Respectfully, single race examples have only slightly better than zero value.

The answer must be verified with much larger samples.

Without a few hundred negative picks made either completely rule-based or before hand, it's all anecdotal.

That's why I react so negatively when someone speaks of building models in notebooks: in order to do research, one must look across dozens of pages in such a notebook.

I am doing it the old fashioned way in a notebook — Conley

OMG!!!!

Ranch right now I am keeping track of track biases and specifically looking at poor/bad or "negative" biases that I can see

I am doing almost 99% of the tracks on North America right now and have data starting from the start of this month if anyone wanted a quick sneak peek of what I do (which is probably nobody) — Conley

Are you doing this in a spreadsheet?

I also flag horses with troubled trips. I figure that a horse should also be forgiven for the occasional troubled trip, but when it keeps happening, maybe it isn't a coincidence. — RanchWest

Please tell me about HOW you do that.

I'm designing a note-taking & searching process in The Studio, and, not being a note taker myself, I'm a little lost.

I am currently working on tracking jockey troubled trips. I know that a troubled trip can happen to any jockey at any time. But I am thinking that jockeys that have a lot of troubled trips may not be very good wagers. What do you think? — RanchWest

How are you doing that?
Comments?

I'm trying to figure out how to share this photo. I'll see what I can come up with because the "Image" and "Upload Files" ways aren't working at the moment. User error, most likely. — Lawrence

Before I tell you how please I am to see you here - just pretend I didn't say that - let me tell you the easiest way to upload a file. OH! You figured it out!

I LOVE what you are doing.

Let me know how I can help.

BTW, I will predict that what you find from your spreadsheet work will work but not the way you think.

I'll guess that you will find that the obvious horses are what have been dubbed BOLOs by the locals. Can't recall at the moment whether it was @RanchWest, @Biniak, or @Steven, but it was definitely one of them

A BOLO is a BET AGAINST LOW ODDS horse.

Congratulations on some nice work.

#BOLO

I'm so confused. Fenwick bet down to 7/1??? — Dustin Korth

Fenwick finished last, 40 1/2 lengths behind. — RanchWest

Probably just got a bad trip :lol: — Dustin Korth

Hey that was my 10k bet you're making fun of. — Biniak

My condolences. The memorial service will be on Tuesday. — RanchWest

My next line is I was the jockey. So don't say "bad ride", it was just nerves. — Biniak

You guys are hilarious.
:rofl:

First line in my post.

(This is a re-release of a blog post from PaceMakesTheRace.com.) — Dave Schwartz

The concepts are still solid.

BTW, I spent some time researching my current approach and think I have found a way to improve it.

Needs more races.

One of the things I like to do is watch handicapping videos. One thing I’ve noticed is that Dave Schwartz and Michael Pizzolla have two totally different styles. Michael says if a race doesn’t have value he doesn’t play it. Dave says he plays them all! no race is unplayable! Here's Pizzolla's Preakness rant. I always give him credit for these because he does them before the race. Who's style would you say your playing style is more like? — Mark

Key point is that all races have a way to play them.

They can be quantified as:
1. Bet Against 1.21
Bet Against a horse projected to be less than 1.22:1
This race is considered chaotic and there will be no handicapping.
(Can't have a Chaos Race with less than 7 horses.)

2. Bet Against Low Odds (BALO)
Bet Against a horse projected to be less than 3/1
This race will be a conventional Contender Selection race, after the BALO horse(s) have been removed.

3. Single 1.21
Race with a 1.21 horse who deserves to be singled.

BTW, I used to do quite a few Live Play Sessions but only for HSH users.
When I release Studio I'll go back to doing them.

As I write The Studio, I am acutely aware of the difference between my coding now and 20 years ago because I have dozens of functions to import. It is downright depressing to see my poor coding habits from the past.

However, things that have been in place for a decade or more, or something that is very complex, needs to remain as is.

Going forward, I am committed to:
Zero documentation.
Because the code is so clear and the variables named so obviously that no docs are needed.
This includes function names.
(Often called writing explicit code.

Always code to my own standards.
Standard icons, button sizes, window ratios, etc.
Every button has a tool tip, etc.

Never write the same code twice.
Turn it into a function or procedure if possible.

Code that fits on a single page
If it's going to stretch across multiple pages, then there should be functions or routines that contain the excess code.

Avoid too much Overloading
Only use the obvious

Declare all variables
Variables should not be declared via use, but rather declared as local or global variables.

Avoid Global Variables
... except when absolutely necessary.

The "#BALO" is a hashtag which makes it searchable.

"BALO" means "Bet Against Low Odds."

How do we find the BA LO horse? — RanchWest

The video provided 2 solid ways.

BALO - I like it!

[edit]
Added as a hashtag in the original post.

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

Great point. :100:

I ask this question a little differently: "What is the best way to EXPLOIT what I believe to be true about this race?"

This is what I refer to as "Leverage Points."

#LeveragePoints #LevPts

I did the same thing with you that I did with everyone else: I changed the setting and forgot that I have to scroll way down the page and hit save.

Fixed now.
Sorry.

Fixed now.

The whale's rake is much smaller. The track's take is way too much! — Biniak

But combined... it's even worse.

It seems to me the whales are on the "best horse" a lot. We have to find races where the "best horse" is vulnerable. It's still a parimutuel game... yes, the whales can bet a horse to 1/5, but that means there may be a 7/1 with a shot. — RanchWest

... that doesn't win.
THAT's the problem.

88% of the races are won by horses under 8/1.
That upper 12% - there are 25 starters for every winner.

In my opinion - If you want to win, you have to be able to find a losing proposition among the low-odds horses. Not a horse that WILL LOSE TODAY, but a horse that will lose money long-term.

This demands a new way to look at the race.

Maybe we should be thankful for the whales keeping our game alive. Seems to me like they are the equivalent of market makers in the stock market, taking a small percentage in exchange for keeping the order flow liquid. — Biniak

That's what the tracks say, but what it does is take money out of the game.

Think of it like a poker table with 2 dealers - both taking a rake.

Can you please be a reference when Woodbine calls for the analyst position in the next few weeks? — Conley

That would need to be a private discussion.