RDSS 2 For Wed 4/27

[mikesal57]

Can we get a card up for today..its a slow day..
either Tampa, Keeneland or Hawthorne

[cdax]

ditto

[Ted Craven]

I'm not sure how many examples I want to post until I clarify the issues raised in my post here: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpost.php?p=70594&postcount=37

For example, despite the automated choices made below, and the poor Hi SR of the #4, perhaps it should be the #1 E horse because it has > 25% of the ES points AND is more than 5% above the 2nd E. In other words should it be:

4-3 / 7-2 (Early / Late) or
4-5 / 7-2 or
3-5 / 7/2 (as shown)

21881

21887


I'm sure folks appreciate that this is a pre-release work (not even quite Beta stage); and that some things are open to interpretation; and that I am attempting to automate not only numbers creation but a selection process (if not quite a wagering process).

None-the-less, it is great that I can get multiple eyes and minds critiquing this stuff and pointing out bugs and suggesting enhancements before the beginning. OK, maybe I'll put up a few more... :)

Ted

[Ted Craven]

...
21882

21888

21883

21889

Ted

[cdax]

Thanks for posting Ted.

I think your new pace is working great as is. I always glance at the percentages first anyway. Maybe to limit any extensive coding, just highlight the percentage when it's over 25% (or 5pts) whether it's e1 or not.

I'm going thru some of the races now and will compare. FYI there are scratches in almost all the Tamba races (Tam1 #7 scr).

May be too short a field, but my selection for Tam1:
5
3
2
1

Tampa Bay DownsFirst Race: 12:25 PM EDT
Race Scratches & Changes
1 7 - Ily - Scratched
2 1 - Wild 'n' Waki Guy - Scratched
3 3 - Yankysjazz - Scratched
4 8 - Essay Money - Scratched
5 7 - Awesome Dream - Scratched
11 - Indy Run - Scratched
6 10 - Seastrike - Scratched
7 3 - Unspeakable - Scratched
11 - Let's Get Ready - Scratched
8 None
9 None
10 6 - Keen On Diamonds - Scratched
12 - Twelve Sixty Seven - Scratched

Chris

[mikesal57]

Ted ..post away....

Lets all look at em and see what happens...

it can only enhance things if we see the whole picture

maybe others can join in and comment..

thxs

[mikesal57]

I believe your right in Tam 1st..

the 4 is eliminated due to not meeting the POR of 57....

in Dave's concept , you bet horses over 7/2 to win and box exacta's with the contenders but not sure of what to do when theres more than one lower than 7/2

lets watch race 1...

the 3 is in as a early and has top late fig...and is presently 9/2

[Ted Craven]

...
2-9 / 1-7 ?

21884

21885

21886

[mikesal57]

TAMPA 2nd...

#1 scratched...


E1-3
E2-6( 1pt difference with the 7 but the 6 has better jock)

L1-4
L2-2

the 2 is at 9-1..the rest under 7/2...

your choice...looks like a pass race

[mikesal57]

TED it would be nice if you can get the live tote in there with AI to make wagers :cool:

[Bill Lyster]

I'm not sure how many examples I want to post until I clarify the issues raised in my post here: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpost.php?p=70594&postcount=37

For example, despite the automated choices made below, and the poor Hi SR of the #4, perhaps it should be the #1 E horse because it has > 25% of the ES points AND is more than 5% above the 2nd E. In other words should it be:

4-3 / 7-2 (Early / Late) or
4-5 / 7-2 or
3-5 / 7/2 (as shown)

21881

I'm sure folks appreciate that this is a pre-release work (not even quite Beta stage); and that some things are open to interpretation; and that I am attempting to automate not only numbers creation but a selection process (if not quite a wagering process).

None-the-less, it is great that I can get multiple eyes and minds critiquing this stuff and pointing out bugs and suggesting enhancements before the beginning. OK, maybe I'll put up a few more... :)

Ted

Ted in this Tam 1 example I think that the 4 gets dropped because the POR of 57 is greater than the high 54 of the 4 horse. My vote would be to leave, AS SHOWN.

Bill

[mikesal57]

So far ..things going good ...2 winners over 7/2

ex tri super in 5th

race 6 interesting...throwing out dominant early #2...so far hes 5-1
the 2's %E is 5pt rule but the other earlies have higher speed numbers

which wins out here?

[cdax]

Ted,

In Tam6 i would use the 2 @ 29% and meets POR. #3 and #9 are tie @ 18% and SR and may need tiebreaker rule, but I would use the 6 with the high sr.

Using Bris speed figs i end up on 2,3,1,8. Looking at your screenshot i end up with 2,6,7,1.

