Overlayed Greyhounds

[moeee]

If its about finding Overlays , where would you look?

Could it be the Favourite?
The Favourite , the animal that everyone wants to back.
The animal that most likely has all the available data pointing to it winning.
Could it be the Favourite?
I think not.
In fact , if you were looking to LAY an animal , then amongst the Favourites would the most likely contenders be found.
The more data available about an animal , then the more likely that that animal is either at the correct Odds , or has been overbet.

How about this.
If given 100 Even money Favourites , is it an easy task to eliminate 50 of these Favourites without throwing away more than 25 Winners?
I reckon I could do it , but I don't know if I could well enough to make a Profit.

Then there is the other choice of say $5 shots.
If we had 100 of these runners , could we do as well or better than with the Even Money Group?
To do as well , means we need to be able to eliminate 50 runners without eliminating more than 10 Winners.
Again , I reckon I could do it , but still not well enough to make a Profit.
But that is if the $5 shots were all in different Races.

BUT HERE'S THE THING.
With the Even Money Chances , these are more than likely in different Races.
And each of them will be at Even Money , because a lot better judges than I have made them so.
BUT , with the $5 shots , there is often 2 or even 3 animals , and not unusual to find 4 in the same race.
So what is happening here , is that those a lot better judges than me are having doubts.
And when there is doubt , there is the potential to get it wrong.

I'm gonna have a play in this thread making suggestions as to where the Overlay might be found.

[moeee]

What I'm doing is knocking up some Markets that may have innaccuracies amongst some of the contenders.
These innacuracies manifest themselves as certain runners appearing at way over the Odds.
But thats fine.
These are usually animals that will be well bet and will be either at the correct Odds or Underlays and of no interest.

What I'm trying to locate are animals that are amongst the group of runners with some sort of winning Chance , but are available at exaggerated Prices.

I have zero ability at predicting what Prices animals will be available at so I won't be suggesting which animals to bet on.
But its not difficult to find the animal if it is there.
It stands out like dogs balls.
It is usually the only Overlay in the race.
Often scenarios roll up where there are more than 2 Overlays in a Race.
These are not Overlays.
They are caused by a Massive Wager on a certain runner.
And usually these massive wagers are very educated.

Here's Race 1 at The MEADOWS

4 KILTANON SKYE $4.1
3 ELLEN BALE $4.2
5 YOWYEH $6.7
1 ATELIER $7.7
2 LASTING EFFECT $10
7 SCUSAMI HOTEL $12
8 SISCO TURBO $25
9 INDIGO FLASH Res. $33

If you look at the way the Odds are grouped I have 2 excellent winning Chances and 2 Good Chances , then 2 more capable of causing an upset.
So in this Race , a substantial Overlay is needed to overcome the Openness of the Race.
But be intensely aware of when there is more than one overlay.

[moeee]

Meadows Race 3

5 DYNA CARI $4.1
7 HODGE $5.7
8 IRVINE BALE $6.4
1 PARISETTE $7.4
6 HARBOUR ROSE $12
3 OUR LISA $12
4 ROCKADORE $15
2 WHERE'S CLEO $16

There is a smooth transition in Odds here from the top selection to the 4th selection.
Many many Winning Chances and the Overlay needs to be almost a double Overlay before becoming eligible for a Wager here , but seems the sort of race where there will be one.
My guess is the Pink , only because all the others can't possibly be available at double the calculated Odds.
But my guess is worse than yours.

[moeee]

Meadows Race 4

5 CORAZON BALE $3.6
1 BATTLE ROSE $3.7
3 ETHEL BALE $5.7
4 WILD ARMS $10
7 EL RIO $14
6 KEEP ME COVERED $16
2 SONADOR MISS $25
8 ARVO'S STEFAN $66

The 3 Winning Chances here.
Unlikely to find an Overlay but some possibility of Battle Rose


Meadows Race 5

3 COSMIC COOPER $2.1
6 RICH SHIRAZ $6
8 CRONOS BALE $11.5
2 SUPER RICO $12
7 PLANKTON $16
9 WICKED MAGIC Res. $20
1 BOGGY SPITFIRE $25
5 KIMBA BALE $30

Just slamming the top selection here.
Only concern that it arrives too late over the 525 as its pet distance is 600.


