No, there is no video.

Today I showed you how to use some of the amazingly simple-but-powerful components in DET.

Each of those components can be used for HIT RATE (low side) or VALUE, simply by reversing the sort.

Yes, it really is that simple.
And, no two players will play the same way.
_______________________________________
What were the takeaways?

1. You need both hit rate and value.
Depending upon what your goals are, you either:
A. 2-PARTS HIT RATE...
... and 1-part value
or
B. 2-PARTS VALUE...
... and 1-part Hit rate.

2. "Hit Rate" is achieved by anything that pushes winners towards the top.
Obviously, strong objects/factors/angles, etc. work better than weak ones.

3. "Value" is achieved by anything that pushes prices up.

4. Hit rate without a value component is destined to fail.
You'll cash a lot of tickets and lose.

5. Value (i.e. price) without a hit rate component is destined to fail.
You'll experience some great days - especially when you can catch 2 or more big payoffs.

In between those big wins, you will receive horrible beatings at the hands of the LHs. (Low-odds horses)

6. The "SECRET" is to have a balance...
...between the two, that serves your desired style of play.

Thanks for this Dave.
Today’s session was interesting for me in that I went from more “Dazed and Confused” half-way through, to a real “Ah Ha” moment for me later on in the session.
For me, you provided a framework of the DET capabilities within the constructs of HOW they might be applied given what you are trying to accomplish in the situational moment (Risk-based approach). The analogies to football play calling were very helpful. I think Horseplayers (me included) like to forge a “Method/Approach/Process” that fits all scenarios.

What brought it to ground for me was when you added the “Risk/Reward” element near the end and having a true sense of being in control based on what I am trying to accomplish at the moment. That's pretty refreshing to me actually...

In short, you provided a great foundation for me to develop my own approach that incorporates different levels of risk, depending on what I am looking to accomplish for the situation facing me at that moment.

My objective moving forward is to formulate my tiers of risk, test them, and apply them appropriately for each situation that I face in my session play. Thanks again!

The "Risk" score is a great idea. Hopefully, someone out there who studies their bets in Excel will calculate a risk score for each race bet and track how they perform in different risk scores...and then share their results with us. The beauty about the risk score is that it is a dT generated figure that reduces the need to take a peek at the tote board--for those of us who still like to see what the public thinks before making a bet.

If I have time this week, I would like to calculate a risk score. Have a lot going on plus a full day of auto/air travel. I may be able to complete a small sample just to see what it looks like.

But, I'm not sure how to calculate the risk score or what this would look like in Excel (the values in the calculation)? I usually end up with 2, 3 or 4 contenders. Would the risk score be based on all of the contenders or just the final 1 or 2 I come up with?

The proposed Risk Score is based on the “b” column. It considers all horses in the race.

I would prefer to leverage the PSR work that I've already completed (and still in progress). Everyone is welcome to it.

Summary: 200+ races (no maiden races). I used GPX, TAM and PRX. PSR Rank 1 contenders win ~31%, Rank 2 ~20% and Rank 3 ~18%. PSR Ranks 1, 2, 3 ~ 70%. Ranks 4 and higher ~30%. Chaos 5 races, Ranks 4 or higher win at a higher percentage.

Keep in mind that the above are averages and results go in spurts (as Dave says above). Streaks where a Rank 1, 2 or 3 contender wins 12 out of 14 races; or a Rank 4 or higher wins 6 out of 10.

All of this circles back to Dave's takeaways above-- Hit Rate and Value. I know that PSR Ranks 1, 2 and 3 contenders achieve hit rate. So what I'm working on now is a BALO process to eliminate contenders with AI Lines <2-1 (1.99-1 or less). Brian just gave me and idea on how to help the process that I think will work.

Then something like this. Chaos 0, 1, 2 and 3 races-- focus on hit rate. Determine if a low odds AI line contender can be eliminated and play the other PSR contenders. Chaos 4 and 5 races-- focus on value. Look to include PSR Ranks 4 and higher contenders. PSR Rank 3 contenders pay about ~$11.60; so you simply cannot dismiss all of the low rank PSR contenders. Need a mix.

My opinion, something like this. PSR Rank 1, 2 and 3 contenders in Chaos 1 - 3 races-- Low Risk. Chaos 4 and 5 races-- Medium Risk.
PSR Ranks 4 and higher in Chaos 1 - 3 races-- High Risk. Chaos 4 and 5 races-- Medium Risk.