The Ponies Thread (part 2)

[Sharkey]

ugh that sucks, still got another one left, hopefully it goes well in the main event.

Not sure about you, but it was fine for me. Whether I win or not, I just want to make good value bets, and I thought I did in that race there. I was given every chance to win it.

 

[Sharkey]

==========

G1 Santa Anita Derby (3:30);

#5 (37.4%/29.4%) = 1.7/1 (3/1 ML)
#6 (36.5%/42.5%) = 1.8/1 (4/5 ML) *favourite*

==========

The public is betting the two Baffert horses (#1 and #6), so I'm going to get more than a fair price on the #5 in this race. Probably get odds double what I have as fair.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

Not sure about you, but it was fine for me. Whether I win or not, I just want to make good value bets, and I thought I did in that race there. I was given every chance to win it.

For sure, value is value making +ev is all that matters at the end of the day. That being said it sucks to see ya get screwed at the very end. I only bet the 1 to win and I liked what he did at his odds, but being that close to a super must sting a bit, I would assume. Then again you've been doing this for years so maybe your skin has thickened over time.

 

[Sharkey]

For sure, value is value making +ev is all that matters at the end of the day. That being said it sucks to see ya get screwed at the very end. I only bet the 1 to win and I liked what he did at his odds, but being that close to a super must sting a bit, I would assume. Then again you've been doing this for years so maybe your skin has thickened over time.

You and me were probably only about a half length of cashing that win bet on the #1 believe it or not. Not in beaten lengths at the line. But a half length more space earlier in the race, and that #1 horse may have been tough to catch late as he would have less pressure and mental energy exerted on him by the #2.

I've been betting well the last few months and hitting my fair share, so that probably makes it easier to stomach losses like that. Plus I've just been trying to fix my mindset and not get upset at results like that. I've been trying to only worry about my bets before the race. Once they're on then that's it.

 

[Sharkey]

Unless I messed up, Santa Anita must've changed their start times today as I originally had it starting at 3:30 west coast time. With all the shit that's been happening at the track the past couple months I'm not surprised.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

Let's get it number 5!

 

[Sharkey]

If the #5 doesn't get clear around the turn he's probably in trouble. But he profiles as doing exactly that, though, based on my numbers.

 

[Sharkey]

Beautiful start anyways.

 

[BluntTrauma21]

Ouch, ran down by the Chalk at the end.

 

[Sharkey]

<----- "Who finishes 3rd?"

I love days like what I spend a bunch of time doing yesterday. Not only did I discover some parallels there, but I also discovered some potentially very impactful correlations in another one of my factors as well in regards to my DSLR category that is calculated into my NF factor and the time between races.

I knew I made a good decision when it came to saving my race data, as well as the PP's that went along with them.

For the record, the top ELD horses who I had ranked in the top half of the field is showing itself by far to be the most impactful for finishing 3rd. I reviewed 268 races yesterday (apx half of what I have saved), and the the top ELD horse which is also ranked in my top half finished exactly 3rd in 97 of them. That's 36.2% of the time. The average field size of all the races I looked at was 7.82, so it's nearly 3 times random. Or, if just sticking to the top half of the field, that's +10.6 % greater than what the average should be for horses ranked that high (1 / 3.91 = 25.6%). The top LP horse who is also ranked in the top half is so far the 2nd most impactful with it finishing exactly 3rd in 78 of those 268 races (29.1%).

 

[Sharkey]

<----- "Who finishes 3rd?"

I love days like what I spend a bunch of time doing yesterday. Not only did I discover some parallels there, but I also discovered some potentially very impactful correlations in another one of my factors as well in regards to my DSLR category that is calculated into my NF factor and the time between races.

I knew I made a good decision when it came to saving my race data, as well as the PP's that went along with them.

For the record, the top ELD horses who I had ranked in the top half of the field is showing itself by far to be the most impactful for finishing 3rd. I reviewed 268 races yesterday (apx half of what I have saved), and the the top ELD horse which is also ranked in my top half finished exactly 3rd in 97 of them. That's 36.2% of the time. The average field size of all the races I looked at was 7.82, so it's nearly 3 times random. Or, if just sticking to the top half of the field, that's +10.6 % greater than what the average should be for horses ranked that high (1 / 3.91 = 25.6%). The top LP horse who is also ranked in the top half is so far the 2nd most impactful with it finishing exactly 3rd in 78 of those 268 races (29.1%).

