Trying to come up with a 1 to 10 rating figure on how each horse finished its race regardless of placing. This is just for a 1 to 10 rating on how the horse finished, so for example:


Example 1: 18 horses in field 800m 400m Place Margin
17 11 2 0.5
Example 2: 10 horses in field 800m 400m Place Margin
9 8 1 0

Example 3: 22 horses in field 800m 400m Place Margin
2 7 12 6.2
Example 4: 24 horses in field 800m 400m Place Margin
2 2 1 0
I am trying to come up with a formula which will rate each horses finishing so I can apply it to the rest of my program. To date, this is the only part of my program which is open to subjective input - something I am trying to eliminate.

Are there any mathematicians here who may come up witht he formula needed so i can apply it to my program?

Hi!
I am sure I could help but I maybe missing something, could you please make it a bit clearer?
Like what the 800 and 400m mean? sectional positions? if so, should'nt be two of them?
Cheers

Sorry!
Upon reading your post again, I see what you mean, it's just the formatting of the post that threw me.
Still not clear though, without knowing the position of the other horses it is hard to put a number on one horse without comparing it to the rest!?

Will consider the problem.
Good luck
Ps.
If you are serious about it, give us an Email address.

Hmmm, it's a little open to subjectiveness.

An 800m,1 400m,1 finished 2 margin 2.50L

Is this worse or better than your example?

Or do you want to rate them on lengths made up?

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 399,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/03/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

I'm sure such a rating number in a horse's last race could be dredged up to suit the distance parameters required, but I'm trying to work out [considering the amount of things during each particular race that would effect individual runners at various distances], what possible use such a rating number could be. Especially taking into account a horse's particular running style, jockey, barrier position and at what track etc. etc. that will all influence the outcome of a race for each horse in it and what position it was in at various distances in a race.

For instance, at the 800m and the 400m a winning backmarker [eventual winner of race] will be about last and a losing leader [eventual last] will be about 1st.
In the last 400m their positions will go through a rapid transformation covering almost every position in the field from first to last. The leader will be covering them as it looses ground and the backmarker will be covering them as it gains ground. In fact this could all happen within the last 300m, 200m or even the last 100m. First to last and last to first.

There might be some use for such a rating figure for on-pace grinders [only], but even that would be of iffy use.

Of far better possible use which could be give a rating number, would be sectional times, but even these figures [suitable to USA dirt tracks and Aust. trots] have debatable worth on Australian race tracks, considering very few of them have the technology involved to gather that info. for a start and also the widely diverse layout of our tracks and movable barriers.

shouldnt he just use horses last 800,or 400 sectional? he,s only looking for melb cup lead up races.and only betting in the cup itself.
i think red is only looking for horses finishing off there races well over shorter distance,s like 2000m 2400m

Hi,
The following method is relatively crude, compared to what is possible. (... think of how you can use this technique not only to correct Calls, BUT ALSO BY Class) But I would also continue to think about the ramifications of changing the data domain.

First set yourself up a table of OBSERVED historical probabilities for getting any given call value. Express them as PERFORMANCE PERCENTILES. So in my example, you end up with eight percentile floor cutoffs, like (a made-up example):

Call 1 = 82.2%
Call 2 = 71.1%
Call 3 = 50.7%
Call 4 = 41.3%
Call 5 = 30.8%
Call 6 = 21.7%
Call 7 = 09.5%
Call 8 = 00.0%

Now, for any given formline where you have a horse and he scored a Call of 3, you know he performed AT THE 50.7 PERCENTILE LEVEL OR ABOVE. So throw away his original Call, and substitute his PERCENTILE score. Do that for all of a horses lines. Add up the percentile scores, and divide by the number of lines you used, and you get the horses AVERAGE PERCENTILE SCORE, which you use as a CORRECTED AVERAGE Call

To project the 800 Call on TODAY'S race, simply get the percentile rating for all horses, put them in order, and give the highest horse a projected break of 1. Next highest a projected break of 2, and so on, just using a simple RANKING of the PERCENTILE AVERAGES.

Important Note: To get a more accurate rating for each horse, don't take the FLOOR percentile for that call, but take the mid-point between the floor and the ceiling. For example, if a Horse has a Formline with a call of 3, don't use 50.7 for his score, instead use ((50.7+71.1)/2) which is the midpoint of the percentile step.

The "trick" here is that you are NOT getting a correction for each formline. Instead, you are getting a corrected OVERALL average for the Horse by changing the domain of your data from CALLS to PERCENTILE PERFORMANCE RATINGS.

And finally, and OBVIOUSLY, this general technique is pretty valuable when applied to other problems of this type commonly found in the handicapping world.

I just KNOW there's gold in what you say Woof, if only I could understand it.

KV

okay, I'll say it.....

What is a call?

racecall?

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 399,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/03/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Hi!
I was thinking along the same lines, but I also included "Class" since I thought it to be one of the main factors. Have some results but so inconclusive as to be utterly useless.
Have to agree with Crash, that running style, ( I don't have this data and never use it) is probably more important in this instance than anything else.
Next of importance would be the barrier pos. - track condition, combination (hence riding tactics) and that's just to start with, in other words we are looking at an endless array of probable outcomes for little or no return.
I think, that sometimes intuition and experience in handicapping is the best course of action.
One example: yesterday at Sandown race 4, there was a horse called "LION DREAM" form line 0094, nothing to write home about, but if you look at it's last performance on a heavy track and the fact it was obviously improving (0-0-9-4), this was a horse to put some money on, now this decision will never come from systems or even ratings. I am happy to say I had 5*50 on it. And only the ability of a superior jockey beat it to second place.
Good luck