NEW PACE= Delaware
 

8/22

rest 8/22
 

rest of card

Results
 

not bad a day

Mike,

Very nice presentation....I caught a few myself including race 4 & 5 and an exacta The winner in race 5, #7 was also top horse in RDSS as well as a New Pace pick and paid $26. Also the winner of race 4 #2 which paid $16 and change was also the dominant early and the top quirin speed (7) horse. That proved to be a great combo.

Ernie

Wed 8/24

rest of 8/24

results
:(

Are you eliminating contenders you do not bet?

And how are you eliminating those contenders?

What a difference a day makes, great stuff Mike, and great presentation , like Ernie stated already.

Patrick

Dave...currently I am just posting no eliminations , just seeing how the 4 contenders stand up...not sure on the best way to go

On this particular day , even if I bet horses over 4-1 there would have been only one hit and the ROI would have not been that low but still a loss for the day..

Any suggestions?..

I know Wednesday's is a day that you like to play..did you have better results?

mike

My results were the FINAL contenders.

That means that the PO horses are removed if the don't qualify.

That cannot be posted ahead of time because you don't know who they are.

How do you handle them?

PO horses comes into play when separating ties...correct?
right now RDSS doesn't have provisions with ties...I have discussed this with Ted already..
So for example...take race number 2..maybe the 5 & 7 could have came in as PO's and made a Big difference at the end of the day???
(#5@20-1, #7 @ 13-1)

mike

Mike, RDSS does not enforce who you must accept as contenders - it presents the NewPace calculations, sorted in various orders, and suggests 4 contenders, which you can modify if you have a different opinion (just click on the rank #s). And yes, correct, I have not yet presented supplementary tie-breaking data (aside from the one rudimentary SR range related one), and I will add more. But the suggested contenders also do not change according to bet-time odds (though that might be a great idea!), so here again you have to manually include/exclude PO horses or choose between multiple < low odds threshold horses.

This is rather analogous to having top 4 ranked VDC or BLBL and having to choose 2 among them to bet to Win based on the long recommended combination of top ranked-ness, bet-time odds minimum threshold (e.g. 5/2 ... 3-1) and best remaining overlay in the top 3 and ties. Same analysis procedure, in my view.

Ted

I did not look at your posting, but that sounds correct.

This makes an absolutely HUGE difference.

Think of it as a horse that is within 1 point is worthy of a bet at 15/1 but not at 3/1.

Please see my analysis of this race in the NewPace discussion Forum.

Attachment 23514

There is no horse within 1 point of being a contender (excepting the #5 and #7 who are 1 point away from each other and we'd like to be able to choose one or the other), so (as I see it) Dave's advice, while generally applicable, is not specifically applicable here. However, there is specific NP method advice which does the job, though always looking to learn, if I got something wrong.

Ted

Log it as it is
 

First off I used the same lines as posted in the RDSS post except for
horse 6 Line two was used there I used Line 1 as line 2 the horse was beaten
by 11 lengths

No matter as line 1 is a throw out to at 7th on Perceptor total

The track was fast

Horse 5 lines 2 3 4 and 5 all were dismal on fast dirt route dist, so why use line 1 in the slop? but to be fair I used the same line

But at the bottom here The 5 would be a toss

# 4 VDC 3 on BLBL But not in top 3 actual so
Logging it as it is for me the race is a miss
Attachment 23515
Attachment 23518
Attachment 23519


Next

FWIW, the E/L Differential view of this race.

Attachment 23523

I would not have had this race outside of the NewPace approach, though I know some would have who focus more than I do on the E/L Differential, or who focus less on WPS pools and more on Trifecta or Superfecta pools.

Ted

New Discoveries
 

This race falls into the 12% area as Doc writes about in Follow Up
76 (page 63 )
That is of winners not in the top 5 Total Energy

So from a pure Sartin Methodology veiw even with the # 1 rating
(the biggest stick) on the e/l graph The 5 would not be a win bet as it would
most likely be taken out based on low total energy

Now further down in the article Doc writes that these horses outside of the top five TE can and should be veiwed whenusing other pools than win So your right on Ted

A model of 8.3 dist. winners Early Late readouts may have shown
a fit

GS
Bill V.