The typical show horse is profiling similar to what the typical place horse does, although the LP rating had a slight advantage over the ELD rating when it came to the place position when I reviewed it.

 

[Sharkey]

This wasn't included turf races, by the way. Just main track races. The nature of the way turf races are ran, how chaotic they generally are at the end, and how close the finishes tend to be, would make it extremely tough in determining place or show probabilities.

 

[Sharkey]

What I have for the three big Derby prep races this Saturday;

==========

G2 Wood Memorial (3:00);

#4 EP - 81.3, LP - 73.9, SP - 87.5, TT - 57.8, MP - 88.3, EL - 80.1, DP - 84.9, ELD - 68.7, SF - 94.1, BT - 103.1, AC - 133.7, PP - 167.8, AVG - 90.0/90.7/90.8/91.5 (28.5%/32.9%) = 2.5/1 (7/2 ML)
#1 EP - 81.9, LP - 69.8, SP - 85.2, TT - 56.6, MP - 85.8, EL - 78.3, DP - 84.1, ELD - 74.4, SF - 89.6, BT - 102.1, AC - 125.0, PP - 167.7, AVG - 88.2/88.4/88.7/88.8 (17.5%/18.6%) = 4.7/1 (9/2 ML)
#10 EP - 82.0, LP - 64.3, SP - 81.8, TT - 51.8, MP - 81.0, EL - 76.4, DP - 82.4, ELD - 76.6, SF - 90.8, BT - 103.9, AC - 108.4, PP - 166.0, AVG - 85.8/85.5/85.3/85.0 (9.4%/7.9%) = 9.7/1 (6/1 ML)
#5 EP - 81.5, LP - 64.4, SP - 81.6, TT - 53.3, MP - 81.3, EL - 75.8, DP - 82.1, ELD - 77.2, SF - 89.3, BT - 103.0, AC - 110.7, PP - 165.2, AVG - 85.7/85.4/85.4/85.1 (9.1%/8.1%) = 10.0/1 (8/1 ML)
#9 EP - 78.7, LP - 64.9, SP - 80.5, TT - 52.5, MP - 80.0, EL - 75.0, DP - 80.1, ELD - 77.3, SF - 86.8, BT - 101.2, AC - 110.5, PP - 160.4, AVG - 84.9/85.0/85.1/85.1 (7.9%/7.8%) = 11.6/1 (30/1 ML)
#3 EP - 79.6, LP - 63.0, SP - 79.8, TT - 55.8, MP - 80.1, EL - 73.4, DP - 80.2, ELD - 77.4, SF - 83.2, BT - 98.3, AC - 112.4, PP - 161.3, AVG - 84.2/83.8/84.2/83.8 (6.3%/6.0%) = 14.8/1 (6/1 ML)
#2 EP - 74.5, LP - 69.0, SP - 81.0, TT - 54.3, MP - 80.9, EL - 75.0, DP - 78.2, ELD - 67.9, SF - 83.2, BT - 94.2, AC - 120.0, PP - 154.2, AVG - 83.3/84.3/84.4/85.4 (6.0%/7.5%) = 15.6/1 (5/2 ML) *favourite*
#11 EP - 83.9, LP - 59.5, SP - 79.8, TT - 54.7, MP - 79.9, EL - 73.7, DP - 82.4, ELD - 68.7, SF - 84.0, BT - 95.3, AC - 105.0, PP - 167.9, AVG - 83.8/82.5/82.4/81.2 (5.2%/3.6%) = 18.3/1 (30/1 ML)
#7 EP - 84.9, LP - 67.2, SP - 85.1, TT - 50.3, MP - 83.8, EL - 79.9, DP - 85.5, ELD - 77.3, SF - 88.6, BT - 102.5, AC - 110.9, PP - 172.1, AVG - 82.8/82.7/82.5/82.3 (4.7%/4.1%) = 20.3/1 (20/1 ML)
#6 EP - 87.8, LP - 55.6, SP - 79.3, TT - 51.5, MP - 78.5, EL - 74.1, DP - 84.1, ELD - 59.7, SF - 81.4, BT - 89.4, AC - 93.5, PP - 173.7, AVG - 81.7/79.7/79.0/77.0 (2.9%/1.5%) = 33.5/1 (20/1 ML)
#8 EP - 79.8, LP - 58.8, SP - 77.3, TT - 50.5, MP - 76.2, EL - 72.6, DP - 79.1, ELD - 72.0, SF - 81.8, BT - 94.9, AC - 97.2, PP - 160.4, AVG - 80.4/79.7/79.5/78.8 (2.5%/1.9%) = 39.3/1 (30/1 ML)

==========

e.g.

