Thread: Speed Mapping
View Single Post
  #8  
Old 3rd February 2015, 11:43 AM
evajb001 evajb001 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 463
Default

Hi guys,

I've tried to reply to each of you individually plus some additional queries/thoughts below:

TS:
To date I haven't taken into consideration rail position simply because I don't have the track data for rail position. But i'm thinking its maybe something I need to consider with my calculations.

Dale:
Definitely agree that tempo/pace has a bearing on if a particular race will be favourable to leaders or not. However there is definitely still bias at play particularly at certain tracks. For instance you cannot tell me Moonee Valley isn't leader bias. Everyone knows this including trainers, jockeys and punters. Yet still those who settle in front at MV do still have an advantage (in my opinion). What i'm looking at doing is simply finding other tracks/distance where there is such an advantage as well - which is evidenced by Chrome Prince's research in a different thread - and attempting to make a profit from that track bias by betting or laying the appropriate runner(s).

Paul:
Certainly understand that PIR data isn't probably enough to put together a premium speed map. However what i'm attempting to do is at least put together a solid speed map with freely available data. I understand your position given you sell said data/maps so I'd expect that your speed maps would be more accurate than mine giving the data inputs you most likely have at your disposal.

I'd be interested in your opinion Paul (and others) on what an acceptable strike rate of predicting the leader would be? i.e. I looked at a very small sample of my speed map predictions and in races <1800m my predicted leader did lead almost 38% of the time, and settled in the top 3 approx 72% of the time. I'm just wondering what type of accuracy I should be aiming for at a minimum (and please don't say 100%). I see it as a decent advantage if you know your predicted leader sits forward that often AND you rate the horses ability/class highly as well.

RCP:
The anti-trend idea makes sense from a form study point of view. However I'm not entirely sure how to apply it to predicting the leader of a race with higher accuracy etc. The anti-trend process is probably what needs to follow once I have a better grasp on deciding what races to bet and if my leader prediction is accurate etc.

Cheers guys
Reply With Quote