new pace

[gl45]

MNR last year meet. A little study just for fun.

[Ted Craven]

Pino,

The last 3 lines seem promising (overall net 29% ROI). As for the rest of the report, any chance of presenting it in a spreadsheet format? The columns and headings are quite misaligned and difficult to read.

Ted

[gl45]

mnr 2010 meet

[Ted Craven]

Pino,

I did a bit of a mash-up of the 2 documents you posted, and rearranged a few rows. Is this information in this picture correct, and the explanations what you meant? If so, I can re-post the excel sheet this came from.

Ted

22789

Here's the modified spreadsheet: 22791

Thanks Pino!

[gl45]

that's fine
txs

[Dave Schwartz]

If I am understanding this right, you use NewPace to get the contenders then use the selected pacelines to split them?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[gl45]

Dave,
if the favorite is in the New Pace contenders I would make a 4 horses exacta box, otherwise is a pass. No pace line selection no handicapping, just bet what the New Pace give out.
Salutations,
Giuseppe

[cdax]

if the favorite is in the New Pace contenders I would make a 4 horses exacta box, otherwise is a pass. Giuseppe

So, you're only betting when the favorite is included. What did the exactas pay where the favorite wasn't included? I understand that they hit less often, but at much better prices.

I use NewPace and I usually bet 3-4 horse exacta boxes when I do, but I do a little extra 'capping to eliminate some of those 436 races lost and ROI should go up.

I understand it's just a study, but seems like I would be stepping over dollars to pick up pennies.

Just my two pennies.:)

Chris

[gl45]

Chris,
the study won 34.88% of the races without handicapping. The idea was to find how many times the favorite was one of the contenders and how many times, won or placed.
I agree that with some handicapping ROI would likely improve. Here is a race where some handicapping would make you a winner.
#7 is the dominant horse and yet isn't one of the contenders. New Pace select the place horse and everybody when gaga after the #6 cause Deshawn Parker on the reins.

[Ted Craven]

Here's a look at a new layout for the NewPace screen in RDSS, with a few updated rules. Pino is right on - the dominant early horse #7 deserves to be the E1 (with 70% of the top 2 early speed points). It sets the PoR itself (58, so no worries about it meeting the PoR) and NOT the Swing horse #10 with its 63 low (the Swing horse does not set the PoR, will not challenge for the lead - and this particular Swing horse certainly not!). Now we need one more Early horse, and we take the highest Hi SR of the remaining Early/Swing horse group - which is the #10 with its 84 high SR.

Voilà. 7 - 10. Win, Place, Exacta.

22833

The above screen (the default sort order) is sorted by Early/Swing group then Hi SR. If you sort by Late group then Low SR, it looks like this:

22834

[gl45]

Ted,
that was an easy race, there are many like it.
Next step is to combine New Pace with BOW, and little bit of Taulbot.
txs

[gl45]

btw, I have a question:

What are the main features that make a professional, OR semi professional horse racing handicapper, succesfull?

[shoeless]

Ted,

Like the layout of that new screen

[cdax]

The idea was to find how many times the favorite was one of the contenders and how many times, won or placed.

Got it. My train of thougth was off the tracks a bit.



Ted, I like the new layout also.

[SilentRun]

22833[/ATTACH]

The above screen (the default sort order) is sorted by Early/Swing group then Hi SR. If you sort by Late group then Low SR, it looks like this:

22834

Ted,

Very nice screens....I personally prefer viewing the latter....sorting by late group then Low SR.
Because in this screen your eye immediately sees the two Highest of the low SR.
whereas the default sort screen shows the early horses and their Low SR as 10 (63) 9 (55) and 7 (58).
The highest lows are separated and in keeping with the concept of new pace I would like to see the the two EE and LL horses jump out at me without having to scan the SR.

Just my opinion.

Ernie

[Ted Craven]

Should the default sort always be the LAST sort you chose?

Ted

[SilentRun]

Should the default sort always be the LAST sort you chose?

