• mikesal57
    61
    Going back to why I was doing this.....
    My static swarm picked up 2 winners , a $8 & $6 winner
    but
    Lost the $19 - $11- $7 winners the Dynamic had..

    so in this case the Dynamic won
  • mikesal57
    61
    Parx 4/1

    1...8-4-2
    2...2-7-8
    3...6-2-1
    4...6-2-5
    5...8-7-1
    6...8-1-5
    7...4-3-7
    8...1-10-4
    9...5-3-1
    10..6-1-2

    Mike

    this will keep me focus on comparing :)
  • Dave Schwartz
    46
    Try this... Model the two against each other. Don't necessarily look for agreement (i.e. consensus).
  • mikesal57
    61
    DYN......................STATIC......................WINNER

    1...8-4-2................4-2-8..........................#1-$9.80
    2...2-7-8................7-2-8..........................#7-$5.20 .....B
    3...6-2-1................6-2-3..........................#2-$5.80.....B
    4...6-2-5................6-7-1..........................#8-$67.80
    5...8-7-1................8-7-1..........................#2-$15.40
    6...8-1-5................8-1-6..........................#8-$3.80.....B
    7...4-3-7................4-3-5..........................#3-$10.30.....B
    8...1-10-4..............1-10-5........................#10-$6.60.....B
    9...5-3-1................3-5-6..........................#4-$28.20
    10..6-1-2...............6-3-8..........................#3-$14.00.....S

    Static wins this day by pulling it out with a 14 dollar winner in 10TH...and makes Static profit for day

    But hitting 5 of 10 would have lost money on day with Dynamic :(
  • Dave Schwartz
    46
    Look back at these races. Pick the best of 3/1 and below and the best of the rest.

    IOW, still 2 horses per race, but...
    1 from low odds
    1 from higher odds
  • Brian Reed
    5
    My exact strategy pick 3 and dutch 2, or sometimes I flat bet 2, seems to be working for me.
  • mikesal57
    61
    Swarmies for:

    Parx 4-8

    1...5-7-1
    2...4-7-2
    3...2-1-4
    4...6-1-3
    5...PASS
    6...4-1-3
    7...12-10-8
    8...5-1-2
    9...2-9-1
  • mikesal57
    61
    Dam....you have some freaking smarts ants in this program....:)a6edfehry6k059bx.jpg
    smy9ad2q8649inbv.jpg
  • Joe Muller
    22
    Hey Mike are you still working with Swarms? I've been out of touch for the past 5 or 6 weeks due to health issues with my parents, but have started re-looking at this technology and was wondering if you're still messing with it.
    Joe M.
  • mikesal57
    61


    Joe, hope is all well with your parents....

    and

    yes...still with it.....with the knowledge of "studies" that I just got into ...I can now create scenarios on when to place my bets....

    Mike
  • Joe Muller
    22
    Cool, I'm behind where you are on the technology, but will work to catch up as I'm seeing possibilities with this as a supplement to other elements of my handicapping. That is to say, I don't at this point see it as standalone and have given up on the idea of push one button and the answer appears. Horse racing is too complicated a puzzle for that, I've come to believe.

    The nut to crack is looking for pieces that can provide insight for profitability beyond the overwhelming power of PSR as a predictor and profit miser. I have a couple of things I like and use, but feel that swarming around a meet itself, race type or something a bit more granular has possibilities.
  • mikesal57
    61
    Actually Joe....I do see it at a standalone approach.....but since it was abandoned , it takes a careful 20-30 mouse clicks to get a race done....the only other object I'd consider is Kevs FTS .
  • Joe Muller
    22
    Interesting. We'll have to see how it goes for me. I'm just too early into it to be informed enough to make that judgement I guess.
  • Joe Muller
    22
    Mike, I really think the swarm intelligence idea has a lot of future. It has increased in popularity since Dave was working on it. Can we say he's a man ahead of his time?

