Quote:
Bill,
I find some value in going back over races and even more value when capping a race even if it is on paper. It is just that your records can be a little skewed because it is not live.
|
Jim I disagree
Not if you are truly working races in a consistent manner.
"if you have a CONSISTENT approach, it will be the same no matter what.
On the other hand, if you do one race "this way" and another race "that way", THAT is when your records will be skewed because the approach was not consistent." I agree with this
Jim Bradshaw used to bet just about every race, If he lost he would just say
There is another race coming up in ,
Since I work races in my own constant manner, my records reflect horses that won the race. The factors that I model come from only plus and plus within a zero pace lines.
If I work a race and pass I still record the final odds of the winner and the winners APV win percentage and days since last race data.
Here is a small block of my data base. There is much more data per line
but It would be too big a screen shot so I'm just showing a part of the line.
These are 9 consecutive races from Parx
I am not sure if I did all 9 races live or after the fact.
I does not matter since I work in a very consistent manner.
If you notice line #765, #768 and #770 have zero's in the factors I model.
This is because of of these reasons, Either the winner had no plus or plus within a zero recent pacelines ,the winner had a plus paceline but I passed the race or lastly a horse who I would not enter a line for won the race
Lets look
Race # 765 This race My two bets were odds of 4.80 and 5.90 to 1
The winner paid $8.60 but It did not have a + or (+) paceline so I have no enties in these factors I mark this race as a loss however I still can record
the winners APV win percentage and days since last race data.
Race #766 There are entries in the factors I model, The winner paid $4.40
Since in the I see 0.00 in the odds of the horses I bet, I passed this race.
Looking at the comments area( not shown) I wrote "Passed winner #1 paid two of the top 3 were under 2/1 so In this race the winner was one of the low odds horses.Doing this comment step, I see I made a correct call in passing.
Race # 767 Since this race is shaded a lighter color It means this was a win.
The two horses I bet both had + or (+) pacelines. My bets were on horses
with odds of 4.30 and 9.80 to 1. The winner was the 4.30/1 horse.
Race #768 this line has all zero's. I see the winner went off at 6/1. I bet two horses in the race but the winner had no + or (+) pacelines, I lost. I still enter the winners APV win percentage and days since last race data. but I leave the win factors with zeros.
Race #769 I have the winners fators but the winner was only .70/1 my bets lost.
Race # 770 This race was for 2 year olds the winner was a FTS that went off at11.30 to 1 since it is a FTS I had no paceline data.
Race # 771 The winner paid $3.20. My two bets lost but I still enter my data.
Race # 772 Here I have a winners data but I see I did not bet the race. I checked the comment area and I passed the race because 2 of my top 3 horses were under 5/2. Here I passed a $13.80 winner.
Race # 773 Here my low odd 5/2 horse won so its shaded and I happlly record all the winners data.
I do this every race every card. Since I use a consistent paceline/contender
method and bet/ pass in a consistent method and have a minimum odds
limit, It really does not matter if I do the race live or for practice later.
Thanks Bill