Penn Natl Race 5 12/18

[justin13892002]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

Hello Bill and Justin,
I’m sorry for breaking into your discussion, but I just felt the need to do so.

Bill, first I’m going to give you my answer to your question about “how long tandems are valid”.
Right up until the horses pass the finish line in the race in which they ran together. After that, forget about it.

Example: Horse “A” runs against horse “B”. The ONLY horse in the race that is “early” is horse “A”. Every other horse in the race cannot even be REMOTELY considered and early horse. Horse “A” wires the field. Is there anyone that believes horse “B” cannot beat horse “A” in a future race over any period of time? Even if horse “A” is one of many competitive early types in a race where horse “B” is the lone closer?

Or, let’s take the opposite. Horse “A” is a stone closer. EVERY OTHER horse in the race is an early type and also very competitive early types. Horse “A” closes to beat the field. Is there anyone who believes NONE of these early types can ever beat horse “A”, even if one of them end up as the LONE EARLY in the very next race with horse “A”?

This is common sense, basic handicapping 101.

Next, let me assure you that I am not what you would call “a matcher”. However, I understand it. I understand it to this extent. Every race (line) you pick to evaluate a horse in a computer program and/or every race (line) you use in your “match up”, brings with it the “match ups” from THAT RACE. If you believe you are a “matcher” then you know that is true. You know that it was the “match ups” in that race that directly affected the outcome of that race, that is the VERY REASON you are trying to find the various times and styles that will allow you to understand which horse(s) will most likely win today’s race based on that information. Once you have made your determination for today’s race, win or lose, what good are today’s match ups the next time any of these horses run again? For any of the information you gathered today to be valid after today, the next race would have to be EXACTLY the same and we all know that there will NEVER be another race like the one you are looking at today.

Justin, you say, “layoffs mean nothing”. The first thing I would have to know is, what period of time between two races do you consider a layoff. Until then, let me offer some facts.
1 – 76% of all winners have run within the last 30 days
2 – 88% of all winners have run within the last 45 days
3 – 92% of all winners have run within the last 60 days
4 – 94% of all winners have run within the last 90 days

Let’s look at it another way. If you are considering betting a horse that has been off

1 – more than 90 days, you have a 6% chance of winning
2 – more than 60 days, you have a 8% chance of winning
3 – more than 45 days, you have a 12% chance of winning
4 – more than 30 days, a 24% chance of winning

It seems “time off” severely impacts the chances of a horse winning once you go beyond 30 days since its’ last race.
This information is based on more than 500,000 races.
Without doing more research, my guess would be, that many of these horses that make up the group of horses that won after having been off more than 90 days, would be those horses at the top of the class ladder that ARE capable of being off for long periods of time and come back to the races in peak form. These horses make up a very small percentage when compared to all the horses in training throughout the year.

For the Lead,

I think the question was refferring to how I use the matchup. When I get down within 4 or 5 horses, I will then look for tandems. I never look at layoffs. I understand most horses win (90% according to you, but my database shows 87%), but a horse has to be good enough BEFORE the layoff to win in the 1st start back. Some horses in your query doesn't stand a shot based on the pace the horse has faced previously before the break, and therefore wouldn't be a contender anyways.

As far as Tandems, as Jim I am sure, would have agreed, that although a horse lost to another, its HOW and WHY he lost to that horse that counts. If the horses were close, and its been awhile, the loser of the 1st race def. can beat the other horse. Now if Horse A beat horse B in the Tandem race, and in that race Horse B was no better than 7th the entire race, I dont care whether the race was yesterday or a year ago, Horse B will most unlikely beat Horse A.

Again, I believe the question was HOW I USE THE MATCHUP. I may have been mistaken, and if so I apologize.