Tam7 and Tam9 both look good to me and come up the same with Bris srs.

Chris

[cdax]

Mike,

I usually box 4 horses in exacta which can include one low odds horse. If there are 2 horses at less then 7/2 i generally skip the exacta or key the to high odds over all 4 horses.

Tam6, my contenders are 2,3,1,8. If odds remain as they are now, I will bet $2 win on 2,3,8 and prob box the 4 horses hoping the 1 misses or only gets 2nd.

Chris

[Ted Craven]

TED it would be nice if you can get the live tote in there with AI to make wagers :cool:

Live Tote will be everywhere - that's what I'm working on right now. The RDSS2 tote sucks at the moment (ask anyone). AI...;)

Ted

[cdax]

beaten by the chalk

[mikesal57]

TAMPA 7th...

This is what I dont believe in....

the 6 beats out the 9 because of the jockey %...but the 9 is 2 times better to get the lead over the 6 (30% vs 13%)..interesting again

[cdax]

FWIW,

I guess it depends on how you look at it (or interpret the rules), I may be bending them a little.

the 9 and 10 are virtually even to me in %. I imagining two speed horses battling for the lead. So between the 30% #9 and the 27% #10 I chose the 10. Now I should prob take the 9 over the 6 but with my srs the 6 is 5 points higher.

Still adapting to new pace.

Chris

[tfm]

I mean, isn't it obvious from the race sequence of the 10 that she was going to be able to control the race on the front end today? She routes on the front end, then she sprints (21.87 1st fraction). Only a rushed ride by the jock got her beat today.

[cdax]

I done for today. Quit while I'm behind.

[rmath]

Since the #7 scratched and the #4 was a double red why not use him in the tri and exacta.
Still trying to make sense of these #s

[rmath]

any chance on putting up Woodbine for tonight?
I am a little lost on the %s and the high lo #s.
any help with an explanation would be appreciated.
Glad you had a safe trip.

[Ted Craven]

Since the #7 scratched and the #4 was a double red why not use him in the tri and exacta.
Still trying to make sense of these #s

Richard,

Given the readouts after scratches and the bet-time odds, how would you have structured those bets?

21892

Ted

[rmath]

Ted;
I would have keyed
the
3@5/1, and the 5 at 3/1 over the 2,3,4,5 with the all in third at acost of 12.00
I would also keyed the 3 top and bottom with the 2.4 &5 in the exacta. cost 6.00
I also would have bet 2.00 to win on the 3 & 5. cost 4.00.
I try to keep my total bets between 20.00 &25.00 per race.
Rmath

[Ted Craven]

any chance on putting up Woodbine for tonight?
I am a little lost on the %s and the high lo #s.
any help with an explanation would be appreciated.
Glad you had a safe trip.

Richard,

Unfortunately, I won't have the time to do that for Woodbine tonight :( - maybe someone can put up a few.

Once you watch the original video by Dave Schwartz, the procedure and concept is pretty clear (though the execution gets tedious - hence EL 2.0 ...). I have a bit of a fine line to travel regarding teaching the concepts behind NewPace because that's what Dave thought he was selling a product to do. When RDSS2 is released (and likely somewhere during the Beta cycle), after an initial 30 day gratis period for evaluation, EL 2.0 (i.e. the representation of NewPace within RDSS) will require that you have purchased the video product from Dave. No one is compelled to do so, or to use it. And I am not saying at all that it is a better alternative to proper use of what we already have in RDSS - just different and perhaps a confirmation of some things we already see, or some long-price horses to consider as contenders (e.g. for exotics)

If I ever published the formula for V/DC (which I would not), I would not appreciate someone else creating a product including it and me not receiving any compensation for it (setting aside the fact that it was Doc's creation, not mine - but you get the drift). That's the reciprocal expectation Dave has, and it seems fair to me.

Therefore, while I'm happy to comment on and observe usage and best practices, in order to be able to offer it at all to the RDSS user base, and by agreement with Dave S, I will probably not elaborate too much on how it all gets created.

The general idea is - we're not trying to steal business from Dave Schwartz. Hopefully the discussion of usage and summaries of hit rate and profitabililty along the way will help folks decide whether they want to use EL 2.0 themselves and whether it's worthwhile buying the original from Dave.

Give me until the end of this week and I might be able to announce a promotional discount on NewPace (and Improve/Decline) for Pace and Cap members. Dave suggested something to me a few weeks ago and we need to review it. It might be only a $10 or $15 discount so it won't break the bank if anyone prefers to just wait until they can get RDSS2 and test it for 30 days first.

