1st 20 race contest cycle

[froggy]

I just wish I had just blindly followed the computer instead of trying to outguess it.
79% win using two horses

[mufasa]

You know Froggy I to have come to the very same conclusion you have seemed to reach. Why handicap the results of the BLBL especially when there is such a juicy odds choice given in the very predictive 1-2 Tiers. I made that mistake once and let a 60/1 horse get away at Belmont and swore then-- never again. I was not playing the races yesterday so I would hope that had the #5 come up for me I would have at least thrown a couple of bucks its way.

The Doc Sartin programs, especially as to my experience with Spec 160/RDSS, come up with some big BLBL bombs from time to time that can not generally be picked-up with conventional capping to include the Match Up. The Doc Sartin based programs of late use the equalized-normalized-adjusted data (which is totally useless as to normal capping--IMO) in conjunction with the ever mysterious chaos math to give a BLBL output with a very steady range of winning odds in the upper tiers, at certain times and tracks. This phenomenon can not be duplicated with conventional capping as I see it.

Thanks,

Robert

[noddub62]

Froggy,

Your 20 race cycle is a testement to Ted's RDSS and the Doc. I over analyized the last three constest races and would have certainly done better just using RDSS' BLBL as I had them in my top 3 readouts. RDSS, aka the Doc's crazy math and hocus pocus refined, should be a no brainer IF
a person can properly select pacelines. Than you Doc and Ted and also Froggy for keeping track of the cycle.

Bud

[lsosa54]

I'm assuming RDSS will come fully documented but can someone point me to the quickest resources for studying Speculator, which I guess was the final Sartin Methodology program? I'd like to fully understand the betting form which seems to focus on BL/BL and V/DC, which again I don't fully understand. I'd also like to understand the rules around "hiding".

Thanks much. Lou.

[froggy]

Robert and Bud,

The #5 was from his last pace line, as picked by Perceptor, better than all of the other horses best pace lines. You couldn't miss it, you could only talk yourself out of it. V/DC then ranked it #1

The Perceptor and V/DC are so strong it is near unbelievable.

Doc Sartin said that the future is going to be in the measurement of deceleration.

Already, because of the methodology and those that ripped it off, favorites and near favorites mutuels are down low enough that is is difficult to make a profit on them.

However because of the methodology the bombs seem to be bigger and readily more identifiable.

What's going to happen when Ted gets finished and unleashes it on the public?

Maybe fewer and fewer bombs or "RDSS II".

Froggy

[gl45]

BINGO!
as every other program. JPCapper only sold 100, he finally stop selling it because his selections odds dropped from 7.90 to 7.40, or something like that.
lbj

[mufasa]

Froggy:

Perhaps the reason payoffs on the favorites or horses whose odds are within the top three favorites seems lower these days is because people accept the program’s results outright.

The bombs they are another story. They require more confidence in the program results since there is obviously no support in the betting or good write-ups by the handicapping talking heads. You can easily talk yourself out of them by way of conventional handicapping methods or practices. Usually the pace lines do not have especially good speed ratings/pace call times or the distances or surfaces seem all wrong or the class is not obvious. But so what, Doc Sartin has found a way around all of that and is able to bring those babies home from time to time.

I too am fearful of what too much of a good thing can do. It is not a 100% guarantee every time, every race, and every track but when it is on look out. IMO it is out of our hands but hopefully there will be some consideration.

Robert

[Forego]

I too am fearful of what too much of a good thing can do. It is not a 100% guarantee every time, every race, and every track but when it is on look out. IMO it is out of our hands but hopefully there will be some consideration.
Robert

correct me if i am mistaken but the software has been out with it's algorhytms for over 7 years now. i refer to the validator.

ted's software from what i can see has not added anything new other than the windows platform as of now. this is not a put down in any way,shape or form. please understand that.

it is a statement meant to focus on the fact that hundreds if not thousands of people/users have had access to these numbers for almost a decade ok? yet long long odds horses still show up with some form of regularity on the program's top 2 to 3 choices. froggy's 20 race contest workup is testament to this.

what users do with the numbers and which horses to wager on looking at readouts also comes after individualistic determinations of contenders,line selection and hiding/non hiding of horses. that is why we do not all wind up on the same horse(s).

these formula's are doc's brainchild and laugh as some folks elsewhere do the darn things definitely view races from a different perspective. folks like myself are just too stuck on old ways to learn to use and win with it in today's racing.

we are safe and do not have to worry about shrinking mutuals. the
formulas have been here for years. this is all nothing new.

my opinion
F.B.

