RDSS 2.1 Factor Statistical Study - Pace and Cap

Mitch44 · 04-14-2016, 08:00 AM

Bill that 406 only represents slightly a fraction more that 20% which tells me there were many good paying horses in there. I myself would rather have a primary factor much higher. At those percentages it should be regulated to a secondary factor for possible ex. and a longshot factor. For winners it destroys the other readouts for the line or score.

In Brohamer's book their objective was to use factors with a high percent in the top 2 for winners. Anytime a low producing factor is added to a group it tears the group down significantly.DD ,Ex. etc. all spring from winners.

Mitch44

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A Disappointed RDSS Evaluator	Ted Craven	RDSS	58	08-08-2011 11:32 AM
RDSS 2.0/Happy Holidays/Thank You!	Ted Craven	RDSS2 / FAQ's	4	01-09-2010 06:03 PM
Release Notes - Version 0.98.7	Ted Craven	RDSS Info, Reference	2	07-17-2009 11:09 AM
RDSS Subscription / Forum Re-organization	Ted Craven	RDSS	1	03-07-2009 01:35 PM

04-14-2016, 08:00 AM	#13
Mitch44 Grade 1 Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: The Villages, Fl. Posts: 3,705	Bill that 406 only represents slightly a fraction more that 20% which tells me there were many good paying horses in there. I myself would rather have a primary factor much higher. At those percentages it should be regulated to a secondary factor for possible ex. and a longshot factor. For winners it destroys the other readouts for the line or score. In Brohamer's book their objective was to use factors with a high percent in the top 2 for winners. Anytime a low producing factor is added to a group it tears the group down significantly.DD ,Ex. etc. all spring from winners. Mitch44