Filtering - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

Pell Mell · 07-01-2009, 07:26 AM

I have had the same dilemma for many years. I'm a long shot spot player and I use certain criteria to make my selections. I usually look at 50-150 races per day and haven't missed a day in over a year. I normally, according to the number of tracks running, come up with 1-10 possible plays on the day. My hit rate has stayed steady at about 15% for a long time. I could have more plays but I eliminate the ones I feel will go off at short odds right away. My average odds are around 10-12/1. I use the same angles for all plays but some will be short and others very long as the angles seem to make no distinction as to odds.
Here's my problem: Say I have 8 possible plays on the day. After careful study of the race, and I am well versed in the use of speed and pace, running styles, trainer stats, class, etc., I decide 2 of these possibles don't have much chance and 2 look very strong on all aspects and the rest are playable if the price is right. Invariably what happens is that the 2 best looking ones are up the track, a couple of the playables hit the board and one of those with hardly a chance wins at 20-30/1. The next day the situation will reverse itself so I am always damned if I do and damned if I don't. I have passed up so many huge winners that I am forced to play everything. I would like to increase my win % but haven't found a way to do it because the angles I use have very little to do with any ability the horse may have.
Another interesting thing I found has to do with what I would call the dynamics of a race. Normally I use my plays as a key in the exotics. If my horse wins at long odds the logical contenders are no where to be found and if the contenders run their race mine is up the track. There is one exception and that is when there is an absolute favorite and the 2nd choice is like 5/1, I will usually be 1st or 2nd. This sounds good but running 2nd to a 3/5 shot doesn't usually pay much.
What I'm looking for is a filtering method of some kind that would eliminate some of the losers. The only thing I've found so far is that my plays with a leading jock up do better. Any ideas?

fiveouttasix · 07-01-2009, 08:20 AM

I have also gone thru what you have described. Instead of applying the speed/ pace handicapping to your "angle" horse, try to determine if the favorites are strong contenders. Races with vulnerable "chalk" should get most of your play.

fmolf · 07-01-2009, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiveouttasix

I have also gone thru what you have described. Instead of applying the speed/ pace handicapping to your "angle" horse, try to determine if the favorites are strong contenders. Races with vulnerable "chalk" should get most of your play.

how often are you beaten by the fav?If your horse is finishing second try the exacta as a place bet to boost your profits.this is an excellent saver bet in your situation but only if your horse is second and you are being beaten by the favorite or even second favorite if you can separate the two.

Bison · 07-01-2009, 12:55 PM

I go through this same thing, and it ends up costing me money.
When I weed out plays that don't look good they win.
My data tells me that if I bet them all, I will show a profit.
I think the answer is to force myself to bet them all.

Pell Mell · 07-01-2009, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmolf

how often are you beaten by the fav?If your horse is finishing second try the exacta as a place bet to boost your profits.this is an excellent saver bet in your situation but only if your horse is second and you are being beaten by the favorite or even second favorite if you can separate the two.

I do get a lot of 2nds and the best method I've found for betting is a win bet combined with a backwheel in the exactas. Many times I get beat by another long one that I never considered.
But the big problem is tossing so many big winners. I don't want to include everything because I've tried that and it compounds the problem because I start to stretch things and that's self defeating. I think everyone has a problem in stretching things so as not to leave out another winner like "yesterday".

markgoldie · 07-01-2009, 01:40 PM

Pell Mell;

The situation you describe is a classic one. What you are finding anecdotally is right in line with the prevailing theory regarding longshots (at least live ones).

There are three essential reasons why longshots do well in races. They are:

(1) The public has overlooked a very solid contender in a race and allowed him to go off at a longshot price.

(2) A longer-priced horse "wakes up" and runs a much better race than he has been running.

(3) The dynamics of the race itself (trips) have led to the demise of the favored horses, paving the way for a longshot to do well.