[mufasa]

Hey FB I am about two years from retiring and I am counting on those fat mutuals to make ends meet. I am only kidding of course and you are probably right.

You have to admit though that as of right now the RDSS Program is sure polished packaging of Doc Sartin’s brainchild, especially when compared to the DOS programs of the past. We live in a totally computer savvy world today. I am no youngster and I do not know anyone who does not own both a computer and a cell phone. I envision a big increase in this old and now new methodology thanks to the RDSS package and good for Ted and company business wise.

There are always the exotics,

Robert

[Ted Craven]

I'm assuming RDSS will come fully documented but can someone point me to the quickest resources for studying Speculator, which I guess was the final Sartin Methodology program? I'd like to fully understand the betting form which seems to focus on BL/BL and V/DC, which again I don't fully understand. I'd also like to understand the rules around "hiding".

Thanks much. Lou.

Lou,

I think you'd get a lot out of slowly and carefully reading Follow Ups 75 - 88 (in the Pace and Cap Library, write Admin if you need access). Focus on:

- discussion of selecting relevant pacelines (using the Paceline Indicator in Val, now Perceptor in Spec and RDSS),
- elminating to top 5 and ties Total Energy/Primary Line Score (on Val Total Energy and Primary Factors screen - BL/BL screen in Spec and Primary Factor screen in RDSS)
- evaluating the top 3 ranked (or tiered) on BL/BL, seeking corollaries by V/DC ranking, and conformation to your records re Early/Late distribution for the track, surface and distance structure
- hiding, or mentally skipping over horses you won't bet on due to low too odds, though remembering them for exotics
- selecting a 2 horse win box (or a 2 horse entry, or 2 horses to win, etc) comprising your remaining top tiered horse, and the best overlay in your top 3, if you get a worst case resulting net mutuel of 1.5 - 1 (or whatever your records say your edge is) or pass the race if you can judge a legitimate favourite
- setting up a good record keeping system to know how you're doing, where your strengths currently are, what's the next area to focus on; try the wagercapping decision form in the Follow Up, or similar ones posted here and there on this website
- use that record keeping system to seek constant and never ending improvement, every single 20 race cycle; use that as a source of positive endorphins
- if you learn something true, share it with others

You can find all of the above in those Follow Ups, and you can make the cross references between screens referred to by Doc for Validator to those in Speculator (minus V/DC, alas), and in RDSS at least vicariously until it's released. In the Speculator forum, there are lots of race workups, many by Richie back in the day, some by me and others. If you see a race done in RDSS, in Spec mode, and it intrigues you, run it through Spec to get the same result, and learn by doing, the different thought processes of the various practitioners.

If you want to use Spec, you should get Spec160 (just ask) - it works better than earlier versions of Speculator.

The documentation on Speculator is indeed dodgy, and this website is as good as it gets for learning some of the finer points. The later Follow Ups are not at all irrelevant and you can learn a lot still from them. Also, just ask for clarification on anything you're researching - lots of people are quite expert at the various readouts and procedures.

RDSS will be documented very well (in due course:)), and gradually there will be lots of video tutorials and regular online seminars.

I think Forego's opinion is quite on the money that this style of the Methodology has been around for 10 years and the mutuels have not gone missing yet.

Lastly, I will always agree that Doc invented all this and eternal thank you's for that work, Guy Wadsworth added a few finesses (subtracted a few others), and I have tinkered with a few tidbits so far, but almost managed to hoist it all up to the 21st Century so we can begin another round of the 'evolution of the handicapping revolution'.

Hope that gave you a few ideas!

yours,

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Froggy, Bud, Mufasa,

There were a lot of folks using RDSS, Spec160, Val4 and earlier versions of Sartin's software this past weekend, and even just considering the Pacific Classic (let alone all the other contest races this year) there is STILL such a diversity of interpretations of the same available readouts that I personally have little fear for the general aggregate mutuels. Froggy, even on straight Win betting, you could give back a hefty portion of your ROI and still be doubling your money.

I see the demands for rigourous application of one's own methodology being such that only a small percentage of any software users will make the consistent effort to apply it, and that will further safeguard mutuels. It's like being a brain surgeon, or concert pianist, or a monk - it's so much damned work you can only do it if you're in love, or obsessed (or have high alimony payments.)

