Projected Final Times for use in making Variants

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Follow Benter, find what's most predictive first, then figure out how to make money with it later.

Finding the most predictive method is not the same as making money. Chances are that the LESS predictive approach will outperform the MORE predictive one.

Do you agree and if you do not can you explain your case?

[classhandicapper]

I think the best figures are the ones that pick the most winners. Those are the ones that will enable me to estimate the probability of a horse winning best and therefore allow me to make better value oriented decisions.

If I was designing a betting "system" that was automatically going to provide me with bets, then I would want the figures with the highest ROI regardless of the win% as long as it was reasonable.

I'll add one other thing.

If one set was producing a much better ROI despite a lower win percentage, I'd try like hell to isolate what it was that was contributing to those better value horses. There might be a profitable insight there or I might even be able to incorporate it into the other set of figures with no loss of accuracy and get the higher win% and higher ROI.

[raybo]

Which "figure" is better, is a personal decision, based on how those figures are going to be used, the purpose and method for using them. That will vary by player.

Predictive value is great, but will not necessarily make you money. Positive ROI, on the other hand, is money, in and of itself. There are 2 parts to making money, hit rate (the predictive value portion) and average prices (the money portion). The problem we all face is in finding the right combination of those two things, for our own needs and goals. And, it doesn't matter if you're talking about figures or any other factor(s) (hopefully, nobody out there is using figures in isolation anyway). If you have the best figures on the planet, you can still lose money, and if you have the worst figures on the planet you can still make money. So, IMO, enough with the pi--ing contest about who's is best (everybody already knows that CJ's are the best anyway, right?), but there are people making money out there who don't, or can't, use them. It's a non-issue, IMO.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Finding the most predictive method is not the same as making money. Chances are that the LESS predictive approach will outperform the MORE predictive one.

Do you agree and if you do not can you explain your case?

Sure I can explain it. You start with the best possible inputs, that should provide you with the best possible prediction i.e. the best possible 'line'. Without the good line we might as well forget about finding value, pull numbers out of a hat. Once you have something that can point out where the winners will be then it should be possible to identify other co-factors that can pull it into a profitable zone.

Sometimes frankly that's the easiest thing in the world, the factor can be as obvious as a big price on a horse that already ranks high on the fundamental model. You may have seen my post on the 3yos and class ranks. Lot's of potential for money there. Ekati's Phaeton ranked second in the stake on class last weekend and was 25-1, just bet it to win, it's beating you over the head right? Second ranks on class win at a 5-1 rate overall. If you're afraid of the top ranked horse, turn it in the exacta with the top rank just in case. They run one two, go collect. Sometimes obvious plays come up just from the ability to shop for price on the board, it should hold up long term if you have good inputs to work with. Ultimately the method you settle on (let's say it's a spot play) might not be the most predictive but the numbers should be highly predictive when you remove all of the rules.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by MJC922

Without the good line we might as well forget about finding value, pull numbers out of a hat.

Hmm... I have to assume that to find value as you put it here, you need to compare your "fair" price to what is provided to you by the odds and if you detect that the crowd is offering you a larger price you go ahead and place a bet... I think this is the only way to interpret 'value' based on what you say here...

It looks good and reasonable, but it simply does not work like this in the real world... The reason this is happening, is that you can never be sure about the final odds that will be offered to you something that would had been the case if we were betting against fixed odds...

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Hmm... I have to assume that to find value as you put it here, you need to compare your "fair" price to what is provided to you by the odds and if you detect that the crowd is offering you a larger price you go ahead and place a bet... I think this is the only way to interpret 'value' based on what you say here...

It looks good and reasonable, but it simply does not work like this in the real world... The reason this is happening, is that you can never be sure about the final odds that will be offered to you something that would had been the case if we were betting against fixed odds...

Good point, logistical issues often get in the way. Poorly worded on my part about a line. People win without lines, people win without speed figures, however I can't imagine anyone who wins without a good sense of knowing value when they see it.

BTW, nice to see you back on the board. One of my favorite 'food for thought' posters.

[mbf2014]

I find that when I use the 1st and second Call and calculate the hidden Par time like Dick Mitchell does and then add the difference between the second and final call, I get like 135 something or in between as the Class PAr then look for the horse that can match it or come closest, especially with calculating the Jockey / Trainer where hes on the horse and has a great rating with Trainer I bet WPS and there you go.

[completebill]

I read this thread and shake my head in dismay, seeing so much energy and so much intellect devoted to exploring a facet of handicapping which almost totally lost its value long ago. "Figures", be they final time, pace, or various combinations of same, are of little use in today's handicapping world.

