I'm Dying at Belmont

[RichieP]

Let's do a card before it runs to see what we can see.

[Dallas4lr]

Bill,

I agree totally, but for those of us who are trying to handicap full time over a few tracks this could do substantial damage to a bank roll. I guess we are just trying to deterimine a likely source for this anomaly, which i feel is a more worthwhile course of action rather than ignoring it and blindly handicapping another track.

Personally I would like to know if this is just isolated to this meet, the track, algorithims in rdss, the need for a profile, or whatever. I dont believe any one is attempting to diminish this great program; we just dont want to see` our bankroll go poff with no explanation or understanding.

If your handicapping three tracks and this develops in two out of the three; and it takes you two - three weeks to determine that this isnt just a bad run rather than an incompatibility with a particular track or meet this could be deadly.

I'm certainly not switching to anything else, rdss is far better than the rest of the pack. Maybe those of us who are more concerned with this can find a way to privately compare notes and findings and figure out whats going on or early warning signs, lol.


Rich, thats a great idea.

Respectfully
Carl

[admin]

Carl

I respect your feelings on this issue

thats what we are here for

I hope I helped, You have helped me

thank you

GS
Bill

[RichieP]

Bill

If we use the chat room to work a card from Belmont in advance can we put up screenshots in there?

I'm thinking maybe Saturday or Sunday next weekend meet up like 11 AM (This way we have scratches known) we can get together and mill around a bit

[Dallas4lr]

Bill,

Everyone one is a great help, I appreciste all of the opinions given. Was just respectfully pointing out that this anomoly might be more important to us. I will definitely participate in any exercise that may shed some light on this. The reason I havent damaged my bankroll is after the first day of non-winners I drastically decreased the size of wagers at belmont, and compensated by betting a churchill downs and Hollywood.

Have anyone noticed how dead the OTB's are lately, I've had to go to verona downs as of late to make my churchill wagers. Their not really setup for us computer handicappers - no outlets for our laptops!!!!!


Carl

[Dallas4lr]

Ahhh Rich,

On a related topic, you posted a belmont track profile in another thread. Hmmmm, it looked like a souped up version of RDSS , lol. Would you care to enlighten us on the origins of that track profile.


Carl

[RichieP]

Carl
May I ask what settings are you using?

[Tim Y]

Spec is doing very well there day to day.

[Ted Craven]

I believe one of Froggy's original theses in starting this thread was that compared to Energy and/or Synergism2 RDSS was faring poorly at this Belmont meet, in his hands. Not necessarily, or only, that he wasn't having success at Belmont: any given meet, or sequence of races can end up inscrutable, or any combination of missed opportunities or attention lapses, or bad beats can and do occur. That's why luck and circumstance tend to have more impact over the short term, but skill, record keeping, self-confidence and application of knowledge not widely held will prove out in the longer term.

Froggy wanted to know why 2 (or 3) programs with similar heritages produced different numbers, and I think Carl was asking a similar question. I don't know the final answer about that specific question - I don't know the insides of Energy as well as I do Validator/Speculator (but I'm learning...). I suggested earlier to compare RDSS uandjusted numbers (i.e. DTV, ITV) to Energy (which are unadjusted by an external DTV and ITV).

Froggy also posted 1 race example, and 1 race does not make an indictment of a meet. I'm sure there are lots of other examples which could be posted, and any one of them may or may not be gettable by following perhaps some alternate consistent paceline or analysis method. It's the aggregate, to me, which is most important, not any given race, though clearly the aggregate comprises single races, so that's where the work is.

Also during this time, Froggy has been posting results from 1 horse bets at Belmont, following his 'RDSS social security system' (or RDSSSSS), and is doing rather well.

It makes me think a few things:

1. there is more to wagering than win betting, and more to win betting than 2 horse betting

2. there are more readouts in RDSS (and Val and Spec) than BL/BL. I myself ALWAYS consider the Segments screen, especially the CBL readouts and who dominates at the first 2 calls, and also look for the opposite horse in the E/L screen. Since I don't have a model of Belmont, I must rely more on my understanding of the Match Up, such as it is. CBL in RDSS/Spec is the readout most analagous to Emuv, Smuv uXr in Energy.

3. These other screen really help in identifying horses with lower energy but high impact on the pace and match up, usually paying good money, if not to win then in other pools when the logical bet is a low priced favourite.


That said, I also want to understand the differences between RDSS and Energy particularly (and also Syn2). Carl, one major difference is the use of external variants from TrackMaster (DTV, ITV) compared to internally constructed variants/adjustments; perhaps there are more than the usual quantity of shippers right now and ITV equalization of tracks surfaces is proving less functional than normal. That's only a hypothesis, not a truth. Perhaps the most truthful observation so far is that mutli-horse win betting off RDSS' BL/BL is insufficient (for some) to turn a profit at Belmont so far.

I'd love to participate in a day at Belmont, next weekend. I can offer the GoToMeeting conferencing system if it is helpful. Anyone can present, all can comment.

Ted

[Ted Craven]

I was gone for a couple of days to Toronto. Yesterday I spent at Woodbine and I worked both the Woodbine and the Belmont cards.

Here were my results for Belmont (using RDSS in Spec mode), based on $10 2 horse win bets. The races I actually bet are marked in bold.



There were several place and exacta opportunities available by making judicious use of BL/BL in combination with CBL and the E/L screen, and in the 7th race a juicy exacta, tri and super available for free. (I did not wager any of those).

This was just one day (9 races worked), and I personally would not make any judgements on that small a sample. When I wager (not often enough) I seek to stay even, but be on the ball when the longshots roll in. I missed that opportunity (for the gettable longshot) at WO yesterday in the 8th race ($55.60) and only broke even.

Ted