Ted

No..If I had the option of using either sort.. In most cases I probably would not even use the default sort.

Ernie

[Ted Craven]

Ernie,

In this example, it's just circumstantial that when sorted by Late/Low SR, the E1 and E2 are grouped together. If the Low SR for the #9 were 59, it would not change who the E1 and E2 are, but then the #7 and #10 would be separated by the #9 as the Early/Swing horses would be sorted by Low SR in the order #10 #9 #7 (Low SR= 63 59 58).

Seems like saving the last sort chosen does the trick - you can have it default to anything you like.

Ted

[SilentRun]

Ernie,

In this example, it's just circumstantial that when sorted by Late/Low SR, the E1 and E2 are grouped together. If the Low SR for the #9 were 59, it would not change who the E1 and E2 are, but then the #7 and #10 would be separated by the #9 as the Early/Swing horses would be sorted by Low SR in the order #10 #9 #7 (Low SR= 63 59 58).

Seems like saving the last sort chosen does the trick - you can have it default to anything you like.

Ted

Ok... the options are there and all the data is nicely presented.

Ernie

[gl45]

I started 2011 meet at MNR, and here are the results for the first month.

[Ted Craven]

Thanks Pino for the MNR stats and the progress report. So again, the only wager rules you've applied are: 4 horse exacta box, must include the favourite; and the only races considered are the Claiming condition categories you mentioned, only distances you mentioned, only Dirt. Is that right? No other reference to how many other low odds horses other than the favourite might be (e.g. 9/5 plus 5/2 in the same race, both contenders). Or are some races like this a pass also?

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Would you be able to post 2 or 3 spreadsheets (or images) of races from MNR this year showing your NewPace calculations? I just want to compare what RDSS creates using TrackMaster's SR (or the internal Adjusted SR). I presume you are using BRIS or DRF SR?

Thanks in advance!

Ted

[shoeless]

Pino,

Nice job.I was going to ask the same question as Ted about what kind of bet your spreadsheet was based on.

[gl45]

Ted, Jeff,
Five races from MNR 7/15 posted by Richie for everybody to look and compare the differences between BRIS and Trackmaster numbers.
Any questions to why I choose certain horses please ask.

[Ted Craven]

Race 6, why is L2 #6 and not #7? #7 has a higher Low SR than #6 (69 vs 63). Favourite?

Race 10, could you explain the tied-break process you used to choose the #6 and #8 as L1 and L2, and not the other Late horses (all tied or separated by 1 point of Low SR).

Thanks Pino!

Ted

[gl45]

#6 has higher High, better rider and is a fav.

[gl45]

Ted,
Horses seems to run toward higher rating, unless are in the race for a workout
#6 and #8 have higher High than the other late horses. I always choose the higher to select the contenders.

[Ted Craven]

I always choose the higher to select the contenders.

For Late contenders, you select from the Hi SR sort, rather than the (recommended) Low SR sort? Was this the approach you took in your 2010 MNR study?

Thanks,

Ted

[Dave Schwartz]

Horses seems to run toward higher rating, unless are in the race for a workout
#6 and #8 have higher High than the other late horses. I always choose the higher to select the contenders.

Experience SEEMS to show that "high" (RegSpd) is more effective with low-odds consistency, while "low" (RegSpd) works better at getting higher-prices. We've actually been working on an object that uses a 3rd factor to improve performance with RegSpeed. Awaiting better research on that.

[gl45]

Ted,
yes that was my approach. Select High SR sort.
From the 2010 study:
in 226 races when the favorite did win OR placed the average exacta was $16.29 for $12 bet.

[shoeless]

Pino,

Was Ted correct in how you are betting these races a $1 box of 4 horses that includes the favorite.

Jeff

[gl45]

Jeff,
not for the 2010 meet. I started to use new pace after few weeks of the introduction. New pace compliment my Taulbot method.

[shoeless]

Pino,

Ok then since with spreadsheet you started New Pace is your play $1 ex 4 horse box as long as favorite is included.


