st call)
SEGMENT 1: 3+ ES horses

A. Within 1 length (inclusive)
B. Within 3 lengths (inclusive)
C. Outside of 3 lengths
D. Outside of 6 lengths.

SEGMENT 2: 2 ES horses

A. Within 1 length (inclusive)
B. Within 3 lengths (inclusive)
C. Outside of 3 lengths
D. Outside of 6 lengths.

SEGMENT 3: 1 ES horse

A. Within 1 length (inclusive)
B. Within 3 lengths (inclusive)
C. Outside of 3 lengths
D. Outside of 6 lengths.

SEGMENT 4: 0 ES horses

A. Within 1 length (inclusive)
B. Within 3 lengths (inclusive)
C. Outside of 3 lengths
D. Outside of 6 lengths.

6. In the end we wind up with 16 scenarios, each with a different set of factors.

Perhaps a better way to say it is:

"In a race with 3+ Front Runners...
horses that figure to be within 1 len at 1st call...
win because they have lots of ???"

Same for the other calls.

7. Our HSH users just do this dynamically. That is:

1. They create the SEGMENT by fetching the appropriate races from the database to match the ES Pressure.
(Special note: We use a slightly different SEGMENTING approach because we've got the computing horsepower to do it.)

2. The system is queried based upon each of the 4 possible 1st call positions. (i.e. subsets)

3. The top 3 factors are determined for each subset and a handicapping object is created.

All of this is done with the click of a single button. The entire process takes about a minute.

Hope this helps.

Dave

PS: The HSH software is currently $347 in our store for the rest of April.

[Dave Schwartz]

It appears that there have been some problems getting the coupon to work on some items.

I believe the problem has been fixed. However, if anyone tried to use a coupon and it didn't work, just email me and we'll arrange to refund the 37%.

Sorry for this problem.

Take 37% off Everything with this coupon code:
28Ann37Pct


Special Deal: Spend $100 or more and choose ANY additional electronic product from the store for FREE.

After making your purchase, just email me with the name of the free product you want.

Please note that the free product does NOT have to be under $100!

[Dave Schwartz]

Well, we continue to have problems with the coupons.

Until the problem gets fixed, we will just automatically refund 37% of any order we get.

If anyone has purchased and not received the discount, please email me.


The store tech support is "unavailable" to help right now, so it seems there isn't much I can do to fix the problem.

So sorry for the inconvenience.

[Dave Schwartz]

We've audited all our sales going back to the beginning of the coupon announcement and refunded several full-price orders.

If anyone has been overlooked, please do not hesitate to call or email.

28Ann37Pct appears to be working again.

[Dave Schwartz]

I am thrilled to announce that the Coupon is working properly now!

28Ann37Pct is good for 37% off any item in our store until April 30th.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Denny

I've had two winning years in the last ten.

Maybe that has something to do with my being as you call it "passive aggressive".

Most people don't make it on betting alone and either need a job or a wife with one to pay the mortgage.

Great that you can teach and find enough buyers for your product to pay yours.

Thumbs up, Dave.

The (not so) subtle digs just keep on a comin'

[Tom]

So let's see, 8 losing ones out of 10.
Maybe you should give speed figs another chance!

[kdavis7837]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

The (not so) subtle digs just keep on a comin'

About a month ago I was struggling as a Handicapper, I am like a lot of guys out there, been handicapping 30+ yrs, blah, blah, heck I was raised on the backside as my father was a Trainer, anyway I contacted Dave thinking I could find some product to help straighten me out, he did not push his product, instead he worked with me to get my head back in the game, he suggested I go back over 50 or so races, chart my contenders,find out what works for me and more importantly what doesn’t, at the time I had a subscription to just about every thing available and mixing it all up including my head, I couldn’t pick my nose much less horses with consistency, Dave did not ask for a dime, what he did was make me simplify my process back to what has always worked for me, not many including so called friends would take the time, he did, His 1-2-3 system is so simple, it didn’t effect the way I handicap but it did force me to relook at what is important and what isn’t
Having fun again,only using 1 product (not his) thanks to Dave’s help
Thanks Dave. And happy anniversary

[Dave Schwartz]

For many this is the most important racing week of the year,
so I won't take up much of your time.

"All You Need to Know About 123" will continue after the Derby.
(That's a free series I am doing that explains how the 1-2-3 system works.)



What happened to the 37% off sale?
Today is the last chance to get 37% off.
Coupon is 28Ann37Pct

If you spend $100 you get HSH ABSOLUTELY FREE!

All it takes is an email saying HSH for free and pay ZERO.

[pktruckdriver]

Congrats Dave
28 years, wow!
Thanks for being there for me, teaching me so much.
Now just teach how to hit this Super this Saturday...lol

Here's to 28 more!