one way to handicap successfully - please review

[racer100]

Greetings to all,
I am new on this board and a young kid so I don't claim to have a lot of experience with handicapping. I gave been doing this for about 2 years now as a hobby and making some good pocket change along the way. I wanted to start this thread to show my way of handicapping and get some serious feedback from you all as the experts with Speculator and RDSS. I recently started using Speculator 1.60 and with the generous help of Mr. Craven I am making some good progress in using it. Ok lets get to business here.
The race I am showing is for the Tampa 02-06-07 and in particular race #1, #2 and especially #4. Races #1 and #2 are chaulk..I think anybody with a bit of common sense can pick those without using any program. I show a screenshot of those just for your reference so you see how my way of handicapping works. Race #4 is a good one..a $396 trifecta which is a good return for your efforts.
Along with Spec 160 I use a program called Speed Handicapper 5.0 which gives me the Carroll Speed ratings. The CS ratings are an improved version of Beyer ratings and they show what the public does not see basically. Along with those I use the Moss Pace ratings as a secondary check. I posted race #4 in the way Speed Handicapper gave it to me after picking one representative line for each horse with 100% Track Constants applied and calculated. The result speaks for itself and what my question is here for you -- how could I have handicapped this race with Spec 1.60 or RDSS to arrive at the same result? I asked Mr. Craven and he was generous enough to send me his analysis step by step which I will post here as well a bit later. First I wanted to get some feedback from you to see how I can "marry" the PPs selected with Speed Handicapper and feed them into Spec160..or can Spec160 be used to come up with the same results on its own? Please pay attention to the dates of the PP for each horse which can then be selected in the Spec160 and analysis be ran afterwards. I look forward your input and enjoy the workout!

[racer100]

Tampa Race #1 020607

[racer100]

Tampa Race #2 020607

[admin]

Hi Race100

I did race 4 from Tampa 2/6/07 with Spec160
I think it did a good job getting the winner

Here is my BLBL

My contenders and lines used were

#1. line 1
#2 line 1
#4 line 3
#5 line 1
#6 line 1
#7 line 1
#9 line 1
#10 line 3
#12 line 1

I entered these lines and calculated these contenders,
Then I eliminated the horses that were not the top 5 Total Energy or Primary Line score

[admin]

Here are my contenders before I eliminate the horses that were not
top 5 Total Energy or PRL =Primary Line Score

[shipper]

Racer100: In response to your question on how one might handicap the 4th at Tam on 2/6 with RDSS and/or SPEC160, it would be pretty straightforward. Simply select the best of last three pacelines, i.e. Adjusted Speed Rating, preferring turf route. If no turf, prefer dirt/polytrack route over sprint. The BL/BL ranking for each program is the same: 5-6-4, which gives you the winner on top as well as the cold exacta and trifecta. Hope this helps...Marty

[Ted Craven]

Hey Marty! Great minds think alike (or is it that your mind has influenced me so much I now think like you...).

Racer: First, welcome to Pace and Cap and very best wishes with your research into Spec160 (I know you're aiming for RDSS). You're welcomed to post the Spec160 screenshots we worked up, or your own variations on them. Regarding Speed Handicapper, since this is the Speculator forum, perhaps lets keep discussion of that software to its current comparative role in your own investigations of Spec. Not proscribing reference to it or screenshots, just emphacizing the primary focus in this forum. If you work a race in SH which appears to perform better than Spec and you can't figure out how to make Spec work better, please post your analysis and I'm sure it will stimulate specific response and learnings, such as Bill's and Marty's above.

Again, welcome!

Ted

[Ted Craven]

#6 line 1


Bill, what happens if you use line 2 for the #6? Though still a TP Poly line, a better Primary Line Score (Perceptor screen) and a good running line.

I found that helped produce the cold trifecta Marty referred to (and which Racer found with SH software).

Ted

[racer100]

One small comment: I posted the screens of Speed Handicapper not because I view it as a superior tool to Spec160. I simply did it to show "outside the box" thinking. I don't know about you all, but if I find a tool that helps me handicap better and more directly - I will use it! Speculator is a great tool to use.
Ted Craven has been generous to walk me step by step into his way of handicapping this race. I will quote his original comments. He selected different PPs than I selected with SH but arrived at the same result. Here is his reasoning.

"#4 Murphy (Show horse) – look at the F3 panel in Spec160 and observe the Perceptor 1 Total rank for recent turf lines. Line #3 is a standout."

[racer100]

#5 Unleash (the winner) – same answer re line 1

[racer100]

#6 Bernstein (place horse) – same answer re line 2. I know TP poly projects too fast sometimes, but if you must use it to get a route for comparison, might as well use the best.

