Trainer Angle Suprise

[sam4022]

Being retired and working on my second novel or maintaining my terrorist related web site ( Terror101.com) I relax by playing with the grandchildren or handicapping. Like most of you I employ a subset of general handicapping factors, i.e., finish in last 2 or 3 races, pace in feet-per-second, Average Purse Value, win and ITM % along with the trainers overall win % and, if relevant, post position for the race distance and/or track. However after reading several articles on trainer intent and methods I began researching trainer’s angles and, as follows, received a very unexpected result.



On a stand alone basis only two (2) angles showed a positive or close to positive ROI from the ten (10) I began with:

- First time Lasix

- Switch from sprint to route

- Switch from route to sprint

- Layoff 31 – 60 days

- Layoff plus 61 to 80 days

- 2nd off layoff of 45-180 days

- Two year old races

- Record off a win

- Switch from turf to dirt

- Switch from dirt to turf



The selection rules are that a Trainer must have a positive ROI ($2.10 or more) and:

- 3 starts with 100% wins

- 4 – 6 starts with at least 50% wins

- 7 – 15 starts with at least 40% wins

- 16 – 30 starts with at least 30% wins

- 31 or more starts with at least 25% wins



Should more than one trainer in a race have the same angle the race is disregarded. When an angle reached 10% negative win ROI it was dropped. From April 1, 2914 through July 27 the only remaining angles were ‘Two year old races’ and ‘Switch from route to sprint’. No other factors such as track condition, odds, race type, jockey, distance, etc. were considered.



Current results:

- Route to sprint (249 races) … Out $498, Return $682.60 … ROI = 37%. Place and show bets were negative 5% and 15% respectively.

- Two (2) year olds (101 races) … Out $202, Return $201.10 … ROI = 0%. Place and show bets were negative 8% and 13% respectively.



Now the question: Given the overall positive of ‘route to sprint’ for 249 races is it OK to lean toward betting the following tracks or, as a subset of the overall, is their total race figures inadequate?



- Belmont 4 wins in 7 races for + $28.40


- Les Bois Park 3 wins in 7 races for + $20.60


- Lone Star 6 wins in 14 races for + $40.50


- Mountaineer 7 wins in 16 races for + $55.20


- Woodbine 8 wins in 21 races for + $64.90


- Thistledown 4 wins in 9 races for + $71.90




I always considered any horse dropping from a route to sprint but had no idea it could be this much of a handicapping factor. I’ll be most interested in hearing any and all comments……….Best to everyone.

[mutualwagerer]

Have you ever considered First time blinkers or blinkers off, trainer/jockey combos, or even pedigree, or first off a claim?

[Moto Pete]

May I ask what data service you use? I'll add second start blinkers on/off and second off the claim.

[sam4022]

Originally Posted by mutualwagerer

Have you ever considered First time blinkers or blinkers off, trainer/jockey combos, or even pedigree, or first off a claim?

Yes. I may be incorrect but it seemed that it would take quite a long time to accumulate enough races, I always go for a minimum of 100, for a reliable result.

[sam4022]

Originally Posted by Moto Pete

May I ask what data service you use? I'll add second start blinkers on/off and second off the claim.

I discovered that Allhorseracing's past performance is actually a trainer's angle report listing every track/race and trainer with one or more angles every day.

Similar reports I had considered would have cost about $5 per day and may not have covered every track.

Let me know if you need more info.....good luck.

[Robert Goren]

I haven't done any research on it, but I think one trainer angle that might be worth investigating is when a low percentage trainer wins at huge odds. I have noticed that their other horses often starting winning at a pretty good clip (often at pretty good odds) for while before the trainer returns to being his mediocre self. Leo O'Brien at Aqueduct last fall comes minds as an example.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by sam4022

Being retired and working on my second novel or maintaining my terrorist related web site ( Terror101.com) I relax by playing with the grandchildren or handicapping. Like most of you I employ a subset of general handicapping factors, i.e., finish in last 2 or 3 races, pace in feet-per-second, Average Purse Value, win and ITM % along with the trainers overall win % and, if relevant, post position for the race distance and/or track. However after reading several articles on trainer intent and methods I began researching trainer’s angles and, as follows, received a very unexpected result.



On a stand alone basis only two (2) angles showed a positive or close to positive ROI from the ten (10) I began with:

- First time Lasix

- Switch from sprint to route

- Switch from route to sprint

- Layoff 31 – 60 days

- Layoff plus 61 to 80 days

- 2nd off layoff of 45-180 days

- Two year old races

- Record off a win

- Switch from turf to dirt

- Switch from dirt to turf



The selection rules are that a Trainer must have a positive ROI ($2.10 or more) and:

- 3 starts with 100% wins

- 4 – 6 starts with at least 50% wins

- 7 – 15 starts with at least 40% wins

- 16 – 30 starts with at least 30% wins

- 31 or more starts with at least 25% wins



Should more than one trainer in a race have the same angle the race is disregarded. When an angle reached 10% negative win ROI it was dropped. From April 1, 2914 through July 27 the only remaining angles were ‘Two year old races’ and ‘Switch from route to sprint’. No other factors such as track condition, odds, race type, jockey, distance, etc. were considered.



