Today's Greyhounds

[jimibt]

I do something like this on the dogs, offering the BACK/LAY prices in the columns to the right.

By product of that is I take the lowest lay price when applying it to Horse Racing and lay the field at that price or close to in BF price. Not all tracks though, there or 4/5 where it works well due to camera angles and distance to the finish line etc.

i do recall MANY years ago working on strategy with you (?) that involved comparing every runner in each race to their previous performances (trap/odds/bends, the lot) and how they paired up with their adversaries on the day. i recall that the (fairly) simple analysis initially held a lot of promise, but then faltered (which i presume was mean reversion -or dogs just getting old !!).

I guess that the long and short is that stats can at best provide historical context - but for sure (100%) can't present future results. the job therefore is to cut between the lines and determine probabilities that are supported by your own synthetic odds. in truth, i never managed to work this out, even tho i had an embarrassment of riches in terms of data!!

[Archery1969]

I do something like this on the dogs, offering the BACK/LAY prices in the columns to the right.

By product of that is I take the lowest lay price when applying it to Horse Racing and lay the field at that price or close to in BF price. Not all tracks though, there or 4/5 where it works well due to camera angles and distance to the finish line etc.

i do recall MANY years ago working on strategy with you (?) that involved comparing every runner in each race to their previous performances (trap/odds/bends, the lot) and how they paired up with their adversaries on the day. i recall that the (fairly) simple analysis initially held a lot of promise, but then faltered (which i presume was mean reversion -or dogs just getting old !!).

I guess that the long and short is that stats can at best provide historical context - but for sure (100%) can't present future results. the job therefore is to cut between the lines and determine probabilities that are supported by your own synthetic odds. in truth, i never managed to work this out, even tho i had an embarrassment of riches in terms of data!!

Yes, you did Jim.

Now I just input the Timeform Master Rating for each dog, come up with some value prices and bung them into the market from 10 mins out.

[sniffer66]

I do something like this on the dogs, offering the BACK/LAY prices in the columns to the right.

By product of that is I take the lowest lay price when applying it to Horse Racing and lay the field at that price or close to in BF price. Not all tracks though, there or 4/5 where it works well due to camera angles and distance to the finish line etc.

i do recall MANY years ago working on strategy with you (?) that involved comparing every runner in each race to their previous performances (trap/odds/bends, the lot) and how they paired up with their adversaries on the day. i recall that the (fairly) simple analysis initially held a lot of promise, but then faltered (which i presume was mean reversion -or dogs just getting old !!).

I guess that the long and short is that stats can at best provide historical context - but for sure (100%) can't present future results. the job therefore is to cut between the lines and determine probabilities that are supported by your own synthetic odds. in truth, i never managed to work this out, even tho i had an embarrassment of riches in terms of data!!

Sounds very similar to what we worked on Jim, with the addition of randomising weighting each of the data points and seeing which weighting produced the best results. Didn't we have 5000 different combinations of weighting at one point ?

And again, it only went on to prove that historical data doesn't prove future results

[jimibt]

I do something like this on the dogs, offering the BACK/LAY prices in the columns to the right.

By product of that is I take the lowest lay price when applying it to Horse Racing and lay the field at that price or close to in BF price. Not all tracks though, there or 4/5 where it works well due to camera angles and distance to the finish line etc.

i do recall MANY years ago working on strategy with you (?) that involved comparing every runner in each race to their previous performances (trap/odds/bends, the lot) and how they paired up with their adversaries on the day. i recall that the (fairly) simple analysis initially held a lot of promise, but then faltered (which i presume was mean reversion -or dogs just getting old !!).

I guess that the long and short is that stats can at best provide historical context - but for sure (100%) can't present future results. the job therefore is to cut between the lines and determine probabilities that are supported by your own synthetic odds. in truth, i never managed to work this out, even tho i had an embarrassment of riches in terms of data!!

Sounds very similar to what we worked on Jim, with the addition of randomising weighting each of the data points and seeing which weighting produced the best results. Didn't we have 5000 different combinations of weighting at one point ?

And again, it only went on to prove that historical data doesn't prove future results

ahh yeah - we did work on that concept. was quite infuriating the number of angles that turned out to be just randomness within the sample. and again, i seem to remember that the out of sample data had an annoying tendency to show promise, only to then discover that it tailed off to almost coincide with putting things live.

it's almost as if the door had been opened and we were in the room, only to see the front window open and the curtains flailing in the wind

good times tho!!

[jimibt]

I do something like this on the dogs, offering the BACK/LAY prices in the columns to the right.