The top ELD horse in the top half of the field was the #9 horse. The top LP horse in the top half of the field was the #4 horse. I know the #4 finished 3rd this race, and if I'm remembering right the #9 horse was that big longshot who finished 4th at 60/1 and almost grabbed 3rd.

*Edit, as I initially typed the #3 as the top LP horse instead of the #4

 

[Sharkey]

In the Blue Grass the high ELD in the top half won the race, and the top LP in the top half finished 7th. But he was ranked 7th of 14 and there was separation between him and the 6th rank horse (only gave him 28.5/1 fair odds). If he was eliminated as a "top half" horse because of that separation the highest LP horse of the other horses in the top half did finish 3rd.

 

[Sharkey]

Stop reading this stuff T!

I'm doing this so I can unseat you as the trifecta master on this site I'll have you know, and I'll have no chance to do that if you're using the same concepts I am.

 

[Sharkey]

Beyond fiddling around with my AC category for a few races, and at times directly implementing my NF scores into my pace categories, I haven't made any changes to this system of mine since early/mid Dec I believe. But I'm going to have to make a small change now when it comes to the DSLR inputs after what I discovered yesterday. The good thing about that is that "DSLR" fits what I discovered as it's the correlation between 'Difference in Speed Last Race' and 'Days Since Last Race'. It's going to be a 2 in 1 category now, which means I'll have one open slot that I'm going to have to leave blank (for now) when it comes to my NF ratings. I've been using my FLR as a fitness category for months now (i.e. Fitness Level for Race), which is just a recent track time (race + workouts) calculation and thus eliminated what it was first intended to be since my system is based on recency, race relevancy, and rank now. The last race is generally the one that is weighted more than others anyways.

 

[t6p]

Stop reading this stuff T!

I'm doing this so I can unseat you as the trifecta master on this site I'll have you know, and I'll have no chance to do that if you're using the same concepts I am.

Haha, no problem bud. I promise I won't use anything you post to make my picks.

Meanwhile, me reading through the thread today.....

 

[Sharkey]

Haha, no problem bud. I promise I won't use anything you post to make my picks.

Meanwhile, me reading through the thread today.....

Haha. Brilliant!

But seriously, we're going to absolutely crush the Derby this year whatever method you and I use. With still a month to go to better research/collect data for finishing 3rd and the chance to delve into what looks best when it comes to 4th, I'm thinking a 5 or 6 figure super is in the cards for us lunatics.

 

[Sharkey]

==========

G3 Sam F Davis Stakes (race 11 at Tampa);

#9 EP - 90.7, LP - 63.6, SP - 85.9, TT - 53.5, MP - 85.5, EL - 79.8, DP - 82.9, ELD - 67.0, SF - 107.8, BT - 99.7, AC - 110.1, PP - 170.5, NF - 44.2, AVG - 87.6 (104.5/96.6) = 2.4/1
#6 EP - 78.9, LP - 61.6, SP - 78.6, TT - 52.9, MP - 78.1, EL - 73.1, DP - 77.9, ELD - 76.3, SF - 77.0, BT - 95.8, AC - 105.5, PP - 157.5, NF - 52.5, AVG - 82.0 (90.8/86.9) = 8.1/1
#3 EP - 87.4, LP - 59.5, SP - 81.6, TT - 52.8, MP - 81.0, EL - 75.9, DP - 78.1, ELD - 65.1, SF - 94.2, BT - 92.9, AC - 101.9, PP - 160.6, NF - 31.0, AVG - 81.7 (90.6/85.5) = 8.2/1 *5/2 ML favourite*
#8 EP - 74.2, LP - 65.8, SP - 78.8, TT - 50.1, MP - 77.5, EL - 74.1, DP - 80.6, ELD - 71.7, SF - 80.6, BT - 93.2, AC - 108.2, PP - 159.8, NF - 52.4, AVG - 82.1 (90.2/88.7) = 8.5/1
#1 EP - 71.2, LP - 66.7, SP - 77.9, TT - 53.0, MP - 77.5, EL - 72.4, DP - 80.8, ELD - 67.5, SF - 77.5, BT - 88.4, AC - 114.3, PP - 159.8, NF - 50.4, AVG - 81.3 (88.3/88.2) = 10.1/1
#7 EP - 77.9, LP - 62.9, SP - 78.8, TT - 48.6, MP - 77.1, EL - 74.5, DP - 78.8, ELD - 72.9, SF - 81.9, BT - 94.7, AC - 101.0, PP - 157.5, NF - 51.9, AVG - 81.4 (87.4/85.5) = 10.9/1
#5 EP - 73.1, LP - 61.0, SP - 75.3, TT - 49.6, MP - 73.9, EL - 70.9, DP - 75.9, ELD - 76.5, SF - 69.8, BT - 93.1, AC - 99.4, PP - 151.2, NF - 54.3, AVG - 78.8 (82.3/80.8) = 16.8/1
#4 EP - 81.9, LP - 56.8, SP - 77.1, TT - 53.7, MP - 76.9, EL - 71.5, DP - 74.1, ELD - 67.3, SF - 85.2, BT - 91.2, AC - 98.7, PP - 152.5, NF - 44.4, AVG - 79.3 (82.2/79.3) = 16.9/1
#2 EP - 81.9, LP - 52.6, SP - 74.4, TT - 45.3, MP - 71.9, EL - 71.3, DP - 70.2, ELD - 62.1, SF - 88.6, BT - 88.0, AC - 78.8, PP - 143.5, NF - 51.7, AVG - 75.4 (77.6/74.0) = 24.7/1
#10 EP - 72.4, LP - 55.3, SP - 71.3, TT - 47.8, MP - 69.5, EL - 67.7, DP - 70.3, ELD - 70.4, SF - 65.3, BT - 86.1, AC - 87.2, PP - 141.2, NF - 32.8, AVG - 72.1 (72.5/73.8) = 37.5/1

