Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > RDSS 2.2 (and previous versions)
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

RDSS 2.2 (and previous versions) Racing Decision Support System - The NEW Version 2.2

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-13-2016, 05:47 PM   #1
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,852
Smile RDSS 2.1 Factor Statistical Study

Bill Lyster volunteered to gather statistics from RDSS2.1 Factors, some existing and some new ones, and present them in a way which might give some validation that the factors represent either an improvement over what we have now (e.g. the new CR+ Class Rating compared to the traditional CR Class Rating) or new factors which we have not seen before: the Rx Line Score and the Rx1 variant of it (which excludes the external 'Power Number' component of it, currently BRIS ProfitLine).

I can't keep straight (sorry Bill ) how many races are involved, because some races from 2015 did not involve Rx (only Rx1) and we added VDC only after a large number of races has already been captured. But it 2000+ races in all from 2015 and 2016 were input (Bill, feel free to clarify).

(Note: in future, this is what the Modeler is for - statistical including Impact Value studies).

Attached here in Excel spreadsheets are some of the results of what Bill has presented to me, broken down in various ways. The sheets show Hit Rate, average Mutuel and ROI by rank, and a subtotal by Top 4 combined ranks (also Rank 5 in the overall Summary sheet). Also a combined ROI% betting ALL Top 4 ranks (i.e. the loss involved)

The sheet named '...by distance...' is broken down by distance groupings. It has separate lines for races from Southern California (SA and DMR) in 2015 and for all other races (2016 GP, TAM - possibly other tracks).

The other Summary sheet is broken down by Winners/Maidens, then Field Size groupings, then Surface.

The overall takeaway is:

1. The new CR+ as a Class factor is several percentage points better than the old CR factor.

2. CSR Composite Speed Rating is a very predictive factor - 74% Top 4 and > 80% Top 5. CSR ranks > 5 hit less than 20% of the time (all distances, tracks, surfaces, field sizes)

3. Of the new Rx and Rx1 factors (Rx1 excludes the external 'Power Number' / ProfitLine), Rx has a slightly higher Hit Rate (74.8%), and Rx=1 (Rx rank 1) average mutuel than Rx1, though lower average mutuel from Ranks 2 and 3. The Top 4 combined ROI for Rx is slightly better than Rx1 (4% loss versus 6% loss). However for day-to-day use, the Rx and Rx1 line Scores can probably be used interchangeably (i.e. you don't need TwinSpires' ProfitLine number - except perhaps in Maiden races with FTS, where it is a definite help along with Workout Patterns and Tote Analysis).

4. VDC Top 4 Hit Rate is 73% - always reliable, although a fair number of tied ranks.

Notes: These initial studies are imperfect in that they often have multiple ties, which means that in someraces, there are more than 4 horses in the Top 4 ranks. VDC has more tied ranks than CSR which has more ties than Rx and Rx1. CR+ has almost no ties. Further studies need to be done (i.e. in the Modeler) to create proper Impact Values for these and other Factors.

However, I have found that there is almost NEVER a doubt in identifying which are the Top 4 ranked Rx or CR+ horses. Also - the BL/BL ranks/tiers are almost always unique, though not yet part of these studies.

FWIW, I almost never include CSR horses with rank > 5 as Primary Contenders - unless there are extenuating circumstances such as trouble or unsuitable distance/surface or other legitimate excuse in usually the last 2 lines, being the most highly weighted in the CSR formula (in which case there is a method of recalculating CSR without that line).

All in all - I found these stats sufficiently encouraging to create a new Analysis screen around them - the Rx Screen.

The Studies:
* RDSS Summary Stats-Rev2.xlsx
* RDSS Summary Stats - by Distance-Rev2.xlsx


If Bill Lyster is available to comment on these studies or correct any mis-statements I have made, I will appreciate his help with that while I am gone the rest of the month.

Again, thank you Bill - it was a monumental amount of hand data entry (though I know you love it ). In the future, the Modeler should make this and much more, much easier.

Enjoy!

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™

Last edited by Ted Craven; 04-13-2016 at 05:52 PM.
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 07:52 PM   #2
RichieP
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Craven View Post
FWIW, I almost never include CSR horses with rank > 5 as Primary Contenders - unless there are extenuating circumstances such as trouble or unsuitable distance/surface or other legitimate excuse in usually the last 2 lines, being the most highly weighted in the CSR formula (in which case there is a method of recalculating CSR without that line).

