RDSS Tutorial Webinar #1

[raceman5]

Nice job Tim.

Bob

[Lt1]

Thanks Bob.
Tim

[Bill Lyster]

Originally Posted by Lt1

Since pacelines are of primary importance here are some other things I do. First I use the BRIS pps as my primary handicapping tool. They just contain more information then TM pps. After I note the paceline the program has chosen[and I left stand] I go to the Bris pps for confirmation. I do not use lifetime best races for horses 5 & up. I also check to see if the line is out of line with what the horse usually runs. For example lets' say that the line was chosen and has a Bris speed ratting of 89. I check the rest of the lines and see it has never more than 80 in the other races I won't use that line. My cut off is 5 pts so if it has 84 or 85 showing in the pps then I may use the 89. I also check for sealed track lines which I won't use if at all possible. There are times when fast tracks are sealed when bad weather is anticipated that day. Hope that clears my paceline selections.
Tim

Tim,

Thanks Tim, I was wondering about some of those aberrant speed ratings and how to handle them.

Where do you stand on improvements made by inexperienced horses? Do you have a limit on significant SR advances (this is, more than 5 pts) for horses like young horses learning how to run? Is there a number great than the previous PPs that makes you nervous to use?

In horses coming back after layoffs, especially if the first one or two races are dull SR-wise from previous races, do you look at previous layoffs if they had any to see if a pattern of improvement occurs after ___ races?

Have any qualms about using a first off a layoff if it matches the previous best? Do you consider that if a first after layoff races matches the previous range of best, do you look for improvement from that race or just use it as a good representation.

[Lt1]

Hi Bill. I don't try to read into anything. I just use what I see in the pps. I leave the crystal ball stuff to folks more qualified than me. As far as young horses I usually don't play too many races restricted to 3 yr olds mainly due to a lack of info and the inconsistent nature of their performances. Also I haven't mention this before I use several non Sartin factors that help me deal with some of the questions you ask such as 2 dull races in a row etc. I also pay attention to the class of the horse. Low level horses don't usually make magical turnarounds overnight. If one some how does and beats me well it's on to the next race. I do take a quick look to see if maybe I missed something but most times I didn't so why worry.
Tim

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by elocutionist

Ted, it seems you place significance in the PW%. I understand it is the ratio of place to win bets. Why is this important? Good seminar today. Looking forward to future ones.

Phil

Phil, after years of anecdotal evidence, 1000+ race modelling of this info at about 1 MTP shows a high correlation to in-the-money performance, > 80% and as high as any other factor for the Win, Place and Show performance, and higher than straight Win Odds.

Yes, ratio of Place to Win pool money. Typically (not always), money is distributed across the straight pools something like 50-30-20% (or some similar declining ratio, 60-25-15, etc). For real contenders (and for simplicity, Top half of the betting odds in reasonable sized fields) when there is MORE money bet to Win than to Place on a horse than a normal ratio (and particularly in a greater ratio than the overall Win to Place pool totals), the relative numbers of the PW% ratio indicate that someone (or collection of someones) has a better opinion of the horse's chances than is evident by either public handicapping data or simply the Win pool odds alone.

Of course, it doesn't always work. Sometimes the perceived superior PW ratio disappears after all pools are settled, or another horse rises to prominence. Often the PW% ratio agrees more or less perfectly with Win Odds, so - no extra information.

Good uses of this ratio are: to confirm that a strong Win pool favourite is also favoured by this ratio. Conversely, if a favourite is 2-1 yet is say, worse than 3rd in the PW% - this indicates an assessment of potential weakness by 'those in the know' (or 'wisdom of crowds' which is what a pari-mutuel pool is).

Or - if a longer priced horse (per Win pool money and Odds) takes consistent strong action to Win compared to what a normal distribution of money in the Place pool ought to be (= stronger PW%), then this horse is interesting, if not to Win, then to finish in-the-money. A good example on this day was Race 4, the #2 horse (http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpos...80&postcount=8 and http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpos...2&postcount=10). At Odds of 13-1 at bet-time, it had a strong PW% advantage over the 4/5 favourite. Why was that? It paid $6.60 to Place (vs $3.00 on the favourite #6 to Win) and provided a $19.40 Exacta.

This is precisely the scenario the PW% ratio was designed for, including Maiden races like this or other races where public info is equivocal or absent, such as First Time Starters. If someone or a group has privileged info about a horse, if they ACT on that opinion, it will show up in the pools somehow, sometimes with enough clarity to act yourself.

Of course, this pool imbalance scenario shows up in many other ways, in Exacta/Quinella pools, Daily Double look-ahead and look-back analysis, will-pays for horizontals, etc. With the right analysis tools, you can see lots of hidden info (sort of like an Xray, but for Tote ).

When betting, I always try to bet close to off-time and always am aware of the Top 3 PW% horses. It does not always prove useful, except when it does.

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by Lt1

... Also I haven't mention this before I use several non Sartin factors that help me deal with some of the questions you ask such as 2 dull races in a row etc. ...
Tim

FWIW, I think that what have come to be called 'Sartin factors' arose originally because of empirical evidence-based observation, modelling and record keeping. Many of those factors happened to be related to pace analysis and a Matchup analysis of running styles related to incremental energy disbursement, which was esoteric enough at the time, also difficult to process without software. Hence the advantage it gave at the time to those who could put in the effort.

Any 'non-Sartin' factors which demonstrate their usefulness on a repeated basis to improve hit-rate, ROI, finding long-shot horses, clarifying form cycles, identifying false contenders, etc - in other words, factors/analysis which works, persistently - deserve to be in anyone's arsenal! Often these work so well and are so 'under the radar' that they are not widely shared, which is part of the zero-sum-game which is pari-mutuel betting.

For me, detailed tote analysis is such a 'non-Sartin' factor. It works so reliably for me, it almost deserves to be called a 'Sartin factor', LoL, by the same reasoning that pace analysis and the Matchup got to be called 'Sartin factors' in the first place. (To be clear, much more than the PW% ratio included in RDSS). But 'Sartin Factors' are historical and publicly available and documented (some formulas more public than others), while tote analysis and other useful stuff is newer and not publicly available, so - a 'non-Sartin factor' by that definition.

I estimate that most RDSS users also make use of a collection of other tools they find useful.

Ted

[elocutionist]

Thanks Ted, Great explanation.
Phil

[Bill Lyster]

Originally Posted by Lt1

Hi Bill. I don't try to read into anything. I just use what I see in the pps. I leave the crystal ball stuff to folks more qualified than me. As far as young horses I usually don't play too many races restricted to 3 yr olds mainly due to a lack of info and the inconsistent nature of their performances. Also I haven't mention this before I use several non Sartin factors that help me deal with some of the questions you ask such as 2 dull races in a row etc. I also pay attention to the class of the horse. Low level horses don't usually make magical turnarounds overnight. If one some how does and beats me well it's on to the next race. I do take a quick look to see if maybe I missed something but most times I didn't so why worry.
Tim

Thanks Tim, always appreciate your input.

[Ted Craven]

The next edition of the RDSS Tutorial Webinar series is scheduled for this Wednesday April 28 at 1pm. Guest handicapper Tim G (Lt1)

Here is the Thread for that meeting: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpos...51&postcount=1

See you all there!

Ted

[CheckMark]

Ted

Could we have a pool as to who will be after LT/Tim? Could be a way to see who users on here want as their next guest handicapper

Just a thought