Greyhound Mystique

[spreadbetting]

Have to admit I've built a scraper myself, though I'm not following this strategy. Figured I should include form cards in the data I gather.

Which site are you scraping? I'm just doig the SportingLife, but not the full form data which maybe I should

[sa7med]

Have to admit I've built a scraper myself, though I'm not following this strategy. Figured I should include form cards in the data I gather.

Which site are you scraping? I'm just doig the SportingLife, but not the full form data which maybe I should

I'm doing sportingLife, seemed more straightforward to scrape than racingpost

[ilovepizza82]

You dont need any sophisticated spreadsheets or software to analyze the dogs.
Odds on the exchange reflect all of the calculations you mentioned in the first post.
Dont tell me nobody has noticed that yet...

[Bog]

I wrote a script to crawl thru the Sporting Life page and it pulled up these, so guess I'll have to set up some logger now also to see if they do contract in price

12:31 Central Park Mon 20 January 2020,6. Zenas Nepotism, class A3, time difference 0.22
12:39 Henlow Mon 20 January 2020,4. Ebony Velvet, class A10, time difference 0.12

"Time difference"0.22 & 0.12 it's different average calculation from original method -"difference between the 1st and 2nd dog average speed of 0.10 or higher"?

I'm asking because for example @ 12:31 Central Park, difference between trap 6 and 3 it's not 0.22, it's 0.02


I'm missing something?

No idea what data it used because the race has passed and the data isn't available to scrape again. It was set to take an average and if only one value there just use that. Only just started learnng python so probably that

I posted the data also:

2:31 Central Park, difference between trap 6 and 3 it's not 0.22, it's 0.02

1. Dog 1 - Best: 29.77s Last: 30.49s -> Average - 30.13
2. Dog 2 - Best: 29.76s Last: 30.45s -> Average - 30.10
3. Dog 3 - Best: 29.76s Last: 30.06s -> Average 29.91 Pascali Hawk
4. Dog 4 - Best: 29.80s Last: 30.24s -> Average - 30.02
5. Dog 5 - Best: 30.00s Last: 30.60s-> Average - 30.3
6. Dog 6 - Best: 29.54s Last: 30.24s-> Average - 29.89 Zenas Nepotism

Best average 29.89-> Dog 6. Second average - 29.91-> Dog 3 . Difference between 1st and 2nd is 0.02 not 0.22 so doesn't qualify because the rule was at least 0.10 difference. That's why I asked Archery1969. Maybe other method was used or I'm missing something

Also for 12:39 Henlow, time difference it's 0.15 not 0.12 between trap 4 and trap 6.

Henlow 12:39

1. Dog 1 - Best: 29.00s Last: 29.73s -> Average - 29.36
3. Dog 3 - Best: 28.81s Last: 29.83s -> Average - 29.32
4. Dog 4 - Best: 28.64s Last: 29.07s -> Average - 28.85 Ebony Velvet
5. Dog 5 - Best: 28.99s Last: 29.57s -> Average - 29.28
6. Dog 6 - Best: 28.76s Last: 29.24s -> Average - 29.00

Cheers

[spreadbetting]

My scraper doesn't save the data , it calculates as it runs so can't look at what figures it used for those races as they've now passed and Sporting life change the data to the results page. It's simply set to get an average of the best and last , then rank them then take the difference between 1 and 2 and spit out a possible B2L if the difference is >=0.1

edit: Just looked at the code and it was due to some error trapping with it using the best price only as far as I can see from a quick check

[Bog]

My scraper doesn't save the data , it calculates as it runs so can't look at what figures it used for those races as they've now passed and Sporting life change the data to the results page. It's simply set to get an average of the best and last , then rank them then take the difference between 1 and 2 and spit out a possible B2L if the difference is >=0.1

It's possible it omitted a runner if the data couldn't be gathered, if it's not in the expected format etc.

Attachments with Central Park 2:31, I had screenshot. Average betwwen 1st bets and second best is 0.02 so less than 0.10.

Archery1969 posted a 0.22 difference :

12:31 Central Park Mon 20 January 2020,6. Zenas Nepotism, class A3, time difference 0.22

Maybe other method was used to get that figure?

