"Messing with my head." Great phrase. LOL

Your reaction is completely normal, especially for expert players who have been close to winning for a long time. I often use the phrase "just one small tweak away from winning consistently."

What’s really different here is that the depth isn’t coming from YOUR WORK anymore — it’s being driven by the shape of the race itself.

Think of it like this...
You probably do a lot of work on each race but now you have a REALLY SMART assistant to do all the PREP WORK.

*** Picking contenders, separating them, narrowing them down, finding value... all of this is deep work - and the further you go into the race, the deeper it gets.
*** The more decisions you have to make in a race, the greater the likelihood of a mistake that costs you the race.
*** But now, ABBY hands you a clearly defined framework.
*** Because of ABBY's proven consistency you can have confidence and clarity on precisely what you need to do next.

The framework ABBY hands you is so strong that it could almost be used as a black box. You could bet every contender it gives you in every race and lose roughly five cents on the dollar. I'm not suggesting you do that — it’s simply a way to show how solid the starting point is when the typical player is losing about 23 cents per wagered dollar.
________________________________
Just to be clear...
If you took the specific horses that are in the 88s, made them your contenders, and picked 2 or 3 to bet, you'd have a great shot at being more than even - especially if you stop trying to bet into the tote board.

Alright, I follow what you’re saying, but I’m still not clear on how someone actually builds these new factors.

I’ve been at this a long time, and I’ve never really seen anyone lay out what that process looks like.

So if there’s a practical way a regular handicapper is supposed to approach it, I’d appreciate a little direction.

Or must I have the DeTerminator to do this? — BobbyB

Hello, Bobby.

Are you the Bobby B who was an HSH user about 2 decades ago?

Thanks for asking.

It was nothing life threatening.
I've been struggling for a few days with a very painful back issue.

Until this morning it was a minor annoyance, but this morning it escalated to such a level that I was unable to walk without some real support. It was pure level 10 pain.

Sat in a wheelchair in the ER for FIVE HOURS waiting to see a doctor. Amazingly, when I got out of the wheelchair for the first, the pain was reduced to about 10% of what it was. No clue what caused that.

They ran lots of tests - including a cat scan and a lot of blood tests. The doc says I've got some arthritis, but all my bloodwork returned (his words) "really good numbers."

Then they gave me an intravenous steroid and I walked out.
Still have pain, with a few shots that hit level 7 or 8, but nothing like the prolonged pain at level 10.

I will let the rest of the community address your other questions.

Dave
PS: Really great thread for your first post.

So my contention that an 88:4 race being approximately in the middle of the possible range of contenders might indeed be a good candidate for a 4 horse exacta box? Or am I reading too much into this?

@Dave Salvini

On top of that you need to determine VALUE.

If you watched the videos enough you have probably heard about “The NEAL.”

At the bottom of the scale you get hit rate and higher up you get price/value.

My play demands a PROFIT horse or else why bet the race?

So, the two horses- HEDGE and PROFIT work together.

The Hedge is the lowest Neal and the Profit is the lowest of all the horses ABOVE the “profit threshold.”

It is logical you could find some interesting “criss-cross” bets.
(My name for them)

Example:
Key (hedge,all profit)


[edit] Sorry for the sloppy post. I was in the ER all day - from 10am to 6pm. Hard to write from my phone.

@StatsMan and @Dave Salvini

Welcome!

Every reply in this thread has been accurate.

What we’ve seen is that the SMALLER the field the more accurate it is.

If you look at the AI Line closely (which is the source of the percentages that create the 88), you will notice that when you get to the high end, you can really be splitting hairs.

For example, in an 88:7 race, the difference between the 7th and 8th horses is often less than a single odds point.

Now, that’s plenty when we’re looking at 6.0 and 7.0, but not so accurate when it’s 32.2 and 32.6.

@ponyplayer recently discovered that when the 88 is above a certain threshold- I think he said 6 - you should consider adding an extra horse.

I will leave it to Brian to discuss his research.

Confirm with NEalfirst — Rick Irvin

In the DET vernacular, the NEAL comes in two flavors:
NEAL PLUS
NEAL MINUS

"Plus" means sorted highest to lowest.
"Minus" means sorted lowest to highest.

This provides CLARITY.

All of this is great work.
Thanks for taking the time.

1. Imagine that you leave the Reports window open.
2. Click the "Send Object" button.
3. In ABBY, refresh your ODDS page.
4. The columns (1 thru 5 factors show), as well as Reynolds and some other stuff.

.

My initial observation of where I hope this all goes- my existing deT process is pretty darned good and I'm super-pleased with what it's been doing. But the final piece of the puzzle that I've been searching for is an adjudication of the low odds horses. It looks like this new Pace Model might be that final piece. So I envision this as a final step to ENHANCE but not REPLACE my existing process. — Jeff Capper

That's a reasonable expectation.

I have a question on the video pace module on the left hand side in green you have pace E pace LP and Pace SR on mine there are 8 buttons with Mdl numbered 1to 8 what does this mean and how do I change it back to the pace ones — Ira Yorn

Those are your own personal weights.


The How-to is really quite easy.
It's on the video.
Just look for the section when I'm editing the buttons.

But meanwhile...
1. You create a name.
2. Give it a button number.
3. Fill in the weights.
4. Hit Save.

Ping @Jeff Capper
Maybe when you're watching the video again, you could notice when the button discussion takes place and post it here for Ira.

1. What does pc Method 71 do differently from the important buttons that deT2 introduced? I've been relying on abPace/BH and BR2/pcrH, abRx, abRy. I've built a system that looks at all of these and gives me very good answers. I'll be re-playing recent races that I've played live to see if I can discern the differences. But any context will be interesting to know.

It uses the Model weights rather than the standard weights.
______________________________

2. I really like this new Pace Model's ability to weight each individual race. I'm now comparing these weights against the the red and green pace designation from the "front" of the AI Assistant panel. Sometimes they are consistent- meaning that the highest weighted pace button from the new Pace Model matches the green Abby Pace designation. But sometimes they don't align. Why is that? — Jeff Capper

Because it is not simply counting the ES points in the race.
Instead, it is using an AI-base algorithm.

Video is up

The only reason I'm even curious is Amwager is very professional shop, lot of the big gun rebate players live there, so I doubt they would put out junk. But I've been fooled a million times before....so, ya know — Chuck Jones

I don't think was saying they are junk.

They're just ratings. And everybody at amWager has them.

Guessing the ELO would work well for selecting contenders. — Jim Pommier

Actually, it would logically push you to shorter priced horses.

I have used chatgpt for analyzing PP's to breakdown anything in the race that a human eye might overlook. Does a great job. — Gillycapper

My point is that when people upload data to be analyzed, they think it is using a Neural Network when it isn't.

So, it can't use AI, rather it uses statistical methods-- using a lot of data. — Jim Pommier

Correct.

Yes, I watched them all. What I don't understand is that if the factors we've all been using for years only matter for low odds horses what do we handicap with?

Did I miss that in the video? — BobbyB

That's a really great question.
The answer lies in what we call HANDICAPPING OBJECTS.

It isn't that the factor ranks don't matter at all. They still do.

They just don't matter as much as we think they do.

The answer is MORE FACTORS generated together to produce a NEW FACTOR that CAN separate the other horses.

So the two are in a single model?

↪Jim Pommier Yes. I will start a DMR model once the meet kicks in — Gillycapper

Are you modeling one track at a time?

looking forward to it keep me posted — Ira Yorn

The posting will always be as it was last night.