Projected Final Times for use in making Variants

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by 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.

We all know that. It's just that we all also think that we possess these character traits, and those sound betting strategies.

[Elliott Sidewater]

Great post, with a lot of truth packed in to less than one page. Getting really good at understanding one or more of the underused handicapping factors has been a focus of mine for years, and continues to be. Mastery of the basics is not enough, not even close to enough to sufficient in today's competition for betting profits. 15 years ago, it was so much easier than it is now, it's almost as if we're playing a different game.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

We all know that. It's just that we all also think that we possess these character traits, and those sound betting strategies.

Some do think that, but some "know" they don't have them, but think they can overcome those deficiencies anyway, somehow. Sad.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by traynor

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.

I don't know what serious money does as a group. The only reason that I see to make your own speed figs is to separate from the public for betting purposes. Yet, after seeing the research on different figs, they seem to have about the same for strike ratio. A low roller weekend warrior working nights in his man cave will probably do better accepting the commercial figs and investing their time in other formulas.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

We all know that. It's just that we all also think that we possess these character traits, and those sound betting strategies.

Does our vanity keep us playing in spite of profits?

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by raybo

Some do think that, but some "know" they don't have them, but think they can overcome those deficiencies anyway, somehow. Sad.

On the other hand, they just might want to have fun.

[Tom]

I think everyone is making this more complex than it needs to be.
You find what works for you and not concern yourself with what everyone else is doing.

It's only a danged horse race.

[classhandicapper]

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 agree with just about everything you are saying, but I still think some kind of method or figures that measure underlying ability and performance are a necessary part of the overall picture.

What good is it if I identify some horse coming off an underappreciated tough trip if on his best day he can't beat the field he's in?

As long as we are going to have answer these kind of questions, we may as well measure these things as well as we can even if that's not where the value is these days. Plus, if you do measure these things better, there IS some incremental value in it.

[blameblame]

Originally Posted by traynor

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.

I know plenty of bettors that use figures made by someone else and they are betting very serious money.

[Tom]

I don't know anyone betting serious money who relies on purchased speed figures or pace figures.

Never met a sheets user, huh?

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

I don't know what serious money does as a group. The only reason that I see to make your own speed figs is to separate from the public for betting purposes. Yet, after seeing the research on different figs, they seem to have about the same for strike ratio. A low roller weekend warrior working nights in his man cave will probably do better accepting the commercial figs and investing their time in other formulas.

That is where the rubber meets the road. I think anyone generating markedly "better" figures is smart enough to realize they are worth more in use than by selling them. They are also the least likely to publish/produce/display their results.

The perversion of seeking approval/admiration/adulation of others is not shared by all. As Katherine Jung remarked once, "They can have the glory. I want the money."

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Tom

Never met a sheets user, huh?

Not in the last few years. Many years ago, yes, but strictly limited to NYRA tracks. I make no claim to knowing what "serious bettors as a group" do or do not do--only those I know personally (well enough to know when they can be reasonably assumed to be truthful, without either "marketing puffery" or ego displays). In that (strictly limited subset) group, the distinct preference is for creating one's own figures.

It is not so much the micro details of wind velocity, and whatever else, as much as it is the macro conceptual details of pace analysis that matter.

[cj]

Originally Posted by traynor

That is where the rubber meets the road. I think anyone generating markedly "better" figures is smart enough to realize they are worth more in use than by selling them. They are also the least likely to publish/produce/display their results.

I guess it would depend on the definition of "markedly better." Even if we had the perfect figures which measured speed for all horses at all points with absolute precision and were comparable across racetracks, distances, and surfaces, speed figures still would only be part of the puzzle. Speed figures measure past races, not future ones.

[DeltaLover]

There is a lot of interest in conversations about 'better' or perfect figures and my feeling has it that most of the handicappers seem to overestimate the importance of the quality of the figures, still without been able to objectively define it.

Probably since my very first week in my horse betting career (several decades ago) I have spent quite a long time, mental energy and programming effort, trying to design the 'perfect' figure..

I have concluded though that, what is way more important is the use of the figure rather than the sophistication in its creation.

As far as the creation methodology remains the same as time goes by, we need to develop a specific methodology of how to use it, having as a target to maximize profit (and not to increase the predictability of the model). Note the remains the same as time goes by statement, which I think is the most important attribute of any figure creation methodology!

This process will reveal the quality of our figures and if better precision is required it will immediately become apparent since the betting model will not be able to show a profit..

Having said these and in contrary to what others have already stated here, I have discovered that relying in publicly used figures (BRIS in my case) is sufficient for my purposes. Since I have shifted my main focus from creating custom figures, to using them as input to my models, I have seen a clear improvement in my bottom line and I do not plan to go back any time soon.

Two remarks:
(1) Since making this transition, my betting selections tend to be in lower odds but of course with a higher striking frequency...

(2) I still use a few custom figures (of secondary importance), that can be described as very simple derivatives of the pps (plain vanilla z-scores and nothing more sophisticated) mainly to measure attributes that are not provided from bris..

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by traynor

That is where the rubber meets the road. I think anyone generating markedly "better" figures is smart enough to realize they are worth more in use than by selling them. They are also the least likely to publish/produce/display their results.

The perversion of seeking approval/admiration/adulation of others is not shared by all. As Katherine Jung remarked once, "They can have the glory. I want the money."

My speed figs can do at least as well as BRIS, but BRIS rr and cr reign supreme.