Of the three scenarios, the first is far and away the most rare. The open-market bidding system that makes the odds of horses is rarely that far off. Wake-up longshots are also rare, though less so and even though it may seem that you see this quite frequently, keep in mind that every race usually has a group of longer-priced horses, so percentage-wise the number is quite low. The third scenario occurs with a better frequency, but when it does occur, as you point out, the exacta may consist of the longshot that you brilliantly picked out, and another longshot that you couldn't possible use.

The question you ask is if there is a filter system that would eliminate some of the losers. The answer is probably "no". Without a complete analysis of your selection process, it would be difficult to guess where such a problem might lie. On the other hand, you are a veteran at this and I'd be willing to bet that your own "self-censor" has weeded out the losing angles long ago.

The best you might do is run an ROI analysis on the hordses you are betting. Try to divide them into categories by order of preference, something like A, B, and C selections. Then see if one category is dragging you down. Other than that, there are some things in racing that you just have to accept and frustrating losses are a big part of it.

Mark

fmolf · 07-01-2009, 04:10 PM

keep detailed notes of your roi in each odds range for about 2 months.This might be worth a try at least to tell you which odds range will produce the best roi.....good luck whatever you choose to do.

dvlander · 07-01-2009, 06:20 PM

I have a couple of longshot spot plays that I use consistently. I use JCapper and we have a factor that rates opposing favorites as legitimate or vulnerable. My longshot spot plays have a lower win percentage against legitimate favorites but they result in a HIGHER ROI than with vulnerable favorites.

I am not going to claim that this will be universally true with all longshot angles but my point is to tread carefully when filtering longshot plays. There is a reason they are longshots because no one expects them to win. If you start looking for reasons to eliminate losers, you inevitably will filter out a 39-1 shot that inexplicably conquers what appears to be a legitimate 3-5 favorite.

Clearly, longshot plays are not for the faint of heart. You have to be able to stomach some lengthy losing streaks and I readily admit that it took me a while to come aboard and trust that the numbers and percentages would take care of themselves based on the pre-testing I conducted.

Dale

Pell Mell · 07-01-2009, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dvlander

I have a couple of longshot spot plays that I use consistently. I use JCapper and we have a factor that rates opposing favorites as legitimate or vulnerable. My longshot spot plays have a lower win percentage against legitimate favorites but they result in a HIGHER ROI than with vulnerable favorites.

I am not going to claim that this will be universally true with all longshot angles but my point is to tread carefully when filtering longshot plays. There is a reason they are longshots because no one expects them to win. If you start looking for reasons to eliminate losers, you inevitably will filter out a 39-1 shot that inexplicably conquers what appears to be a legitimate 3-5 favorite.

Clearly, longshot plays are not for the faint of heart. You have to be able to stomach some lengthy losing streaks and I readily admit that it took me a while to come aboard and trust that the numbers and percentages would take care of themselves based on the pre-testing I conducted.

Dale

My thoughts exactly but convincing my clients of this is quite another thing.

plainolebill · 07-02-2009, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dvlander

I have a couple of longshot spot plays that I use consistently. I use JCapper and we have a factor that rates opposing favorites as legitimate or vulnerable. My longshot spot plays have a lower win percentage against legitimate favorites but they result in a HIGHER ROI than with vulnerable favorites.

I am not going to claim that this will be universally true with all longshot angles but my point is to tread carefully when filtering longshot plays. There is a reason they are longshots because no one expects them to win. If you start looking for reasons to eliminate losers, you inevitably will filter out a 39-1 shot that inexplicably conquers what appears to be a legitimate 3-5 favorite.

Clearly, longshot plays are not for the faint of heart. You have to be able to stomach some lengthy losing streaks and I readily admit that it took me a while to come aboard and trust that the numbers and percentages would take care of themselves based on the pre-testing I conducted.

Dale

Nice post, I don't play against all the favorites but there are 3/5 horses losing everyday.

