testing my exacta play prior to actually betting

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by MJC922

I'm trying to figure out why you don't have a large enough sample by now to split it and test more thoroughly on the second sample (instantly) that way. After that, if it comes up positive on the second set of races I can see testing it day by day with real money . This whole thing with back-fitting to a prior sample and then testing it day by day from there, I suppose it's something to keep one busy but chances are that's all it will do. If you take 500 races and find something that shows a profit on 100-200 'playable' races, the chances of that actually winning again on another set of 500 or so races with 100-200 plays is actually very very small. I think most people would be surprised to find that 19 out of 20 times when you have something that 'beats' a 500 race sample with 100-200 playable races you have absolutely nothing but a fit to noise. Then you have people talking about ROIs on trainer angles with 20 plays. Don't get me started. Small sample sizes, the new opium of the people I suppose.

For us laymen, i recommend a copy of Burton Fabricand's book "Horse Sense".
Go to page 176. Standard deviation formula, and sd probabilities.

then on page 172 he applies the sd to his sample of 6088 races at various incremental odds ranges. (i keep track of those ranges by % to about 15 places, but i just use just 2). then on pages 174 to 175 he explains the results further

of the 6088 races, he finds 1478 races that fit his system picks.

now that's about where I am. I started with a database of about 800 races, extracted about 300 that find my suspected winning formula's and now I test those formulas with new races.
and the analysis continues: coffee:

[formula_2002]

we should all have days begining this way.
reviewed about 15 races, found 4 what fit the formula's all 4 had a winner
3 wins and 1 reverse exacta winner

[formula_2002]

play

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

I CAN CHANGE THE WIN BET SIZE AND INCREASE THE (WIN RETURN $ / WIN BET $ ) AS INDICATED ON THE ATTACHED

INCREASE FROM $0.95 TO $1.09**

AND INCREASE FROM $1.31 TO $1.37

** reverting to the origional bet size would increase TODAYS 7 RACES $1 return from $0.87 to $1.12...MORE DATA, MORE DATA, MORE DATA

[headhawg]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

i don't think sealing the hole in the cockpit window with duct tape would hold. it only has a tensile strength of 40 pounds, however I'll watch the rest of it tonight. the acting seems good and i served in Korea for 18 months and worked with Korean men and women. They were a fine group of engineers and architects. Good memories, '57 to '58

This response -- along with the majority of your replies (as well as your impractical research) -- shows your level of sanity. And no -- I am not going to play your Google search game.

[formula_2002]

STRUGLING WITH THE BEST WIN BET SIZE.
WILL STAY WITH THE ORIGINAL BET SIZE, BUT ELIMINATE A WIN BET ONLY ON ONE OF THE 4 PLAY STRUCTURES.

[formula_2002]

TODAYS RESULTS. BOTH REVERSE EXACTA AND WIN PLAYS WERE PROFITABLE.
COMBINED $1 RETURN WAS $1.22
10 OF THE 12 PLAYS WON.
LOOKS LIKE 2 OF THE 12 DID NOT COMBINE FOR A PROFIT

[FakeNameChanged]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

i don't think sealing the hole in the cockpit window with duct tape would hold. it only has a tensile strength of 40 pounds, however I'll watch the rest of it tonight. the acting seems good and i served in Korea for 18 months and worked with Korean men and women. They were a fine group of engineers and architects. Good memories, '57 to '58

Depends on how big the hole. I've been driving a Korean car for the last six plus years, and it's the best car I've owned. Just for balance I also own an American car, but it sits in my driveway most of the time. It no longer costs me much money either. Thank you for your service.

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by FakeNameChanged

Depends on how big the hole. I've been driving a Korean car for the last six plus years, and it's the best car I've owned. Just for balance I also own an American car, but it sits in my driveway most of the time. It no longer costs me much money either. Thank you for your service.

I appreciate your thanks.

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by headhawg

This response -- along with the majority of your replies (as well as your impractical research) -- shows your level of sanity. And no -- I am not going to play your Google search game.

THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD, IT EVEN LEAVES A PAPER TRAIL!!

[formula_2002]

here is something I found interesting.
Recently, I started to download the total dollars in the wps pools.

with respect to the reverse exacta play:
when the total wps dollars are <$50,000
20 wins in 88 races (23% winners) had a $1 return of $0.93


when the total wps dollars was >=$50,000
16 wins in 67 races (24% winners) had a $1 return of $1.31

in both samples, the average number of runners was 7 horses

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

here is something I found interesting.
Recently, I started to download the total dollars in the wps pools.

with respect to the reverse exacta play:
when the total wps dollars are <$50,000
20 wins in 88 races (23% winners) had a $1 return of $0.93


when the total wps dollars was >=$50,000
16 wins in 67 races (24% winners) had a $1 return of $1.31

in both samples, the average number of runners was 7 horses

Well money talks, right? I think anytime we're looking for smart money we need to consider just how much money is actually being wagered. It is likely that what seems to be working for you in the larger pools will fail to live up to expectations in the smallest of pools. At the end of the day odds are just percentages but then Evangeline Downs is one thing and Gulfstream is another.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

For us laymen, i recommend a copy of Burton Fabricand's book "Horse Sense".
Go to page 176. Standard deviation formula, and sd probabilities.

then on page 172 he applies the sd to his sample of 6088 races at various incremental odds ranges. (i keep track of those ranges by % to about 15 places, but i just use just 2). then on pages 174 to 175 he explains the results further

of the 6088 races, he finds 1478 races that fit his system picks.

now that's about where I am. I started with a database of about 800 races, extracted about 300 that find my suspected winning formula's and now I test those formulas with new races.
and the analysis continues: coffee:

If it set you into motion to this extent, my word... ok I guess I'll look into the book.

[formula_2002]

play

[formula_2002]

Originally Posted by formula_2002

play

RESULTS