Since Speed is the Long Pole in the Tent

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by raybo

I too was unaware of that, if it is indeed fact.

It is a fact. I'm at DRF for about 1 1/2 years.

I don't post here as an employee of DRF. Everything I say on these forums is as a guy that loves the sport and loves to bet on horses just like the rest of you. I just also happen to work for DRF. I am on the technical side of the company and not in management. However, I do have contact with some really great guys on the handicapping and product side to talk horses. :-)

[lamboy]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

It is a fact. I'm at DRF for about 1 1/2 years.

I don't post here as an employee of DRF. Everything I say on these forums is as a guy that loves the sport and loves to bet on horses just like the rest of you. I just also happen to work for DRF. I am on the technical side of the company and not in management. However, I do have contact with some really great guys on the handicapping and product side to talk horses. :-)

nice gig!! i also live in queens, if you're ever in Aqu Longshots drop me an email.

as an employee, i guess you're ineligible for the nhc but still able to play for cash prizes like Matt B did?

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by lamboy

nice gig!! i also live in queens, if you're ever in Aqu Longshots drop me an email.

as an employee, i guess you're ineligible for the nhc but still able to play for cash prizes like Matt B did?

I don't go to AQU as often as I once did, but if I do, I'll let you know.

I haven't played in any tournaments. I don't have many insights into that kind of play. We have a weekly tournament for employees that I get into, but that's like swimming in shark infested waters.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

Not so fast. There's a lot to be said for sticking your neck out on a single factor. The ROI's can be surprising. I had a 13 week winning streak with a modified Giles' style pace figure.

There was a common saying before digital took over timekeeping: "Even a broken clock is right twice a day." One person's short-term experience at (one track? two tracks?) could hardly be considered as an indication of universal applicability.

There was a nice return on the "same driver, same trainer, high ML odds" strategy on the harness thread awhile back, too. Like most short-term samples, it turned sour and quietly died after the initial illusion of "success."

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by traynor

There was a common saying before digital took over timekeeping: "Even a broken clock is right twice a day." One person's short-term experience at (one track? two tracks?) could hardly be considered as an indication of universal applicability.

There was a nice return on the "same driver, same trainer, high ML odds" strategy on the harness thread awhile back, too. Like most short-term samples, it turned sour and quietly died after the initial illusion of "success."

By their applications, single factors can pay better period. If you like class only then you contend with only those who like class. If you like class, speed, pace, and connections then you contend with those who like class, speed, pace, and connections. A bigger audience in a paramutual pool lowers the payouts.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by pandy

I've said this in many columns. Although gambling is a form of entertainment, it's a lot more fun if you win! There are thousands of horse players out there, and it used to be tens of thousands, that do the same thing every day and are perennial losers. And these guys are the toughest to convince to try something new, they stubbornly go down the same losing path.

That may be the greatest problem in horse racing. It is not that winning is all that impossible/difficult/arduous. It is that those who have learned "the old ways" are forced (by their own internal drives) to both continue using those ways, and to vigorously argue in their support.

It is a shame, because there a lot of ways in which new bettors, recreational bettors, and hard-core long time bettors could improve their overall return (followed by increased enthusiasm, more vigorous wagering, and even better returns) by making (relatively minor) shifts in their thinking.

[lamboy]

i don't dispute the fact that there's " many ways to skin a cat" and the main reason is one develops a comfort level which provides them with a perception of knowledge or understanding of the races. my goal is to become better at p6 and contests. figs don't cut the mustard because youre often presented with mandatory races that dont lend itself to figs and thats where the big paydays are. im not here to argue the merits of figs. i love this forum b/c of the many brilliant minds and ideas offered. just like a home improvement forum, one doesnt need to agree with the method suggested. the only way to get better is to keep an open mind.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

By their applications, single factors can pay better period. If you like class only then you contend with only those who like class. If you like class, speed, pace, and connections then you contend with those who like class, speed, pace, and connections. A bigger audience in a paramutual pool lowers the payouts.