[spreadbetting]

Had a quick look at my code and looks like it's due to some error trapping defaulting to the best price. I did say I was new at python

It was down to some error trapping I put in to capture races like the 18:49 Harlow where the last race is at a different distance, but it was triggering regardless

[spreadbetting]

Here's the tweaked version with data

20:27 Harlow Mon 20 January 2020,4. Nutty Crunch, class A7, time difference 0.2
{27.15: '1. Aulton Cain', 27.41: '2. Rough Reddington', 27.16: '6. Some Frustration', 26.95: '4. Nutty Crunch', 27.19: '5. Cupmoretea'}
21:16 Harlow Mon 20 January 2020,5. Croftview Jane, class A7, time difference 0.13
{27.49: '1. Glenbrenton Ed', 27.34: '2. Bumblebee Socks', 28.07: '3. Corgrigg Toffey', 27.79: '4. Moors Ryans Boy', 27.21: '5. Croftview Jane', 27.73: '6. Cavan Act'}
20:13 Yarmouth Mon 20 January 2020,5. Cadawill, class A5, time difference 0.19
{29.27: '1. Colski Flyer', 29.12: '2. Popular Jessie', 29.06: '3. Edmundo', 35.78: '4. Marg In Charge', 28.84: '5. Cadawill', 29.03: '6. Harton Harrier'}
18:44 Doncaster Mon 20 January 2020,5. Jet Stream Chaos, class A3, time difference 0.27
{30.54: '2. Swift Galloway', 30.86: '3. Redbrick Rankin', 30.82: '4. Bellagio Bon Bon', 30.17: '5. Jet Stream Chaos', 30.44: '6. Wanted Me Teddy'}
19:17 Doncaster Mon 20 January 2020,3. Bellagio Bauer, class A2, time difference 0.21
{30.48: '1. Magna Figo', 30.4: '2. Baguio Boy', 30.05: '3. Bellagio Bauer', 30.26: '4. Mike Ace', 30.43: '5. Poolie Bobbo', 30.47: '6. Slaneyside Swan'}
15:49 Romford Mon 20 January 2020,5. Borwick Happy, class A9, time difference 0.14
{25.25: '1. Borwick Panda', 25.44: '2. Im In Charge', 25.13: '3. Droopys Sive', 25.18: '4. Chopchop Yvonne', 24.91: '5. Borwick Happy', 25.05: '6. Oneco Molly'}
16:29 Romford Mon 20 January 2020,2. Lisneal Lupo, class A10, time difference 0.13
{25.18: '1. Burtonlodge Ward', 25.05: '2. Lisneal Lupo', 25.21: '5. Poor Lite', 25.5: '4. Piemans Liberty', 100: '5. Bonville Patch', 25.3: '6. Slippy Seanie'}
17:28 Romford Mon 20 January 2020,4. To Tone Alfie, class A7, time difference 0.14
{25.02: '1. Liberty Pearl', 25.43: '2. Trapstyle Boss', 25.05: '6. Love Is Blind', 24.88: '4. To Tone Alfie', 25.15: '5. Swabys Elsie'}
17:44 Romford Mon 20 January 2020,6. Clonnacool Gem, class A4, time difference 0.26
{24.86: '1. Poli Girl', 24.79: '2. Westwind Aero', 24.8: '3. Pucs Premier', 25.04: '4. Sneezys Duke', 24.82: '5. Spottyulla', 100: '6. Borwick Bob', 24.53: '6. Clonnacool Gem'}
15:19 Monmore Mon 20 January 2020,2. Daryanoor King, class A5, time difference 0.17
{29.59: '1. Russmur Marie', 29.14: '2. Daryanoor King', 29.35: '3. Brocknmatts Tara', 29.44: '4. Rockburst Swift', 29.31: '5. Elderberry Rey', 29.86: '6. Leahys Dakota'}
16:19 Monmore Mon 20 January 2020,1. Relentless Monk, class A8, time difference 0.21
{29.38: '1. Relentless Monk', 29.59: '2. Black Shadow', 29.9: '3. Keeperhill Socks', 29.62: '4. Swift Idris', 30.31: '5. Moanteen Polly', 29.77: '6. Meri Ann'}
16:39 Monmore Mon 20 January 2020,2. White Hart Lady, class A7, time difference 0.12
{29.55: '1. Elderberry Simba', 29.41: '2. White Hart Lady', 29.68: '3. Jayhawk Swift', 29.86: '4. Moanteen Shaun', 29.85: '5. Agent Tyler', 29.53: '6. Mo Cara Max'}
17:37 Monmore Mon 20 January 2020,5. Agent Ava, class A7, time difference 0.34
{29.54: '1. Westwind Bound', 29.8: '2. Mindyerbiscuits', 29.86: '3. Monroe Silver', 29.67: '4. Beepee Sophie', 29.2: '5. Agent Ava', 29.64: '6. Smokestack Loco'}
17:54 Monmore Mon 20 January 2020,5. Jimivy James, class A6, time difference 0.36
{29.36: '1. Murphys Meadow', 29.35: '3. Mo Cara Nicco', 29.43: '4. Mad Trend', 28.98: '5. Jimivy James', 29.39: '6. Munie Theresa', 29.34: '2. Goonerette Jen'}
15:07 Sheffield Mon 20 January 2020,5. Swift Benedict, class A4, time difference 0.17
{29.75: '1. Maryjane', 29.8: '2. Kranky David', 29.78: '3. Spoken For', 29.58: '5. Swift Benedict', 29.84: '6. Tyrur Sean Andy'}
16:27 Sheffield Mon 20 January 2020,4. Hillcroft Cain, class A8, time difference 0.11
{30.87: '1. Autumn Reaper', 30.75: '2. Orange Lucille', 30.86: '3. Viking Rache', 30.38: '4. Hillcroft Cain', 30.49: '5. Charity Joleen', 30.68: '6. Stepaside Ramos'}
17:39 Sheffield Mon 20 January 2020,3. Coney Clinique, class A7, time difference 0.17
{30.38: '1. Stunning Ivy', 30.34: '2. Lilys Law', 30.17: '3. Coney Clinique', 30.37: '4. Camp Anna', 30.46: '5. Me And Tom', 30.49: '6. Flynns Flash'}