Ted

Hi Ted
May I ask if this is right:
CSR is also distance (S/R) influenced in creating the number? I ask because I am betting only longer priced horses and a LOT are not top 5 CSR. I dont even look at that rating anymore (looking at all tracks, surfaces with minimum of 8 betting entries when I have time to wager).

Also a caveat I feel is needed here: since Nov 14th I have bet a total of only 45 races, I PASS a ton of races that dont look right to my Mind's Eye if you will and I am doing very well achieving a 40% ROI without rebates win betting only.

Saying this because in no way am I attempting to put down all the hard work that its creator has done on it

Please this is not meant as a redboard but todays 8th race at Oaklawn is a perfect example of my opening paragraph. $16.80 wire to wire winner is nowhere on CSR yet figures in some way,shape or form if one were to start at the bottom of the pp's and work there way up/

YES the last races were sprinting and the race today was a 2 turn mile and this horse did ALL its winning routing.

Can you please clarify a bit whats up?
Thanx for ALL your hard work!
Richie
__________________
"Grampy I'm talking to you!"
RichieP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 07:59 PM   #3
Bill Lyster
Grade 1
 
Bill Lyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
The study was done before Ted and I decided that we needed the ability to forgive a really bad race (but only one race for each horse), so the CSR info includes horses who might have fared better in the CSR rankings had we used the open to recalculate. I have checked this "forgive" feature out on a limited basis and sometimes the CSR ranking changes and some times it does not. So in my view the CSR win %-ages should be looked upon as a minimum. Also note that when you use the forgive feature it usually only changes the SCR ranking if the race forgiven is the last or 2nd last race. This is because the weighting decreases the deeper into the PPs you go.

Also note that the top 5 CSR win about 80% on the dirt but only about 66% on the turf (races with at least 7 horses entered). The hit rates are a little higher in fields of 5 or 6 but that is to be expected

A couple of examples of the types of horses that might benefit with the recalculate feature:
- horses that get creamed at the break and never got into the race;
- horses that especially in the last two races ran on new surfaces and did not fare well, but which today are returning to a surface on which they have done better;
- At Santa Anita the adjusted speed ratings for horses running the downhill turf course are about 7 or 8 points LOWER than horses who ran on flat sprint turf races elsewhere or turf routes. So if you see that a horse prepped down the hill and got a 74 SR, the horse will usually bet competitive with milers or other distance horses with adjusted SRs of 81-82
Bill Lyster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 09:08 PM   #4
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP View Post
Hi Ted
May I ask if this is right:
CSR is also distance (S/R) influenced in creating the number? I ask because I am betting only longer priced horses and a LOT are not top 5 CSR. I dont even look at that rating anymore (looking at all tracks, surfaces with minimum of 8 betting entries when I have time to wager).

Also a caveat I feel is needed here: since Nov 14th I have bet a total of only 45 races, I PASS a ton of races that dont look right to my Mind's Eye if you will and I am doing very well achieving a 40% ROI without rebates win betting only.

Saying this because in no way am I attempting to put down all the hard work that its creator has done on it

Please this is not meant as a redboard but todays 8th race at Oaklawn is a perfect example of my opening paragraph. $16.80 wire to wire winner is nowhere on CSR yet figures in some way,shape or form if one were to start at the bottom of the pp's and work there way up/

YES the last races were sprinting and the race today was a 2 turn mile and this horse did ALL its winning routing.

Can you please clarify a bit whats up?
Thanx for ALL your hard work!
Richie
Hi Rich - this will probably be my last post for a few days (taking off to your fair country for 2 weeks ). The CSR is not really distance related - it uses the projected-to-today's-distance Adjusted Speed Rating and does a weighted composite of the last 4 of those, emphasis gradually declining as we go back in time.

However - I completely agree that that particular race - maybe many of the races you are working and winning - are won by other means in the 'big tent' of Sartin Methodology/Matchup. By my reckoning, there are approximately 17 (or 71 ) ways to get various races - some used on the same race by different people and getting the same winner - some other races (or particular kinds of races) lending themselves only to being won by certain analyses.