MEADOWS Race 6

4 FLIP BALE $5.5
5 RYKER BALE $6.2
7 TIGER GLOW $7
6 EVERYWHERE $7
2 DARLIN BALE $7
1 TAKE IT HOME $10
8 GLENDA BALE $14
3 MR. SHARP $16

Good Race to stay out of.
But we shall see.

[woof43]

How about this.
If given 100 Even money Favourites , is it an easy task to eliminate 50 of these Favourites without throwing away more than 25 Winners?
I reckon I could do it , but I don't know if I could well enough to make a Profit.


Imagine Moeee, you classified each of those Even money dogs, say by variables that the public use for wagering, would an even money fav that has the Best L5 avg ART of the other 7 dogs, be a better proposition, than the Best Class avg L5 start dog.
It would make your task a lot easier in which dogs to eliminate, I'd suggest

[moeee]

Meadows Race 4

5 CORAZON BALE $3.6
1 BATTLE ROSE $3.7
3 ETHEL BALE $5.7

The 3 Winning Chances here.
Unlikely to find an Overlay but some possibility of Battle Rose


Unfortunately the top selection was a Massive Overlay and lost badly in this Race.

[Raven]

I'd suggest that if you wanted to LAY a dog, the fave is your only option. Looks to me to be very little money trading on the dogs.

In the gallops, I somtimes lay something at say $21, I may have priced it at $61 for example, and if I'm convinced the BF market price is wrong, I will lay. No way you could get set on the dogs.

So Mo, how do you price these markets. Some sort of speed ratings? I'm almost interested in learning about the greyhounds but don't know where to start. I fool around with speed ratings on the gallops, and I'd have thought that method is suited to the dogs.

Interesting thread.

[moeee]

I have rarely messed with LAYING,
I just have morbid fear of the payout should the animal win.
To pay out $100 for the sake of winning $5 - That means you are in fact taking 20 to 1 on about an Event.
Why would you do that?
I mean $5 doesn't even buy a decent burger , and should you fail , it will be at least 20 more wagers before you can even think about getting one.

Messing with Favourites could be an option though.
It is quite often that the Favourite is Odds On and the payout then is actually less than the collect.
The problem here is that the Favourite at such short a Price is often because heavy bettors are privvy to information that I simply do not have.
So the Question needs to be asked ," Am I absolutely sure I have this right?"
And I can never in my wildest dreams answer yes.
Until you are amongst the top 10% in your chosen Field can you have faith in your judgement.
If you just a hobby player like me , the only way to survive is to respect your Bank and treat it like the blood supply to your body.
If it runs low , limit the flow loss.
If their is a surplus, only then consider a small withdrawal.

RAVEN.
I read somewhere in your posts that you are managing an 18% ROI.
If that ain't providing enough sustenance , then I suggest you consider alterations in that sphere somehow that the 18% realizes a suitably large enough dividend to get you what you need.
You have absolutely no reason to depart into a different Field , not even to test the water , or as a backup to your working methodology.

But I have seen yoour brilliance and intelligence in action.
And if you can outdo WOOF43 and translate it into everyday understandable , then I should be asking you to enlighten me on your methods.
Although perhaps the eccentric and clinical application and personality that WOOF43 has is an essential requirement to do well in the Gambling arena.
Just being smart ain't enough - most geniusses seem to have been eccentrics.

RAVEN.
If you are truly interested in how I come up with my Markets , then here is the Link to where it all started.
http://www.propun.com.au/racing_forums/showthread.php?t=11591

Perhaps a good idea may be to ask one of the members that received the actual spreadsheet to post it here.
I notice Chrome Prince was amongst those members.
How about it CP?
You still have that sheet from 7 years ago?
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

[moeee]

This is copy and paste from a few months back

HOW I FORM A MARKET

For the example , I have chosen Race 8 at Shepparton tonight.

What I do is download each runners race history and place it in my Excel Spreadsheet.
I only go back 24 months.This I have found is usually more than sufficient.
I only use the latest 18 starts if the animal has more than that in the previous 2 years.
What I use to compare each runner against the others is their race times.
Of course the problem is the various tracks and distances that exist.
So there needs to be a common datum that links all the tracks and distances.
Track Records is good.
Or perhaps an average of the 3 fastest times? - or 5?

