Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP
2 week summary totals:
84 races
57 wins in contender mix (top 2 bolded early and late + the double red when he is 5th contender) = 68% (sucks I.M.O)
33 exactas in contender mix = 39%
57 winners total $718.20
avg win price = $ 12.60 (Very good I.M.O - getting prices)
33 exactas total = $2,590.20
avg exacta price = $78.49 (very good I.M.O - getting prices)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOkIU...eature=related |
Hi Richie,
I've been following the threads by you, Snake, and others on this new feature of RDSS 2.0 closely, and appreciate all the work that's being invested.
I'm aware that this is derived from the work of Dave Schwartz, and have also been reading the threads dealing with it on Paceadvantage. Certainly, this is too complex to pursue in detail here, but my main question deals with the role of the 'double red', which I take it, indicated the dominant 'E' horse in the race, and is distinguished from the four 'contenders'. I just wondered when, and how often, this horse is included as part of the contender mix in the stats you've tabulated, since it would greatly influence the way the results are interpreted.
As far as 'win' performance goes, these results are unimpressive, especially compared with RDSS, but Dave seems to be indicating that this program should be thought of in terms of 'value', which is fine with me. From what I've seen here, and on Paceadvantage, it seems that the 70% win-rate for the four contenders is fairly stable. If we assume an average hit-rate of say, 9/2, for all of them (although probably eventually we'll have a more accurate idea of each factor's hit-rate), this will reduce the number of horses that can be bet to win, but looking at the ROI of all contenders going off at odds of 6-1 and above, could give us an idea of its ability to identify longshots.
The exacta results look great, but this is why I asked about the 'double red'.
If you box the four contenders, this is a 28% profit. However, if you box all five horses, it loses 23%. Since this program is good at producing higher exactas, maybe this issue can be dealt with by setting a minimum payoff above break-even for all combinations of bets rather than betting the full box. For a 40% win-rate (which seems to be the average) $60 would be break even, so you could simply bet only on combinations that would pay more.
Any feedback appreciated. Thanks again for all your hard work.
Cheers,
B Jennet