In the OP race you cite, someone looking for an Early horse who could dominate the other Earlies (including slowing down sufficiently to still stay ahead and throw the other Earlies off their preferred position) might have clearly landed on the #8 winner. I see different tools for different practitioners. The use of a collection of aggregate factors like CSR (and its involvement in the Rx) in no way invalidates the Matchup (haha - as if). That horse also showed the largest E/L Early stick (as did several of its other pacelines going all the way back to its deep past) - so, I would like to think that if I was (or if any astute person was) paying attention to fundamentals (i.e. the Matchup) they would have clued into that horse. Maybe not - who knows.

Name:  OP0413-8.png
Views: 1458
Size:  179.7 KB

I guess my question is (a rhetorical question) - because some races can be won by the means cited above - does that mean that NO races should be looked at by means suggested by the weight of stats Bill has gathered, and as portrayed in the BLBL screen and (perhaps) the upcoming Rx Line Scores? I suspect there are enough races for BOTH approaches - sometimes at the same time.

Some approaches allow you to play A LOT more races - some less so. Each method is valid for a particular person's temperament, IMO. I salute your focus on the races which work for you - and your winning record lately!

No problem with any point-of-view you have taken here - and no problem if - on balance - you choose to 'kick to the curb' the CSR or ANY other factor. It's the winning, the thickness of the wallet, and the enjoyment and sharing of good times which is the measure of things (IMO )

Continued success!

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 09:35 PM   #5
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
I agree with RichieP and totally ignore the CSR and wish it wasn't even in the line score or program. Modelling has proven it to be a nonfactor for me. While the recalculate feature can probably help some IMO we would have to recalculate surface also. Additionally going back too many races one has to wonder if their still dealing with the same horse. The best two of the last three at a similar dis. & surface would be a much better factor.
A top four ranking is good for exactas but we should be concerned with factors with a high ranking of # 1 & # 2 for winner getting.

IMO wishing it was excluded.

Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 09:51 PM   #6
Bill Lyster
Grade 1
 
Bill Lyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
Mitch, when the study was done, we set the paceline selection to automatically select the best of the last three according to how the program is coded. In many cases, I personally would not have chosen the lines that the program did, but the results are what the program chose, not me. In some cases, the program chose grass lines for dirt races and vice versa when races on todays surface were not competitive - which really surprised me! So in that respect there was no deviation in the selection of pacelines. In my own handicapping I am learning that I do a lot of zigging and zagging and as a result my paceline selections get shaded towards my own long held beliefs which long term have not yielded much to crow about. 2500 races later, my beliefs are changing for the better because of what this study shows. Races came from SA, DMR, TAM, GP, BEL, with the number of races approximately split between east and west.
Bill Lyster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2016, 10:07 PM   #7
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
Your zigging and zagging is completely understandable. And anyone not reviewing those automatic pace lines is asking for trouble. Every horse and line must be reviewed for agreement and success.

Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2016, 12:56 AM   #8
Bill Lyster
Grade 1
 
Bill Lyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
Mitch:
While in concept I totally agree with you about reviewing paceline selection, let me put this infront of you:

With automatice line selection based on "best of last three ..." In races with more than 7 horses there were 406 races where the winner was in the top three CSR AND in the top three Rx. So the bet would be $2 x 3 horses, total $2436. The return for this bet was $3,298.70, a profit of $862.70 and an ROI of +35.4%.

When both are top two, the profit on 248 races $658.40, ROI +66.4%

To put this in perspective this number of wins is approximately 10% of the study, so there is about one play per card.
Bill Lyster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2016, 03:00 AM   #9
Mark
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 318
What is Rx?
Mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2016, 03:33 AM   #10
Bill V.
The egg man
 
Bill V.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
Bill

You say " Best of the last 3"
Did you use Doc's guidelines of the best of the last 3 speed ratings based on the adjusted track master speed ratings. at a comparable distance and surface ,and competition level based on total energy ?
With the 50 % dtv? While using Validator mode
Or did you test your best of last 3 using other methods ?
Bill V. is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Disappointed RDSS Evaluator Ted Craven RDSS 58 08-08-2011 11:32 AM
RDSS 2.0/Happy Holidays/Thank You! Ted Craven RDSS2 / FAQ's 4 01-09-2010 06:03 PM
Release Notes - Version 0.98.7 Ted Craven RDSS Info, Reference 2 07-17-2009 11:09 AM
RDSS Subscription / Forum Re-organization Ted Craven RDSS 1 03-07-2009 01:35 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:29 AM.