• Dave Schwartz
    187


    Seems like your outlook is a lot like "Jimmy's" who I mentioned above.
  • Tom
    48
    Conley,
    I do something very similar, starting at the bottom working up, looking for form cycles and trying to figure out how the horse fits to today's conditions and where his form is today.
  • Conley
    298
    ↪Conley

    Seems like your outlook is a lot like "Jimmy's" who I mentioned above.
    Dave Schwartz

    Is that a good thing or bad thing?
  • Conley
    298
    Conley,
    I do something very similar, starting at the bottom working up, looking for form cycles and trying to figure out how the horse fits to today's conditions and where his form is today.
    Tom

    Cool! Glad we think alike :)
  • Tony Kofalt
    277

    Excellent approach
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    Is that a good thing or bad thing?Conley

    As I said, I learned a lot from him.

    But I suppose the proper answer would be, "That depends upon whether or not it is working for you."

    Based upon the picks you've posted it would seem that it is.
    (Allowing for small sample, of course.)
  • Steven
    108
    Okay, back from the ether.

    I found a few items on time decay variables but the most informative was Jeff Pratt's (jCapper Jeff) description of some new jCapper time delay variables. He uses a half life of 120 days so I tried that. Taking the maidens out of the spreadsheet gives us a win percentage at GPX 2021 of 21.9% with an roi of 1.77.

    Next question "is 120 days a good half life or is there a better one, 90 days, 75 days?????". I'll get around to answering my own question when I get to sit down in front of the computer for another couple of hours.
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    Next question "is 120 days a good half life or is there a better one, 90 days, 75 days?????". I'll get around to answering my own question when I get to sit down in front of the computer for another couple of hours.Steven

    That is the standard Benter approach.
    I've tried some others a decade ago and it seemed to be better.
    Might have shifted out a little further but not by much.
  • Dave Schwartz
    187

    Your post describes a different purpose than what I use it for.

    I am using it as a METRIC so that I don't have to BUILD A STORY.

    That's why I can completely handicap a race in 3 minutes, giving me time to enjoy the watching of the race.

    So many people see each race as a PUZZLE to be figured out.

    I see RACING as the PUZZLE!
  • John Rosier
    1
    I would be interested in what you learnt about the Australian approach. Can you share it?
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    I would be interested in what you learnt about the Australian approach. Can you share it?John Rosier

    A couple of very cool ideas.

    First, understand that the AUS PPs are just... lacking. What we take for granted in the depth and quality of data is literally like 50x what the AUS punters have!

    When working with the AUS guys I was able to get their data. Would you believe that what we get for (say) $125 per month would cost over $3,000 over there - and would still be like 1/3 of ours!

    So, when I say, that I learned some good stuff, I don't mean that it is readily available.

    So, here's some cool ideas that I will be adding to our stuff.

    RAN WELL
    Think of it as sort of like Quirin's "Good Race."
    Ran 1st,2nd,3rd
    or
    Within 2 lengths (3 lengths in a route)

    But, instead, they measure it in lengths behind the winner.

    EXPECTED TO RUN WELL
    Imagine a table that has 2 columns.
    • 1st column is ODDS.
    • 2nd column is lengths behind

    Now imagine that the Lengths Behind column represents the Average Lengths Behind for a horse in each of the given odds ranges.

    Thus, one can look at a horse that is 5/2 and say that HE SHOULD RUN WITHIN 2.3 LENGTHS.
    (Not the actual number.)

    Imagine having that for each odds range.

    CORRELATING ODDS TO LENGTHS & BACK
    The upshot of this is that a particular performance (i.e. beaten lengths) can now be graded as "He ran like 2/1" or "He ran like 12/1."

    Of course, the class levels are another cool thing, but I will leave that for another day.
  • John Rosier
    1
    If you want to see an interesting analysis of Expected Performance Last Start vs Actual Performance This Start see https://www.betfair.com.au/hub/importance-of-previous-starting-prices/
    The analysis relates to Australian racing and the article is on Betfair Australia site. Let me know if you can't access it.
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    If you want to see an interesting analysis of Expected Performance Last Start vs Actual Performance This Start see https://www.betfair.com.au/hub/importance-of-previous-starting-prices/
    The analysis relates to Australian racing and the article is on Betfair Australia site. Let me know if you can't access it.
    John Rosier

    That is an excellent article!
    A bit more in-depth than the one I read on Sky Racing.

