| Steward Graded Stakes  |
| ||
|
| Steward Graded Stakes |
I'm really thinking through this here.... It may be worth while to revise the way that Strong and Weak are treated. In the example cited, (and I'll approximate from here on out) knowing that 20% of 80 horses with Strong ability in 40 races won means that there were 16 races won by strong speed ability horses (Best Speed is also Strong Speed). That's 40%. (This does not mean that *A* Strong Speed horse has a 40% chance of winning - a Strong Speed horse has a 20% chance of winning since there are more than 1 strong speed horses per race). Take this data a bit further. If 30% of 40 BEST speed horses won, that means there were 12 BEST speed winners. So, we have 16 races where a Strong Speed horse won, of those 12 were won by the BEST speed. That means ONLY 4 horses with STRONG speed and NOT best speed won! This would indicate, if you were keying in on speed in your handicapping, that if you thought the BEST speed horse was not going to win, you could look OUTSIDE of the EquiSim Strong Speed category of horses for the winner and find that winner (in this sample) _most_ of the time _when_ you were right about the best speed horse not winning. Consider that non-strong speed horses usually pay pretty well, this deductive means of finding contenders starts to look, well, profitable! Essentially, 40 races - Best speed winners = 28 races. 28 races - 4 strong speed winners = 24 races. 24 races / 28 races = 86% of the time Strong Speed horses did NOT win when the BEST speed horse also did NOT win. Maybe I'm kidding myself, but that seems very useful. The problem right now is only that the presentation of the information requires you to do the above manually to get down to the more useful info. Is it worthwhile to employ ES to do this type of calculation, worthwhile to spend the time determining a useful way of presenting this information? Hmmm..... -N | |||
|
Graded Stakes |
"Maybe I'm kidding myself, but that seems very useful. The problem right now is only that the presentation of the information requires you to do the above manually to get down to the more useful info. Is it worthwhile to employ ES to do this type of calculation, worthwhile to spend the time determining a useful way of presenting this information? Hmmm....." after watching the way you cleaned up in that contest yesterday.....I would say "it might be worth using all these idea's" . Nathan, the nice thing is that you have already figured most of this stuff out for us. But I am glad you are taking us along for the ride. I can tell the guys on this board that haven't met Nathan, that all of this stuff goes thru his head in about a second and a half. He is hard to keep up with (at least for an old country boy like me) but his mind is always working. I for one am enjoying the ride here. This is fun, but I am a little weird. Keep coming with the information Nathan. It can only make me a better user in the end. Being a better user of ES results in profits.  Just Another Horse player | |||
|
| Graded Stakes |
Nathan.. I thought you would still be partying; however, here you are in dee-eeep thought. Unless it's a turf race I never pay any attention to the "weak" designations, and, then, only at the weak E1. When looking at a turf race I will look for the "weak" E1 only when I have found a "best" or "dominant" late pace horse. Completely axeing all designations except "best" and "dominant" would be just fine with me. Also, on the rare occasion that I print the form view, it would be nice to omit the printing of those weak designations. I concur with JustRalph...thanks for giving us a glimpse of the roadmap. | |||
|
| Steward Graded Stakes |
Hey George, Thanks for the feedback. Don't forget you can go to the Profiler Preferences dialog, Display tab and hide the abilities you are not interested in. A) They won't appear when you view (or print) B) ES won't waste processing power calculating stats for hidden abilities. -N | |||
|
| Graded Stakes |
N... I've tried everything to keep the "weak" and "strong" from printing or even showing in the form view, but those suckers are everpresent. I can omit both in the Profiler view, however. I am rather sure that I have properly "hidden" all "weak" and "strong" designations. I'm obviously overlooking something. Give me an assist when you have time. Thanks, George | |||
|
| Steward Graded Stakes |
Ahh, you are right George. They are everpresent in the Form View. The only way to rid them is to use the Form View menu and turn off the ALL the abilities from being displayed. -N | |||
|
| Graded Stakes |
N... Don't worry about this at all. It's just another of those small things that we old men insist on fretting about. If I wasn't frettin' about this I'd be frettin' about something else. I seldom print the PP's, and you've got much better things to do. Thanks anyway, but fergit it!! | |||
|
| ALWN1X |
I have been reading everyone's comments about which settings they use. Nathan,(our resident expert), which settings do you think would produce the best indications for the winner? Personally, I use the Speed settings, plus the Strong E1 and E2, along with the strong Late for long higher class races. I also use the E-Distance Cutter because I have picked some horses that have been competitive in its last race and are shortening up 1/2 length in today's race. Anyone care to add to this?? MyHorse1 | |||
|
| SoCal Handicapper Graded Stakes  |
Myhorse1, I use track, dist category. surface, and no off-tracks. Good question, I'm looking forward to the responses. Jim | |||
|
© 2002