|
Google Site Search | Get RDSS | Sartin Library | RDSS FAQs | Conduct | Register | Site FAQ | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read
General Discussion General Horse Racing Discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-03-2018, 12:51 PM | #21 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
|
Hi Bill,
Personally I don't believe in giving up anything going into a race in reference to percentages to the game. I believe also that until one can obtain a 63% with two horses they should stay clear of any freelancing and adhere to the guidelines that have proven their mettle. At that point one should always be trying to improve their game, be open minded to new ideas or concepts developed by their research and testing, to hone their skills to a fine art. At that point they can become a jazz player and play that funky music at the same time knowing what guidelines or other brain farts are useful. 63% is demonstrated performance as I've seen you do Bill V. Mitch44 Last edited by Mitch44; 02-03-2018 at 12:54 PM. |
02-03-2018, 04:47 PM | #22 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 644
|
Excellent thread and PDF presentations!
Thanks for the hard work - looks like Doc was paying it forward. The Evolution continues....... |
02-03-2018, 07:04 PM | #23 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: England
Posts: 489
|
Awesome thread. I've really appreciated reading this. Thanks to everyone that has posted.
|
02-04-2018, 09:38 AM | #24 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
|
Bill Lister: I just reread your thread # 4 FTL Guidelines compilation. First of all you deserve great credit for this massive undertaking of that much data and in applying the principles. I'm sure many hours of work went into it to obtain the results.
Two things jumped out at me; 1. "Dirt races were won by 64% of FTL's contenders; turf races were won by about the same %." This is an extremely low % for contenders making it impossible for a member / player to achieve a 63% strike rate with two horses. 2. For the DMR meet 79.2% of all winners were "TOP FOUR AND TIES IN MORNING LINE ODDS (81% DIRT, 78% TURF). "One would be much better off to use the ML to select contenders as it would be faster and have a higher % of winners in the top 4. Approx .79.5% (averaged) as compared to 64%. Even this I consider low. A better should strive for the winner to be in their contenders 85%. I'm not advocating the use of the ML for contenders as I consider the 79.5% low. Additionally there are better tools within RDSS to achieve a higher % of the winner within their contenders. With Ted's new version of RDSS different factors can more readily be accessed and quantified to ascertain a better % to have the winner within one's contenders. Again great job Bill L, for your hard work. Mitch44. Last edited by Mitch44; 02-04-2018 at 09:55 AM. |
02-04-2018, 12:31 PM | #25 |
The egg man
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
|
top 4
Hi Bill
I agree with Mitch, Unless I am reading this wrong,Using FTL's guidelines,64% seems low. When you compare it to using the top 4 ML horses which for me stands at 77% in all races For RDSS users, Just using the Tote Xray #2 which is 81% in the top 4 Good Skill Bill |
02-04-2018, 02:50 PM | #26 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
|
As you read through the various threads by FTL, you will come to the conclusion that the number of races that he BETs probably represents a very small subset of all races in which he finds contenders/qualifiers. He demands value, never bets favorites and plays multiple tracks, a quality, not quantity formula, involving patience proven over time.
At the summer DMR meet over one third of all races had more than two unknowns, either races with more than 2 first time or foreign starters, or races with two or more entrants changing surface or distance,or any horse that had not run in 90 days or whose ML was 20/1 or greater. If you choose, you can integrate FTL's contenders with those in the top 4 and ties ML. These add backs can use best of 3 comparable or any other Sartin decision making tool, and many of them will not deserve to be put back. One of the things FTL has said many times relative to modeling is that you need to break down races by sex, distance, surface and even class levels. I have done some of that. I used FTL's contenders (some of which are not top 4 ML!!) and integrated (or gave a second look to) any top 4 and ties ML horse. Here are some of the best subset results: Non maiden females (any age) on dirt were top 3 Seg 1F 78.6%, top 3 Seg 2C 85.7% (Segments screen) Non maiden males (any age) on dirt were top 3 Seg 1F 74.2%, top 3 Seg 2C 81.8% (Segments screen); HOWEVER, they were top 2 Seg 2C 66.7% I am sure that there are better subsets of data within these numbers, its just a matter of delving deeper to find them. The problem, as always, with such a small sample is that once you start slicing and dicing, the sample sizes get quite small |
02-04-2018, 03:08 PM | #27 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Pembroke Pines, FL
Posts: 170
|
The beauty of FTL's guidelines is that they provide a framework for consistent, disciplined analysis of a race. One needs patience and discipline and must bypass races with short priced horses as well as those with multiple unknown factors in order to be successful. By playing multiple tracks one gets more opportunities to locate value and the types of profitable situations that makes the guidelines work best.
From a percentage standpoint there may be more winners with other selection methods, however I find that betting older or questionable pace lines does not guarantee any greater success in locating the actual winner if you are a two horse better. It may even cloud the readouts with lines and rankings that are perhaps better looking than they should be. |
02-04-2018, 04:02 PM | #28 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Valley Stream NY
Posts: 9,037
|
Since contender and pace line selections are part of the guidelines I thought I would share some thoughts that were expressed by various teaching members both at seminars and in private conversations that have stuck with me over the years. The first was that if you are going to make a horse a contender you must give it every chance to win[ also expressed several times at the 1993 Vegas seminar available in the video section of the library] which to me supports going past the last even if it's a + line. Another from Marion Jones at the same seminar "don't put a horse in the computer that you aren't willing to put your money on". On a lighter side I remember several of us talking with Tom Brohamer at Saratoga and someone bringing up how he would be surprised when his 5th pick would win a race. Tom just smiled and said why are you surprised you made the horse a contender therefore you were saying it could win the race. And finally Docs' only rule that I remember "NEVER rate a horse off a 0 race".
Tim
__________________
Trust but verify |
02-04-2018, 05:12 PM | #29 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
|
I don't care how selective a person is of races or odds. Out of these 318 races you can eliminate 100 or even 218 races. The fact is that there are only 64% winners in the top 4 of the remaining 100 races. Playing two horses one would have to be just about perfect to hit 63% winners and also bathe with Ivory soap which is 99.9% pure.
As far as 81.8 and 85.7% at the Second Call on the segment is irrelevant because it doesn't consider the whole race, they don't pay off for the SC and do for who hits the finish line first. All that has nothing to due with the picking of contenders and pace lines. It is absolutely impossible to hit 63% winners betting two horses to win with only 64% winners in your top 4 contenders and that isn't even considering if we have the correct pace line. If they can I want to purchase their picks. Mitch44 |
02-04-2018, 11:47 PM | #30 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
|
Quote:
This is what Bill Lyster said just prior to posting those percentages. “One of the things FTL has said many times relative to modeling is that you need to break down races by sex, distance, surface and even class levels. I have done some of that.”
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
8 Month Matchup Thread (Re-posted) | Bill Lyster | Matchup Discussion | 4 | 05-01-2015 05:02 PM |
Just follow the guidelines | For The Lead | Pace Makes the Race / TPR | 138 | 08-19-2014 10:28 PM |
Just follow the guidelines | For The Lead | Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...) | 138 | 08-19-2014 10:28 PM |
Saturday Collective/ Positional on the lead projected pace races | RichieP | Matchup Discussion | 92 | 06-07-2009 04:39 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 |