So i subtract what time the animal ran from the standard for that course and distance
I do this for the 18 starts , and then averagethem.
Do this for all 8 runners and you now have a starting rating.
It will be grossly innacurate , but is more accurate than a dartboard.

Once I have a rating for each dog , I place the rating into a Formula which translates the ratings into a Market

So my Raw Market for Race 8 is this.

1 MISTER MOOMS $23.4
2 VUVUZELA $7.3
3 DIEGO SIYAN $21.3
4 LUCKY I'M FAST $21.7
5 TIME MATTERS $19.1
6 HIAVACKOVA $5.6
7 BEST PERFUME $2.1
8 VALLETTA FLAME $33.4

The first problem that needs to be overcome is that ALL 18 lines are included in the average.
I have no idea how to mechanically get rid of unsuitable lines , so I must go through each animal and get rid of , or modify lines that are biasing the rating incorrectly

For example Mister Mooms is clearly racing better now , so I eliminate a couple earlier poor performances

Also the suitability of the Box draw needs to be allowed for.
Poor Box draw means an animal wont be able to repeat a good performance.
Good Box draw means can eliminate some poor performances which drag an animals average rating down.
Mister MOOMS is extremely well drawn so I eliminate many more poor lines.

After doing all that , I now end up with this much more accurate Market

1 MISTER MOOMS $3.3 - before $23
2 VUVUZELA $12.2 - before $7.3
3 DIEGO SIYAN $18.9 - before $21
4 LUCKY I'M FAST $49.0 - before $27
5 TIME MATTERS $32.0 - before $19
6 HIAVACKOVA $6.8 - before $5.6
7 BEST PERFUME $2.9 - before $2.1
8 VALLETTA FLAME $55.8 - before $33

The obvious major change is the Odds of the Red Runner.

Next I look at the stats in The Watchdog.
It gives me an idea as to whether it loves a box or a track and how cionsistent an animal is.
I also look at The watchdog Market to see if I am way out.
I also look at the Computer ratings to see any ovious errors there.

And my Final Market becomes this

1 MISTER MOOMS $3.5
2 VUVUZELA $9.3
3 DIEGO SIYAN $16.8
4 LUCKY I'M FAST $51.9
5 TIME MATTERS $33.9
6 HIAVACKOVA $7.2
7 BEST PERFUME $3.1
8 VALLETTA FLAME $30.4

or in Market Order

7 BEST PERFUME $3.1
1 MISTER MOOMS $3.5
6 HIAVACKOVA $7.2
2 VUVUZELA $9.3
3 DIEGO SIYAN $16
8 VALLETTA FLAME $30
5 TIME MATTERS $33
4 LUCKY I'M FAST $50

So going by The Watchdog market , there isn't a lot of Value here.
But to force the wager , I would suggest backing 6 HIAVACKOVA for the place.
Its Odds of Placing are $2.05

[moeee]

Here's the results of that race example

1 - MISTER MOOMS 5.9 2.4
6 - HIAVACKOVA 2
2 - VUVUZELA 2.2
5 - TIME MATTERS 0

[Raven]

I have rarely messed with LAYING,
I just have morbid fear of the payout should the animal win.
To pay out $100 for the sake of winning $5 - That means you are in fact taking 20 to 1 on about an Event.
Why would you do that?
I mean $5 doesn't even buy a decent burger , and should you fail , it will be at least 20 more wagers before you can even think about getting one.

I just look at the bigger picture. Value is value, is it not? Laying someting at $17 that is a true $51 chance (in my opinion, obviously) is value. Since May 2011, I have layed 87 horses at greater than $11, of which only 3 have won. Total profit on these is $456, which represents 39% of the hold. I'm in a position now that 3 of these longshots would have to win for me to get into the red again ( I lay them at $200 liability). But then again there will be a high percentage of losers in between to help recoup the losses. Am i wrong?

[Raven]

Cheers Mo, I will read through all that today.

About my method, If i showed you how I rate speed then you would see me for the hobby punter and idiot that I am. Its the type of rating that wouldn't satisy the Woof's of this world, but it provides me with a base to start from.

Then the rest is all opinion & supposition. But that's this game really. No one "knows" how a race will unfold, who is ready to produce their best, who is going to put in a shocker, etc. We just form an opinion. No moving averages & logits will create a crystal ball.