    Thank you.
  • Jim Michalak
    3
    Dave: are you willing to share what makes Jimmy's work out chart different than the standard work out chart where there is a point scale for the various times at the various distances. Thanks!
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    Dave: are you willing to share what makes Jimmy's work out chart different than the standard work out chart where there is a point scale for the various times at the various distances. Thanks!Jim Michalak

    Sure.

    Do you have the workout chart?

    Let me see if I can find a link.
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    Dave: are you willing to share what makes Jimmy's work out chart different than the standard work out chart where there is a point scale for the various times at the various distances. Thanks!Jim Michalak

    HorseStreet Workout Chart

    Take a look at it and see if there is anything that strikes you as meriting discussion.
  • RanchWest
    278
    Take a look at it and see if there is anything that strikes you as meriting discussion.Dave Schwartz

    In the recesses of my mind is something about breezing and handily being different in different regions, east vs. west. This had to have been from at least 15 years ago and maybe much more. Have you ever heard anything like that? I don't know whether it was true back then or whether it would still be true today.
  • Jim Michalak
    3
    Dave: what is the thinking behind making the horse's time slower for a gate work? Also, are the additions and subtractions for breezing, gate and muddy full seconds or fifths of seconds? Most work out charts I have seen start with 100 points = 46 seconds for 4 furlongs whereas Jimmy's is 46.4. It also goes up to 120 points. And the scoring is different. thank you for posting.
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    Dave: what is the thinking behind making the horse'stime slower for a gate work? Also, are the additions and subtractions for breezing, gate and muddy full seconds or fifths of seconds? Most work out charts I have seen start with 100 points = 46 seconds for 4 furlongs whereas Jimmy's is 46.4. It also goes up to 120 points. And the scoring is different. thank you for posting.Jim Michalak

    1/5s of a second.
    Remember this was built a long time ago. Back then everything was done in 1/5s.

    Slower for gate work
    Jimmy always said that a horse who needed to work from the gate had a problem with the gate.

    I first researched this about 1998 or so. Tried a bunch of different numbers - ranging from +8 to -8 and could not find anything better than -5. (i.e. same as Jimmy.)


    In the recesses of my mind is something about breezing and handily being different in different regions, east vs. west. This had to have been from at least 15 years ago and maybe much more. Have you ever heard anything like that? I don't know whether it was true back then or whether it would still be true today.RanchWest

    I did that test as well. The results were that Breezing vs Handily, while inconsistent at some tracks, still enhanced the results.

    Building Track Workout Pars
    I also tried building track pars for workouts.
    Every effort I made with that was a complete failure.

    While it seems obvious (to me) that works from AQU should be on a different scale from (say) WYO, I just could find no basis for any adjustment.

    It's like daily variants... Sure, I create them in my HorseStree Pars. But I NEVER actually use them.

    Every study I have ever done indicates that no variant outperforms any variant.

    Not saying that figures made on a race-by-race basis are not an improvement.
    A craftsman can work numbers with figs. Or they can be completely inconsistent. Depends on the craftsman.

    But even the best numbers are not going to make THAT MUCH difference.
    Before you jump all over me for that one... It is the PROPER INTERPRETATION of those numbers that make it work.
  • RanchWest
    278
    Before you jump all over me for that one...Dave Schwartz

    The only way I use variants is as one of many, many factors as to whether to use a line as my pace line. If the variant is too extreme, it may not be a representative line.
  • Biniak
    48
    Every study I have ever done indicates that no variant outperforms any variant.Dave Schwartz

    So why not just use raw times?
  • Dave Schwartz
    187
    So why not just use raw times?Biniak

    Because they are not as good as ratings produced from pars.

    Pars WORK!
    AVERAGE Daily variants do not.
12Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Please register to see more

Forum Members always see the latest updates and news first. Sign up today.