    Anyway, this topic is really generating lots of attention and has been anecdotally tested with horse racing. Watch this Ted talk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eu-RyZt_Uas

    I know that's one example, but there are a lot more if you google swarm intelligence or AI prediction markets, etc.

    Is anyone else out there in the HSH universe using this part of the program?
  • Gino
    32


    In this time lapse video we see the intersection at Meskel Square, the nerve center of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

    This intersection operates with NO white or yellow lines, NO directional arrows, NO traffic lights and NO one directing traffic.

    Yet, there are no skid marks in the intersection. Driving this intersection is not for the timid, patient or slow-thinking driver. It takes guts, split second timing, and brake and gas pedals that work!

    Also check out the pedestrians as they navigate this chaos.

    In this time lapse video we see the intersection at Meskel Square, the nerve center of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

    This intersection operates with NO white or yellow lines, NO directional arrows, NO traffic lights and NO one directing traffic.

    Yet, there are no skid marks in the intersection. Driving this intersection is not for the timid, patient or slow-thinking driver. It takes guts, split second timing, and brake and gas pedals that work!

    Also check out the pedestrians as they navigate this chaos.

    Meskel Square, Addis Abeba - YouTube
  • Dave Schwartz
    46
    Actually Joe....I do see it at a standalone approach.....but since it was abandoned , it takes a careful 20-30 mouse clicks to get a race done....the only other object I'd consider is Kevs FTS .mikesal57

    I assume you are doing it dynamically?
  • Joe Muller
    22
    Am experimenting with a non-dynamic Contender swarm for a specific track and timeframe that has no pace factors and a pace swarm (pace factors only) for the same track and timeframe and letting HSH handicap them both for the race. Not sure what to make of it yet, but it anecdotally finds a lower priced contender and often a nice longer price for an exacta and trifecta play. The other way to say it is that it also identifies the low price horse or two to eliminate. Interesting!
  • mikesal57
    61


    I never liked using "pace" factors in any approach since I started with HSH...I always believed that the best horse will overcome pace....And to prove things my regression analysis had none of the pace factors as significant.....that doesnt mean its bad, its that it is so widely known that it lost its luster in the handicapping world....you need a "unique" set of factors that Joe Public doesnt have..good luck with that...:)
    I still believe that swarms is a stand alone system and you dont need any other decision making to the out-come.
  • mikesal57
    61
    Heres something to throw out for discussion....

    When you research.......what winners do you look at....low priced or high priced?

    I always looked at a "high" priced winners....why?.......because anyone(program) can come up with a low priced favorite....Its the not obvious horse that a system picked , should be looked at...
  • Dave Schwartz
    46
    I tend to look at lower odds (winners and losers) because the most important decision is whether or not there is a play against horse.
  • mikesal57
    61


    With swarms...there are no decisions...top horse best, 2nd is 2nd, 3rd is 3rd..and so on...
  • Dave Schwartz
    46
    I was responding to your comment: "What do you look at?"
  • Joe Muller
    22
    I look for both low and high priced horses. I tend to bet horizontally so will acknowledge the fact that low priced horses do win their share of races and therefore have to be considered, but also know that the higher priced ones, when they come in, are the real gold in those bets. I guess I'm looking for play against horses among the low priced ones and overlooked quality among the higher ones. That sounds like a mealy mouthed answer, but I don't see the reason to drop a solid favorite in a pick 3, just because it's low priced. Very, very few of these bets don't have a favorite winning one of those legs.
  • Joe Muller
    22
    Mike, I agree there needs to be uniqueness to gain profit. Are you saying that your swarm factors for contender selection don't include the likes of PSR or other highly predictive factors in addition to ones not well correlated to it? Or are you using unique factors only?

    The difference between a PSR included swarm with uncorrelated factors and one without PSR I think would be that you find overlooked quality horses versus ones that are not gettable on a regular basis and ultimately not profitable. I am open to being wrong about my thoughts on this as it's early for me with swarms.