The problem is the time and energy it takes to eek this profit. I find it draining, but at the same time I have no plans to find a new hobby. And I am also well aware that I am the worst gambler in the world. Whenever i do a pure gamble, it never comes off. My recent success is on the back of 20 years of losses. But at least I realise that. And it's all because I decided to add some discipline to my punting, and not just go down to the pub at noon every Saturday, see the guys, have some beers and hope for the best.

[moeee]

Am i wrong?

Not at all.
Its an emotional issue for me.
I would feel as though the world had ended and feel devastated.
If you can control your emotions to match what the result actually means , then you have what many posters advise , and that is having the personality and the discipline to actual be successful at Punting

Even the sharpest and most expensive tools will yield poor results in the hands of an inept tradesman.

[moeee]

Since May 2011, I have layed 87 horses at greater than $11, of which only 3 have won. Total profit on these is $456, which represents 39% of the hold. I'm in a position now that 3 of these longshots would have to win for me to get into the red again ( I lay them at $200 liability).

That you have access to this sort of information is the reason why you are successful.
I don't do this.
I know should and have everything to gain by doing so and zero to lose , except perhaps some time.

Could you tell me something about 2 scenarios that could occur in these 87 Wagers?

Supposing you had a horse rated at $50 and the man wanted $10
I figure from what you write , that you would let him have $20 on it at $10 and that would be that for that Race.

And supposing in another Race where you had something Rated at $14 and the man wanted $10 , then again, you would let him have $20 on it at $10 and that would be that for the race.

Is that so?
Tell me if not.

If it is , can you see that the animal that you have given almost no chance , is being treated exactly the same as the animal that you give some sort of chance?

I have a Formula here that AngryPixie helped me with that will help you take advantage of the discrepancy between your rated Price and the other Player.

[woof43]

The first problem that needs to be overcome is that ALL 18 lines are included in the average.
I have no idea how to mechanically get rid of unsuitable lines , so I must go through each animal and get rid of , or modify lines that are biasing the rating incorrectly

For example Mister Mooms is clearly racing better now , so I eliminate a couple earlier poor performances


Moeee, in one of those sheets Kennedy had, he asked for such a filter, I put in a z score filter, that would eliminate runs based on a zscore.
If you enter into your spreadsheet (ART- avg of all runs)/ stand deviation will produce a z score you may decide you don't want to include in your calculations any run that scores more then 1.00.
example
1 form line time = 19.807
average all runs = 19.722
stdevp .313
(19.807-19.722)/.313 = .271
this run is kept in your calculations.
Your better to look at a formline based on a z score I feel

[woof43]

Cheers Mo, I will read through all that today.

About my method, If i showed you how I rate speed then you would see me for the hobby punter and idiot that I am. Its the type of rating that wouldn't satisy the Woof's of this world, but it provides me with a base to start from.



My main performance variable, no matter if I'm betting on racing , greyhounds and to more an extent pacing, are all based to a degree on Time and distance.
answer these two questions an you know what i'm doing.
How long is a race?
When is the race over?

[moeee]

Moeee,
Your better to look at a formline based on a z score I feel

First of all can I say that I actually understood this post , and the previous one of yours.

My concern is that should the bad z-score be its most recent run , then I feel it is significant and i want to make the decision whether it is dismissed or not.

While I'm here , Here's GEELONG RACE 5 for this afternoon.

4 DYNAMIC VIEW $3.8
1 BLACK PHYSIQUE $4.7
6 MOUSE'S IMAGE $6.1
7 WHAT AN EFFORT $6.3
2 VUVUZELA $7.6
9 LEKTRA GOLD $16
10 DONS DAUGHTER $66

2 Winning Chances and 3 further place chances should provide the Trifecta.
I have the Winner as coming over the top of the weak front runners

[woof43]

My recent success is on the back of 20 years of losses. But at least I realise that. And it's all because I decided to add some discipline to my punting, and not just go down to the pub at noon every Saturday, see the guys, have some beers and hope for the best.

To go to a venue that has Keno isn't such a bad thing and could be the spark one needs, Keno which has a negative expectation, but also has moving probabilities can allow you to develop skills in discipline and understanding wagering probabilities that are required in these other more complex games

[woof43]

First of all can I say that I actually understood this post , and the previous one of yours.

