Limits of the Methodology?/ Cheap races
 

I have been a practioner of the Methodology, off and on, for almost twenty years, and found it very effective in most racing situations. However some recent experiences have reminded me of some perennial problems I've had with cheaper races - say 10k and below.

Many years ago, in the only conversation I've ever had with Tom Brohamer, I mentioned my enthusiasm for the higher mutuels of cheap races to him, and his reponse was, 'Yeah, the prices can be great, but look how erratic they are.' He went on to say that although the Methodology could be used on such races, the results were often much less predictable than those with better stock, and said that he himself was cautious about playing them.

I've generally found this to be true, and have also come to believe that in races of this kind, the physical condition of the horse is really more relevant than any information to be found in the pace figures. And also, for the same reason, I've come to believe that local players and insiders have an edge over those playing off-site.

For these reasons, I've played few of these races over the years, and since I play mostly turf, this isn't usually a problem. But due to the lack of grass racing at this time of year, I tried my hand at a number of cheap dirt races, and the results were so bad, I had to laugh at myself for forgetting Brohamer's words.

Don't get me wrong - I know some handicappers who do very well with cheap races - but the methods they use tend to involve trainers and have nothing to do with pace or even speed figures.

I probably won't be playing these races again anytime soon, but I would appreciate hearing from anyone who does successfully use the Methodology to handicap them.

Cheers,

B Jennet

cheaper races and the methodology (continued)
 

Of course you're absolutely correct about the cheaper races, it gets even more chaotic when you're handicapping, dare I say it, lesser tracks? Here the physical condition of the horses is a primary concern; more often than not, all we can do is guess about the state of their health. You're aware of this, I'm aware of it, and it's likely everyone on this site knows of it; the "new fans" race tracks are courting are kept in the dark! In fairness to those "new fans" management should reserve a stall in the starting gate for the horse ambulance, it might ignite their curiosity.

It's to easy for me to fire cheap shots, at cheap horses, running at secondary venues. The economics of the game are such that horses are generally run where they can try to earn enough to pay for their oats. And, you're also correct, some handicappers experience success using other approaches.

My concern is with those races at the better tracks. Rather than think of them as cheaper, I catagorize them as the types of races I don't consider; and of course I do miss some good opportunities that look so clear in retrospect, it happens. But I do retain my equilibrium. I believe these races are the "farm teams" where our future cheap claimers develop their craft. They are for me in order of preference. Maiden claimers, non winners of two lifetime, talking claimers here, not preliminary allowance conditions, non winners of a race for specific period of time (often 1 year) and my favorite, because I find them, for whatever reason, the most vexing - State Bred races. It's my list and it works for me.

So if I work two tracks, and eliminate those 'types' of races, I'm left with six, possibly, seven races to consider. For me that's a full load. The best thing about this approach is that I come to those six or seven races with an uncontaminated attitude; I've not wasted energy and emotional currency trying to guess which of the combatants can negotiate the oval without falling apart. This a variable that I can usually waltz aroung when I stay with my six or seven races.

Though I've not responded to your querry directly to "hear" from practioneers who are applying the methodology to the situation you describe, I have, for the moment, found a way around it.

Regards,
Chris

As Brohamer states

The limitations are in the horses being evaluated and not in the methodology.

Cheap tracks have cheap horses.

Good tracks have some cheap races with cheap horses.

Personally, I don't see a great deal of distinction between them.

I have two friends who own stock which race at MNR and CT. They almost never know how their respective horses will run and neither do their trainers.
And I've never seen either of them bet more than $20 to win on any of these nags. One of these fellows also owns horses which race at CD and AP. He once bid seven figures for a horse at the Fasig auction. So, he's not afraid of money. That $20 limit should tell you something.

Just for hell of it I once again exercised a lesson in futility when I got T-Graph for MNR last Tuesday. The horses there remind me of Khan from Star Trek, "I spit at the patterns."

My experience with any of the Sartin programs at these tracks has been just as unproductive...a complete waste of time, effort and money.

If you think of them as strictly entertainment and are out to have a good time you'll do fine.

To think you can beat them...well, to me that seems delusional.

The only consistent (which is really wishful thinking) way to win cheap races is to have inside information or use a good Ouija board. As always, your mileage may vary.

No past performance is guaranteed, be it a Grade 1 ability horse or a Cheap Claimer ability horse, however, the probability of Grade 1 ability horse running similar races back to back is a lot higher than the Cheap Claimer.

