7/18/2024 tdn r6

[Ted Craven]

Practice Key selection -

I studied this race because Tim (Lt1) indicated he had made a nice hit using the Rmath Longshot method (always a but 'fuzzy' protocol to me, I confess it ): http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthr...566#post154566

Result: 1-4-5-6 Winner pays $40, Exacta = 95-1

I allow that the #1 winner would never be a Key horse, thus must be a companion - not difficult given its NP L1, LP1, TSF3-1 (tied) and 19-1 odds.

Success lies in getting the #4 as Key, rather than, say the equally likely #3.

My decision process/observations -

1. VPB = 16 or Neutral: so TPR ratings apply/help; also sort NP by the High range SRs
2. #3 and #4 are the top 2 TPR, #4 is the better 4-Factor/BPP/PL horse; #3 is the better on the L/P Key factors; #4 is the NP Swing horse (FWIW)
3. #3 appears better than the #4 on Segments.

For me - it's a toss up between the #3 and #4. That's the best analysis I have. Chose the #4 and get the 95-1 Exacta, choose the #3 and get nothing!

Consistent protocol is what we're about in this method, IMO. If one makes a personal 'rule-of-precedence' guideline which ALWAYS (or more-or-less) says: when breaking ties, err on the side of BPP/PL rankings (i.e. 4-Factor method, or the 'mythical' Rx4 ) - then you choose the #4 and smell like roses.

Thoughts greatly appreciated (Dick , and of course everyone).

[Ted Craven]

Dick asked me to post this reply -


Ted,
I think your process is spot on. That being said, when we look at horses as close as the 3 and 4 we need some support making the final call. I have looked at situations like this and made the wrong call a number of times, so I am not claiming great knowledge. I have wrestling with "fine line" deciding factors.

1. So far, PL and BPP seem to work pretty well if the horses are candidates for the Key. My picture of the race looks like this. Not sure why this is different from yours. I get 3,6,4 as candidates for the Key. I would move the 6 to the companion because of his huge lay off. So I am down to 3 and 4. If you use PL and BPP as a final decision tool among candidates you play the 4.




2. I have been investigating, ie just observational data using the positional analysis screen as a final decision tool. Lining up on 2nd call and observing Pos+Call 1 we see the 4 as in better position and better gain. Like I said. Observational data only.




I think both these tools help us make the final decision.

[Ted Craven]

Thanks Dick! I got -- use the 4-Factor method as tie-breaker. I'm good with this, AND - I am looking for ways to best incorporate 4-Factor method into this Leverage/Pace analysis (or at least - the Prime Power and ProfitLine component).

I think this is an important aspect of our work with this L/P method - use of 4-Factors (or at least the external PP/PL factors) as confirming or non-confirming input.

--

Re the Positional Analysis screen (found under the Tandem Tab), yes interesting (though not really part of this L/P method ... so far). If it has any persistent value, we need more study and documentation (which for me right now, is a bit of a distraction). Though - per Bill's thoughts, it could be investigated.

Bill - shall I make a separate Forum under this L/P study for you to develop that further (this was after an old idea of Bill's - certainly interesting, though not deeply tested).


To your question - I use Default Config settings. Yours might differ slightly.



Ted

[kahunab]

Ted,
My settings are the same as yours. Did you make any line changes?

[Ted Craven]

Here is a look at the Entries screen for this race



here is some text - the Rx screen (again)



This is the final line of the post!

Ted

[bet2windo]

should everyone in the group have the same settings?