Really like what you have done with you spreadsheet

[gl45]

manually entering MNR 2011 data from 3/1 to 5/31 so far. No bad for a black box approach.

[pktruckdriver]

So let me see if this is right, you would have had over a 1,000.00 profit playing the NewPace horse's boxing 4 in the exacta box for a 1.00.

races won 112

races lost 148

This would also include the postime and M/L favorite if it was a NP picked horse, (e1 or e2 or l1 or l2)

is this correct? if so then like you said nice black box

patrick

[gl45]

pat,
That's right. Just postime favorite. I'm using Bris speed numbers, also, as I go along I'm noticing how many time the dominant horse is winning, and I can say not many in my kind of races.
Good luck

[gl45]

swing horse in cheap claimers is very strong if is in a tie or 1/2 points difference

[Dave Schwartz]

GL,

Yours is the kind of research that helps ideas progress. I hope to schedule an interview with you in the near future so that we may discuss your discoveries.

I have some new twists myself and am planning a followup workshop very soon to discuss them with other NewPace users.

Dave

[gl45]

Dave,
will be a pleasure.
Thanks for the kind words.

[pktruckdriver]

Yes thank you for your research and quick replies.

If you use a swing horse, do you go 5 in a box or cap some more to decide who to leave out, boy this could go on and on, as I have so many questions.

It may be best for me to just be patient and wait my turn to beta test, and answer my questions myself, and then post them here for others to see as you did.

I have to admit your first post of the spreadsheet was very hard for me to understand , but the last one was perfect to read for me, I am still unable to use a spreadsheet efficiently yet, but making progress.

i was wondering also how win betting may go with this, have we determined yet what wins more E or L and or 1 or 2, of course I would think no, how could we determine this, it to me would be too evenly spread out among them all, except 1 may have advantage at a track with a very dominant speed bias, maybe, but otherwise I would think even give or take 5%, but then, ... there is so many questions, I must wait and try to answer them myself, if possible, and I should be able to by now, can't wait.

thank you again for your time

patrick

[pktruckdriver]

pat,
That's right. Just postime favorite. I'm using Bris speed numbers, also, as I go along I'm noticing how many time the dominant horse is winning, and I can say not many in my kind of races.
Good luck


This statement leads me to believe that you tracked all races, but that the dominant horse that is winning is winning in race's that you would normally not play, which are what if I may ask, sir?

Thanks

patrick

[shoeless]

Pino


GREAT JOB

[gl45]

Pat,
I only play MNR, here are the race class that I play

Race Class
C5000
C5000NW26M
C5000NW16M
C5000NW3Y
C5000NW2Y
C5000NW1Y
C5000NW4L
C5000NW3L
C5000NW2L

also I don't play a race where the field is less than 7, and I only play 5.5f, 6f, mile and mile70 distances.

[gl45]

Yes thank you for your research and quick replies.

If you use a swing horse, do you go 5 in a box or cap some more to decide who to leave out, boy this could go on and on, as I have so many questions.

It may be best for me to just be patient and wait my turn to beta test, and answer my questions myself, and then post them here for others to see as you did.

I have to admit your first post of the spreadsheet was very hard for me to understand , but the last one was perfect to read for me, I am still unable to use a spreadsheet efficiently yet, but making progress.

i was wondering also how win betting may go with this, have we determined yet what wins more E or L and or 1 or 2, of course I would think no, how could we determine this, it to me would be too evenly spread out among them all, except 1 may have advantage at a track with a very dominant speed bias, maybe, but otherwise I would think even give or take 5%, but then, ... there is so many questions, I must wait and try to answer them myself, if possible, and I should be able to by now, can't wait.

thank you again for your time

patrick


Pat,
Playing the same track, same distances and same race classes, you become familiar with trainers, jocks and most important horses.
I play exacta only.
Bias, variants I care less, I leave that to the pro. I play with raw numbers.
New pace is a very interesting concept, you got 4 horses at the top of the stretch, who's more likely to win. Once you have your 4 horses you can used any form of handicapping to select your winners, also don't worry about if E1 wins more than E2 or L2 etc....it is how you discover where the value is.
Good luck

[gl45]

just finished the month of June study for 2011

[rmath]

gl45,
You won 150 of 324 races played. 324x12=3888.00 invested. correct?
You say you won 3878.10from the 150 races you won. This looks like a break even at best proposition,unless the 3878.10 is after you deductedthe 12.00x150=1800.00 bet on
these 150 races.