Current results:

- Route to sprint (249 races) … Out $498, Return $682.60 … ROI = 37%. Place and show bets were negative 5% and 15% respectively.

- Two (2) year olds (101 races) … Out $202, Return $201.10 … ROI = 0%. Place and show bets were negative 8% and 13% respectively.



Now the question: Given the overall positive of ‘route to sprint’ for 249 races is it OK to lean toward betting the following tracks or, as a subset of the overall, is their total race figures inadequate?



- Belmont 4 wins in 7 races for + $28.40


- Les Bois Park 3 wins in 7 races for + $20.60


- Lone Star 6 wins in 14 races for + $40.50


- Mountaineer 7 wins in 16 races for + $55.20


- Woodbine 8 wins in 21 races for + $64.90


- Thistledown 4 wins in 9 races for + $71.90




I always considered any horse dropping from a route to sprint but had no idea it could be this much of a handicapping factor. I’ll be most interested in hearing any and all comments……….Best to everyone.

this is great stuff!

i don't know how anyone can live without your website either. my problem is that chrome won't let me bookmark this

[lamboguy]

i just took care of the bookmark part

[WP1981]

Originally Posted by sam4022

I discovered that Allhorseracing's past performance is actually a trainer's angle report listing every track/race and trainer with one or more angles every day.

Similar reports I had considered would have cost about $5 per day and may not have covered every track.

Let me know if you need more info.....good luck.

Do you actually use allhorseracing? They were the first online book I ever used in 2004. They sent me shirts, hats and all sorts of cool gifts.

Their rating is a D- and hasn't changed since 2007, but going there now looks like they are part of sports book.ag.

Always looking for a small mess around NFL book that won't stiff me aside from 5dimes.

[sam4022]

As of Thursday 8/29/14 starting on 4/2/14 the 'Switch from route to sprint' angle as the only selection criteria for 359 races resulted in the following:

Out - $718
Return - $894.50
Profit / (Loss) - $176.50
ROI - 25% (24.58%)

Leading tracks:
EVD - 8 of 25 +23%
WO - 11 of 30 +68%
GP - 8 of 20 +44%
LS - 6 of 14 +45%
IND - 7 of 20 +108%

I'll continue on to 500+ but will miss next two (2) days as I won't have computer access.

Is this a system or what?

Opinions?

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by sam4022

As of Thursday 8/29/14 starting on 4/2/14 the 'Switch from route to sprint' angle as the only selection criteria for 359 races resulted in the following:

Out - $718
Return - $894.50
Profit / (Loss) - $176.50
ROI - 25% (24.58%)

Leading tracks:
EVD - 8 of 25 +23%
WO - 11 of 30 +68%
GP - 8 of 20 +44%
LS - 6 of 14 +45%
IND - 7 of 20 +108%

I'll continue on to 500+ but will miss next two (2) days as I won't have computer access.

Is this a system or what?

Opinions?

I understand you are doing this for fun and relaxation as you say, but none of the factors mentioned in this thread has the potential of showing positive results. Continuing betting using this kind of an approach represents a sure way to lose your bankroll.

As far as your route2sprint and 2yo factors you are mentioning here, I would advice you double check your data. The fact that you have a win ROI of 37% (!) while place and show are both negative makes your data collection and interpretation suspect to a systematic error... Check for outliers and how you calculate ROI and I believe you will reach a different conclusion.

[burnsy]

Good angles. I use this stuff too. Another one is second time lasix. I would be interested that outcome too.

[JackS]

For the data makers and computer users who are showing a profit "bless you", you have truly found the Holy Grail.
As a non Computer user it is my belief that each race sets up its own circumstances that may or may not comply with ANY factor you may choose to use. Sophisticated data is interesting and some factors should be incorporated into a handicappers thinking but the best handicappers would still remain suspect of such data and choose to use or reject any known factor that seems to show a profit in any given race.

[iwearpurple]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I understand you are doing this for fun and relaxation as you say, but none of the factors mentioned in this thread has the potential of showing positive results. Continuing betting using this kind of an approach represents a sure way to lose your bankroll.

As far as your route2sprint and 2yo factors you are mentioning here, I would advice you double check your data. The fact that you have a win ROI of 37% (!) while place and show are both negative makes your data collection and interpretation suspect to a systematic error... Check for outliers and how you calculate ROI and I believe you will reach a different conclusion.

Or was there a huge long shot ($150.00) included in the winners. If there is, that would drastically reduce the ROI.

[sam4022]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I understand you are doing this for fun and relaxation as you say, but none of the factors mentioned in this thread has the potential of showing positive results. Continuing betting using this kind of an approach represents a sure way to lose your bankroll.

As far as your route2sprint and 2yo factors you are mentioning here, I would advice you double check your data. The fact that you have a win ROI of 37% (!) while place and show are both negative makes your data collection and interpretation suspect to a systematic error... Check for outliers and how you calculate ROI and I believe you will reach a different conclusion.

Dear DL,

Are you indicating that someone has done a study of the factors mentioned in this thread showing that none has a snowball's chance in hell of showing positive results? Who or what organization performed the study?

You're probably right to go along with all those horse player negative vibes (Oddball in Kelly's Heroes) but suppose it goes for a 2 or 3 year run prior to busting?

A last question ....Would you have given Trotter your bankroll to bet with his?

Regards