The lesser ability the horse, the more erractic his/her performances can become, making it more difficult to evaluate horses and find the true contenders in todays race.

This is why you see millions of dollars bet on say BC races and only a few hundred dollars bet on the Cheap races

Ditto Charlie D and that's why I personally have to wagercap. But I love cheap horses in cheap races because you can better uncover the double digit payoffs. RDSS works great, great, great in this venue.

Budman

The programs are great tools, but like any program, input garbage and you will get garbage out

This is why the contender selection part is so important


There is some good stuff about contender selection on the Las Vegas and Lets Get serious tapes imo and well woth listening to if you already have not

Here's an exmple

On Earlier Bel, GP runs the 8 was a contender here, however, those Bel,GP runs may not apply in todays Match Up and by including the 8, it messes up the read outs you as you can see

It's easier to say than do, but finding and using the true contenders for todays Match Up is the key to success

I have two friends who own stock which race at MNR and CT. They almost never know how their respective horses will run and neither do their trainers.



They better find themselves new trainers

Paul Nicholls is top National Hunt trainer, he has 3 horses entered in Gold Cup next week at Cheltenham

He can't tell us which will win

K Fallon, a World Class Jockey stated he would prefer to be riding Soldier of Fortune to his mount Dylan Thomas in 2007 Arc because of the ground conditions

He would have ended up on the losing horse and not a winning Arc horse if he had got his preference


The point - the majority of trainers/jockeys don't have clue about handicapping a race and the result of this is, the majority of horses have more losses to thier names than wins

If that's what you believe fine with me

It's not a matter of belief Jeff, it's reality


A trainer with a 25% 30% win strike rate means the other 75% 70% of runners lose,


So you have someone who trains more losers than winners, why?? because they place their horses in the wrong races most of the time

to: BJennet and chris

obviously you are doing something wrong.

you don't have to be playing grade 1 races in order to win.

to: For The lead.

Of course you're absolutely correct; I usually don't know what I'm doing, just didn't think it was that obvious.

Regards,
Chris

Curious if anyone has done a workup of these specific races using Howard's guidelines of best of last 3, 7.5 blf as max. Talking minimum of 200-250 races specifically for nw2l.

Also using the TM download as data source and advanced Methodology software:
1) Synthesis
2) Validator
3) Validator 2
4) Validator 3
5) Validator 4
6) Rdss in Validator mode
Talking specific races where NO horse has won beside his maiden win. Not these multi condition jobs.

Hiding to top 5 total energy and primary line score and tracking % of winners top 5.

Fwiw here were yesterdays and todays.

safe weekend

"cheap races and the methodology"
 

In ,my experience doing multi thousands of races,synt.-val. 1-val-man.-val 4
they are superior,as long as same surface,track, similar dist.,avoid long lay
offs,?? cond. horses,and projections.
" IDEAL RACE= HAS 10-12 ENTRIES SAME DIST. SAME TRACK,WEAK
FAVORITE,MOST ENTRIES HAVE RACED RECENTLY 45 DAYS OR SO
THEN USE DOCS GUIDE LINES, "YOU CANT LOSE IN THE LONG RUN"

JEFF KENT

Here's reality for you this horse pops today at 29-1 at Tampa going wire to wire.The trainer uses the oldest trick in the book taking a distance horse cutting it back in distance then stretching it back out.

race
 

Hi Jeff
can you tell me the race number and horse's name

The trainer stats tell the story Jeff

Sprint to route 85% lose
Claiming 86% lose
Routes 87% lose
No Class Change 88% lose

If i or you throw enough Darts, we will hit bulls eye a few times and end up with a similar %

Anyway Jeff, this is not worth bothering with really, as you stated earlier if it's what i believe then fine, if you believe different, then fine

Lets try and make some money from what we each believe is the reality

Good Skill

Chart Bill

Bill,I was just going to put it up,I came up with the 10,7,5 in that one.Jeff

Tampa 2
 

I do see the 9 is coming right back in 6 days
and is the #1 APV horse
line 6 puts the 9 right up top. If I was betting the race
I would not have had the 9

The follow up says APV works best in lower class (class being determined by low total energy ) races ..The #1 APV and an in form horse takes the 2nd race today

Bill

Bill

Looking at chart, #11 must have been a scratch

Bill,I didnt even realize that horse was coming back 6 days later,it makes that trainer's hidden workout even more impressive.Jeff