[gl45]

rmath,
if that is the case, oh well. I'm not that good in math.
Thanks for point it out.

[rmath]

gl45,I was not trying to rock the boat but I do think you have a very good starting point.
If you could find a way to eliminate some of the lower payoffs you would show a profit.
Maybe passing the races where the favorite is below 8/5. I do not know if you keep track of the odds on the favorites in your playable races, if you do then try seeing what this would do for your average mutual.

[gl45]

rmath,
good catch. My idea was to find out how many times the favorite was in the new pace contenders, and as I went along I was adding the winnings and the losing money without considering the investment. Everything was based on four horses exacta. You can call it a senior moment.
will post a revised results for 2010and 2011

[gl45]

revised 2010 results and 2011 from 3/1/2011to present

If the favorite is one of the new pace 4 contenders, eliminate him and use the remain three contenders in a Ex box.
I don't know how this approach would work at different tracks, higher race classes, longer or shorter distances than what I used for this study.
The contenders are sorted by high ratings.
I the event of ties or 1 or 2 points differences between contenders, your handicapping expertise should help you to find the right one. Like race #10 at MNR last night, in this race for E2 the choices were #5 and #9 and for L2 were #3 and #6. With sound handicapping judgment these 4 horses would have provide a cold ex.

[rmath]

With this revised method you are hitting 25% to 30% of your plays, I know this may seem low to some but the potential return on your investment would be fantastic for such a mechanical approach. The only problem is , if 10 to 20 other people do the same, this would probably drive down your average mutual, especially at a track like MNR.
I used to play MNR almost exclusively many years ago, but I switched to some of the day time tracks, like DEL. Suffolk. Finger Lakes, TDN, RD, and BEU.
Thanks for posting this information , I know a lot of work went into it.
rmath

[gl45]

rmath,
MNR tonite

race #1
contenders 7-8/6-2

#1 seems to be the fav, no bet. Odds can change fast tho.

[gl45]

race 1
#7 was the fav and is eliminate
8-6-2 ex box and a loss.

[Dave Schwartz]

The only problem is , if 10 to 20 other people do the same, this would probably drive down your average mutual, especially at a track like MNR.

People always say that publishing your ideas will kill the prices and yet typically you could round up a roomful of the guys who are reading this and between them there would not be an extra $100 in the pool on the winning tickets.

Historically, when I have improved my approach and gone on to something new, I have shared my previous method with my users. To date, nobody has ever said, "I am doing exactly what you described and I am making money with it."

Perhaps it is because the real winning players have a need to "do it their way."

Dave

[rmath]

Dave, I am not advocating not sharing ideas, I think very highly of anyone who does this. I was only pointing out a "what if " scenario knowing full well that very few would follow up on this case at MNR. The number of plays per day would keep 99% of most players from doing the work required to get one or two plays at one track. Most players I know want more action than that.
rmath

[Dave Schwartz]

I totally agree with what you are saying.

I have tried for years to get people to collaborate more. They rarely will.

Dave

[gl45]

Thanks to Ted for fixing my errors in tabulating the data.
MNR 2010 & 2011 (so far) with corrected results.

[gl45]

any software (free will be nice) that would show real time odds and ex payouts?

[Ted Craven]

Pino, could you clarify? Your ADW shows this info, but you must mean something else.

(If you mean shows tote info along side NewPace info, well, RDSS2 does show that ...)