    As for Pace, I think you make a good point and the same must be made for using PSR like factors, both are too popular by themselves. Which is why I wouldn't use pace by itself as a selector, but believe that the pace of the race matters, whether everyone sees it or not. One lone speed horse in a fast pace race versus one where the race is devoid of all pace is a simple example where obvious pace makes sense to me as one predictor. However it can only be one of several predictors that might lead to the winner of the race.

    I don't think we're far off on our belief that to win profitably means we have to find what others cannot or will not take the effort to find in order to bet successfully. Right now I'm looking at the race from at least three separate angles (a Leonardo DaVinci method I learned about many years ago and has application in many things in life) and trying to "sub-swarm" to a set of two to four horses in a race. Right now I'm using a contender, eliminator, pace and trainer set of factors for non-maiden races. Now I'm working on swarming the contender and pace factors to see how it does against my current static approach. I haven't gotten into dynamic swarms yet. I should also add that I am looking at the meet by race type level, which does produce an issue with number of races, and am watching that issue.

    Anyway this post is getting too far out into the ether for an early Saturday morning, appreciate your posts Mike. Thanks!
    Joe M.
    Seattle
  • mikesal57
    61
    Joe....I'm using "significant" HSH factors and PSR is NOT one of them.....the more I use this approach the more I see it as my "GoTo" System.....I am getting 10/20 ML odds in the picture that are hard for Joe Public to see ...and those short price horses too....thats all I need going forward!!!!
    Keep me up-dated with your venture
    Mike
  • Joe Muller
    22
    That's great Mike! Exciting stuff and glad you have a system your enthused about.
  • mikesal57
    61
    I would never bet a limited win horse vs open winners...
    But this happens quite often...
    I thought my aML was good ...but Swarms makes better decisions
    qto4g6vza7mm2iv7.jpg
    wf2yfcbiv8giwc3s.jpg

    At 9/2

    tmnephmzfqzjr74g.jpg
  • Gino
    32
    yo Swarming Sal, both you and H$H nailed this race...
    nice $11 score!!
    Sooper was bonus bucks too!! $213 for a dime...
    i want to hear more on yer arti intel!!

    (joe- i hope the sun is out at EMD)

    OP 04 Summary   Bet Int=10													
    	Prg Horse                Cont Odds Prob    $Net    Opt%  Cons  Cnt													
    	  8 Match Play              C    3 14.1    $1.12   -14.7  203   11													
    	  4 Greeleys Charm          C    5 12.1    $1.46    -5.4  193   11													
    	  5 Sutton Impact           C  7/2 11.2    $1.01   -14.1  126   11													
    	  6 Cash for the Soul       C   13 10.9    $3.04     4.0  112   11													
    	  7 Major Munnings          C  9/2 11.1    $1.22    -8.7   87   11													
    	  9 One Son of a Chief      C    6 10.9    $1.52    -4.0   78   11													
    	  1 Plumbago                C   10  8.0    $1.75    -1.3   54   11													
    	  2 After Hours             C   16  9.2    $3.11     3.5   38   11													
    	  3 Minefield               C   16  7.6    $2.58     1.8   19   11													
    	 10 Anteros                 C   21  5.1    $2.23     0.5   11   11													
    	COMPOSITE RATINGS (Rank)													
    	    Name   Rtg| Rtg  ES  F1  EP  SC  FT  SP  FW  PW  LP Cls Lvl Frm LRc C90 PSR CPW													
    	___________________________________________________________________________________													
    	 8  Matc 7  80|   1   1   1   1   1   2   2   1   2   2   2   2   1   .  82   4   2													
    	 5  Sutt 5  70|   2   3   3   3   4   3   4   2   .   4   1   2   2   1  90   1   4													
    	 4  Gree 2  67|   2   .   .   .   3   1   1   2   1   1   2   1   .   1  94   1   3													
    	 7  Majo 6  58|   4   2   3   4   4   .   .   4   .   .   4   2   .   4  87   3   1													
    	 6  Cash 7  57|   4   1   1   1   1   .   .   3   .   .   .   .   3   4  83   6   6													
    	 9  One  3  56|   4   .   .   4   4   3   4   4   3   4   .   2   .   4  81   6   8													
    	 2  Afte 3  44|   .   .   .   .   .   .   4   .   3   3   .   .   3   1  88   5   5													
    	 1  Plum 1  36|   .   .   .   .   .   .   3   .   4   .   .   .   .   .  84   8   7													
    	 3  Mine 5  36|   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .  81   9   9													
    	10  Ante 1  15|   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .   .       9   9													
    	___________________________________________________________________________________																
    																	