Yes and no. A lot depends on what you consider "single factors." I think extracting single data points from the same PP's everyone else uses has been milked dry. That is, finding the best average of last two Beyer's (or similar) is not going to be overly productive in the long-term.

The difficulty in the scenarios you mention is that factor values are not additive. Each combination creates a new variable, and can only be studied with meaningful results if that is taken into consideration. Combining superfluous factors into the mix often dilutes the predictive value of the other factors.

There are few things more comical than reading a post in which someone states that he or she "demands" such and such before wagering. It is the inclination of timid/hesitant/unsure bettors to seek "additional proof" before betting that undermines their efforts. The additional proof (top speed, top trainer, higher class, and a jockey who has won with this horse before, or whatever) more often reduces the predictive value of the primary factor(s) used than it increases them.

The primary factors used in the "very sophisticated" software apps I have seen are not what most bettors--including those who develop or write their own software--would consider primary factors. That is, they are not based on the typical old-school speed, pace, class, current form, connections criteria.

[lamboy]

thats the problem we're all faced with. in this era of "big data", many corporations can turn to the internet or social media to extract data and turn it into information. horseplayers have the same set of data which has been at our disposal for a long time. the transformation phase of this data such as creating better speed, pace,class, composite, comprehensive figs have been discussed ad nauseum. new tools such as spark and rattle makes life easier to try and uncover nuggets of information but personally i have plenty of ideas but my day job gets in the way.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by traynor

That may be the greatest problem in horse racing. It is not that winning is all that impossible/difficult/arduous. It is that those who have learned "the old ways" are forced (by their own internal drives) to both continue using those ways, and to vigorously argue in their support.

It is a shame, because there a lot of ways in which new bettors, recreational bettors, and hard-core long time bettors could improve their overall return (followed by increased enthusiasm, more vigorous wagering, and even better returns) by making (relatively minor) shifts in their thinking.

I think players make relatively minor shifts in their thinking all the time. It's just that these "mental shifts" don't do much to correct the "mistakes" in their play. To "know", and to "DO", are different things.

I find that most people don't just "want to win". They want to win in their own particular way. The losing exotics bettor won't easiy gravitate to win betting...nor will the losing horizontal bettor accept the vertical bets with equal zeal. Many SAY that they are playing for profit...but their betting habits reveal that they are primarily seeking comfort and enjoyment. When you are really playing for "profit", then you step outside of your "comfort zone"...and you do what has to be done. That's only MY opinion, of course...and it's quite possible that my own prejudices have worked their way into it.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by lamboy

thats the problem we're all faced with. in this era of "big data", many corporations can turn to the internet or social media to extract data and turn it into information. horseplayers have the same set of data which has been at our disposal for a long time. the transformation phase of this data such as creating better speed, pace,class, composite, comprehensive figs have been discussed ad nauseum. new tools such as spark and rattle makes life easier to try and uncover nuggets of information but personally i have plenty of ideas but my day job gets in the way.

I agree. However, that is not the purpose/intent/strategy of the high-end race analysis apps. Specifically, refining and re-refining the same old same old is both pointless and unprofitable. The proliferation of easy-to-use data mining, data analysis, and machine learning apps (that readily accept PP data as input) has made that line of enquiry much less productive than it may have been previously.

[ReplayRandall]

Quality Information-->filtering-->Knowledge-->filtering-->WISDOM

Analogy is like someone panning for Gold, you must pick quality spots first(information), to even have a small chance at finding a golden nugget (knowledge), and if you find enough nuggets, you can make a fortune(wisdom)....

[traynor]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I think players make relatively minor shifts in their thinking all the time. It's just that these "mental shifts" don't do much to correct the "mistakes" in their play. To "know", and to "DO", are different things.