No matter whether you're using top last race, best of last 3, average of last two, or ANYTHING you want, you can look at the persistent, consistent, and continuous decline in profitability over the last 20 years or so. EVERY serious horseplayer has access to excellent figures. The more people use any particular component of prediction, of course, the less it becomes of value.

You can argue, I suppose, about who makes the best "Numbers". I thought it was probably Henry Kuck, while he was alive. I'm now partial to those made by Jim Cramer, at HDW (I know some disagree, and some quite vehemently!). The probable Consensus is that the "Numbers" made by Ragozin and Thorograph are as good as, if not better than, any. Yet ALL these numbers-makers (including Beyer) now warn their customers to be extremely wary of just betting the best "Numbers". They warn that their best use is in Form and Pattern prediction.

The same goes for Pace. Up until the mid-1990's, if you could predict who'd be the 1st Call leader, you had the key to the Mint. As more and more people began to recognize the value of early speed, and to use it, it steadily began to decline in profitability, in almost a straight decline. Of course, just like Final Time figures, as more and more people began to have access to good pace figures, this contributed to the erosion in profits.

It would be funny, if it weren't so sad, to observe so many handicappers, including some really fine minds, arguing or discussing the relative merits of predicting winners vs. maximizing profitability (Measured by P.O.I.)The results of that game were in long ago.

Sure--You need to be able to find Singles, often, to use in your horizontal bets. It's helpful, too, to be able to identify a probable winner, that will also be probably overbet. Use it in singles, MAYBE use it on top in vertical bets, if you feel strongly about longshots for the other spots in the bet, but otherwise PASSING races is often, overall, a great road to profits.

It's EASY to pick winners. The good "Figures", or "Numbers", are indeed great for that. Which of you can bet every race, and year after year get !/3 winners? The "Crowd" can. They also lose 16% on their bets. I use HTR which has some terrific features for construction of Spot Plays. I've created Lots of them that win over 50%, a few as high as 60%, month after month, year after year. Ah--But are they profitable?? Another question, indeed.

If you think I paint a dismal picture of our great sport, you're wrong. It's just that the game is changing. The way to profit from it now is NOT to devote your time to Figures, or to Pars, or to Variants, or to Speed Ratings--Probably not even to Pace analysis.***********Don't get me wrong---all of these are useful in Contender Selection**********************.

Profitability, though, is found in discovery and use of factors UNDERUSED by the betting public.----Factors NOT staring you in the face from the pages of the DRF. There are lots of them. Enough for each of us to determine what combinations work best for us.

Form and Condition are still poorly understood. Race spacing, Layoffs, and (particularly) workouts. There are no profits left in the DRF's "Money Box", but there are now so many claiming conditions, and purse structures so badly confused by casino money, that there's still probably some untapped potential in Class analysis.Pedigree is another vastly under-used factor. SO necessary for FTS, 2TS, Distance changes, and Surface changes.

Trainer, Jockey, and Jockey/Trainer stats still offer untapped potential.-----***AND--there's LOTS more.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Finding the most predictive method is not the same as making money. Chances are that the LESS predictive approach will outperform the MORE predictive one.

Do you agree and if you do not can you explain your case?

I think it is essential to understand that "predictive" methods that are unique and/or proprietary are way different than "predictive" methods that anyone with a computer and minimal analytic skills can find (or replicate). I agree wholeheartedly that the latter are (usually) worthless. The former are where the profit resides.

[Capper Al]

completebill,

It would be funny, if it weren't so sad, to observe so many handicappers, including some really fine minds, arguing or discussing the relative merits of predicting winners vs. maximizing profitability (Measured by P.O.I.)The results of that game were in long ago.

Well I'm not one of those fine minds(right PA?), but I agree with what you say. My point earlier was on similar lines-- we can buy all the speed figures or pace figures we need. Why bother? Yet, I have spent many hours with speed and pace. I think it might just be something we have to do as handicappers to get to know the game and realize what you are saying is true.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by traynor

I think it is essential to understand that "predictive" methods that are unique and/or proprietary are way different than "predictive" methods that anyone with a computer and minimal analytic skills can find (or replicate). I agree wholeheartedly that the latter are (usually) worthless. The former are where the profit resides.

The point I am trying to make, is that the objective of the game is not about predicting how the race will evolve and who is going to win it (of course this is impossible to be done in a deterministic fashion) but to find holes in the way the crowd is making its predictions (which can very well be absolutely correct)....

A method can (and probably will) have way less predictability compared to the public consensus but still can represent a very profitable approach...

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by completebill

I read this thread and shake my head in dismay, seeing so much energy and so much intellect devoted to exploring a facet of handicapping which almost totally lost its value long ago. "Figures", be they final time, pace, or various combinations of same, are of little use in today's handicapping world.