My concern is that should the bad z-score be its most recent run , then I feel it is significant and i want to make the decision whether it is dismissed or not.


Maybe you should have Raw averages and adjusted avgs, and look a zscores for each run instead of looking at the times if the zscore moves towards a minus its racing above avg and so on

[Raven]

How's that?

I just layed Queens Fashion at $15.47. Rated at $41. Short half head and I look plain silly.

I'll tell you the worst thing. If one of these gets up early in the day, you KNOW you will end up the day in loss. You simply can't recoup the $200 in one day. Its a ******** feeling.

Maybe I should look at less than $10 only.

[Raven]

To go to a venue that has Keno isn't such a bad thing and could be the spark one needs, Keno which has a negative expectation, but also has moving probabilities can allow you to develop skills in discipline and understanding wagering probabilities that are required in these other more complex games
Woof, are you Mr Z? lol

Funny thing is i only gamble on the gallops. Never do Keno, lotto, scratchies, pokies, etc

[moeee]

While I'm here , Here's GEELONG RACE 5 for this afternoon.

4 DYNAMIC VIEW $3.8
1 BLACK PHYSIQUE $4.7
6 MOUSE'S IMAGE $6.1
7 WHAT AN EFFORT $6.3
2 VUVUZELA $7.6
9 LEKTRA GOLD $16
10 DONS DAUGHTER $66

2 Winning Chances and 3 further place chances should provide the Trifecta.
I have the Winner as coming over the top of the weak front runners

10 DONS DAUGHTER $66
Yes thats the Rating I gave the Winner of the race.
And thats the reason I don't LAY dogs and never will.
Certainly not the roughies anyway.

[Raven]

My main performance variable, no matter if I'm betting on racing , greyhounds and to more an extent pacing, are all based to a degree on Time and distance.
answer these two questions an you know what i'm doing.
How long is a race?
When is the race over?
I think I have seen you pose that question before. Are you getting at that the winner runs 1200m im 70 sec, but the 2nd horse 1197m in the same time, etc?

I give the race a rating in points, and adjust for beaten margins. The rating is an average rating as I don't see the point of just looking at final time, so I also give the final 600m a rating as well.

I convert each race to a standard, and use 1200m as my standard. So if the race is 1600m, I divide the time by the 1600m Par then multiply by the 1200m Par.

[moeee]

How's that?

I just layed Queens Fashion at $15.47. Rated at $41. Short half head and I look plain silly.

I'll tell you the worst thing. If one of these gets up early in the day, you KNOW you will end up the day in loss. You simply can't recoup the $200 in one day. Its a ******** feeling.

Maybe I should look at less than $10 only.

Just keep doing what you are doing and keep examining the areas like you did with the 87 roughies.
If it starts turning to ******** , then maybe think about sticking with under $10 shots.

But you could still get your money back is say you laid a $2.50 shot , and it lost , you win nearly half your money back right there.
But you are looking at and experiencing the Big Picture Raven , so you should be just fine.

[Raven]

That you have access to this sort of information is the reason why you are successful.
I don't do this.
I know should and have everything to gain by doing so and zero to lose , except perhaps some time.

Could you tell me something about 2 scenarios that could occur in these 87 Wagers?

Supposing you had a horse rated at $50 and the man wanted $10
I figure from what you write , that you would let him have $20 on it at $10 and that would be that for that Race.

And supposing in another Race where you had something Rated at $14 and the man wanted $10 , then again, you would let him have $20 on it at $10 and that would be that for the race.

Is that so?
Tell me if not.

If it is , can you see that the animal that you have given almost no chance , is being treated exactly the same as the animal that you give some sort of chance?

I have a Formula here that AngryPixie helped me with that will help you take advantage of the discrepancy between your rated Price and the other Player.
Mo,

I do not lay EVERY underlay. I'm not that good. I pick out between 3 and 12 horses to lay on a Sat. I get a gut feel for a horse mostly. If I'm confident my asessment is rock solid, I need big value to get involved. That's with the roughies anyway. So no, I doubt I would lay a horse at $10 If i rated it at $14, unless I had a gut feel. Did it run well off a VVF pace last start? Was it pace advantaged, etc? I do that ********.

