I've seen the way several different handicappers watch and analyze races and do trip notes -- and a lot of people have very different approaches.
The right approach is the one you find out works best for you through trial and error. Doing this kind of work like Ateam is doing will give you an edge...and especially a lot more so over time.
This is good effort Ateam. I haven't studied a lot of those races and appreciate your write-ups.
Ultimately for me, the best way that I found that I could maximize an edge doing trip notes was not to do a circuit like you are. Even though you are detailed and do a good job, you are going to watch quite a few races where, for the most part, nothing really important to note happens.
Over the years, I went from initially trying to make something out of nothing with those type of races -- to eventually just writing stuff like "Fairly enough run race" for my entire analysis of it. It looked like it screamed of laziness -- but I learned over time that some races simply aren't even worth the effort.
They are typically fairly paced races, where all paths and running styles have a chance, and no major trips happen...and when they do, chart callers do a decent job noting it.
My entire M.O. for my trip notes eventually changed to where I developed a profiling system for finding the kind of races that are likely going to create big edge situations. And filtering out the kind of races that appear to be unlikely to create much advantage going forward.
Before I ever watch the race, I especially want to analyze trips on days where I believe racing surfaces are biased. I want to analyze races where I know extreme pace scenarios happen. I want to analyze races that I believe are unusually strong (or weak for finding bet-against if you do exchange betting) I don't care where these races take place. They can take place at Canterbury Park for all I care.
The real trick to this approach of mine is figuring out where the bias days are, where the crazy paces are, where the strong and weak races for the level are.
The type of horse who raced against both a track bias, and unfavorable pace dynamics, in an unusually strong race for the level -- is going to do a hell of a lot more for you than one who legitimately had a few lengths worth of trouble in a fairly paced race over a fair racetrack...especially if the chart caller caught the trouble.
The type of horse who was aided by a track bias, as well as highly favorable pace dynamics, in a below par for the level type of race is going to be a much better bet against than a horse who got a nice ride and had a perfect trip in an avg paced and quality race over a fair track.
The big drawback to my newer approach VS your current approach (which is very close to my old approach) is that what you are doing now will help you a lot more with multi-race wagers like the Pick 3 and Pick 4. Those are the best value wagers on the standard betting menu in America right now -- and a lot of times I'm stuck not playing them.
Anyway. Good work. I appreciate the effort and look forward to reading more. If you start to feel burn-out from this at some point -- don't give up on it, just put less emphasis and fewer words into the races that don't merit as much effort on your part.
If you watch a race just once -- and write "fairly enough run race" and quickly move on -- that is nothing to feel bad about.
|