|
|
02-14-2018, 01:57 AM
|
#226
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
|
CJ, let me throw this your way.
I don't know your involvement in the SoCal pools, but here are some numbers for summer 2017 Del Mar.
Subject races are all maidens for older horses, N2L and N3L, whether claiming or starter allowance, for older horses.
Races carded were 94
The mean price of a winner was $9.40, the average price of a winner shoots up to $15.40.
These are the races I handicap. When I am playing optimally, I demand 6/1 on my bets. It's a rule I set in 2008 when I started focusing exclusively on these conditions as I found from 2002 to 2007 the mean for these races at the 3 major SoCal tracks was $9.60 and the average was $14.20. (I believe the substitution of LosAl for Hollywood will ultimately have a negative effect on the mean, and I'm actually starting to see that to be true.) Unfortunately, I meander away from this 6/1 rule all too often, and start betting shorter priced horses. This is when I get stung.
These numbers indicate to me that overlays start showing themselves at the 6/1 and higher price under these conditions, meaning, of course, the value in these races lies in these higher priced horses, and the horses priced 7/2 to 5/1 are priced more accurately. Below 7/2, the underlays begin dominating.
My feeling is that in the higher quality races, you can probably find more overlays in the 7/2 to 5/1 neighborhood, but in these cheaper races, including MSW, those priced horses are more likely EV neutral, if not leaning negative. If you venture into the maiden claimers and starters in SoCal, that steady diet of 3/1 or 4/1 you may be continually finding contenders at could very well be a thick patch of poison ivy, whereas in the higher quality race, betting Bolt d'oro at 7/5 may make all the sense in the world.
Though N1X is not a condition I follow, being it's one step away from MSW and it's N2L nature (though the handle of a good N1X will be appreciably higher than a claiming N2L), it doesn't surprise me that the subject horse of the OP's post settled out at 5/1. The probability that the bots nailed fair value is considerable.
|
|
|
02-14-2018, 01:34 PM
|
#227
|
PA Steward
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,660
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny
Pace Advantage and his horrible attitude of "Adapt or Die" and "screw" the horseplayer.
Back to page 11.
|
Yeah, I said screw the horseplayer...that's what I said.
This entire game as been an ADAPT OR DIE game since it was invented.
If you don't want to face reality, that's your right.
Last edited by PaceAdvantage; 02-14-2018 at 01:36 PM.
|
|
|
02-14-2018, 10:45 PM
|
#228
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,889
|
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
02-17-2018, 11:28 AM
|
#229
|
PA Steward
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Del Boca Vista
Posts: 88,660
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
|
Enathema?
Wow.
|
|
|
02-17-2018, 11:57 AM
|
#230
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,889
|
Better than an enema!
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
02-28-2018, 09:31 PM
|
#231
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 989
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ultracapper
CJ, let me throw this your way.
I don't know your involvement in the SoCal pools, but here are some numbers for summer 2017 Del Mar.
Subject races are all maidens for older horses, N2L and N3L, whether claiming or starter allowance, for older horses.
Races carded were 94
The mean price of a winner was $9.40, the average price of a winner shoots up to $15.40.
These are the races I handicap. When I am playing optimally, I demand 6/1 on my bets. It's a rule I set in 2008 when I started focusing exclusively on these conditions as I found from 2002 to 2007 the mean for these races at the 3 major SoCal tracks was $9.60 and the average was $14.20. (I believe the substitution of LosAl for Hollywood will ultimately have a negative effect on the mean, and I'm actually starting to see that to be true.) Unfortunately, I meander away from this 6/1 rule all too often, and start betting shorter priced horses. This is when I get stung.
These numbers indicate to me that overlays start showing themselves at the 6/1 and higher price under these conditions, meaning, of course, the value in these races lies in these higher priced horses, and the horses priced 7/2 to 5/1 are priced more accurately. Below 7/2, the underlays begin dominating.
My feeling is that in the higher quality races, you can probably find more overlays in the 7/2 to 5/1 neighborhood, but in these cheaper races, including MSW, those priced horses are more likely EV neutral, if not leaning negative. If you venture into the maiden claimers and starters in SoCal, that steady diet of 3/1 or 4/1 you may be continually finding contenders at could very well be a thick patch of poison ivy, whereas in the higher quality race, betting Bolt d'oro at 7/5 may make all the sense in the world.
Though N1X is not a condition I follow, being it's one step away from MSW and it's N2L nature (though the handle of a good N1X will be appreciably higher than a claiming N2L), it doesn't surprise me that the subject horse of the OP's post settled out at 5/1. The probability that the bots nailed fair value is considerable.
|
Very interesting to hear your approach, ultracapper. But do you mean "median" when you are saying "mean"? Isn't the mean simply the average?
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|