For example on Sat, I layed Ofcourseican at $17. Now she would have rated OK as she did rate 103 last start and More Joyous only rated 100. BUT, she was advantaged by a massive outside bias & pace advantaged by a VVF pace, and suited at handicap conditions in producing this rating. $34 was probably a fair assessment there

[woof43]

Woof, are you Mr Z? lol

Funny thing is i only gamble on the gallops. Never do Keno, lotto, scratchies, pokies, etc

as if he would frequent forums.

but keno does lend it self to be worked over probability wise, if you have a spare hour or two every day

[woof43]

I think I have seen you pose that question before. Are you getting at that the winner runs 1200m im 70 sec, but the 2nd horse 1197m in the same time, etc?

I give the race a rating in points, and adjust for beaten margins. The rating is an average rating as I don't see the point of just looking at final time, so I also give the final 600m a rating as well.

I convert each race to a standard, and use 1200m as my standard. So if the race is 1600m, I divide the time by the 1600m Par then multiply by the 1200m Par.

if you multiply the time by distance this becomes your track constant, then you just divide the other times into this track constant to get the distance it covered in the same time.
but you would have 3 or more track constants that provide cross hairs on a runners performance, these are fixed(track record) , relative(par or an average standard) and moving(todays performance).
these would form your basis of performance.
everything is adjusted in metres.

[Raven]

Mo, a few questions.

In the formguide for dogs, when you see the time & early split for each dog's previous runs, are they the actual time that dog ran, or is it the winners time & you have to adjust for beaten margins? I assume the latter, I also assume the lead split time is the leaders only.

What about weight. Is the weight of a dog significant? Are variations in weight from last start worth considering? I sense this is my next little project.

[Raven]

Woof,

Don't you consider the effect of pace on final time, horse racing especially?

[moeee]

I have very busy day today and I will get back to you eventually Raven.

But with the FormGuides , the time is what the animal actually ran in the Guide that I use.
Same with the First Split.
A dogs weight can be important in certain situations.
I don't utilize it much as a Factor , But I do consider weight changes from the previous run , especially when the animals are returning from a spell.

[ijuandaQLD]

Mo, a few questions.

In the formguide for dogs, when you see the time & early split for each dog's previous runs, are they the actual time that dog ran, or is it the winners time & you have to adjust for beaten margins? I assume the latter, I also assume the lead split time is the leaders only.

What about weight. Is the weight of a dog significant? Are variations in weight from last start worth considering? I sense this is my next little project.

the time and early split written in form guides depends on the form guide. some print the overall time for the winning dog and some print the actual time each dog ran. generally time differences are 1 length equals .07 of a second so it is easy to adjust to see what a dog would have run if its not given in your form eg if a winning dog runs 30.00 and the dog you're looking at get beat 10 lengths (10 x 0.07 = 0.7) so your dog has run 30.70 (this can adjust if the dogs was weakening or coming home)

early splits on the other hand are entirely different and hopefully in the future form guides will look at this as it is a major indicator in greyhounds. the thing is a lot of tracks dont have the technology to record first splits for each dog just the lead dog (metro tracs like wenty, albion, sandown, meadows however do) yet too often you find forms that dont have first split times. suprising since it is a very high percentage of greyhounds who lead that win.

your question of weight is exactly as moe says. the actual weight of the dog you can disregard on all basis except one. a 40kg dog and a 23kg bitch race to the first turn together and bump. who do u think wins the bumping duel? 40% its the inside dog, 10% its the outside, 20% its the bigger dog, 20% its the more determined/bigger heart, 5% its the smaller dog and 5% they bump enough that the dog running third gets inside or outside them to take the lead.

the weight variation is the key. many greyhound websites that have career stats for a dog will display this. generally a dog has a set (natural) racing weight. the rules are a dog cannot vary more than a kilo between starts and no more than two kilos between starts one month apart. generally in a career you will see a dog range between 1-1.5kg either side of its natural weight with little impact on its performance. yet weight variations when changing trainers can be significant. i have know leading trainer tony brett to add or take off anywhere up to 3 kilos on a dog and improve its performance immeasurably.

