To all those who say you can't win using speed & pace figures only...

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by jimmyb

Thanks, CJ. I also found it (the formula) works the same for turf, dirt, sprints, routes, quarters, small tracks as well as large, east coast as well as west.

Thanks also to P A for laying down the gauntlet and issuing the challenge.

Just wanted to say I appreciate your post and your insight here. Every race, every track, every surface, coast to coast. The player's best friend is more races and no bias. The world is our oyster. Country wide overlays! Love the concept and try to stay out of my own biases!

[traynor]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Does the fact that I post plays for every track in the country and don't discriminate by track, distance, or surface, play any part in making these current results more "normally distributed" then you may have originally thought?

Actually, the opposite. I do a lot of monitoring by circuits, similar tracks, and so on. Different track sizes grouped in harness. In general, the most accurate models are track specific. By accurate, I mean one clump of races can be studied and used to locate useful trends. Basic problem is that a given set of results from a given set of races is most tightly matched with that specific set of races. That is the reasoning behind all the "statistics nonsense" of splitting samples into training sets (clumps of races) that are used to locate patterns that can be used on test sets/control sets (other clumps of races) to see how they fare.

[traynor]

I understand (and fully appreciate) that other approaches may use totally different concepts and be quite successful. I think it is great that people are posting winning selections--and actually tracking the performance of the selections they post.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by traynor

Actually, the opposite. I do a lot of monitoring by circuits, similar tracks, and so on. Different track sizes grouped in harness. In general, the most accurate models are track specific. By accurate, I mean one clump of races can be studied and used to locate useful trends. Basic problem is that a given set of results from a given set of races is most tightly matched with that specific set of races. That is the reasoning behind all the "statistics nonsense" of splitting samples into training sets (clumps of races) that are used to locate patterns that can be used on test sets/control sets (other clumps of races) to see how they fare.

A method of play though, should be considered more robust if it can be shown to perform well given any track, distance or surface...wouldn't you agree?

[traynor]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

A method of play though, should be considered more robust if it can be shown to perform well given any track, distance or surface...wouldn't you agree?

Absolutely. That would indicate some kind of generic method.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Generic is awesome at 5-1!

[PaceAdvantage]

Another new high after today...12%

Top pick went 3 for 8 and returned $27.90

TOP PICK (OVERLAYS ONLY) Running total (47 Days):

99 for 457 | $914 Wagered | $1024.90 Returned | $1.12 ROI ($1.00 = Break Even)

All plays went 5 for 28 and returned $50.10

ALL PICKS (OVERLAYS ONLY) (47 Days):

159 for 1099 | $2198 Wagered | $1993.50 returned | $0.91 ROI ($1.00 = Break Even)

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by jimmyb

I realize this is a small sample size but here are the results of 127 races I posted in the selections forum.

The early end of the 30 day challenge. I understand 127 races is a small sample size but here are the results after 10 days.

127 races
27 wins
21% win percetage

$297.20 returned from
$254.00 wagered
+ $43.20
1.17 ROI

I didn't use video trip handicapping, but i did use a formula that weighs heavily on pace and speed.

I don't mean to denegrate anyones form of handicapping, only did this to prove that I could eke out a profit.

Have you used your method for longer periods of time...or is this 127-race sample the only "test" that you have at your disposal?

[formula_2002]

excellent results.
with such a big spread in the two posted roi's, I would be interested in what the LAY bets roi would look like

[jimmyb]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Have you used your method for longer periods of time...or is this 127-race sample the only "test" that you have at your disposal?

It's the first time I posted using this method. For fear of redboarding, I don't want to comment on past or present other than to say I'll continue with this form of handicapping.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by jimmyb

It's the first time I posted using this method. For fear of redboarding, I don't want to comment on past or present other than to say I'll continue with this form of handicapping.

The way you presented your initial post here suggested (to me, at least) that you might not have extensive experience with this method...that's why I replied to you as I did. "I realize this is a small sample size..."...you said. If you've used this method for long periods of time, then you know what you've got...and the 127-race sample doesn't mean very much.

[jimmyb]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The way you presented your initial post here suggested (to me, at least) that you might not have extensive experience with this method...that's why I replied to you as I did. "I realize this is a small sample size..."...you said. If you've used this method for long periods of time, then you know what you've got...and the 127-race sample doesn't mean very much.

PA threw a challenge out there, I accepted. Nothing wrong with that. I also figure if I'm going to throw my two cents in I should have some credibility. If nothing else, it provides me some. I'd prefer to not just talk the talk. Ever put your skills out there for all to see for any period of time? Not many are willing.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by jimmyb

PA threw a challenge out there, I accepted.

I'm not sure it was a challenge as much as it was questioning why more people don't keep track of their posted picks. I mean, I know the reason why...I guess it was more of a rhetorical question.

Congrats on your positive run! I hope it keeps up for you.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by jimmyb

PA threw a challenge out there, I accepted. Nothing wrong with that. I also figure if I'm going to throw my two cents in I should have some credibility. If nothing else, it provides me some. I'd prefer to not just talk the talk. Ever put your skills out there for all to see for any period of time? Not many are willing.

Where did I imply that you did something "wrong"? You showed a method that has shown impressive results over 127 races...and I just asked if you had tried the method out over a longer period of time. Did I do something "wrong" by asking you that?

No...I've never "put my skills out there for all to see for any period of time". When I decide that I need some "credibility" here...then, maybe I'll try it.

[Light]

In both PA and jimmyb's case, have your experiments revealed a key handicapping factor or factors (besides odds) that must be present for a bet? Or is this just "conventional" handicapping?