By product of that is I take the lowest lay price when applying it to Horse Racing and lay the field at that price or close to in BF price. Not all tracks though, there or 4/5 where it works well due to camera angles and distance to the finish line etc.

i do recall MANY years ago working on strategy with you (?) that involved comparing every runner in each race to their previous performances (trap/odds/bends, the lot) and how they paired up with their adversaries on the day. i recall that the (fairly) simple analysis initially held a lot of promise, but then faltered (which i presume was mean reversion -or dogs just getting old !!).

I guess that the long and short is that stats can at best provide historical context - but for sure (100%) can't present future results. the job therefore is to cut between the lines and determine probabilities that are supported by your own synthetic odds. in truth, i never managed to work this out, even tho i had an embarrassment of riches in terms of data!!

Yes, you did Jim.

Now I just input the Timeform Master Rating for each dog, come up with some value prices and bung them into the market from 10 mins out.

glad to hear that you're still chipping away at it. i lost patience a few years back, so have the utmost admiration for the likes of yourself, sniffer and a few others that attack the dogs from every conceivable angle... keep it up.

[Archery1969]

i do recall MANY years ago working on strategy with you (?) that involved comparing every runner in each race to their previous performances (trap/odds/bends, the lot) and how they paired up with their adversaries on the day. i recall that the (fairly) simple analysis initially held a lot of promise, but then faltered (which i presume was mean reversion -or dogs just getting old !!).

I guess that the long and short is that stats can at best provide historical context - but for sure (100%) can't present future results. the job therefore is to cut between the lines and determine probabilities that are supported by your own synthetic odds. in truth, i never managed to work this out, even tho i had an embarrassment of riches in terms of data!!

Yes, you did Jim.

Now I just input the Timeform Master Rating for each dog, come up with some value prices and bung them into the market from 10 mins out.

glad to hear that you're still chipping away at it. i lost patience a few years back, so have the utmost admiration for the likes of yourself, sniffer and a few others that attack the dogs from every conceivable angle... keep it up.

Thanks Jim, i never give up. Even though I am probably flogging a dead horse/dog.

[sniffer66]

i do recall MANY years ago working on strategy with you (?) that involved comparing every runner in each race to their previous performances (trap/odds/bends, the lot) and how they paired up with their adversaries on the day. i recall that the (fairly) simple analysis initially held a lot of promise, but then faltered (which i presume was mean reversion -or dogs just getting old !!).

I guess that the long and short is that stats can at best provide historical context - but for sure (100%) can't present future results. the job therefore is to cut between the lines and determine probabilities that are supported by your own synthetic odds. in truth, i never managed to work this out, even tho i had an embarrassment of riches in terms of data!!

Yes, you did Jim.

Now I just input the Timeform Master Rating for each dog, come up with some value prices and bung them into the market from 10 mins out.

glad to hear that you're still chipping away at it. i lost patience a few years back, so have the utmost admiration for the likes of yourself, sniffer and a few others that attack the dogs from every conceivable angle... keep it up.

Damn you Jim, you've got me wanting to try again now. If nothing , it was a an interesting exercise

[MemphisFlash]

I know you guys hate my P&L's

Capture.PNG

[sniffer66]

I know you guys hate my P&L's

Capture.PNG

An entire months one would be good Tom

[Crazyskier]

I know you guys hate my P&L's

Capture.PNG

An entire months one would be good Tom

I have asked for this many times, or preferably a 90 day one, to show consistency. Anyone can have a good day but a bad month!

CS

[The Silk Run]

I know you guys hate my P&L's

Capture.PNG

I don't. I'm inspired EVERY TIME.
Just love them. And I am NOT being sarcastic.

Keep sharing the Love Tom
Minnie LAI

[firlandsfarm]

FOR LAYERS

After a pretty appalling period where favs seemed to win with depressing regularity in the UK dogs, I've noticed (for me at least) much more positive results in the last few days.

It's an unpredictable cycle that's persisted for years. Laying favs looks good so people gradually start doing it, that eventually moves the odds so it fails, and then people gradually move to backing instead and the same happens that side. Unfortunately it's not possible to predict, I've seen cycles take a month or 6 months going back over the last 6yrs info.. All sports are like that. Well that's laying everything at SP so as usual it's value vs SP that makes money if you do them all, or being selective and finding SP value

Shall we call it the Warren Buffet system!

[MemphisFlash]

More stats at my Fingertips

Capture.PNG

[napshnap]

More stats at my Fingertips

Capture.PNG

"Career win%", 1st cell should be 100%, second one 12.9% (4/31*100), 3rd and 5th 20%.

[MemphisFlash]

Thanks for pointing that out. Is this better.

Capture.PNG

Capture2.PNG

Capture3.PNG