Edward DeVere · 07-02-2009, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markgoldie

The question you ask is if there is a filter system that would eliminate some of the losers. The answer is probably "no".
Mark

The answer is definitely "yes."

The key is the power of "no."

That, and the power of 500 races per week.

dav4463 · 07-02-2009, 03:58 AM

Do you keep track of your picks by "type of race" such as cheap claimer, high level claimer, allowance, starter allowance, stakes, handicap, maiden, route or sprint? Also, by distance: sprint vs. route, or surface: turf vs. dirt or polytrack

You may find a subset that is taking your money.

Also, try breaking it down by track. Some circuits may be costing you money because your angles don't work as well there. Mine is Pimlico!

nobeyerspls · 07-02-2009, 08:30 AM

It's time for you to go horizontal, and I don't mean taking a nap. Use all eight plays as keys in pick3's. With a single horse in one leg you can get creative in the other two. I look for returns in the range of 20-1 to 40-1 on the total that I bet on a pick. Thus 1x2x4 is an $8 wager seeking a payout of $160 to $320. If that first horse wins at 15-1, you are very likely to achieve that goal.
You may get as many as three pick3 plays out of each horse depending on where they are in the race sequence.
I'm an angle player too so I am forced to handicap races that I would otherwise skip in order to complete the pick. Recently one of my angles (favorable surface change) won at 14-1. I had to use all seven horses in the last leg (older males sprinting - my worst category) but it turned out OK.
As to trying to pick which of your angle picks to play straight, play them all to win and place. If your selection process is strong enough you should do well.

Tom · 07-02-2009, 09:40 AM

I think the worst thing you can do is find a good angle spot play an then add conventional handicapping to it. My experience is you will dilute it. One of my best is third off a layoff, back numbers make it a contender today, and showed something in one of the two comeback races. Now, that alone is what the spot play is, but add in jockey and equipments and whatever and you are revising the play from its intent. I find many good plays pay good because they do not look good on other handicapping factors. Some spot players I know of intentionally put in an ugly factor to make the horse look uninviting.

I use the filtering aspect when I develop the plays, not after.

markgoldie · 07-02-2009, 10:19 AM

[QUOTE=dvlander]I have a couple of longshot spot plays that I use consistently. I use JCapper and we have a factor that rates opposing favorites as legitimate or vulnerable. My longshot spot plays have a lower win percentage against legitimate favorites but they result in a HIGHER ROI than with vulnerable favorites.

This is an important point. It seems like every decent player wants to find vulnerable favorites and why not? Betting against losing favorites is the easiest and best way to make a substantial profit, both in straight play and especially in gimmicks.

The problem is what I might call the "Dave Schwartz" rule. Dave seems to be the only guy on this forum who regularly and consistently gives credit to the wagering public for the mostly brilliant job they do as an aggregate. I think it was a couple of weeks ago some guy was crowing about his strike rate in betting against favorites. Dave's come back was something to the effect that well, you may have a pretty good strike rate but I'll bet if you look at it, the rate is pretty low against 2-5 shots.

Dave's point was that not all vulnerable favorites are so vulnerable and the difference can be clearly seen on the odds' board. The lower the price, the less vulnerable. And if they're betting the heck out of some favorite that you don't have very good numbers on, chances are pretty good that they're right and you're wrong. Why? Because it takes conviction to spend the money to drive down a horse's price. Especially if the numbers look weak.

So the dilemma is this: If you're doing a great job at isolating weak favorites, one of two things are highly likely: (1) The favorite's odds are high, that is, he's a luke warm favorite in the 5-2 range or (2) There's information out there about the horse that you have no access to. Either way, your essential value is sapped.

So this brings about the BIG question for longshot players. Are you better off trying to play against weak favorites, getting your best strike rate but also your lowest reward? Or are you better off playing against the strong favorite, getting a lower strike rate but a higher reward?

Maybe someone here has a definitive answer. I'd like to hear it.

Mark