Hope that's clear. I'll make a further announcement about how NewPace is going to fit into RDSS2 and whatever licensing issues there may be - as soon as I know them.

NewPace Blurb: http://thehorsehandicappingauthority.com/products-page/handicapping-systems-methods/newpace-early-vs-late-video-seminar-download/

Good luck tonight (it's rather showery at Woodbine).

Ted


***Update: the private NewPace Forum is established for any and all detailed discussion about this topic (http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7386)


.

[rmath]

Ted since i did not have the revised read out I actually played the race as I posted it. I did run this race thru RDSS1 and The 6 only ranked 4th.

[Ted Craven]

Ted;
I would have keyed
the
3@5/1, and the 5 at 3/1 over the 2,3,4,5 with the all in third at acost of 12.00
I would also keyed the 3 top and bottom with the 2.4 &5 in the exacta. cost 6.00
I also would have bet 2.00 to win on the 3 & 5. cost 4.00.
I try to keep my total bets between 20.00 &25.00 per race.
Rmath

Ok Thanks. That's $107.30 return for $22 bet or 3.87-1

Ted

[seattlesnake]

Good Luck tonite.....

21893

21894

21895

21896

21897

[BJennet]

I believe your right in Tam 1st..

the 4 is eliminated due to not meeting the POR of 57....

in Dave's concept , you bet horses over 7/2 to win and box exacta's with the contenders but not sure of what to do when theres more than one lower than 7/2

lets watch race 1...

the 3 is in as a early and has top late fig...and is presently 9/2

Hi Mike,

From the results we have, 7/2 seems to be too low as a cutoff for a profitable win bet. I believe Dave has claimed a win rate slightly over 80% for New Pace, but the win % for the contenders as a group as been pretty steady at about 70% over 800 or so races. Take a look at Bill Lyster's numbers for 500, which are taken from a dozen tracks, and are consistent with the hit rates of races put up by Snake and Richie. But it also looks like the contenders differ in hit rate - just as an approximation, the E1 looks to be about .22 (7/2), the E2 - .12 (7-1), the L1 and L2, both around .17 or .18 (roughly 9/2). If you want to bet any single horse to win, obviously you need to go an odds tick or two higher. And if you want to bet more than one horse, you need to go another tick higher for each.

However, from what Dave has said, this was his intention. This is a value-based (longshot) program. Actually the odds are close to, if a little worse, than Richie's profitable automated paceline from a couple of years back. At one point he said, 'Hey, do I need to hit longshots just to make a profit?' I think with his or this automated program, the answer is yes.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[mikesal57]

BJ..I'm just stating what Dave mentioned in the video...with further analysis from the guys here that are tracking results , I'm sure that a conclusion can be made to a constructive way of wagering..

With the Woodbine races that were put up...it looks to me as a good day...
forget the maiden race ...in the next race , if we can do without a long layoff horse that $30 winner would have came in as the second early horse
this to go along with the other 2 winners $13 and $24

nice

[BJennet]

BJ..I'm just stating what Dave mentioned in the video...with further analysis from the guys here that are tracking results , I'm sure that a conclusion can be made to a constructive way of wagering..

With the Woodbine races that were put up...it looks to me as a good day...
forget the maiden race ...in the next race , if we can do without a long layoff horse that $30 winner would have came in as the second early horse
this to go along with the other 2 winners $13 and $24

nice

Hi Mike,

Hope I didn't sound negative in that post. Last night was great for me at EVD, and I think everyone is going to benefit from this program. I especially like it because it suits the way I play. But from many of Dave's comments on this program, it seems to me that he hasn't really tested it thoroughly, although he knows it 'works' in some sense. In a way, we're all his beta testers :-). So I would take his claims about odds with a grain of salt, and err on the side of conservatism until, as you say, we have 1500 or so races.

Cheers,

B. Jennet

[mikesal57]

non taken buddy....
were all in here to try to get things and peoples observations going to make this the ultimate tool

:)

[cdax]

because I usually play three high odds horses out of the four or five contenders to win. I just feel if the 7/2 comes in it covers my $6 bet. If I need to bet all four to win, the lowest odds i use is 9/2.

Chris

[Ted Craven]

This thread is replicated in full in the new NewPace Forum (see: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7386 for info). I have made edits to and removed a few posts prior to this point in the thread where rules and formulas were discussed. These detailed rule and formula discussions can continue in technicolor in the NewPace Forum.

I am very sorry I had to do this, and apologize. If I had known I was going to be 'requested' to exclude detailed public discussions about the workings of NewPace, I would have been more attentive much earlier on. I hope folks will find this acceptable...

Ted