Even the most brilliant among us will screw up regularly enough to keep the game interesting for the rest of us. A very good friend of mine, and excellent user of Spec, RDSS and all previous Sartin programs, performed a brilliant analysis of the Pacific Classic - and expertly eliminated the winner. He wrote me: "I love this game!! It's the only one where you can be so smart you're stupid!"

Reports of the sport's demise are overrated, just yet.

Ted

[froggy]

Ted,

Do they really have alimony in Canada?

I marvel at what we have does.
It takes horses from different tracks, surfaces and distances and comes up with a probable winner and is right more times than it is wrong.
I no longer keep track profiles or Brohammer Models.
No more worrying about whether a track is faster or slower or is a different class level than todays track.
No more worrying about par times or whether its muddy or sloppy or poly or turf.
I just look at the corollaries a little and ask "can this horse do the distance and do I have the right odds".
This week will be spent going back over several 100 races to see if I can streamline things some as per your suggestion.

Thanks for everything.

Froggy

[lsosa54]

Lou,

I think you'd get a lot out of slowly and carefully reading Follow Ups 75 - 88 (in the Pace and Cap Library, write Admin if you need access). Focus on:

- discussion of selecting relevant pacelines (using the Paceline Indicator in Val, now Perceptor in Spec and RDSS),
- elminating to top 5 and ties Total Energy/Primary Line Score (on Val Total Energy and Primary Factors screen - BL/BL screen in Spec and Primary Factor screen in RDSS)
- evaluating the top 3 ranked (or tiered) on BL/BL, seeking corollaries by V/DC ranking, and conformation to your records re Early/Late distribution for the track, surface and distance structure
- hiding, or mentally skipping over horses you won't bet on due to low too odds, though remembering them for exotics
- selecting a 2 horse win box (or a 2 horse entry, or 2 horses to win, etc) comprising your remaining top tiered horse, and the best overlay in your top 3, if you get a worst case resulting net mutuel of 1.5 - 1 (or whatever your records say your edge is) or pass the race if you can judge a legitimate favourite
- setting up a good record keeping system to know how you're doing, where your strengths currently are, what's the next area to focus on; try the wagercapping decision form in the Follow Up, or similar ones posted here and there on this website
- use that record keeping system to seek constant and never ending improvement, every single 20 race cycle; use that as a source of positive endorphins
- if you learn something true, share it with others

Ted

Thanks for the guidance, Ted. Looks like Follow Up #75 was done in the Spring of 1999. My involvement with the Methodology was approximately between 1989 - 93, and I got as far as Thoromation, although I was not successful with it, but that's on me.

I'll start with #75 and slowly go through #88, which I assume is the last Follow Up produced in late summer/fall of 2001.

In your opinion. does the "modern" phase of the Methodology, for lack of a better term, start with Follow Up #75?

Thanks again for the help. Lou.

[Ted Craven]

Lou,

I just noticed an atricle about BL/BL (Bottom Line / Betting Line) in Follow Up Issue #70, and I think there are some articles about Synthesis for TrackMaster in #67 and forward. There was sort of an organic progression from PaceLauncher -> SYnthesis -> Validator I and II, then after Doc, Speculator. You could also scan through those issues as well, looking for discussion about how to interpret the BL/BL readouts, keep track of which tiers winners come from and at what odds (i.e. wagercapping).

A noteable change in program usage came when Doc started using TrackMaster downloads (Synthesis), as he then made use of the Inter Track equalization tables inherent in those data, along with the Daily Track Variant to enable better comparison of disparate lines to each other. The cherry on the cake came with the V/DC rankings and the wagercapping concept, epitomized in Val2 and Val3. (Val4 repaired the 'broken' ITV and DTV formulae, due to TM's 2006 change to Speed Ratings and base units, but is otherwise Val3, unchanged).

Ted

[lsosa54]

Thank you again, Ted. Having the historical progression of the programs helps me put it in perspective. So Speculator, then, was all post Doc and driven by Guy Wadsworth and maybe some ideas he had for improvement?

[Ted Craven]

Thank you again, Ted. Having the historical progression of the programs helps me put it in perspective. So Speculator, then, was all post Doc and driven by Guy Wadsworth and maybe some ideas he had for improvement?

Yes.

Perhaps, if you want to continue this aspect of the discussion, you could start a new thread, either here or in the Speculator forum. Lest we wander too far from Froggy's original thesis for this topic...

Ted