EL2 - Monmouth June 25

[Ted Craven]

Here are a few races, before scratches.

[Ted Craven]

A few more.







Good luck everyone!

Ted

[pktruckdriver]

Thanks Ted

race 2 E winner 9.20 ex and tri too

race 4 no winner

race 5 L winner 6.00

race 6 L winner 5.40

Race 7 L winner 12.00

Race 8 L winner 8.00 ex and tri too


This is awesome the winners in so few races

thanks again

[Ted Craven]

MTH June 25 Race 4, after scratches



Result: 8 - 4 - 9

Win $37.00
$1 Exacta $44.40
$1 Tri $195.90


For the card:
Winner: 6 / 6
Exacta 4 / 6
Trifecta 1 / 6

I don't think all races were bettable ...

[rmath]

Have you also run these races thru Rdss2 tosee if the same horses come up on BL/BL or VDC? I have on several occasions when time permits to do the manual new pace numbers and on several races have gotten only one or two horses coming up in the top 4 together, so instead of 4 contenders you end up with 6 or7 combined. The results of these races is just as chaotic as the number of contenders. Have not been able to distinguish which ones to play. I will say that the winner is in the combined group over 90 % of the time, but it is impossable to play 3,4,or more horses to win.
Has anyone of the RDSS2 testers had similar results?

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by rmath

Has anyone of the RDSS2 testers had similar results?

And just for the record, anyone using the existing version of RDSS (0.99.2) can answer this question as well, as RDSS2 produces the same numbers for BLBL, VDC, Velocities and Energies.

For this card, I did not run it through a paceline selection/analysis process - I didn't have the time (and also I didn't bet the races that day).

I accept that you can't bet 4 horses to win, nor 4 horse Exacta boxes (most of the time). Schwartz recommends a betting strategy accompanying his NewPace material (and in his Basics of Winning wagering strategy course).

I don't have any tested advice (yet) about how to bet those NewPace contenders, but your observations about winner 90% of the time within those 4 contenders is a good starting point! I believe you can apply some Matchup principles and an energy analysis to the #1 Early horse to determine when it will not win (hint: a lot of the time) which leaves you with 3 horses for the Win position and 4 horses (plus maybe a 'price-only' horse) for the other vertical wagers.

I also believe that with proper paceline selection, you can rely on the Top 4 BLBL tiers and the top 3 and ties VDC ranks to produce the winner 85% + of the time. You can win and lose different races using either method consistently. Perhaps a portfolio concept is in order: one bankroll is bet according to EL 2.0 (NewPace contenders) and one bankroll according classical Methodology practices. Similar to how you might invest some of your total financial portfolio in large cap stocks, some in commodity-related, some in income-producing, etc, etc - and accept the average of the collection of approaches (diversification).

Ted

[For The Lead]

Perhaps I am confused, but "rmath" seemed to be saying that he has noticed the winner of the race 90% of the time among the contenders when "combining" both New Pace AND RDSS, with there being 6 or 7 different horses in total. In an average field there are only 8 horses. In that case, finding the winner among all the contenders 90% of the time certainly seems plausible, however, I can't see it as being profitable under any circumstances.

[Ted Craven]

FTL,

You're right. On re-reading, that's what he is saying and I agree it's not useful. I would not have estimated the winner was among the 4 Contenders identified by EL 2.0 / NewPace 90% of the time. And I don't have sufficient volume of records to say what it actually is. But I think it is a very high percentage of the time.

Also, in my experience, although there can sometimes be 6 or 7 different horses when merging the 2 Contender identification methods, more often I find that number is 5 or less. And as stated above, I often don't treat all 4 NewPace contenders as bona-fide Win Contenders.

Ted

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

FTL,

I often don't treat all 4 NewPace contenders as bona-fide Win Contenders.

Ted

As well you shouldn't.

I'm just curious, the New Pace concept boils down to EARLY vs. LATE, with early NOT meaning the second call. But it doesn't seem to mean early "energy" vs. late "energy", rather, it seems to mean early energy vs. anything else. Am I correct?

[rmath]

I do not always get 6+ contenders when using both approaches, this only happens about 25% of the time , but the rest of the time you are correct at getting it down to 5 or less. I took Daves BOW class and found several of his betting suggestions helpful. I currently get 85%+ winners in my final 5 contenders using best of last 3 comparable adj. speed ratings.
My problem is that I am getting too many 3.00 to 6.00 winners.
I am aware that I am not the only one with this problem, but not sure what the solution is ,since even in these low price wins one or both of my other top 3 VDC horses goes off at 4/1 or higher.
The 90% winners comes when I have too many contenders, I have tried rerunning only these 6+ contenders thru RDSS but too many of the new pace horses are eliminated for lack of a decent pace line in their best of last three.
.