What's your plan to win?

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by pondman

I definetly believe that the more data you've accumulated the narrower your focus becomes. You might have an extremely secure method. And you might be profitable. But if you are playing horses you'll completely miss the most profitable plAys in racing. Because those horses wil have a high risk and level of volitility. I have my secrets that go against convention. When I hit, I'm called crazy, or lucky, because it goes against the easy, big data. If I lose, I'm told I have a problem because that's not the beliefs of the old guys boxing speed ratings.

I think that having as much data as possible can certainly not hurt, while it might be extremely helpful in the case of a shipper from a third class race track that you can measure with accuracy just because you happened to have its last two seasons in you data base..

Some of my worst beats and larger wins as well, are coming from horses shipping from tracks like Lousianna Down of Finger Lakes to major Leagues like Saratoga..

Maintaining a complete North American results database is a must for the professional horse bettor.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I think that having as much data as possible can certainly not hurt, while it might be extremely helpful in the case of a shipper from a third class race track that you can measure with accuracy just because you happened to have its last two seasons in you data base..

r.

I'm often told by big data people that it's a bad idea to bet a maiden winner to repeat. If you throw out all the numbers, and understand the class levels and focus on distance, this is the best bet in racing. How many times have you seen a horse come back at over 10-1? I caught an 85-1 shot with a big bet on it. It was life changing. And that was 2 days after I was told by a big data person not to bet maidens to repeat. We even see them on the TC trail. My point is: if you get away from the big data and whales, who are going to be using pace and speed in a huge database, you can find a number of profitable plays. If a person is going to sit and play what is easily collected, then you might be profitable, but it will be playing a long term trend, which will suffer from a tremendous amount of volatility.

[Capper Al]

I go through cycles with data, hoarding and streamlining. As with food buffets, more always seems better at first until one realizes that they shouldn't be eating that much. So what happens in capping for me is that I measure more and more statistics until I realize that my bottkm line hasn't been improving with all the addition of information. When this happens, I seek to bring my processes back down to what worked before and eliminate everything else except what showed promise.

[Dave Schwartz]

Pondman,

My recollection is that I've not seen posts from you in recent history. Good to see you posting again/more.

I'm often told by big data people that it's a bad idea to bet a maiden winner to repeat. If you throw out all the numbers, and understand the class levels and focus on distance, this is the best bet in racing. How many times have you seen a horse come back at over 10-1? I caught an 85-1 shot with a big bet on it. It was life changing. And that was 2 days after I was told by a big data person not to bet maidens to repeat. We even see them on the TC trail. My point is: if you get away from the big data and whales, who are going to be using pace and speed in a huge database, you can find a number of profitable plays. If a person is going to sit and play what is easily collected, then you might be profitable, but it will be playing a long term trend, which will suffer from a tremendous amount of volatility.

You make valid points here.

Just as you said, as a general rule, maiden winners do not repeat. This is more accurate coming out of maiden claiming than MSW.

I think there is a lot to be learned by reading between your lines in a couple of places, though.

Most important is that "As a General Rule" part, as well as the "Easily Collected" part. If you put the two together, you get a thought that really validates what I believe you are saying:

Those that want to just look at the high-level rules and mantras (i.e. (never bet horse off more than 30 days" etc) and not look deeper will miss the obvious exception to the rule.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by pondman

I'm often told by big data people that it's a bad idea to bet a maiden winner to repeat. If you throw out all the numbers, and understand the class levels and focus on distance, this is the best bet in racing. How many times have you seen a horse come back at over 10-1? I caught an 85-1 shot with a big bet on it. It was life changing. And that was 2 days after I was told by a big data person not to bet maidens to repeat. We even see them on the TC trail. My point is: if you get away from the big data and whales, who are going to be using pace and speed in a huge database, you can find a number of profitable plays. If a person is going to sit and play what is easily collected, then you might be profitable, but it will be playing a long term trend, which will suffer from a tremendous amount of volatility.

First of all, of course I agree that betting on the repeat of a maiden winner has the potential to be one of the best bets in the game. Absolutely correct, although the profile of this kind of runner should be compensated by other angles that will put in the thin winning cluster of this types of horses.

In my response, I meant to say that maintaining a complete chart database for the last couple of years, is very beneficial because you will be able to discover some very interesting bets based on your complete universe of custom speed and pace figures, trainers stats etc

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

First question, what are you a hunter or a gatherer? Gatherers use known systems or purchase software, and try to squeeze out a profit by not reinventing the game but by seeking out hidden patterns and/or better statistical understandings. Scenario players are a good example of this group. This is by far the largest group.

Hunters, on the other hand, say nuts to the common understanding of the game and will seek their own formulas of methods. They believe that nobody is going to give away or sell the knowledge needed to profit. These are guys like Pittsburgh Philly who invent their own handicapping ideas or methods.