I find that most people don't just "want to win". They want to win in their own particular way. The losing exotics bettor won't easiy gravitate to win betting...nor will the losing horizontal bettor accept the vertical bets with equal zeal. Many SAY that they are playing for profit...but their betting habits reveal that they are primarily seeking comfort and enjoyment. When you are really playing for "profit", then you step outside of your "comfort zone"...and you do what has to be done. That's only MY opinion, of course...and it's quite possible that my own prejudices have worked their way into it.

That is my point exactly. Bettors tend to seek validation of their "rightness" rather than simply winning. Rather than seeking/adopting/developing a new "view" they want to tack on a few bells and whistles to the old "view" and make dramatic improvement in returns. In business schools it is often described as the "buggy whip phenomena."

It is not that getting from Point A to Point B is all that difficult. It is that dragging all the excess baggage of the past on the journey makes it seem so.

[lamboy]

Originally Posted by traynor

I agree. However, that is not the purpose/intent/strategy of the high-end race analysis apps. Specifically, refining and re-refining the same old same old is both pointless and unprofitable. The proliferation of easy-to-use data mining, data analysis, and machine learning apps (that readily accept PP data as input) has made that line of enquiry much less productive than it may have been previously.

agreed, one would think with open source tools so readily available why is it that a certain individual or group arent taking advantage of this and scooping up most of the pots? in particular, i dont see anyone employing these tools in the contest scenes. there are plenty of 6 figure prizes awarded via contests and these gurus ignore them?

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I think players make relatively minor shifts in their thinking all the time. It's just that these "mental shifts" don't do much to correct the "mistakes" in their play. To "know", and to "DO", are different things.

I find that most people don't just "want to win". They want to win in their own particular way. The losing exotics bettor won't easiy gravitate to win betting...nor will the losing horizontal bettor accept the vertical bets with equal zeal. Many SAY that they are playing for profit...but their betting habits reveal that are primarily seeking comfort and enjoyment. When you are really playing for "profit", then you step outside of your "comfort zone"...and you do what has to be done. That's only MY opinion, of course...and it's quite possible that my own prejudices have worked their way into it.

I 100% agree. I am predominantly a pick 5, pick 4 and in some cases pick 6 lover. Losing streaks (like 3 or 4 day losing streaks) get under my skin. In those times, I force myself to have a winning day despite it being a boring day (no sexy pick 5 payoffs to wait for eagerly). Wether it be to place 2 win bets for the day instead of the usual $300 in the pick 5 or to make 1 heavy place bet on a horse that I am 90% sure will place and earn $3.40, I make it a point to break the streak.

I wasn't like that 10 years ago. I wasn't 100% like that 5 years ago. It is necessary today, to stay profitable and avoid busting.

However, I don't do that on a card that i love. If I like a sequence, I will play it even if I am in a 'losing streak'. It's cards that I am not enamored with which get me to once again think "keep it simple, make money, even if I have to bet super boring".

I have a friend who always makes excuses for losing. Every time I analyze his play he scoffs. He bets too many tracks, bets all vertical pools, never ever bets horizontals as he is too afraid to pick a winner. To each his own but he doesn't do well in horizontals either. He prefers to lose in 1 shot vs. waiting 90 minutes to lose (sick theory if you ask me).

He is so desperate to win, he asks me to bet his bankroll in his ADW. I do so and quite franky he is ahead for the year on the wagers I place for him. Despite this, HE STILL refuses to bet horizontals on his own.

He is of the disease of "If I win, I want it to be my way".

He liked one horse the other day. I told him, take your $1000 that you will lose anyway and play it on that 1 horse to place. Even if you reduce the price, you will earn $3.60 (that's with the favorite earning the other spot in the place pool).

He was almost tapped by the race, bet a meazly $40 bucks on the horse in tri's/exactas. Collected $56 when the horse ran second to the vulnerable fav.

Do you think he would've said, I should've bet the $1000 to place or $300 to win and a $100 exacta with the chalk above his horse?

Nope, he just said I'm jinxed and moved on to looking at tomorrow's card.

If I didn't love him as a friend, I'd abandon him but I keep trying.

He says maybe I'll box more tomorrow...