[mikesal57]

FTL...those are awesome numbers from a vast data base and a good tip to look for lines within 90 days ..nice

But Justin is comfortable using his last 4 no matter what..this is what works for him

With tandems bro...let me tell you...I dont keep data or models or track profiles ...but let me tell you...when I look at a race after the fact( i know its wrong) I see that the horse lost to another once in the PP's..ok that said..

next time I cap, I look and see if a horse lost to tandem horse before...ok..he did...but theres no way this will happen again...guess what ...it does..no matter what I thought , somehow he loses to him again..this is just my opinion and what I remember..

p.s- 500,000 races you just gave away your age...lol


mike

[justin13892002]

Originally Posted by mikesal57

FTL...those are awesome numbers from a vast data base and a good tip to look for lines within 90 days ..nice

But Justin is comfortable using his last 4 no matter what..this is what works for him

With tandems bro...let me tell you...I dont keep data or models or track profiles ...but let me tell you...when I look at a race after the fact( i know its wrong) I see that the horse lost to another once in the PP's..ok that said..

next time I cap, I look and see if a horse lost to tandem horse before...ok..he did...but theres no way this will happen again...guess what ...it does..no matter what I thought , somehow he loses to him again..this is just my opinion and what I remember..

p.s- 500,000 races you just gave away your age...lol


mike

Lol how old would you say Mike....60?

As far as the recencly of last race goes, again horse has to be better before the layoff to win todays race, otherwise horse is a kickout anyways. I dont want to offend you FTL, but I posted 3 races in last 3 days and winner in top 2 in all of them. The match-up is what I use, not handicapping 101. lol. I use what Jim teached, using different fractions. I dont even lable horses E/P/S at all. If a horse can compete and keep close at a 1:09 time for 6 furlongs, and nobody in the race can compete at a 1:10, I dont care whether there is a Lone E, Lone S or what, the horse that can go 1:09 and finish strong can beat a horse closing or setting the pace in 1:10 anyday!

Mike, will you be doing some live races today?

[mikesal57]

Originally Posted by justin13892002

Lol how old would you say Mike....60?

As far as the recencly of last race goes, again horse has to be better before the layoff to win todays race, otherwise horse is a kickout anyways. I dont want to offend you FTL, but I posted 3 races in last 3 days and winner in top 2 in all of them. The match-up is what I use, not handicapping 101. lol. I use what Jim teached, using different fractions. I dont even lable horses E/P/S at all. If a horse can compete and keep close at a 1:09 time for 6 furlongs, and nobody in the race can compete at a 1:10, I dont care whether there is a Lone E, Lone S or what, the horse that can go 1:09 and finish strong can beat a horse closing or setting the pace in 1:10 anyday!

Mike, will you be doing some live races today?

Justin...I have a foot of snow in front of my house..I am dreading going out there cause I dont know when or if I'll return...

good to see your an early bird too

mike

[mikesal57]

shhhh...i think hes older..lol

[mikesal57]

and speaking of tandems...look at my Hollywood 5th..


I picked the 6 thinking I'll get a speed dual up front and he'll close on them

guess what...It didnt happen and the 1a that beat my 6 prior...did it again..

mike

[gl45]

there is only one MU, "The HAT" MU.
All the others references not using 100% "The HAT" guidelines are not MU, just proficient methods which might incorporate some of The HAT ideas, that's all.

[mikesal57]

Originally Posted by gl45

there is only one MU, "The HAT" MU.
All the others references not using 100% "The HAT" guidelines are not MU, just proficient methods which might incorporate some of The HAT ideas, that's all.

Pino..true..but the bottom line is....PROFIT!!

like u said

[mikesal57]

and my opinion from what I've seen and read and tried...no one can do what that man has done..so 100 % ...forget about it

[justin13892002]

Originally Posted by gl45

there is only one MU, "The HAT" MU.
All the others references not using 100% "The HAT" guidelines are not MU, just proficient methods which might incorporate some of The HAT ideas, that's all.

I would have to agree gl, that there is only 1 Jim Bradshaw. But that said, NOBODY can do what he did. NOBODY. He has vision like nobody else, and everybody on here will agree, nobody can pick winners like Jim.

With that said, I derived off his ideas, instead of matching up how the horses will setup the race, my idea makes it so that you can see IF the pace is SO and SO fast, only these horse can be close...

I am in no way saying it is the "matchup". Everybody on here has tried "the matchup" with moderate success, mostly due to the fact Jim was an expert at what he did, and I really dont think many can re-create his actions. Its the same idea, just different approach.

Mike, and the rest that are following along, I will be posing selections today from time to time, using my version. Feel free to stop by and chime in. Wish you all luck today.