Rmath's 4-factor Method - 'from the top'

[Mitch44]

Its effective by the settings chosen and perhaps it could be by the track or few tracks chosen for the study.

Also something else that just dawned on me and perhaps your correct is because the way those lines are weighted and where the abnormal variant occurs it has little or no effect unless its the last line. 75 % chance that its not the last line.

Within the all the other readouts etc. Within RDSS for the line chosen that line is not weighted so therefore has more effect or is 100% effected by the line chosen , therefore the default setting are the correct setting to choose for all other readouts. With the CSR there a 75 % chance of not being L1 so not impacted as much due to weighting. Ideally if the high variant or abnormal one is L4 is the even better.

IMO and to each their own while the effect is lessened by which line it falls in of the four,the high variant or abnormal one is due to weighting, I still think its an improvement and more efficient to use the default settings.

Mitch44

[kmspokes]

Lt, in your reference to prime long shot horses in non contenders are the #2 VDC, #4 CSR, #3 Supp Factors, #1or#2 TE, #2 TS+F3 minimum numbers in all those categories? So if a horse has these numbers or better or just those actual numbers? Additionally what are the 333, 332 that Doc made reference to?
Thanks,
Ken

[Lt1]

Hi Ken. According to Richies' guidelines to qualify as a longshot a non contender must rank in the top 5 of both CSR & VDC. That is the bare minimum. Now when deciding on whether to wager[or how much] on this horse I look for some supporting corollary rankings in either the primary or supplemental factors[preferably both]. What you are looking for is a top 3 ranking in any of the factors. The more factors it ranks in the top3 the better. I love it when a top3 ranking falls in one of the dominate factors of my model for win at the track concerned. The numbers I showed here were the actual rankings generated by my handicapping. Most times you won't find a lot of supporting factors, but when you do, be prepared to bet the horse with confidence, for w/p and in exotics. If support is lacking I will still make a small win bet and use the horse underneath in exactas and usually on top in $1 dds with my top 3 in the next race. In the older programs Doc pointed out that any horse that ranked 3-3-3 in E/P,SP, and AP was a prime longshot contender based on reports generated by both teaching members and clients. Similarly horses that ranked in the top 3 of 2 of the factor ie 3-3-x.3-x-3,x-3-3 also qualified. The x represented any rank above 3. In RDSS I use EPR,LPR, and CPR when looking for the 3-3-3 angle. Hope that helps.
Tim

[kmspokes]

Thanks Lt ! Yes that cleared up a lot for me. I haven’t seen much mentioned about TT of non contenders in particular top 3 TT. It shows up in my place models but I have a hard time evaluating since many times they are running many lengths back in their pace line being used with modest gains on the leader. I use auto pace line feature most of the time. Any insights ?
Ken

[kmspokes]

I should have mentioned when considering place horses in exactas.
Ken

[Lt1]

A couple of things about tt. It is good when evaluating mdn winners going against winner for the 1st time. Doc mentioned and I have found it to be true that if the mdn winner isn't among the top 2 turn times they generally won't win. As Doc pointed out mdns tend to loaf on the turn even when winning. A second useful thing to look at is that if a horse is losing ground between the 1st and 2nd call then again it's a poor win prospect.
Tim

[kmspokes]

I love how many little nuances there are in this sport, thanks for sharing your experience Lt.
Ken

[Lt1]

Anytime Ken. In my early days we had seminars and teaching members to help guide us. There usually was someone you could reach out to for help. Today we have this site and those who have been around and have insights or info that can help others win then they should share if asked.. Even then it's up to each person to do the work for themselves and keep records. Depending on someone else to do the work for you won't cut it. It's up to the member to make the Methodology work for them.
Tim

[derrick24948]

Hi all, I recently signed up for RDSS and checked out this thread as it's referenced in Ted's welcome email. I really appreciate this relatively simple approach being shared.

For those that either use, or have used the 4-factor Method, I have a couple questions:

Ted's step by step instructions go with using the Best Preceptor, Last 3 for line selection. Do you keep it simple and go with the software-chosen line? Or do you still make paceline adjustments as makes sense?

Most of the posts discuss multi race wagers (p3s,4s,5s,6s). Do those that have used it find this approach well applied to straight win betting? I.e. taking the ranking and dutching the top 2 with minimum odds (e.g. 2-1)

Also, Lt1 and a few others mention a long shot angle for qualifying non-contenders. Is that angle/qualification defined in any post? I'm not seeing it.

Thanks!
Derrick

[Lt1]

Hi Derrick and welcome. When it comes to paceline I generally use the programs' choosen line about 95% of the time. I will however change lines I disagree with. As for Richies' longshot angle it refers to a non contender which ranks in he top 5 of both vdc and csr. See post #73 of this thread where I expand on it.
Tim