LOL! I read that earlier too and was going to let it pass as some killer spelling error but I am curious also. What could it be?

Pook

Thank you for your post and I hope whatever you took away from my writings were beneficial to you.

With regard to your findings on horses OFF more than 90 days, I think you made an incorrect calculation, which has been done before, by the way.
Looking at the numbers you provided in your post, the two main ingredients for the correct calculation appear to be missing.

This really is an easy calculation and the number of total horses has nothing to do with it.

You simply take the total number of races in your sample and divide that into the number of winners from those sample races where the winner did not race in the last 90 days.

i.e.- 5 winners that did not run in the last 90 days / 100 races = 5%

An "allburger" is a query without filters.
Say you look at horse who finished second last time, and you specify that it was withing 90 days. Without that filet, it would be an "allburger" - horse who finished second last out no matter when it occurred, what track, what surface, etc.

No race in 90 days, period, is an allburger, but no race in 90 days, Pletcher, at GP with 3yos might a totally different animal.

I'm traveling today and will be away until Monday. But I'll try to take a quick look at this before leaving..
Mitch44

Haha! Some folks here also use HTR, and I recognize a few terms from Zim's post. Thanks Tom for the elaboration.

Ted

Just to be clear - the RDSS Paceline Selection tools are just that, for selecting consistent and relevant lines to represent a horse - and there are several automated strategies not just BLT/C, also your own manual decisions.

It does NOT automatically qualify/disqualify Contenders (except for those not running in less than 270 days, which it marks as Secondary). Contender qualification is yours to do manually, using whatever guidelines work best for you - and FTL's guidelines are among the best - though not the only ones. Eventually, the other half of the automation will get added (i.e. applying whatever Contender guidelines you adhere to). Right now, it takes (me) but a few seconds to demote usually all but 3 or 4 horses to either Secondary or non-Contender status, using recency, having run good races recently against same or stronger calibre competition, or good efforts after a layoff - and (for me) critically, how the horse is held close to post-time in the odds and various pool analysis factors.

Per some of Bill V and Bill L's writings and models - you can get 3 or 4 contenders pretty quickly, and rigorously, using these approaches. Then see what prices you are offered, compared to your recorded strike rate and average mutuel for the pools you bet in.

BLT/C or any line selection strategy is NOT meant to be the final word in who deserves your Win bet, or other vertical position contender bet (Place, Exacta, Tri, etc).

Ted

Ted makes good points.

Whether it is RDSS, FTL Guidelines or whatever, Paceline Selection tools are just that, a means of selecting consistent and relevant lines to represent a horse. In the case of FTL Guidelines, it also selects contenders or, if you prefer, eliminates non-contenders.

Also, I agree with Ted that be it FTL’s Guidelines, BLT/C or any line selection strategy, they are NOT meant to be the final word in who deserves your win bet. On a personal basis, I can tell you most of my work is done after the guidelines are applied. The guidelines are a starting point NOT a final analysis.

Ted's point is very valid and I've previously stated that the user must check to see if they agree with the automatic line selection. It's up to the user to confirm the line.
Mitch44

Jeebs On your race today: While a 4 & up race should be the bread & butter of type races to play even those are not created equal and contain tough decisions.

Once you look at a race you get a feel for a race. The problem with this race was too many contenders that could win. Some of these questions are easy to answer and others not till the race is over. I thought the 8 was the best horse but had problems separating the other 4 (1-2-5-6) I downgraded the 5 and decided it just had to beat me & same for the #1. The 2 & 6 gave me a problem and I settled on the 2.

As I said this was not a prime betting opportunity. Money management is an important aspect of this game, also knowing when to make larger bets or more on a race. Its stupid to bet the same amount on every race as their not all created equal.

This race was a pass or a small fun bet. I was going to key the 3 in the show slot for a .50 Tri but it scratched.
Good skill,
Mitch44

Very smart and it doesn't get said enough for my liking.


Knock'em dead,
Mike