After you take out the 11, take out the 1, 2 and 5 from your contender list as they never ran the race you and subsequently the computer thought they may


Who is now left in this race with a shot??

hide
 

Hi Charlie

I'm confused why whould I take out the 1, 2, and 5 ?
I'm sorry I don't understand what you said

GS
Bill

Trainers
 

Hi Jeff Yes I agree
This is just my opinion and many might think i'm nuts

Sometimes horse players seem to think that some horses
have trainers and some don't.
I think people maybe not to this extreme but something like the racing secretary goes to the barn and pulls 8 horses from their stalls and sends them to the starting gate , only some of them have trainers,
like entertainers some have agents and managers and some just are
from central casting. Just extras if you like.
I am a lot more convinced that its the match up and the horse that runs the race. But each horse in the race has a trainer and a jockey and an owner
the trainers are working against the other trainers They have to
have jockeys who are working to be the best to get more wins
and therefore more salary they are working against the other horses jockey
The owners want to win so they expect the trainer to win
The #9 horse put it all together A strong earner In form with a smart move by the trainer
The other connections in the race did what they could in this race
but It was just number nines day.

Bill

Hi Bill



Because the 1, 2, 5 in Tam Race 2 have an effect on The Dynamics of Incremental Velocity and Energy Exertion readouts

Had your Minds Eye seen the 1,2,5 running down feild before the race you would not have had them as contenders


This is why finding and inputting ONLY the TRUE contenders into the computer is so, so important

Las Vegas 9.2

The HAT

I look at it this way - if the trainer knew he was going to win, the horse would not have been 40/1. Knowing you're going to win is found money, and human greed or need in such a situation would have one bringing a truckload of money to the window.

I don't know the size of the pools involved, so for argument's sake, let's say he had 100 bucks on it at 40/1. Even if a 200 wager would have knocked it down to 30/1, he would have done it if it were "a sure thing."

The trainer can perhaps have thought that he had a good chance, or a better than usual chance, but how many other trainers in the race had the same thought?

Can the trainer predict traffic trouble? Or a bad start out of the gate. Or being carried wide? Maybe his horse stepped on a safety pin that morning.

There are no sure things, not at 40/1 or 1/10.

Clore,Win is not the only form of betting.



Bill,Good thoughts

Sorry
 

Charlie
With all respect. After 12 years of using the program as per instruction
and guidelines from the follow up. I know that betting two horse
I am going to lose about 8 or 9 races each 20 race cycle
If I bet this race this would have been one of them

If I were to quote Mr Bradshaw I would say
"I know I'm going to lose races but I know why I lost them
and I don't let it send me into a tailspin"

What I do works best for ME, why? because I have to follow my heart and tell
myself Bill.You don't know what your doing
Bill You have no way to say which horse will get the lead or even what the pace will be
Bill,You don't understand tandem race
Bill You CAN NOT BET ONE HORSE !

So For me to throw out horses for any other reason then
they are not one of the top 5 total energy and primary line score
Is looking for trouble
The way I can win is to find a representative line that will show me
not which horses run fast but more important how they run fast

Matchers are smart and way out of my league
I agmire you but I would go broke fast if I went down
that road.

Bill

Jeff,
for your enjoyment. #9 good numbers and great attributes. I would have bet this horses even without numbers. His attributes are so strong that is behind my comprehension how QP send this horse at 28-1. Who said that trainers don't know how to train. As long they think that way is fine with me.
gl45

Bill

I'm not havig a go at you, all i'm doing is using your post to try to show how important it is to get the right horses as The Hat states

Input a pretender and it will mess up the readouts as you can see from the screenshots posted

More thought has to go into the pre-input stage as the computer cannot see the 1,2,5 being pretenders in todays Match Up, only we can

no problem
 

Charlie
Thank you for your input
I believe what this thread is showing is that many of us
are useing different methods and Its possible to win
almost any race type and class
We can all profit many ways. Things work best
when you believe in them and yourself

Bill

As they say Bill, there is more than one way to skin the cat and your right, it is possible to win any race type and class


The only barrier is our knowledge and understanding of who are the TRUE contenders in todays Match Up and who are not

What follows is meant to knock anyones Methodology

This is just a little demo of how a little more thought could turn a losing race into a winning one

Best of last 3 TE comparable , Top 5 kept

Same horses in Match Up Mode with Pace Projection

Further evalution, - Slow horses removed, non contenders imo - OUT

Tandem Line between 1 and 8 added