==========

Ah yes. I remember this race well and I think it's a great example race when it comes to exotic ticket structuring. And yes, I crushed it when it happened. Besides a couple races at Mahoning Valley and one or two elsewhere, this was my best bet race the last few months.

The #9 won (top early horse of top half, and by far the best going in) the #6 finished 2nd (top ELD of top half), the #8 finished 3rd (2nd LP of top half/field), and the #1 finished 4th (top LP of top half/field). It's also another good example of the "conflict" concept I always talk about as, while the #3 was ranked 3rd overall, the #9 used the same early energy style that it used and was better at it going into the race, as well as in better condition (higher SF and NF). The #3 shit the bed in this race and finished 6th I believe from memory (#7 finished 5th I think) because he couldn't match the pace/energy that the #9 was expected to set, nor the sustainability. In the race the #9 set the pace and crushed them by a few lengths at the end, whereas the #3 was put into chase mode while sitting 2nd early and then faded badly late.

This race is a great example of pretty much everything I've been trying to explain on here with all things, and shows some element of what I uncovered yesterday. The top SF horse and top overall won at great odds (think it was 8/1), the lesser of the two "conflict" horses shit the bed (as the favourite at that). The top ELD horse finished 2nd and then the two best late horses finished 3rd & 4th.

I really wished every race was this easy going in because this was basically race dynamics 101 if such a thing existed.

 

[Sharkey]

Ah yes. I remember this race well and I think it's a great example race when it comes to exotic ticket structuring. And yes, I crushed it when it happened. Besides a couple races at Mahoning Valley and one or two elsewhere, this was my best bet race the last few months.

The #9 won (top early horse of top half, and by far the best going in) the #6 finished 2nd (top ELD of top half), the #8 finished 3rd (2nd LP of top half/field), and the #1 finished 4th (top LP of top half/field). It's also another good example of the "conflict" concept I always talk about as, while the #3 was ranked 3rd overall, the #9 used the same early energy style that it used and was better at it going into the race, as well as in better condition (higher SF and NF). The #3 shit the bed in this race and finished 6th I believe from memory (#7 finished 5th I think) because he couldn't match the pace/energy that the #9 was expected to set, nor the sustainability. In the race the #9 set the pace and crushed them by a few lengths at the end, whereas the #3 was put into chase mode while sitting 2nd early and then faded badly late.

This race is a great example of pretty much everything I've been trying to explain on here with all things, and shows some element of what I uncovered yesterday. The top SF horse and top overall won at great odds (think it was 8/1), the lesser of the two "conflict" horses shit the bed (as the favourite at that). The top ELD horse finished 2nd and then the two best late horses finished 3rd & 4th.

I really wished every race was this easy going in because this was basically race dynamics 101 if such a thing existed.

Race begins at 1:29:45 of the video;