i would suggest looking at thedogs.com.au or grv.org.au they are the official websites for New South Wales and Vic greyhound racing. (the dogs requires free registration) they have very good form for meetings as well as indepth career stats, thedogs.com.au in particular

[Raven]

Moeee, in one of those sheets Kennedy had, he asked for such a filter, I put in a z score filter, that would eliminate runs based on a zscore.
If you enter into your spreadsheet (ART- avg of all runs)/ stand deviation will produce a z score you may decide you don't want to include in your calculations any run that scores more then 1.00.
example
1 form line time = 19.807
average all runs = 19.722
stdevp .313
(19.807-19.722)/.313 = .271
this run is kept in your calculations.
Your better to look at a formline based on a z score I feel
I actually undertsand that.

One question, do you eliminate ALL outliers, be they too fast, or too slow? Or is there a case to consider a dog's very best ratings in the greater scheme of things, and just eliminate the slow outliers?

[ijuandaQLD]

what do u mean by outliers raven? and when you say the dogs best ratings, what constitutes its best ratings?

[Raven]

the time and early split written in form guides depends on the form guide. some print the overall time for the winning dog and some print the actual time each dog ran. generally time differences are 1 length equals .07 of a second so it is easy to adjust to see what a dog would have run if its not given in your form eg if a winning dog runs 30.00 and the dog you're looking at get beat 10 lengths (10 x 0.07 = 0.7) so your dog has run 30.70 (this can adjust if the dogs was weakening or coming home)

early splits on the other hand are entirely different and hopefully in the future form guides will look at this as it is a major indicator in greyhounds. the thing is a lot of tracks dont have the technology to record first splits for each dog just the lead dog (metro tracs like wenty, albion, sandown, meadows however do) yet too often you find forms that dont have first split times. suprising since it is a very high percentage of greyhounds who lead that win.

your question of weight is exactly as moe says. the actual weight of the dog you can disregard on all basis except one. a 40kg dog and a 23kg bitch race to the first turn together and bump. who do u think wins the bumping duel? 40% its the inside dog, 10% its the outside, 20% its the bigger dog, 20% its the more determined/bigger heart, 5% its the smaller dog and 5% they bump enough that the dog running third gets inside or outside them to take the lead.

the weight variation is the key. many greyhound websites that have career stats for a dog will display this. generally a dog has a set (natural) racing weight. the rules are a dog cannot vary more than a kilo between starts and no more than two kilos between starts one month apart. generally in a career you will see a dog range between 1-1.5kg either side of its natural weight with little impact on its performance. yet weight variations when changing trainers can be significant. i have know leading trainer tony brett to add or take off anywhere up to 3 kilos on a dog and improve its performance immeasurably.

i would suggest looking at thedogs.com.au or grv.org.au they are the official websites for New South Wales and Vic greyhound racing. (the dogs requires free registration) they have very good form for meetings as well as indepth career stats, thedogs.com.au in particular
Many thanks, invaluable

[Raven]

what do u mean by outliers raven? and when you say the dogs best ratings, what constitutes its best ratings?
I'm refering to my method for gallops, sorry. By outlier, I'm talking about a run that does not look representative. In gallops this can be their best speed rating as well as their worst, BUT early pace has a huge impact on time in gallops, I assume its impact is negligible in the dogs, ie, thet jump & just try to run the distance at full speed?

If i consider a dog's certain run to be its fastest, and lets say its more than 1 std dv faster than its mean, is that unrepresentative data OR worth considering in a best case scenario sense?

hope that makes sense

[moeee]

If i consider a dog's certain run to be its fastest, and lets say its more than 1 std dv faster than its mean, is that unrepresentative data OR worth considering in a best case scenario sense?


Unless the fast time is an error in data entry or whatever , then the animal ran that time.
For whatever reason it did it.
It is up to the handicapper to find good reason why it won't repeat the effort.
This mainly applies to last start good efforts.
If this massive effort was 6 months ago , then you would need substantial reason why it should suddenly repeat.

I suggest you dump poor performance outliers and not dump the good ones.
The most important decision is that when you dump lines be aware of what you are doing and why.

Pace is not something that dogs decide as would a jockey.
But races are run at a different pace , because there may be 4 really quick early animals , and this tends to break up the Field and the slower beginners have trouble winning because they need to make up a lot of ground and need to negotiate traffic as they do so.
And only minor loss of time is usually the difference between figuring , and also rans.

