Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP
Today was the 1st day since I started thread (honest) that I jumped back in with my method as outlined in earlier posts. Why? Honestly it is brutal amount of work to do by hand man and I dont have the time like that anymore.
Very simple I do my lines for all tracks with my template then straight to Bl/Bl and hide 1 at a time from bottom up til there are 5 guys left. Then it is to TS conditionals and I enter all 3 top Bl/Bl horses with a 9/2 at 0 mtp conditional win bet for 2 beans.
Very simple and so far incredibly consistent hitting right around the 15% mark which I know is good % for higher odds bets. From 8 betting days with real money I have 7 winning days and 1 losing day betting ALL these horses.
This was day 8 of my auto template doing ONLY the races I described earlier. If you check the races/bets shown you will see they are EXACTLY the types I described with NO deviations. These are the ONLY races I am betting this month on my TS account.
 |
Hi Richie,
Glad to see the excellent work is going forward. I just wanted to throw in a study I did of TE over the last few months that's a slightly different take on the autopaceline concept, in case some aspect of it might be useful.
I mainly began this to check what seemed to me to be the improved performance of TE, having switched from SpecPa to Spec 160. Filtering out races for 2yos, 3yos, all maidens, and all races under 10k, I selected pacelines by the standard Sartin best (TE for this study) of last three, same distance, same surface.
Over 1140 races (but with little change after the first 200), these were the win rates by TE rank:
1. .38
2. .25
3. .21
4. .10
5. .05
This confirmed to me that one of the big improvement of this software over earlier Sartin software whose results Doc tabulated in the later Follow Ups, is that it clusters more winners among the top 3 TE ranks. If you go through the many worksheets posted in the Follow Up, you find that the hit rates of the Top BL/BL horses (which are basically ranked by TE) taper off much more gradually.
As far as the average mutuel of the top three, by TE rank:
1. $7.40
2. $10.00
3. $12.20
This confirmed for me a truth that your study also seems to be finding, and that Doc asserted in one of his more honest Follow Ups, that most of the profits from using the methodology could only be found in about 20% of races. And that was 10-15 years ago, when prices were better. I would say that now, it's about 15% (talking only about win betting).
However the upside is demonstrated by your results. If you set minimum odds a bit higher, the profits are still there. When Guy first talked to me about the Spec software, he told me that by cherrypicking tracks and only playing horses at odds of 6/1 or greater, he was making 200% profit. I wondered if he had gotten hold of some medical marijuana. But after I began to see the average mutuels (which didn't change much) during my early period of my study, I simply adjusted the minimum odds at about two ticks above hit rate - TE- 1. 3-1 TE 2.5-1, and TE 3. 7-1. The results over 1140 races- 200% ROI. What's really strange about this is that it produced nearly the exact same ROI at each rank, even though there were many more plays for TE -1 than the other two. Now obviously this could be an outlier, but there was very little variance in the results.
I'm putting this out there so that if you or anyone else who's interested, can check this out against their own results and see if you get anything similar.
Best of luck.
Cheers,
B Jennet