    	DOUBLE DRUTHER																
    	                        Pace Ratings                    Synthetics      Fractions																
    	Prg Horse            ES  F1  EP  SC  FT  FW  SP  PW  LP|  FX  SR  AB  MG|  F2  F3  F4  HF|Avg																
    	_____________________________________________________________________________________________																
    	 8 Match Play         7   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1|   1   1   1   1|   1   1   2   1|  1																 
    	 5 Sutton Impact      5   2   2   2   2   2   2   2   2|   2   2   2   2|   2   4   1   2|  2																
    	 2 After Hours        3   4   4   4   3   4   3   3   3|   3   3   4   3|   4   3   3   4|  3																
    	 6 Cash for the Soul  7   3   3   3   3   3   4   4   4|   5   6   3   4|   3   4   6   3|  3																
    	 4 Greeleys Charm     2   5   5   5   5   5   4   5   4|   4   3   5   5|   5   2   4   5|  4																
    	 7 Major Munnings     6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6   6|   6   7   6   6|   6   7   7   6|  6																
    	 1 Plumbago           1   7   7   7   7   7   7   7   7|   6   5   8   7|   8   6   5   7|  6																
    	 9 One Son of a Chief 3   8   7   8   8   8   8   8   8|   8   8   7   8|   7   8   8   8|  7																
    	 3 Minefield          5   9   9   9   9   9   9   9   9|   9   9   9   9|   9   9   9   9|  9																
    	10 Anteros            1   9   9   9   9   9   9   9   9|   9   9   9   9|   9   9   9   9|  9																
    	_____________________________________________________________________________________________															
    																
    	TEA FOR TILLER															
    	                        Pace Ratings                    Synthetics      Fractions															
    	Prg Horse            ES  F1  EP  SC  FT  FW  SP  PW  LP|  FX  SR  AB  MG|  F2  F3  F4  HF|Avg															
    	_____________________________________________________________________________________________															
    	 8 Match Play         7   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1|   1   1   1   1|   1   2   1   1|  1															
    	 6 Cash for the Soul  7   2   2   1   2   2   2   2   2|   4   4   2   2|   2   1   5   1|  2															
    	 5 Sutton Impact      5   3   3   3   3   3   3   3   3|   2   2   3   3|   3   4   1   3|  2															
    	 7 Major Munnings     6   3   3   3   3   3   3   4   3|   3   2   4   3|   4   3   3   3|  3															
    	 9 One Son of a Chief 3   5   5   5   5   5   5   5   5|   5   5   5   5|   5   5   4   5|  4															
    	 3 Minefield          5   5   6   6   6   6   6   6   6|   6   6   5   6|   5   6   6   6|  5															
    	10 Anteros            1   7   8   7   7   7   8   7   7|   7   8   7   7|   7   8   7   7|  7															
    	 2 After Hours        3   7   7   7   7   8   7   7   7|   8   9   7   8|   7   9   8   7|  7															
    	 1 Plumbago           1   9   9   9   9   9   9   9   9|   9   7   9   8|   9   7   9   9|  8															
    	 4 Greeleys Charm     2   9   9   9   9   9   9   9   9|   9   9   9   9|   9   9   9   9|  9
    
    _____________________________________________________________________________________________
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Please register to see more

Forum Members always see the latest updates and news first. Sign up today.