Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > RDSS > RDSS2 / FAQ's
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

RDSS2 / FAQ's Information, discussion, screenshots, videos about the upcoming version, FAQ's

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-16-2011, 09:00 PM   #31
rmath
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,676
Regarding the 100 races

First I missed counted the top vdc horse, the top only won 50 not 51 as I posted earlier. Sorry for the mistake.
I stated in that post that New Pace was not doing that well,but as I went over my records I noticed that if I compared the horses from both methods and only used the ones that were listed in the top 3 vdc and were also listed in new pace that the winner was in this group most of the time.
43/50 top horses or 86%
15/22 second
9/11 third horses.
In most of the races I got it down to 1 or 2 final contenders for win. Once in awhile I ended up with 3 win horses.
Instead of looking at 5 or more horses I am able to separate the ties using the combined method.
Dave Schwartz talked about using two different approaches to get it down to only a few horses in each race. He said you should use two very different methods, and IT is my thinking that RDSS & New Pace meet that goal.
I tried it today and caught three nice payoffs at Finger Lakes: 11.60, 15.40 and in the last a 34.20 horse. I played 5 races where I only had a total of 12 contenders. In the two races where I had 3 horses I bet the 2 best prices. One ran 2nd beaten by a 4.10 horse that even tho it was one of the final horses I eliminated it for odds.
Dave suggested that you should be able to get 2/3 of your winners from 1/3 of your contenders and I think this is coming pretty close.
rmath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2011, 07:46 PM   #32
So Cal Al
So Cal Al
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: San Diego/ La Quinta
Posts: 214
Send a message via AIM to So Cal Al
New Pace impressions

First off, nice work guys! With enough analysis , we might get down to some workable considerations. I have formed some "impressions" so far that I can share. Perhaps, others will be able to add or subtract from these "impressions". There is no question that what Ted has done in RDSS2 makes NP a faster handicapping approach. It also seems that those with accurate paceline selections can do well (or better) using VDC. If I understand some of Ted's recent input, I think he is looking for collaries, as well as differences in performance between VDC and NP. One early "impression" that I have so far, is that NP works better at lower class tracks, e.g. Mountaineer better than Del Mar. Has anyone come to a similar opinion? Another impression is that when NP and VDC top contenders are alike, there is a very strong betting opportunity. My last " impression" for this reply is that NP, although "automated" must, per se, ignore foreigh horses and first time starters (which also cannot be in VDC readouts), but can be shown to be viable contenders by checking other information found within RDSS. Thoughts?
So Cal Al is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2011, 07:53 PM   #33
Bill Lyster
Grade 1
 
Bill Lyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
The current testing module for NP offers Trackmaster SRs and adjusted SRs. If you choose the TM SRs you can get foreign first time US starters because their races have been given a speed ratings.

I think there have been one or more examples at DMR so far this meet.



Bill
Bill Lyster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2011, 08:33 PM   #34
Bill Lyster
Grade 1
 
Bill Lyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
larger vs smaller tracks

In the 507 race sample only MNR and TAM would probably be considered as smaller or minor. the best results came from the first version of NP 34/48 wins at MNR and 42/50 at TAM

KEE hit 48/56 and AQU 50/61 as some of the best of the larger tracks, but be aware that hit rates where fields are smaller should be better just from a numbers standpoint (pointedly AQU). This would make KEE a standout.

OP hit 39/50.

The rest of the tracks studied hit about 2/3rds. Also no apparent bias between dirt or synth tracks.


Bill
Bill Lyster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
** NewPace in RDSS 2.0 ** Ted Craven RDSS2 / FAQ's 16 09-04-2014 03:10 PM
Tampa R6 4/24 SilentRun RDSS 6 04-26-2010 01:19 PM
Daily Racing Form Abbreviated Race Conditions For The Lead Previous 'Handicapping Discussion' Forum 1 11-12-2009 03:15 AM
Score Board Bill V. Golf Shirt Contest 6 10-10-2009 03:19 PM
Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to learning the Matchup RichieP Hat Check - How Can We Help You? 1 05-25-2009 09:52 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:26 PM.