Philadelphia Park Data for Decision Making

[Bill V.]

Its really an enjoyable task to make the data

I even get a little smile now and then

Here are races from this weekend and Mon Tue
10/2-10/5

Good Skill

PhillyTP.xls

------

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

If a horse can be made ready to win fresh out of the box
Then why can't a horse that has not raced in 90 win also

f

That is a very good question, but one for which I do not have the answer, but if you research that and learn the answer, let us all know.

[Bill V.]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

That is a very good question, but one for which I do not have the answer, but if you research that and learn the answer, let us all know.

Surprise. when in doubt ask the Doctor
Follow Up 81 shaded area

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

Surprise. when in doubt ask the Doctor
Follow Up 81 shaded area

Attachment 20808

*** Bill, you confuse one thing with another. The last question discussed was:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill V. View Post
If a horse can be made ready to win fresh out of the box
Then why can't a horse that has not raced in 90 win also

Quote:
Originally Posted by For The Lead View Post
That is a very good question, but one for which I do not have the answer, but if you research that and learn the answer, let us all know.


*** your [Follow Up excerpt] in response, has nothing to do with it.

But since you put it up there, let's look at it. If 31% of all winners come from horses off more than 30 days, and 5% of all winners come from horses off more than 90 days, that means 26% of all winners come from horses off between 31 and 90 days. And I advocate playing that 26% of horses. ***


__________________

[Bill V.]

Hi FTL



My feeling is I agree with what Doc wrote in follow up #81

As I wrote before please look at the shaded area
Doc writes that once a horse is off over 30 days
the amount of time of the layoff becomes more unimportant



I agree with this . That is my opinion I was asked how i felt about the subject and my usual response to anything regarding the methodology is within the pages of the Follow Ups and manuals

I will always feel this way I have been blessed eith an ability to do rather well
and I feel that I earned this ability by taking information from the writings of Howard Sartin and Pirco
Its my goal and Its a promise to Howard that I would be his VDC Messenger
meaning I would keep his ideas and writings avaiable to users of his methodology

When you ask me how I feel or to do research I will always go with what Doc
wrote. I used this follow up screen shot to show the readers if they are interested where my ideas come from


Thank You
Bill Varone

Thanks

[Bill V.]

Hi FTL

I appears there is confusion on your end too .
Your question in Post #52

my answer to the comment about FTS and layoff horses
led me to post the screen shot from Follow up 81

easy as pie

[alydar_ David]

How germane that this quote was included in the word-of-the-day email (the illustration is my contribution :>)

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

Hi FTL
Attachment 20809


My feeling is I agree with what Doc wrote in follow up #81

As I wrote before please look at the shaded area
Doc writes that once a horse is off over 30 days
the amount of time of the layoff becomes more unimportant



I agree with this . That is my opinion I was asked how i felt about the subject and my usual response to anything regarding the methodology is within the pages of the Follow Ups and manuals

I will always feel this way I have been blessed eith an ability to do rather well
and I feel that I earned this ability by taking information from the writings of Howard Sartin and Pirco
Its my goal and Its a promise to Howard that I would be his VDC Messenger
meaning I would keep his ideas and writings avaiable to users of his methodology

When you ask me how I feel or to do research I will always go with what Doc
wrote. I used this follow up screen shot to show the readers if they are interested where my ideas come from


Thank You
Bill Varone

Bill,

Respectfully, citing someone else's work in an answer to a proposition under discussion (Layoffs, FTS), as you did with the Follow Up excerpt of Doc's - is not the same thing as 'research', at least not the same as digging into a collection of data (either an electronic database or a collection of DRFs as they did in the old days) to prove, disprove or qualify a point. Not minimizing the 'research' you did to search through the FU issues to find a relevant opinion once held by Doc - which may or may not be currently valid, or as valid now as then - just that it strikes me FTL may have been referring to 'research' with some hard, current and of long duration numbers behind it (re hit rate, or average mutuels of FTS winners). He does seem to have provided that info for Layoff horses.

I accept that you trust and believe and are a messenger for what Doc has written on various subjects - but Doc himself (sometimes) changed his opinion on things he once wrote, changing with the times or sometimes with newly provided information. I also believe a lot of what Doc and others wrote, but usually only until I can prove or disprove it for myself. I once jokingly asked him if he would reimburse me for losing bets I made based on implementing my understanding of what he wrote in the Follow Up. He laughed and declined (i.e. it's up to me...)

And for whatever it's worth, it occurs to me that one difference between Layoff horses and FTS is that the population of the former would likely be much older than that of the latter, FTS probably tending to have a much higher percentage of 2 YO than the entire population of Layoff horses FTL cited. For FTS, all you have is workout patterns (and opinions about breeding and trainers, etc), while with Layoff horses who have run before, you have their previous ability and previous form cycle info, as well as their laid-off time frame to use as a factor when identifying them as Win contenders or not, today.

FWIW.

Ted

[BJennet]

Just wanted to add that the most relevant factor to be derived from any set of stats is ROI. Ken Massa, formerly the partner of Tom Brohamer, has presented detailed stats on the IVs and ROI of layoff horses broken down by distance, which appears under the title 'The Lowdown on Layoffs' in the May 2007 issue of his newsletter.

Not to go into too much detail, Ken found some surprisingly counterintuitive and cliche-busting results. One is that a quick (within 7 days) return, a key positive factor for many, has huge negative ROI. Another is that horse returning from longer layoffs - in the range of 66-166 days - had the highest ROI of any group tested, with a striking difference, perhaps predictable, in the way this benefitted routers more than sprinters. I suggest anyone interested in this subject take a look at his site.

Just one last for for FTL - I think it's perhaps misleading to lump all horses over 99 days together in the way you have. Obviously this group would include horses that have been off for years. I think it would be worth breaking out the group between 90 and 120 days, from which I and I think others have hit many longshots, as having a higher percentage hit rate and ROI than you suggest.

Cheers,

B Jennet