Aah I see - one query though - how do you get their lead sectional? Doesn't the GRV onlypost the lead sec for the leader?

Just bear in mind that a greyhounds brain is about the size of a peanut!

Duritz,
I work out the first sectionals from the video tapes. On my video recorder there are 25 slow motion "clicks" to the second so it easy to work out the sectionals. Time the leading dog to the post the first time and record that sectional then count the number of "clicks" between that greyhound and the rest of the contenders. I can also say with confidence that the times in form guides are not always accurate. Double check them by timing yourself.

moeee,
My POT is running at 12% since we last "talked" on this forum. Casino on Fridays has been a bonanza whilst Angle Park is slightly in front. The Gold Coast has been consistent with a POT of 14%. Dogs brains might be small but they are creatures of habit. A wide runner will remain a wide runner and a fence crusher will remain exactly that. Dogs do not have jockeys on them that cost them the race and they also go flat out from start to finish so "pace of the race" is not an issue as it is in thoroughbreds. Only ever eight runners maximum too.

You look like you have understood correctly. The difference is when you have a 300 metre race, they run alot quicker so the distance becomes greater.
.066 seems to be a reasonable sort of estimate, but it is easy in excel to be more precise. The difference between 31.61 and 31.66 is nearly 1 length.
An estimate I have made which I cannot confirm is that 1 length equals 1 metre? Obviously some dogs are bigger than others but until somebody can give me better information, that is what I will continue to use.
I always convert all speeds to the current race distance before finding the fastest, the fastest average etc.
As I said, I convert using the track records as my base. From lowest distance to highest distance there will be noticeable pattern. I am not on my own computer so shall give more info about the formula at a later date...

Please remember, I am not claiming anything, just the process I use and believe in....

BJ,
Quote:
"If a maiden dog runs 31.00 seconds to win a race, and then in a free for all over the same distance, the winner also runs 31.00 seconds. To me the performance is equal, and the class of the race is irrelevant."

This is where I completely disagree. A maiden dog can run fast time in low class but put it into a third or fourth grade event and it will struggle to repeat the fast time. It's called "PRESSURE".

The other point I would be interested to get your answer on is track bias.
How do you account for track bias in your database. The Angle Park track will vary by up to 1 second in times from one meeting to the next with similar class dogs running on both nights. If a dog has had 60 career starts and won 10 races at the track in the following times - 30.2, 30.25, 30.33, 30.25, 30.35, 30.40, 30.21, 30.25, 30.37, 30.36 and 29.85, do you assess this dog as a 29.85 dog or something else? You might find that the night it ran 29.85 the track was on fire with all winners on the night breaking 30.00 seconds.
In my opinion it would be a costly mistake to rate this dog as a 29.85 dog if racing against GENUINE sub 30sec dogs.

Another query for those dog followers that don't do videos:

How do you know if a dog "chases' or not if you're not watching videos. The form guide does not tell you this important factor. You need to "see it" for yourself.

Hi Rock Steady,
I have mentioned a number of times about the importance of the Standard Deviation in our Handicapping, what you have mentioned re "chasers" gives a prime example of how one can catergorise types of runners by just using the STDev with one other Factor.
A typical "chaser" has a smaller then normal lengths beaten from winner avg(will then be overplayed by the public), but a larger spread of Race Win Times thus a wider STDev.
(So knowing this type of runner/s are in todays race gives an edge once known.)

A sidelight to these types of runners and what one should do when modelling these runners is this, what chance has this dog of running times, 2 deviations slower then his avg time then running 2 deviations quicker, in fact this type gets nowhere near the 2 deviations quicker mark maybe not even halfway.

Are you saying to me that a dog that wins a maiden will run slower in its next race?
I don't care how many starts a dog has ran in its career as long as all dogs in the field have had at least 3. I am only interested in the dogs last 3 races, I do not care about its fastest ever time. Therefore a dog with a fastest recorded time of 29.85 would not be rated as such, unless it ran that time in each of its last 3 races over the current distance.
I am looking for standout dogs, with the fastest speed rating, the fastest average speed rating, from its last 3 starts. This is to target dogs that don't get into trouble, generally dogs that are at the front at the first corner.
In races with quality fields, chances are there will be no betting opportunities because of the closeness of their ratings. As I said, there is about 1 betting opportunity every 3 races. Some of these dogs are odds on, some of them pay $20.
I do not have a database of previous starts. All I have at my disposal, is track records, and form of the dogs for last 3 starts. That is all I want. An easy system, that returns >100%.
I do agree that track bias would play a part, however, you would need to keep too much information up to date to put this to use. All statistics from each track in the country would need to be recorded and maintained, which does not interest me in the slightest.

BJ,
Are you talking POT of >100%? If you are and you genuinely can do that over a long period, then you would be the most successful punter I have ever heard of. Good luck to you. I am very happy with a POT of around 12%.

How on earth do people do form without watching race replays? Whether it be dogs, trots, thoroughbreds, tennis, NRL, AFL etc etc., if you don't see them how do assess their ability and style?

Rock Steady,
I am talking about Returns of greater than 100%(100 being break even). You are saying 112% for yourself, which I would be more than happy with also.

I previously have said that I am not yet backing it up with money, but so far have been satisfied with the purely statistical results. At this stage I am trying to work out how to automate it somewhat, so I can check daily results without any manual labour. Time constraints, and PC problems are delaying any further production.

As far as Video replays, I would like to be able to study that way, but am only looking to have an automated system (as automated as possible). Watching videos would possibly lead to smart punting, but not a system of any sort. But I do tend to agree with other sports, a greater knowledge is needed. The greyhounds, I tend to think in the majority of races, are flat out for most of the race. They are not hindered by human strategy....

I have also stated that this is what I believe, and cannot guarantee any results, and will not provide any stats regarding win/loss.

I can totally understand that you are satisfied with your method, and good luck to you. If you find something that works, stick with it. I am trying to find something that works, and this is how I am going about it....