Composite Speed Rating - CSR

[Segwin]

A favor Bill, would you post a screen shot of the Trip Tab for the number 8 please?

Thanks.

[Bill V.]

Hi speed figures

. The guide lines you mention will never get these type of winners, They are provided to keep you off this type of race and betting these type of non comparable horses

This is not a knock against Rmath. As I said in a earlier post Richard can post many $7.00 - $11,00 winner using his CRS-VDC method.

Most winners day in day out will fit the guidelines from the just follow these guidelines thread .

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9382

This horse is 57/1 ! There are many systems that will get you this horse
posted around the web


BTW by request I was asked what would happen if I ran the race in Phase 1?

[Bill V.]

Originally Posted by Segwin

A favor Bill, would you post a screen shot of the Trip Tab for the number 8 please?

Thanks.

Here you go Terry

[Segwin]

Originally Posted by rmath

Bill here is a race that CSR helped in making the final betting decision.
Final 3 horses 5-7-8

Rich, did new pace have anything to do with your selecting 8?

[rmath]

No New Pace had nothing to do with my selection of the 8 horse.
I look for certain combinations of both VDC rankings AND CSR rankings to get the two or three main horses that I feel have the best chance to run first or second. Then I let the final odds at 1 minute to post dictate how I bet the race.
Hope this answers your question.
PS: I saw that someone else posted that under FTLs guidelines this horse was a non contender because of its ML was 30/1.
I personally do not use those guidelines, I prefer to look at the CSR ratings and choose my pacelines and let the program do its job.

This is in no way an attempt to influence anyone to ignore FTLs guidelines.
He is a very good handicapper, I just happen to take a different approach because I have found that too many high priced win and place horses do not always fit specific guidelines.

[borodin]

Back in the mid 1970s, a group of four handicappers, all winners, sat a a table in the clubhouse every day at Arlington, and they'd discuss their picks with each other. One man kept detailed records on conditions (the DRF didn't have conditions on allowance or claimers then), equipment, jockey/trainer combinations, etc. Another made his own speed ratings, something like Beyer used to. The third was one of the many trip handicappers and would study replays religiously. The fourth was one of the early pace handicappers. All of them made money, and they shared their information with each other so that all could profit more. I quickly learned to reserve the table a step above theirs. I would sit there, seemingly buried in my Form, marking things (actually scribbling) and using a calculator, and I was careful to never look at them or appear to pay any attention to anything they said. I would often say to myself (loud enough to be heard at their table "now what did Ainslie say to do next?" before scribbling more things on the Form. Of course, i was listening intently to them, but to them, I was just another method freak.

One day, they were discussing the upcoming race. In it was a horse trained by a man who, we'll say, wasn't above board. The first handicapper liked the horse because because it was moving up from four consecutive open claiming $2,500 races into a $3,200 claimer with non-winner conditions, actually a steep drop in class. The second said that the horse had the best speed ratings of the field. The third noted that the horse had been severely checked at the top of the far turn last time. The fourth noted that the horse was the only one that went to the lead, and would thus have the race to himself. At 15 minutes to post, the trainer's brother and another man, who were sitting a couple of tables away from the group, walked by. The second man asked: "So how do you like (name of horse" in this race?" The trainer's brother answered: "(Trainer name) says he was sick for three days last week, and he isn't quite ready yet. He'll get what he can with the horse, but I'm going to wait until next time." The two moved on up the stairs.

I said: "I'd better hit the bathroom," to myself and followed them at a distance. The trainer's brother and the trainer went up to the $50 windows (which were behind a short wall) and placed bets. Each had at a healthy stack of $50 tickets, and the second man was still holding his tickets in hand. I walked past them and glanced down. I wasn't at all surprised to see that he'd bet the trainer's horse. He must have had 20 tickets.

I waited until they were out of sight and walked around, placing $300 worth of bets in on the horse, at 10 different windows.

I'd assumed that the trainer's brother knew that they were talking about the horse, and since each of them bet decent money, that they MIGHT try to discourage them. That's exactly what they did.

It worked to a degree. The four of them were still talking about whether or not to bet the horse. One of them finally did go up and bet about a fourth of what he usually bet.

The trainer's horse went out and opened a six length lead and coasted home by a little more than that. It paid $11.40, this back in the day when WPS was the only wager available on several races, including this one.

The trainer and other man kept up their charade. "I wish I hadn't listened to the man. That horse won for fun." They actually looked upset.

There were four men sitting a row down from me who were wishing they hadn't listened, either. I just kept my nose buried in the Form and didn't cash my tickets until two races later.

The point of this story is that four guys used four vastly different methods to come up with the same horse. I'd also seen them at odds with each other on as many as three different horses in a race, and each went up to bet his horse. Obviously, they couldn't all win that race, but they were all winners in the long run, and all were using winning strategies. There's more than one road to profit.

[rmath]

Borodin, thanks for the post. This is what I have been trying to say all along. There are many different ways to get the contenders in a race. None are right or wrong if in the end we all get a high percentage of them in our final bets.
The way I select my contenders works very well for me, it is quick and easy and profitable. My reason for putting it out there was only to help anyone who wished to check it out or who were struggling with contender selection to give it a try.
Again thanks for the post.

Rmath

[Appy]

My dad always told me "you can't be outstanding AND be just like everyone else".