[Video] Gold P10 Landing This Week

Later this week, we'll be releasing Geegeez Gold Phase 10 into live. It is a significant release that includes a number of major upgrades, as follows:

- Sire Snippets inline on the race card
- Sire search / addition of sires to Tracker

- Pace tab displays historical run style performance for course / distance combinations
- 'Blob' format offers an at a glance view
- Table shows more detail including place information

- Draw tab now incorporates 'Actual' draw, factoring in the absence of non-runners
- Draw also has Draw/ Pace combination views
- Table: sortable data, including win, place, A/E, and IV columns
- Heat Map: at a glance indication of impact of pace and draw in combination

- Odds style makeover
- Addition of BetVictor to odds comparison

In this video, I walk through the enhancements - check it out! [Click the square box bottom right of video to watch in FULL SCREEN]


 

I hope you enjoy the new features and, if you have any questions, our e-door is always open.

Best Regards,
Matt

p.s. Not a Gold subscriber? Get one week for one pound here.

Your first 30 days for just £1
21 replies
  1. Denis mc grath says:

    Very impressive data as a follower of stallions and how their progeny are doing invaluable bit if kit

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Glad you like it, Denis. I think those into their stallions will get plenty out of this. The key is that it’s right within the race you’re looking at. Will be especially useful for things like maiden races, and where a horse is stepping up in trip. I’m looking forward to sharing!

      Matt

  2. Bubbles180 says:

    Yippeeeeeeeeeeee more great additions to make me even more money
    VERY HAPPY MEMBER

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Geegeez Gold has nothing to do with Proform, Chris. I’ve no idea what their update is, or why anyone would pay 4x more for it! 😉

      Best,
      Matt

  3. Dhynes says:

    Some Fantastic additions Matt. Looking forward to using the heat map and blobs. Seems very straightforward. Keep up the exceptional work.
    Declan.

  4. David Price says:

    Very good update Matt. I have a feeling the heat maps might be very useful…….and profitable

  5. charliem9112 says:

    I love the heat map idea geegeez always comes up with a way to make your form study much quicker.

      • charliem9112 says:

        Could there be an option in the future to eliminate horses via the pace and draw tab? Like what we currently have with the X icons on instant expert and card tabs.

        • Matt Bisogno says:

          Yes, that should be possible – it’s a good idea. After all, if a horse is eliminated from consifderation in one place, it makes sense to remove from all…

          Matt

  6. Everyone calls me Paul says:

    Matt, apologies if this has already been suggested, but with Newcastle going Tapeta is it possible to split the AW stats in race / form characteristics?
    Example: Andrew Mount on gg.co.uk put up Fastnet Rock as a Tapeta sire to follow recently. If you look at his AW record his progeny are 14% win (-22 PL) but his course record at Wolverhampton, admittedly from a smaller sample, is 24% (+56.75 PL). With the relevant stats for Newcastle limited, there may be a big betting angle short-term which we’d be unable to access easily based on selecting “course” because of the lack of relevant historical data (you can see it today – St Patricks Day in the 810 – because it’s at Wolverhampton).
    I appreciate there’s only so many button spots available, but we don’t really need a “Flat + AW” option as it’s the same as clicking both “Flat” and “AW”.
    Thanks and regards,
    Paul

    • Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Paul

      You can’t check ‘flat’ and ‘AW’ because you can only select one of those buttons. So, in this case, why not just check the ‘AW’ button and the ‘Course’ button?

      That should achieve what you’re trying to achieve, I think.

      Matt

      • Everyone calls me Paul says:

        Ok on the first point.

        On the second, it’s not Wolverhampton course form I’m saying we won’t be able to see, it’s Newcastle (in other words a runner at Newcastle’s next meeting will have pretty much zilch relevant course form, and no way to see Tapeta stats that I can fathom)…that’s the betting angle I was referring to. But if it’s a logistical issue, fair enough.

        Paul

        • Matt Bisogno says:

          Hi Paul

          I don’t really understand the question, I don’t think.

          When racing is at Newcastle, you can select ‘AW’ and ‘Course’ on the Full Form Filter, and if the horse/trainer/jockey/sire has run there, the data will display.

          If I’m missing your point, can you please spell it out for me (and apologies in advance)?

          Thanks,
          Matt

          • Everyone calls me Paul says:

            The new track at Newcastle, Matt…the two – is it two? – meetings since the switch to AW means the course history is next to useless. The AW will give you the stats for all the different AW surfaces but, as in my original example, not the specific Tapeta form (ie Wolverhampton).
            It’s a niche angle (Wolverhampton to Newcastle, and vice versa) but, I’d suggest, potentially profitable for a newly laid surface in these early days.
            As I say, if it’s a logistical issue – or just too niche – don’t worry about it.
            Paul

            PS Unless St Patricks Day bolts up, in which case get it sorted (lol)

          • Matt Bisogno says:

            Hi Paul

            I think the fact that we don’t differentiate between the new tapeta Wolves surface and the old poly surface there is much more material than the AW surface at Newcastle. I’m not at all sure that angle will work, principally because tapeta is considered to be the artificial surface closest to turf (hence why they ripped it up at Santa Anita straight after Euro horses ran 1-2 in the Breeders’ Cup Classic for the only time ever!). In other words, I would conjecture that there is little difference between tapeta to turf/vice versa, and tapeta to tapeta.

            Also, the way the artificial surfaces are bedded in, how deep they ride, and the general course constitution (Newcastle is a MUCH stiffer circuit), would mean comparisons are convenient rather than scientific in my judgment.

            Put another way, there are three polytrack circuits – at Kempton, Lingfield and Chelmsford – but there is very little to be had from backing solid performers at one of those to replicate that form at either of the others.

            So… getting back to your initial point. There is no way of separating the different AW surfaces, be it tapeta, polytrack or fibresand (at Southwell). We don’t get the differentiation in our data feed, I’m afraid.

            Matt

            p.s. I do like the way you’re thinking, by the way!
            p.p.s. I just did a cursory query, where track today is Newcastle and going is Standard, and track last time was Wolverhamption (going standard). 0 from 30 so far…

Comments are closed.