[racer100]

#10 Pletchie – line 4 is within the most recent 3 turf lines, and is a better running line than line 5 (which is technically a better Primary line score); also look at the lengths ahead for line 4 (perhaps RDSS shows it better): the horse fought all the way for the win, an indicator of expending more energy in that fight than velocity alone might indicate; thus I feel line 4 is his best line, or at least a line consistently chosen with how other horses’ lines were chosen

[racer100]

The other lines were the same. You will notice that the BL/BL and Primary Line Score (from the BL/BL screen) are in precise finish order, and Total Energy also ranked the 3 finishers in top 3. If you use these lines in Spec160, like RDSS, you get a much more satisfactory result (line score differences with so many horses due to 1 rank differences in several factors, due to rounding differences between the 2 software):

[Zaf]

Hi Race100

My contenders and lines used were

#1. line 1
#2 line 1
#4 line 3
#5 line 1
#6 line 1
#7 line 1
#9 line 1
#10 line 3
#12 line 1



Using the above lines here is what HTR came up with in the MaxVel Module. Variant 2 option (raw times). :

[racer100]

Racer100: In response to your question on how one might handicap the 4th at Tam on 2/6 with RDSS and/or SPEC160, it would be pretty straightforward. Simply select the best of last three pacelines, i.e. Adjusted Speed Rating, preferring turf route. If no turf, prefer dirt/polytrack route over sprint. The BL/BL ranking for each program is the same: 5-6-4, which gives you the winner on top as well as the cold exacta and trifecta. Hope this helps...Marty

Bill and Marty,
Thanks for your great posts in reference to handicapping this race. Can you explain what "TP poly" means? I have no clue about these abbreviations. Thanks

[Ted Craven]

It has been observed that (at least) 2 Polytrack surface tracks TP (Turfway Park) and KEE (Keeneland) seem to record final times which are noticeably faster than other dirt tracks, so when you use pacelines from those tracks in today’s race, those lines can tend to make the horse look too fast, despite the Inter Track Variant supplied by TrackMaster (and embedded in the Raw Speed Rating) which is supposed to equalize track speed differences. (I made a similar comment regarding TP lines in the RDSS forum Tampa Tuesday 3 thread re TAM 02/06 Race #1). In Speculator, you can slow down the final and incremental times of pacelines on the manual edit screen by entering a positive or negative number of tenths of seconds. This will naturally also be in RDSS, for use when required.

Just enter a single positive or negative number in the MAN column and it will be distributed over the final and incremental times. Experiment a bit, but be cautious and check your results. For example, with TP and KEE, see what slowing down the final time 2-3 seconds does.

Ted

[racer100]

Here are my contenders before I eliminate the horses that were not
top 5 Total Energy or PRL =Primary Line Score

Bill would you be kind enough to post your Energy and PRL step by step reasoning for picking your lines? Ted's approach to me with Preceptor is pretty straightforward, but I would like to see your other ways of arriving at the same result just for reference. In other races the Perceptor might not work well but your approach might come to the rescue. Thanks

[racer100]

It has been observed that (at least) 2 Polytrack surface tracks TP (Turfway Park) and KEE (Keeneland) seem to record final times which are noticeably faster than other dirt tracks, so when you use pacelines from those tracks in today’s race, those lines can tend to make the horse look too fast, despite the Inter Track Variant supplied by TrackMaster (and embedded in the Raw Speed Rating) which is supposed to equalize track speed differences. (I made a similar comment regarding TP lines in the RDSS forum Tampa Tuesday 3 thread re TAM 02/06 Race #1). In Speculator, you can slow down the final and incremental times of pacelines on the manual edit screen by entering a positive or negative number of tenths of seconds. This will naturally also be in RDSS, for use when required.

Just enter a single positive or negative number in the MAN column and it will be distributed over the final and incremental times. Experiment a bit, but be cautious and check your results. For example, with TP and KEE, see what slowing down the final time 2-3 seconds does.

Ted

Great explanation Ted. Thank you much. Perhaps TrackMaster can update their calculations sometimes soon for these tracks. I'll send them and email and see what they have to say.

[Ted Craven]

Racer,

Good luck with that:eek:! Meanwhile, we probably have what we need to stay ahead of Equibase/TrackMaster's ITV updates just by handicapping and comparing projections to actual results. Then use either the 'Manual' adjust or the 'Mental' adjust.

(If you find yourself disagreeing with projections from other tracks, in RDSS, there is a way to save such a customized time adjustment, and reuse it thereafter, i.e. FROM a track/surface/distance TO a group of tracks/surface/distance).

Ted

[Lefty]

One thing you guys might do is go ahead and tell us the results. I always have to take the time to look them up. Just a thought...

[Ted Craven]

Here you go. (I keep this link handy: http://www.tsnhorse.com/cgi-bin/instant_pdf.cgi?type=inc)

[racer100]

results for TAM 020607 race #4

[admin]

Bill, what happens if you use line 2 for the #6? Though still a TP Poly line, a better Primary Line Score (Perceptor screen) and a good running line.

I found that helped produce the cold trifecta Marty referred to (and which Racer found with SH software).

