Yep, any running line at all for any horse that happened to run close to both 4F and Final par. I'm looking for discrepancies in different sites' figures.

2 random horses from 2 different tracks both running to that particular tracks' 4F/Final par (as well as similar TV) should yield similar figures. However, there seems to spots where they don't. I want to see if measuring this theoretical margin of error and adjusting for it yields an edge over other users of those particular figures. Possibly a lot of work for nothing but I have time so oh well...

I think there are very very few instances where a Place bet is a good bet.

Your payout is directly correlated to the other finisher. Since favorites win the most, 2nd favs win the 2nd most, and so on...you are always putting yourself most likely live to the worst payout on your opinion, 2nd most likely to the 2nd worse, and so on. Now, let's say you hate the favorite though?...well in that case you are much more likely to have found an overlay in the Win Pool than you are simply having the previously mentioned Place likelihoods upgraded one spot.

Logically, place bets just don't make sense to ever make outside a few exceptions where you're identifying weaknesses in the market.

Seems a paradox though, no? If I bet both, I'm guaranteed one loss and have effectively cut my paying odds to 3/1 and 7/1. So now I have two underlays instead of one overlay.

On 7/2 program, the #3 Our Noble Ortega shows last race as 6/11 going 1m70y on Dirt. However, that race was actually moved to tapeta from turf.

Well, my BRIS data comes in correct as "all weather" as long as the race was originally scheduled for that. The issue is that off-the-turf races come in as dirt and was curious if anyone else noticed this.

With $1.4 million wagered, updated BEL Stakes odds.
1 We the People 6-1
2 Skippylongstocking 9-1
3 Nest 9-2
4 Rich Strike 7-2
5 Creative Minister 7-1
6 Mo Donegal 5-2
7 Golden Glider 13-1
8 Barber Road 8-1

Here's what I came up with
https://predicteform.com/Blog

A lot of missing top 3 YOs but really a pretty good field. Field is absolutely loaded with late speed and you've got a potential pacesetter that is unproven outside easy trips and may not have to prove otherwise here. Interesting race.

Congrats, go get some winners :fire:

Probably just got a bad trip :lol:

I mean, I get the Derby winner was 80/1 so a bunch of casual bettors are gonna see his 50/1 morning line and throw a few bucks down...but he's shorter odds than Simplification and Creative Minister. Nearly the same odds as Early Voting. This is insanity lol.

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

It's "Pace makes the race"...not "Pace makes it a fluke."

I think the majority of missing pieces out there for handicapping data involve the actual betting. There's tons and tons of data on PICKING contenders but not all that much on BETTING contenders.

If I could magically tell you the winner of a single race with 100% sureness and give you $100, how do you bet it?

There's win, you can top an exacta or tri to all, you can double to all on either side, etc. I wonder how many handicappers actually possess the skill (or will) to actually analyze what the right decision is given this scenario.

I couldn't even count the number of times I've heard people comment (especially myself included) that they had the horse...but they just didn't bet it right.

If I may, I'm going to play a little devil's advocate here for the sake of discussion and say when selecting a single representative paceline to predict today's outcome, This may give you the runner's "ability level"...but would seem to ignore the condition and form cycle pattern of the runner when that particular representative paceline was earned...which could have no relationship to the current condition and form cycle pattern...which greatly affects today's "ability level." Thanks guys.

Ha yeah I was 2 out of 3 also.

Nice exacta in last to mention the 70/1 at least, although I fumbled the “him”…shoulda been “her”

Attached, here's a "bad favorite" checklist I picked up somewhere that may be of interest.

I understand the definitions BRIS gives that you posted. I'm not quite understanding their reasoning.

They're saying variable distance is the reason you use variable lengths for speed figures and since they're measuring fixed distance for pace calls, they can now use fixed lengths.

However, it's not directly the distance that is the reason for variable length on speed figures, it's the variable velocity caused by the distance.

It's fine when they say 44 flat could be a 90 figure whether it's a 5F dirt sprint or 1m turf route...but I'm unsure if it's fair to say beaten lengths would be the same all across that scale.

Wouldn't the measured lengths differ if Horse A at a 90 wanted to "even up" on Horse B at a 92 versus Horse C at a 60 wanting to catch Horse D at 62?

Yea Messier looks pretty strong here. Maybe hurts the other short prices' confidence and some value can run into the exacta.

1 on top of 3,5

Nailed that Holy Bull, Ranch. That's great capping in what looked like a pretty wide open race.

Robert B Lewis at Santa Anita today pretty lacking. 5-horse field and 4 of them have early speed. Yikes.