Looking at Tims PL/BPP findings using the Database Ted has posted

[kahunab]

I post this in honor of Tims work on PL and BPP. Bill Lyster and I have been working on using AI to analyze our database of over 4700 races. As novices using AI, we may make a mistake or two, but I asked AI this question in 3 different ways and got similar results each time and each time the results agreed closely with what Tim was finding. AI broke down the results by surface and distance. (Remember for consistency line selection is automatic in the data base set to best of last 3 surface and distance.)
Since I did the study 3 times and got virtually the same results, I feel comfortable sharing the AI report with you.

Here is the report. Any mistakes that you find are entirely my own.

[Mitch44]

Great work as this will make some $$$$ for those not familiar with this. Wishing you great success.

Mitch44

[dadams6357]

Dick
You must of been one hell of a teacher.
The layout is absolutely superb.
The information presented in an understandabe
well formulated style.
Thanks
Really do appreciat it,

Don

[Lt1]

Great job Dick & Bill. If folks will use this info they will win a heck of a races. Great info for exotic players.
Tim

[kahunab]

Thanks Guys, I am glad the post was helpful and meaningful.

Have a great Day,

Dick

[moffett]

Thank you agian.

[shoeless]

Thanks Dick and Bill for sharing nice job and especially LT1 for
presenting it in the first place.

Jeff

[Speed Figure]

In all fairness, this reflects more on Brisnet ratings than RDSS. RDSS utilizes exclusive data from Trackmaster. It's evident that without PL and BPP, RDSS users would lack valuable insights!

[AwesomeAgain]

In all fairness, let’s not get carried away with that nonsense.

RDSS users are not wandering around in the dark waiting for Profit Line and Prime Power to rescue them from ignorance. RDSS still has NewPace, BL/BL, V/DC, Total Energy, TPR, deceleration, %Median, EPR, LPR, FW, FX, paceline structure, velocity interpretation, and the entire Sartin framework under the hood.

Profit Line and Brisnet Prime Power are useful. Nobody with a working brain is denying that. But let’s not confuse added intelligence with life support.

PL and BPP are outside confirmation tools. They are a bonus layer. They can sharpen the picture, expose contenders, and challenge what the internal readouts are saying. Great. That still does not mean RDSS collapses without them.

The foundation is still pace, velocity, energy, pressure, distribution, deceleration, and matchup interpretation. That is the engine. That is the methodology. That is the work.

So no, RDSS users would not “lack valuable insights” without Brisnet. They would lack two useful outside opinions. Big difference. Profit line and Prime Power add value. They do not carry the building.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by AwesomeAgain

In all fairness, let’s not get carried away with that nonsense.

RDSS users are not wandering around in the dark waiting for Profit Line and Prime Power to rescue them from ignorance. RDSS still has NewPace, BL/BL, V/DC, Total Energy, TPR, deceleration, %Median, EPR, LPR, FW, FX, paceline structure, velocity interpretation, and the entire Sartin framework under the hood.

Profit Line and Brisnet Prime Power are useful. Nobody with a working brain is denying that. But let’s not confuse added intelligence with life support.

PL and BPP are outside confirmation tools. They are a bonus layer. They can sharpen the picture, expose contenders, and challenge what the internal readouts are saying. Great. That still does not mean RDSS collapses without them.

The foundation is still pace, velocity, energy, pressure, distribution, deceleration, and matchup interpretation. That is the engine. That is the methodology. That is the work.

So no, RDSS users would not “lack valuable insights” without Brisnet. They would lack two useful outside opinions. Big difference. Profit line and Prime Power add value. They do not carry the building.

Agreed. Strong contender method (top 3, top 5) for both PL and PBB, but absolutely unnecessary for handicapping in RDSS. The database percentages across the Excel worksheet make that very clear. Awesome's guidance on the foundation work is pristine, the tools are already there, assuming you know how to sequence them correctly in your handicapping. Personally, I believe that New Pace as a method is equally unnecessary and misguided, but that's strictly my own private viewpoint. Whatever helps you get there.