Ted

Hi Ted

I used the last line for a few reasons
I saw the 74 speed rating and the 79 for line two
my gut told me that since this was a turf race
Horse 6 showed nothing in its only turf try
I ran the APV Class ratings from EXDC
I will list all the horses in my step by step post
But I will tell you horse 6 was the lowest APV 65.5% and Its class
rating was 2nd lowest at .99 (#2 had .92)
I have been hearing about the TP poly lines being too fast
I figured that horse 6 just won on that surface at that 8.5 distance
and only got a 74 speed rating. I just had picked a 82 for horse 5
So with the poor apv and CR and the win at the same distance
and a question about the horse on the turf I didn't want to give the 6 too much help. I would have lost the trifecta but I really don't think about them anyway


that i had read that the TP lines were too fast

[admin]

Bill would you be kind enough to post your Energy and PRL step by step reasoning for picking your lines? Ted's approach to me with Preceptor is pretty straightforward, but I would like to see your other ways of arriving at the same result just for reference. In other races the Perceptor might not work well but your approach might come to the rescue. Thanks

Hi racer100

I will do a step by step how I would use spec 160 for this race
As I told Ted in my earlier post on this thread I would have missed the
Trifecta because I use what I felt was the best line for horse 6
if I use line 2 I would have had the trifecta on top

The way I use Spec160 is the same as I used Validator 2 and 3
and Valm hand entry
I do my APV Class ratings first , Then I pick the best line of my contenders last 3 or 4 pacelines I use the APV /CR to determine
how much I want to go back for a horse but generally I use the highest
Speed rating of the last 3 -4 races I try to use the same track
and distance On Spec160 I only look at the Adjusted Normalize Equlized
screen . After I pick my pacelines I hide any horse that is not one of the top 5 Total Energy horses and top 5 Primary line score
On Spec160 I have to do this from the Bottoim Line Betting line screen
On Val Doc had a screen(#3) that was used just for this important step.
when I get down to my top 5 horse I pick 2 of the top 3 horses to
bet I focus on BLBL Balance Total Energy Primary Line Score
The computer made ESP for the horse and the 2nd call beaten lenghts



Ok I will get started

First here are the APV- CR

#1) 92.5% 1,26
#2) 104.6% 0.92
#4) 214.0% 2.72
#5) 95.4% 1.53
#6) 65.6% 0.99
#7) 226.3% 2.04
#9) 76.1% 1.31
#10) 124.4% 1.56
#11) NC
#12 214.0% 2.54 -no form but lifetime turf numbers
#13 77.4% 1.03
#14) NC

I didn't do horse# 11 and 14 these are non contenders
Horse 12 I see lots of money won on the turf way back when
but not much lately so I will enter a line for the horse _

_Past Performances ________________________________________________
Here is horse 1 I used the last line

[admin]

Here is horse 2 I used the last line
suff turf lines are blank so its all I have

[admin]

Horse 3 was scratched Here is horse 4
Here is were my APV CR numbers tell me its ok to go down to line 3
# 4 is 2nd bets on APV and #1 on Class rating
Line 3

[admin]

Here is horse 5
The 82 Speed rating catches my eye as up till now everbody has been in the 70's

[admin]

Here is horse 6 I used the last line
line 2 is better but as I don't want to help this guy
because of the poly track speed rating in a win was only 74
at the same distance 8.5 we just saw # 5 get a 82
# 6 is at the bottom on APV and CR
He ran third :confused:

[admin]

Here is horse 7
looks a little slow but just won here and has good numbers

[admin]

Horse 8 was out here is # 9
evryone seems to be about the same speed rating wise
so I will use the last line 70

[admin]

Horse 10
one of the top APV CR tells me its ok to go to line 3

[admin]

Horse 11
NEXT

[admin]

Horse 12 This horse shows good earning on the turf lifetime
The last line seems right for this race

[admin]

horse 13
poor numbers so I'm not going to go to line 3 or 5
No line

[admin]

horse 14
Nevermind:rolleyes:

[admin]

Ok thats everyone
Now I hit calculate and go to Bottom line Betteing line

[admin]

In this screen shot I am showing that I am going to eliminate
horse 12 9 2 and 1 I have highlighted the Total Energy and Primary line score readouts areas so you can see that these horse rate over 5
and are going to be hidden

[racer100]

Bill,
I followed with great interest your explanation and it makes a lot of sense. Many thanks for doing this step by step in detail. I am posting TAM 0206 #8 race to make a strong point here. Earlier I mentioned the efficacy of the Speed Handicapper 5.0..for the other side of the coin I am showing the results of SH on race#8 based on the lines that Perceptor/energy picked in Spec160. As you see from the screenshot the Spec160 somewhat picked the race but SH fell right on its face!! I wish I could have picked a better line for #4 in Spec160 so I could have broght it closer to the top..oh well :(
Apparently SH and Spec160 don't see eye to eye even when fed the same identical lines. Something to think about... Result is 7-5-4 and the tri paid $218. Finally figured out how to change the font in Tamedos so my DOS screen is a lot easier on my eyes!

[admin]

and Last shot the Bottom line Betting line
Horse 5 and 4 look solid on my readouts
I would have bet # 5 and # 7

I hope I helped you
Thanks for following along

GS
Bill