[Archery1969]

I got a really silly question.....

- Is it possible to have different dogs with the same name running on the same day or do dogs have unqiue names ?

[wearthefoxhat]

I got a really silly question.....

- Is it possible to have different dogs with the same name running on the same day or do dogs have unqiue names ?

No, each name is unique. You might get a lot of Ballys xxx, or Scurlogue xxxx running. The owners are allowed to do that.

[Archery1969]

I got a really silly question.....

- Is it possible to have different dogs with the same name running on the same day or do dogs have unqiue names ?

No, each name is unique. You might get a lot of Ballys xxx, or Scurlogue xxxx running. The owners are allowed to do that.

Perfect. Cheers.

[wearthefoxhat]

My scraper doesn't save the data , it calculates as it runs so can't look at what figures it used for those races as they've now passed and Sporting life change the data to the results page. It's simply set to get an average of the best and last , then rank them then take the difference between 1 and 2 and spit out a possible B2L if the difference is >=0.1

It's possible it omitted a runner if the data couldn't be gathered, if it's not in the expected format etc.

Attachments with Central Park 2:31, I had screenshot. Average betwwen 1st bets and second best is 0.02 so less than 0.10.

Archery1969 posted a 0.22 difference :

12:31 Central Park Mon 20 January 2020,6. Zenas Nepotism, class A3, time difference 0.22

Maybe other method was used to get that figure?

This was my calculation this morning using the racing post data. I like the Timeform website for their seeded rating, but it doesn't have the key info Archery uses: BRT.

Also, the racing post doesn't wipe out the racecard data until later on in the evening.

CP12.31.GIF

[Bog]

Cheers Wearthefoxhat. So do you take best time data from Sporting Life and last run from RacingPost? I'm asking because last run data on Sporting life it's different from RacingPost. Why?

I attached a pictures with Sporting life data for 12.31 Central Park and last run time it's not the same for RacingPost...
https://greyhoundbet.racingpost.com/#ca ... 0&tab=card

Newlawn Crackle last run before today: 30.09 on RP and 30.49 on SportingLife....
Midtown Susan last run before today: 30.15 on RP and 30.45 on SportingLife....

[wearthefoxhat]

Cheers Wearthefoxhat. So do you take best time data from Sporting Life and last run from RacingPost? I'm asking because last run data on Sporting life it's different from RacingPost. Why?

I attached a pictures with Sporting life data for 12.31 Central Park and last run time it's not the same for RacingPost...
https://greyhoundbet.racingpost.com/#ca ... 0&tab=card

Newlawn Crackle last run before today: 30.09 on RP and 30.49 on SportingLife....
Midtown Susan last run before today: 30.15 on RP and 30.45 on SportingLife....

Just checked your screenshot. The BRT does match the Racing Post data.

The last run from either website; (calculated time) may be different. Timeform is different for sure, as they use their own going data.

I prefer to use the R.Post for both pieces of information as they keep their info up longer than other websites.

[jimibt]

a few comments that i'd make about the data (insofar as i've scanned it):

1. The last run time (in sportinglife) is literally the last run time, it doesn't take into account the fact that the race distance may be different (i.e. 480m vs 290m etc). Thus, you'd be advised to scan the Form list and choose the most appropriate matching *last run* based on this match

2. Run time can vary both by track and trap. It may be useful to take into account the amount of *necks* that a runner has been beaten by at each form item level and calculate a true time/speed based on the winning time of the winning runner at that event.

3. Averages across ALL form data is not as meaningful as taking an average across a fixed time period that is relevant to all runners (i.e. 6-9 months, rather than 2 years worth of averages). Too wide a window and you have times for inexperinced runs as well as dogs reaching their natural peak form.

So, in a nutshell, I'd make full use of the sportinglife data but would take time to analyse how best to use the raw data as the plain numbers only tell half the story...

Happy crunching!!