Handicapping Method

[JohnGalt1]

Originally Posted by Tom

What about good old eye-ball capping?
You look at the PPs and never use a pencil or a computer?
Most people I see at the track, when I go, is this group.

Form in one hand, beer in the other.

I love competing with them at the track.

Since I'm betting real money, I want to be prepared. And I want records so I can review my handicapping when I get home.

[TrifectaMike]

Originally Posted by Elliott Sidewater

Better information, more disclosure. I see that I was thinking about the exponential term the wrong way, and why A and B are positive. Thanks.

Can you at least tell us what the formula is intended to do? Establish true probabilities? You said I don't understand it, so why not explain it?

You can set A= B = 1 for now. The rating is unque.

Mike (Dr Beav)

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by Tom

What about good old eye-ball capping?
You look at the PPs and never use a pencil or a computer?
Most people I see at the track, when I go, is this group.

Form in one hand, beer in the other.

The beer can come in mighty handy when cappin.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by TrifectaMike

Pen and paper just won't do, unless you keep it simple and very basic.

Here is a rating which I have developed.

S-Factor = (Phi/n) *(Pr/Pl) *e^(A*F/n + B* R/nr)

I doubt anyone would want to use pen and paper to compute an S-Factor rating for each horse. Also some analysis is required to determine A and B. ...one can get very old fast doing analysis without a computer.

Alright what are the variables for the S-Factor?

Phi - Horse's odds in last race
n - # of runners in last race
Pr - Today's race purse
Pl - Purse last race
e - exponential function
^ - raised to the power
A - Constant to be determined
B - Constant to be determined
F - Finish in last race
R - Rank of average speed rating for the last two races
nr - # of runners in today's race

S-Factor -> The lower the better the rating.

How good is it? Test it yourself.

Mike (Dr Beav)

Mike,

Just want you to know that I copied your formula and will study it when I get time. In the end, I am a number person also. Just want to keep numbers in their proper place after understanding the game first.

Capper Al

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Tom

What about good old eye-ball capping?
You look at the PPs and never use a pencil or a computer?
Most people I see at the track, when I go, is this group.

Form in one hand, beer in the other.

Tom,

Don't you do both? I find myself not looking at the PPs as much as I should since I read the computer output. I consider not looking a weakness in my handicapping because one could miss the story that the PPs can tell.

[Tom]

Yes, sometimes is just use eye-ball scan and nothing more. Mostly at lunch when I don't have a lot of time. I do mental pace ratings - first call 21:0 = 0 and second call 43:0 = 0. Add 1 point for each fifth off the time is and 1 point for each length back.

Race time = 22.2 45.4 = 7, 14
Horse is 4-3 lengths and 2-1 length, = 10, 15 for the pace.

For routes, use 43:0 and 109.0.

Crude, but simple and I can scan the whole 10 lines in seconds and get a rough idea of the pace - contested or easy and then go to the best early of look for a closer with good odds. That is the fun day at the races.

[bob60566]

Originally Posted by Tom

Yes, sometimes is just use eye-ball scan and nothing more. Mostly at lunch when I don't have a lot of time. I do mental pace ratings - first call 21:0 = 0 and second call 43:0 = 0. Add 1 point for each fifth off the time is and 1 point for each length back.

Race time = 22.2 45.4 = 7, 14
Horse is 4-3 lengths and 2-1 length, = 10, 15 for the pace.

For routes, use 43:0 and 109.0.

Crude, but simple and I can scan the whole 10 lines in seconds and get a rough idea of the pace - contested or easy and then go to the best early of look for a closer with good odds. That is the fun day at the races.

Tom
Would it not be easier to use Bris to compare your angle ?
Mac

[raybo]

Originally Posted by bob60566

Tom
Would it not be easier to use Bris to compare your angle ?
Mac

If he is adjusting those times well, that method would produce decent pace numbers.

[bob60566]

[QUOTE=raybo[b]]If he is adjusting those times well[/b], that method would produce decent pace numbers.

My point is keep it simple.

Mac

[HuggingTheRail]

Originally Posted by Tom

What about good old eye-ball capping?
You look at the PPs and never use a pencil or a computer?
Most people I see at the track, when I go, is this group.

Form in one hand, beer in the other.

I've changed since then....with simulcasting, I now have a racing form in each hand, and drink the beer using a straw...

[HuggingTheRail]

I voted pen and paper, as that is most of my handicapping. I do use some Excel spreadsheet to type in my parameters, and it calculates an odds line and some other info.

The move to full fledged computer handicapping seems very overwhelming. I have poked around the sites of many of the software vendors, but haven't made that plunge yet. I think it may be best to tackle that step when I have more time... it seems like each of them have a LOT to digest.

[Dave Schwartz]

When I think about it, I actually use a P&P method. That is, I manually handicap according to a set of rules I have created.

Of course, the software does so much of the grunt work that it takes like 25 seconds per race.

I never actually thought of it that way before this thread.

[ranchwest]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

When I think about it, I actually use a P&P method. That is, I manually handicap according to a set of rules I have created.

Of course, the software does so much of the grunt work that it takes like 25 seconds per race.

I never actually thought of it that way before this thread.

Seems to me you are just finishing your handicapping with a pencil/paper.

If I were going to do p/p, I would start with two ideas:

1) define the races I will not play
2) rate the past performance lines to select either one or two past performance lines upon which I will rely.

To me, that is half the battle.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

When I think about it, I actually use a P&P method. That is, I manually handicap according to a set of rules I have created.

Of course, the software does so much of the grunt work that it takes like 25 seconds per race.

I never actually thought of it that way before this thread.

I agree. I think most of us who have created programs/apps for racing, or really anything else, start with pencil and paper. You get ideas, you jot them down, you probably do some paper testing to get an idea if the idea has some merit. Then you get into organizing the ideas, start working on flow charts, etc., decide what the output will concern and what it should look like, etc., decide what steps should be done first, second .......last, then break down all the steps into workable chunks, etc.. Then finally you start programming the chunks and integrating them.

So, unless you start with some "core" program that was written by someone else, you have to start with pencil and paper.

[Dave Schwartz]

So, unless you start with some "core" program that was written by someone else, you have to start with pencil and paper.

Raybo,

No, I do it way different.

I start with "paper and pencil." The order matters, right?