Major vs. Minor tracks

[Charlie D]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

Charlie, you're killing me!

Have you ever heard the saying,"if you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs"?

When you order an omelet do you care about who gathered the eggs or how the eggs were gathered or who feed the chickens or who broke the eggs or do you just want the omelet in front of you on a plate?

It is "possible" that at some point in time the PP's will represent the unbroken eggs, the source of the omelet, but not the actual omelet and that something else will come along that represents the omelet, the product of an unbroken egg, yet NOT the unbroken egg?

Now remember, I asked if it was "possible" that it could happen.

Of course your answer is "yes", simply because you can NOT prove that it is NOT possible.

FTL


We are not cooking omlete's, we are talking about cappin races and as stated everything you make to do this comes from the Past Performances. Spedfigures derived from final time, FPS, Pace figures derived from Fractions, trainer, jockey stats stats derived from horses performances and so on. Everything contained in a horse racing db comes from PP's. The new product you mention sounds like it will be derived from PP's too.

I know from reading your posts you know this, so why i am having to tell you it is so, i'm not sure
tbh.

If we are going to take the game serious, lets stick to what is relevant eh!! and not bring cooking into it or any other unrelated subject.

[alydar_ David]

Then there's the case for playing minor tracks and going past the last race or two. Wallah.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

FTL


We are not cooking omlete's, we are talking about cappin races and as stated everything you make to do this comes from the Past Performances. Spedfigures derived from final time, FPS, Pace figures derived from Fractions, trainer, jockey stats stats derived from horses performances and so on. Everything contained in a horse racing db comes from PP's. The new product you mention sounds like it will be derived from PP's too.

I know from reading your posts you know this, so why i am having to tell you it is so, i'm not sure
tbh.

If we are going to take the game serious, lets stick to what is relevant eh!! and not bring cooking into it or any other unrelated subject.

Charlie, we got a little far afield and I was just trying to make a point. Sure everything flows from the PP's and at this point in time, he who deciphers them best, does the best. But you have to keep an open mind for new ways like the people who brought us the tools we use today. Tools that were unheard of when I started in this game 45 years ago. We have to remain open to new ideas.
You put forward the use of FPS, Pace Figs and Energy Distribution. As I said, they have been beat to death. Everybody tries to develop their own "figs", but in the end 22.0-45.0-1:10 are still the numbers regardless of what form one tries to express them in. So like I said, trying to re-invent the wheel is useless. It's already been re-invented 100 times. (or maybe more)
So where does race handicapping go from its' current position? Does it remain stagnant or will someone come along with a fresh idea? Obviously any "fresh" idea would not include FPS, Pace Figs, Energy Distribution, Jockeys, Trainers, Angles and all that stuff that you mentioned otherwise it wouldn't be fresh.
"gl45" for an example, seems to be working in that direction and my hat is off to him for his efforts.
Keep up the good work, Charlie, and keep your mind open for news ideas as you move forward, while not losing site of those things that work for you now.

[Charlie D]

I have an open mind FTL, i came to P&C and i saw Richie's and The HAT's posts in Hat Check Forum.


This was NEW to me and and i became a Match Up apprentice.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by alydar_David

Then there's the case for playing minor tracks and going past the last race or two. Wallah.

Very nice.

Perhaps for the benefit of new members, for whom this thread originated, you could explain to them how you arrived at these contenders and the lines used.

Just a suggestion.

[Charlie D]

gl45" for an example, seems to be working in that direction and my hat is off to him for his efforts

I do believe gl45 uses the MU, hence his reference to it in his posts earlier.

[Charlie D]

Lou has posted a winner from SA tonight paying 22 bucks and hit the winner of Sunland Deby paying 35 bucks using the Match Up

The EXDC and SP screens are the Match Up readouts.

Ted Craven had Zardana in his Top two and even though i don't think he bet the win, the BL/BL readout (Match Up) told him Zardana was the horse bet.

Showing that in the right hands, the Match Up methodology kicks ass even today.

[alydar_ David]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

Very nice.

Perhaps for the benefit of new members, for whom this thread originated, you could explain to them how you arrived at these contenders and the lines used.

Just a suggestion.

Good idea.

The pacelines are indicated in the image. I used the best of the last three comparable -- the same technique Ted outlined in his videos...only I do it very quickly. Nothing fancy. I have no model for this track. I spent no more than five minutes handicapping and betting the race.

I daresay anyone using RDSS would have had this horse. No special skills were required.

[Ted Craven]

Regarding the use of Result Chart information versus/in conjunction with Past Performance style information - I have long dreamt of being able to look at a paceline and understand more about what happened in that race which lead to the particular result of the horse in question.

Today, for example using RDSS, we can see a portion of that race's matchup if there are a number of returning runners today (i.e. the Tandem screen). And if we have the Result Chart data plan, we can see the entire Chart of a given race (albeit not very elegantly, right now). Using this depiction of what happened in a past race, sometimes (not always) helps me understand more about why the horse performed as it did in that past race (e.g. 2 non-returning Earlies/fighters killed each other by the stretch call, while our returning horse stalked mid-pack and closed with 2nd best Late energy finishing behind the best Late horse, also not returning today). Perhaps some of the aforementioned scenario is evident by the single PP line of our horse today, but not as much. This is an example of having Results organized data as well as PP organized data. An abundance of other matchup scenarios (or setups, using TFM's parlance, and his great graphical visual representations of a Result Chart) become evident via Result Chart analysis, just for example: how much pressure did a horse face at the early points of call, killing his chances then but obscured from view in a typical PP data representation, but which he may not likely face today?

I'll agree that skilled matchup interpreters might combine multiple, repeated scenarios from a horse with 'good-enough' guestimates as to what happened in a given race, to know what the horse will do versus a different set of competitors today. But some method of knowing more about some of a horse's past race's matchups (i.e. knowing more dimensions to a PP line) could be an intriguing example of what else could be usable besides traditional PP data. (for example, what if we could have a bit of data which told about the mix of Early versus Other Than Early runners in a past race and to what extent these were returning today...)

Just ideas. And I agree, not necessarily on the topic of Major/Minor tracks, but following on the discussions of Charlie, FTL, Pino re Results oriented vs PP oriented data.

Ted

[Charlie D]

If you think you get more out of a result chart, why not make use of video replays and take notes.