Pbs Numbers ?

[stormbringer]

Richie, Bill,Ted,Froggy whay did the Sartin Methodology quit using p.b.s. numbers for getting contenders down to a "workable" number:confused: I know one of you guys know, when I got in I never heard mention of them till reading in the libary any answer . also What is a "BINDER INPROVER" CAN YOU SHOW AN EXAMPLE.

THANKS
STORM

[admin]

Hello Stormbringer

First thank you very much for your support of Pace and Cap

I appreciate your nice words. I apologize for not getting this demo
done sooner

Anyway The Binder Improver is a horse that is either ranked 1 or 2 on
The VDC readout But is not in the top 3 Bottom line Betting line

Here is a example This is from yesterday at Woodbine
this is the 5th race , The first contest race
The Binder Improver is the 8 horse

See how its #2 on the VDC readout ?
but its also ranked 5th on BLBL

This example horse is a good one because
I find that when all the contenders are sprinters
or Routers the Binder Improver works best

You will get binder improvers when you mix sprinters and routers
but then you have to deal with can the horse win sprinting
or routing?

This race, The BI did not work I bet the 6 to win and used the
8 binder improver to place

The 6 won but the 8 never did much and finished 2nd to last

[RichieP]

why did the Sartin Methodology quit using p.b.s. numbers for getting contenders down to a "workable" number
STORM


P.B.S. (Pace Balanced Speed or Pizzolla Bradshaw Sartin) initially conceived by
Bradshaw/Pizzolla fell out of favor when MP left Pirco.

[stormbringer]

Right ! Did any of you guys use them?

[peter e]

I used PBS numbers for years.
It got the contenders about 80-85% in the top 4 horses in short fields (7 or less entries) or the top 5 in larger fields.

[lsosa54]

Right ! Did any of you guys use them?

I agree with Rich as probably why they fell out of favor. It also may have been the popularity of Phase 1 numbers as well for contender selection. I can't tell you that I did a long test run on these but I did try to use them with mixed results.

I think where they may still work well is when you've got a race with horses form the same track or tracks that differ too much in speed within the same distance structure and surface. I found that when I had routers mixed in with sprinters going either way or turf horses mixed in with dirt horses, it made it pretty difficult.

I also found situations where the BRIS speed number for a particular pace line pointed the hose out as a contender in the field but the PBS numbers, even with the proper adjustments, did not. I guess the raw times were just too slow and the PBS adjustments weren't sufficient to bring the horse into contention. Raw times on the different polytracks of SoCal, esp. Del Mar, can create other problems, esp. when speed ratings and variants are not available.

Mike P. went on to refine these a bit in Handicapping Magic where he also introduced the Projected Power Fraction, the Fulcrum concept, Form Cycle Windows, etc. I don't think it was anything unbelievably new but his Form Cycle Windows concept was the most useful to me, esp. in turf races. The LASST concept and similar had been talked about in various forms by Doc and others but I thought Michael expressed it in clearer form.

Bottom line, I think there are better contender selectors out there at this point in time. I know Doc later said that APV and Class were not applicable at the big tracks (ie. entire SoCal circuit except maybe FPX) but were most effective at smaller tracks, but I find that especially APV and to a slightly lesser extent Class is still very applicable. I know Bill V uses it religiously and Philly isn't the smallest track in the world.

I've been using the calculations from AOdds off the BRIS DRF file because it avoids the hand entry. I don't know exactly how Jim B. calculates APV and Class (more so what time frame he uses and whether he isolates depending on the surface) but it's been very strong. If you're just focusing on the winner, here's a few from yesterday @ SA:

Papanonie paid $26.80 2nd APV
Arnone paid $19.60 4th APV (not counting the #1 APV as a suspicious class dropper)
Stoneside paid $31.80 1st APV
Petite Cherie paid $30.00 1st APV
Foxysox paid $11.40 3rd APV

That's 5 consecutive races at SA with some pretty good rent paying mutuels, wouldn't you say?

What I try and do since I'm just focusing on the winner is try and isolate the top grouping in APV and Class. For example, in R9, you only needed to put 3 horses into EXDC - the 3,1, and 5. You had the winner and in this case the exacta but you won't get a ton of exactas this way.

You may not get 5 races in a row like this most days buy day in and day out, you will get these types of mutuels. I'm not sure our parimutuel competition is using APV and Class on their own terms these days.

[tom]

Just curious, has anyone tried making PBS numbers using the balance equalized pace lines? The second call and final time would make it easy to do.
I think I'll try it out and see how it does.

btw, good to see the Match Up screens again. That was a good program.

[lsosa54]

Just curious, has anyone tried making PBS numbers using the balance equalized pace lines? The second call and final time would make it easy to do.
I think I'll try it out and see how it does.

btw, good to see the Match Up screens again. That was a good program.

Let us know, Tom. BTW, the screens are AOdds, but I'm thinking you knew that.

[tom]

Yeah, A Odds....senior moment!:D