Is it important that you need to know who your are in the game? I doubt it. The game is fun and that's it biggest reward. But what I find interesting are the stat guys and the programmers who think they are hunters while along they are gatherers. It sets the tone within many who post about handicapping. I'm not saying that gatherers can't be winners or hunters are better. This is all a matter of one's temperament.

I don't know about this "hunter"/ "gatherer" thing, but I started my career with one purpose, to make profit. If I had not thought, seriously, that I could beat the game I would never have bet and probably would have never become much of a fan, maybe the TC trail and the BC, but that would have been about it for racing.

I got some very good mentoring on the basics immediately, but just as immediately, I went my own way, never read a book from cover to cover (except Pittsburg Phil), but I read lots of articles, and some excepts from authors in order to get the basic premise from them, which I either discarded or modified to make them my own.

I started as a pencil and paper 'capper, like most here, with the DRF, but because of my interest in computers it took no time at all before I was using computers and Excel to "do my own thing" and save time and prevent stupid human errors.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

In my response, I meant to say that maintaining a complete chart database for the last couple of years, is very beneficial because you will be able to discover some very interesting bets based on your complete universe of custom speed and pace figures, trainers stats etc

But do these things always have to be present? Does the horses have to always need a specific speed figure? Does it always have to have a pace figure? Do you ever bet a horse that doesn't conform to the theories of pace or speed ratings. I think those ratings are important in some instances. I have a few spots that have been doing really well with early pace figures. You can make some money with pace. But you've got to carefully pick your races and venues.

I have many more spot, at least by times 5, that require neither a pace nor a speed figure. I actually believe that if you want to make money in this game, you've got to bring much more to the game than just a speed or pace figure. You've got to actually look at what the trainer is doing.

I'm not a full card player. I don't claim to be an expert at horizontals. But I can make a lot of money in spots. If you ask me how I plan to win, I'll tell you it's by not looking at too much data.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by pondman

But do these things always have to be present? Does the horses have to always need a specific speed figure? Does it always have to have a pace figure?

OF COURSE NOT

There are many successful bets that can be placed on horses with very inferior figures, assuming they are matching the right pace, trip , breeding or other criteria.

STILL THOUGH, the very prime bets, those that can be bet for really large amounts, should at least combine a speed figure advantage with some other of the main factors (like pace or trip)...

In any case, I feel way more very comfortable when my database is extensive enough to provide me a good image about how every shipper in the race has been running recently

[pondman]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

OF COURSE NOT

STILL THOUGH, the very prime bets, those that can be bet for really large amounts, should at least combine a speed figure advantage with some other of the main factors (like pace or trip)...

Ah...see...this isn't true for me.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by pondman

Ah...see...this isn't true for me.

Me, either.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Pondman,

My recollection is that I've not seen posts from you in recent history. Good to see you posting again/more.



You make valid points here.

Just as you said, as a general rule, maiden winners do not repeat. This is more accurate coming out of maiden claiming than MSW.

I think there is a lot to be learned by reading between your lines in a couple of places, though.

Most important is that "As a General Rule" part, as well as the "Easily Collected" part. If you put the two together, you get a thought that really validates what I believe you are saying:

Those that want to just look at the high-level rules and mantras (i.e. (never bet horse off more than 30 days" etc) and not look deeper will miss the obvious exception to the rule.

Dave

Have you ever run data and created a rule? And then you found yourself falling over your own rule? Or had a situation where in order to save $5, it cost you $100 at the window? When you are trying to predict the future, that type of problem can happen.

[Dave Schwartz]

Have you ever run data and created a rule? And then you found yourself falling over your own rule? Or had a situation where in order to save $5, it cost you $100 at the window? When you are trying to predict the future, that type of problem can happen.

No, I always get it right. LOL

Of course. Not only that, but rules always have trade-offs.

That is, if you make a change towards higher prices, you pay for that change with a reduced hit rate. you have to weigh the net gain relative to what you're trying to accomplish.

Conversely, if you need a higher hit rate, it will likely cost you a few longer prices, and, logically, some $net.


1. There is no free lunch.
2. The game is hard.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by pondman

Ah...see...this isn't true for me.

There are always exceptions to the rule

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by raybo

I don't know about this "hunter"/ "gatherer" thing, but I started my career with one purpose, to make profit. If I had not thought, seriously, that I could beat the game I would never have bet and probably would have never become much of a fan, maybe the TC trail and the BC, but that would have been about it for racing.

I got some very good mentoring on the basics immediately, but just as immediately, I went my own way, never read a book from cover to cover (except Pittsburg Phil), but I read lots of articles, and some excepts from authors in order to get the basic premise from them, which I either discarded or modified to make them my own.

I started as a pencil and paper 'capper, like most here, with the DRF, but because of my interest in computers it took no time at all before I was using computers and Excel to "do my own thing" and save time and prevent stupid human errors.

Do you follow Steve Fierro with his four Quarters book?

[raybo]

Originally Posted by pondman

Ah...see...this isn't true for me.

Me either. Many other things to consider, final time ratings (in whatever form you use for those) are at the lower part of the list.