Quote:
Originally Posted by Saratoga
Have you seen my thread on...Race Lens fallacies.....?
They send out 4 races a week and I can certainly say ...the angles have very little substance..
|
Using the weekly angle email, which gives out but a few of thousands of various combinations, as an example to say Race Lens angles overall have have very little substance, is problematic.
Angles are designed to research theories.
Some theories have no value in terms of efficacy, but may have value in other ways, such as saving time and turning what used to be a time consuming proactive experience into a reactive one. An example might be to point out first time starters i turf route races where the sire or dam has had one or more first time out winners in similar races.
This angle absolutely has a negative ROI, but there are nuggets to be found among all the horses which match the angle.
No matter the angle having a positive ROI or a high win (or in the money) percentage in the past, EACH individual horse must be assessed to see if it fits the prior results for that angle.
I can assure you the Angles tool in Race Lens is highly regarded by a good number of handicappers, including many who played in the National Horseplayer's Championship. One of those final table participants, T J Sonde, is an active Race Lens user, as were many others I had great discussions with during the tournament, where I was 37th with a couple hours to go on race day before ending up 137th of 766, using Race Lens and some of the angles I had generated over the years, to help come up with a few of the horses I played .