Is there anything new to discover?
I think there’s still a lot as to what is prioritized and what is used together. There’s also a lot that is under-utilized.
what I mean is to quickly handicap a race BEFORE considering the data — William Zayonce
I think that the most under utilized thing is our own minds, our imagination. We can often become lost in the data and miss opportunities that arise in the roughly 30% of races that lie "outside the numbers. "
Imagining alternative possible scenarios can be productive. Looking backward, I would guess that roughly 10% of all races would have been unhittable because the races were unplayable or the winners won only because of unpredictable events occurring during their running.That leaves 20% of winners at good odds that might have been playable given an alternative perspective to the data alone. We look at a 20% win percentage as very good for a horse,jockey or trainer so why would we want to omit this group from consideration?
One simple ,practical demonstration of what I mean is to quickly handicap a race BEFORE considering the data . Ignore the speed and pace figures and focus on the running lines and the human connections and "imagine" a scenario in which each horse could win. THEN consult the data and compare results. Often they'll be similar but sometimes you'll find a nice overlay that just doesn't "seem to fit the numbers profile". Perhaps what I'm getting at, is the need to think about the race in addition to "calculating " it. Therein may lie that "something new to discover". — William Zayonce
The point I was feebly attempting to convey was that we have access to soft data that can help with our final selections but often neglect its importance in identifying contenders that might be overlooked in the betting because of shortcomings in the "hard" data ranking . For me, this is the "fun" and "satisfying" part of handicapping. As to "good odds", my threshold of enthusiasm is about 9/2 but I'll gladly take as low as 2/1 in some circumstances . Generally, I'm just looking for contenders that aren't in the top 3 in the betting but ought to be but I'm not detered from betting if my pick is second or third in the betting at 3/1 or better . — William Zayonce
You've captured my meaning perfectly! And explained it in a much more erudite manner.
And, yes, it must be tested, but to remain effective(if it is) it must not become common knowledge...and if its faulty then we must continue to modify the approach. — William Zayonce
Here are some ideas: — Tony Kofalt
If I could magically tell you the winner of a single race with 100% sureness and give you $100, how do you bet it? — Dustin Korth
I once helped a guy structure a P3 ticket:
He hit it 4 times. The horse in the middle leg was Easy Goer, who won with win odds of 2/5 against 3yo's after beating older two weeks earlier (as sure as it gets). The P3 paid $1,600 (x4). So, this guy got better than 13/1 on a 2/5 horse. — RanchWest
Sorry as I dont believe I had the answer you were looking for. — Tony Kofalt