No matter whether you're using top last race, best of last 3, average of last two, or ANYTHING you want, you can look at the persistent, consistent, and continuous decline in profitability over the last 20 years or so. EVERY serious horseplayer has access to excellent figures. The more people use any particular component of prediction, of course, the less it becomes of value.

You can argue, I suppose, about who makes the best "Numbers". I thought it was probably Henry Kuck, while he was alive. I'm now partial to those made by Jim Cramer, at HDW (I know some disagree, and some quite vehemently!). The probable Consensus is that the "Numbers" made by Ragozin and Thorograph are as good as, if not better than, any. Yet ALL these numbers-makers (including Beyer) now warn their customers to be extremely wary of just betting the best "Numbers". They warn that their best use is in Form and Pattern prediction.

The same goes for Pace. Up until the mid-1990's, if you could predict who'd be the 1st Call leader, you had the key to the Mint. As more and more people began to recognize the value of early speed, and to use it, it steadily began to decline in profitability, in almost a straight decline. Of course, just like Final Time figures, as more and more people began to have access to good pace figures, this contributed to the erosion in profits.

It would be funny, if it weren't so sad, to observe so many handicappers, including some really fine minds, arguing or discussing the relative merits of predicting winners vs. maximizing profitability (Measured by P.O.I.)The results of that game were in long ago.

Sure--You need to be able to find Singles, often, to use in your horizontal bets. It's helpful, too, to be able to identify a probable winner, that will also be probably overbet. Use it in singles, MAYBE use it on top in vertical bets, if you feel strongly about longshots for the other spots in the bet, but otherwise PASSING races is often, overall, a great road to profits.

It's EASY to pick winners. The good "Figures", or "Numbers", are indeed great for that. Which of you can bet every race, and year after year get !/3 winners? The "Crowd" can. They also lose 16% on their bets. I use HTR which has some terrific features for construction of Spot Plays. I've created Lots of them that win over 50%, a few as high as 60%, month after month, year after year. Ah--But are they profitable?? Another question, indeed.

If you think I paint a dismal picture of our great sport, you're wrong. It's just that the game is changing. The way to profit from it now is NOT to devote your time to Figures, or to Pars, or to Variants, or to Speed Ratings--Probably not even to Pace analysis.***********Don't get me wrong---all of these are useful in Contender Selection**********************.

Profitability, though, is found in discovery and use of factors UNDERUSED by the betting public.----Factors NOT staring you in the face from the pages of the DRF. There are lots of them. Enough for each of us to determine what combinations work best for us.

Form and Condition are still poorly understood. Race spacing, Layoffs, and (particularly) workouts. There are no profits left in the DRF's "Money Box", but there are now so many claiming conditions, and purse structures so badly confused by casino money, that there's still probably some untapped potential in Class analysis.Pedigree is another vastly under-used factor. SO necessary for FTS, 2TS, Distance changes, and Surface changes.

Trainer, Jockey, and Jockey/Trainer stats still offer untapped potential.-----***AND--there's LOTS more.

I enjoyed reading your post, Completebill...but I can't say that I agree with it. In my opinion, speed and pace figures remain indispensable in today's game...and not just for "contender selection". Competent pace handicapping entails much more than who will assume the early lead in a given race...and the fruits of a thorough job of pace analysis are not "staring you in the face from the pages of the DRF".

To claim that class analysis still offers untapped potential while pace analysis does not, is a peculiar stance to take...IMO.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

completebill,



Well I'm not one of those fine minds(right PA?), but I agree with what you say. My point earlier was on similar lines-- we can buy all the speed figures or pace figures we need. Why bother? Yet, I have spent many hours with speed and pace. I think it might just be something we have to do as handicappers to get to know the game and realize what you are saying is true.

I don't think "we can buy all the speed figures or pace figures we need" is quite accurate. I don't know anyone betting serious money who relies on purchased speed figures or pace figures. They make their own. Without going into a long, rambling, philosophical blither drivel about the hows and whys, the bottom line is that they believe (correctly or incorrectly) that creating their own provides insights that purchased figures lack. I agree.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by traynor

I think it is essential to understand that "predictive" methods that are unique and/or proprietary are way different than "predictive" methods that anyone with a computer and minimal analytic skills can find (or replicate). I agree wholeheartedly that the latter are (usually) worthless. The former are where the profit resides.

Those who deal with the former better realize that just because the wagering public shuns something doesn't necessarily mean that this "something" will lead to profits.

[raybo]

Predictive-ness is still only part of the profitability formula. One must still know when to bet, and at what price, in order to be successful long term. Figures, ratings, velocities, etc., can lead to profitability, or ruin, depending on how you use them. Regardless of what method (factors or data) you use, that method must be combined with essential character traits, and sound betting strategies in order to be profitable. We all know that, or we should anyway.