Ted

[gl45]

Ted,
figuring out how much the EX will pay at 1 minute or less at post with 4 contenders you better be fast or good bye., but thanks anyway.

[Dave Schwartz]

Ted,

RDSS shows the tote board within the software?

If so, can you not get it to show the exacta payouts as well?

Dave

[Ted Craven]

Ted,

RDSS shows the tote board within the software?

If so, can you not get it to show the exacta payouts as well?

Dave

Indeed it does. If I get the Exacta grid parser finished in time, it will be in RDSS 2.0 in September. Otherwise, the Exacta grid will be in 2.1 (December?). My plan has always been to show the real-time $net or ROI based on how many combinations you are betting in a given pool (e.g. multiple win bets, WP bets, Exacta combo bets: wheels, boxes). And upload to ADWs which provide a file upload queue.

22907

It won't exactly be free, though. Just very reasonable priced, for the functionality (I mean, it's included for whatever RDSS costs, not extra).

Just depends on work schedule (and what goes wrong ...)

Ted

[Dave Schwartz]

We are doing the same thing. Currently, the HSH interfaces directly with the At the Races Pro software. Good software, but a bit of a resource hog.

I am building my own as well. Actually contracted it out, then I will integrate it. Supposedly, the code will be in my hands this week.

[Dorianmode]

Ted, I am VERY new to NewPace, as you know, but the screen reminds me of a question I meant to throw out. Does anyone know if there has ever been a study done of the standard deviations from TE, in the RDSS readouts for the Win and/or Place horse in all, or various combinations of, for example, the best three recent, the last three at this distance, etc., etc ? It sort of reminds me of the range of Speed Ratings Range in NewPace. Just a thought.

[Ted Craven]

Ted, I am VERY new to NewPace, as you know, but the screen reminds me of a question I meant to throw out. Does anyone know if there has ever been a study done of the standard deviations from TE, in the RDSS readouts for the Win and/or Place horse in all, or various combinations of, for example, the best three recent, the last three at this distance, etc., etc ? It sort of reminds me of the range of Speed Ratings Range in NewPace. Just a thought.

Dorianmode,

I don't know of such specific statistical studies. However, though it is no substitute for such a study, I would offer that nearly 15 years of similarly adjusted Total Energy numbers, employed as part of the process of paceline selection (i.e. in best of last 3 comparable) then contender winnowing, have resulted in a consistently valid basis for wager decision making. This process can be automated according to user rules. It is the large degree of automation which is attractive in NewPace (though the current version does not automate tie breaking, and does not include the several updated ideas in the NewPace Update video). One again, the brain is thankfully not rendered redundant ...

FYI, we did try using Total Energy as part of RDSS' NewPace process (as an alternate to TrackMaster Speed Ratings or the internal Adjusted Speed Ratings). We found TE was rather worse than those 2 ratings, possibly only because is is not based solely on Final Time and more pacelines will thus be missing TE numbers due to missing internal fractions (i.e. foreign races, fog, other), which problem does not affect ratings based only on Final Time.

Ted

[Dorianmode]

If the statistical, mathematical model for the "90 % of the horse's behavior" is refected in the range of the Speed Ratings, as described in the NewPace video is correct, (I am working on that, and assume it is), then there are many ways NewPace can be used to our advantge to help, and validate choices, and contenders. I am yet to actually try the wagering system as Mr. Schwartz recommends, but just having the model, has already helped me a lot to stay away from a horse that obviously can't run in the necessary, (speed) range, that I was already looking at. Interesting so far.

[Dave Schwartz]

Ted and I had a conversation about this at Saratoga (I believe). We both agree that this concept could be applied to just about anything - speed ratings, energy ratings, whatever.

There is a small hitch in this approach because it assumes that the 10th race back is just as likely to be run today as the last race. This is, of course, not true. Horses are slightly more likely to run back to a more recent race than an older one.

I am currently working on a modeling process that I hope will do a better job of addressing this.