If you follow horses and pace , you already have a handle on whether backmarkers are likely to figure in an event.

[woof43]

Mo, a few questions.

In the formguide for dogs, when you see the time & early split for each dog's previous runs, are they the actual time that dog ran, or is it the winners time & you have to adjust for beaten margins? I assume the latter, I also assume the lead split time is the leaders only.

What about weight. Is the weight of a dog significant? Are variations in weight from last start worth considering? I sense this is my next little project.

If you eliminate approx the first 12 starts of a dog, this is about the time it is maturing, for the remaining runs find its median weight and the better performances will fall to the lighter side (time adjusted by box position) of this weight

[woof43]

I actually understand that.

One question, do you eliminate ALL outliers, be they too fast, or too slow? Or is there a case to consider a dog's very best ratings in the greater scheme of things, and just eliminate the slow outliers?

You really don't want to be measuring how well a dog recovers from being checked or those below average performances or measuring bad runs.
But if it's not checked in the first split you'd keep that data, if the check occurred after the first turn you don't need that 2nd split data or overall time.

Dogs that generally lead the race will run above avg performances, so if you expect a dog to lead, you might decide to only use data when it has raced 1,2,3 at the first turn.

A point to remember most dogs don't perform to a Normal distribution, and depending on the box position and racing style these play an important part of what shape distribution is required. This requires thought but it's logical

[woof43]

Woof,

Don't you consider the effect of pace on final time, horse racing especially?
I'm not worried too much about Final time, the only final time I measure is the 2nd place-getter whom I can be assured is trying to it's best of it's ability.

[woof43]

the time and early split written in form guides depends on the form guide. some print the overall time for the winning dog and some print the actual time each dog ran. generally time differences are 1 length equals .07 of a second so it is easy to adjust to see what a dog would have run if its not given in your form eg if a winning dog runs 30.00 and the dog you're looking at get beat 10 lengths (10 x 0.07 = 0.7) so your dog has run 30.70 (this can adjust if the dogs was weakening or coming home)


here is a more complex way to work this out.
Track record 525
Time = 29.45
525 / 29.45 = 17.83
length of a dog assuming .07 is the correct length , .07 X 17.83 =1.25mtrs at record time

Dog is beaten by 10 lengths beaten =10 X .07= .7 = 29.45 +.7= 30.15

29.45 X 525 / 30.15 = 512.81 metres
525 - 512.81 = 12.19 metres difference
12.19 / 1.25 = 9.75 lengths

see what is happening, the question is how long is a length?

[moeee]

here is a more complex way to work this out.

see what is happening, the question is how long is a length?

You are trying to complicate things by comparing 2 dissimilar items.
If you wish to know exactly what time an animal took to run the complete 525 metres , then you have to keep running the tape until that animal crosses the finishing line and then seeing what time has elapsed.

Because most of us don't have access , and don't care to go to so much trouble to set up the software to do this , we find a very close approximation is arrived at using the method Tijuana describes.

You simply being too clinical again here WOOF43.
I'm surprised you actually get anything done at all.
I know when I try to get anything done perfectly , I take ages to finish the task.

I read somewhere once that second best is usually good enough.
And near enough is good enough.
I mean nobody ever gets even one Race in a lifetime perfectly exactly accurately handicapped.

[woof43]

You are trying to complicate things by comparing 2 dissimilar items.
If you wish to know exactly what time an animal took to run the complete 525 metres , then you have to keep running the tape until that animal crosses the finishing line and then seeing what time has elapsed.

Because most of us don't have access , and don't care to go to so much trouble to set up the software to do this , we find a very close approximation is arrived at using the method Tijuana describes.


Outside of Victoria they mainly use finishing margins and multiply by a Time factor, some tracks will use .066 or .06 and .07. Victoria is fortunate enough to have tracks that provide the time the dog actually crossed the line. Hence the post

[moeee]

Victoria is fortunate enough to have tracks that provide the time the dog actually crossed the line.

Whoulda thought?
I sure didn't know that.
By taking a few measurements from the FormGuide , it seems to equate to .0625 seconds per length.

Might be different for Staying Races and the Short Sprint Races.