Declining wager value

[BJennet]

I'd like to ask a question about BL/BL which I've never seen answered. What are the odds of third and fourth tier choices on the BL/BL when measured against their odds projections? I raise this point because I believe that with the diffusion of pace figures thoughout the handicapping world, the Sartin Metholodology has lost a certain amount of its wager value. I understand Doc's motivation in encouraging his clients to 'hide' top-tier horses, whose odds are often diluted, if not nullified by commonalities with the top Beyer Speed figure, or Bris Prime Power horses, and I think that at one time this was a practical and profitable suggestion, but I have come to believe that the third and fourth tier horses he pointed people toward no longer show a profit at the windows unless played very selectively.

Do I believe the Methodology no longer works? Far from it. In January and February I made more money than I ever have, by using it. But I agree with Jeff Platt that true overlays are becoming more infrequent - probably rarer than most system players believe. In any case, if anybody has an answer to my question, I would love to see the numbers.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[Tim Y]

MORE of the sheet players are descending upon the big venues. It has long been shown, and backed up by major studies, that it is the out of the way venues without the high powered analysis where the longer prices remain.

I have a field day at Stampede and Northlands now because few play those pools.

Find a track where your style works and others are not there. Find a specialty that makes you an expert and you can still cash. maidens continue to be gold mines

Also Woodbine has, per average, one of the highest average mutuels so that is another one to play regularly.

[BJennet]

MORE of the sheet players are descending upon the big venues. It has long been shown, and backed up by major studies, that it is the out of the way venues without the high powered analysis where the longer prices remain.

I have a field day at Stampede and Northlands now because few play those pools.

Find a track where your style works and others are not there. Find a specialty that makes you an expert and you can still cash. maidens continue to be gold mines

Also Woodbine has, per average, one of the highest average mutuels so that is another one to play regularly.

Hi Tim,

This is an interesting point, but doesn't really respond to the question that I asked, which confirms my belief that no study of the kind I specified has been done. I know that software developer Dave Schwartz, who often posts on PaceAdvantage, has done some research on the effectiveness of the Sartin numbers, and that might be a better place to inquire.

Re your suggestion on smaller tracks, I've been aware for many years that they can sometimes provide more hidden value than the big circuits, but they also present other problems: cheaper, more inconsistent stock (I've already posted about this), and pools small enough to be affected by bets at a given threshhold. I like Woodbine, but I've found the crowd there to be quite sharp - I think that the slightly higher average mutuel is offset by the larger average field size of that venue.

If you do come across an answer to the question I asked, I would be grateful if you could post it.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[Tim Y]

That assumption about cheap and inconsistent stock is a fib the big city players tell one another. The horses have less POTENTIAL but they are managed no differently than the big venues.

These little places take time to learn but are FAR better long term investment houses for sure

[gandalf380]

3) The "Power of Tier 3". Pay close attention to what tier YOUR longshots are usually in. Doc Sartin has written MANY times about the THIRD ranked horse on the Bl/Bl being a magnet (paraphrasing here please) which attracts the longer priced horses.

This is a direct quote from Rich P on another thread. Look in the thread "how to use rdss". It will give you some feeling for the third and fourth tiers.

Charlie B

[Tim Y]

3) The "Power of Tier 3". Pay close attention to what tier YOUR longshots are usually in. Doc Sartin has written MANY times about the THIRD ranked horse on the Bl/Bl being a magnet (paraphrasing here please) which attracts the longer priced horses.

This is a direct quote from Rich P on another thread. Look in the thread "how to use rdss". It will give you some feeling for the third and fourth tiers.

Charlie B

just hide the odds on horse and play the rest. Odds on loses 2/3 of the time

[BJennet]

That assumption about cheap and inconsistent stock is a fib the big city players tell one another. The horses have less POTENTIAL but they are managed no differently than the big venues.

These little places take time to learn but are FAR better long term investment houses for sure

Tim,

I didn't disagree that smaller tracks are worth playing, and I continue to play them selectively. However, I stand by my comments about the shakier form of horses below 10k, and I've also been playing for many years. You didn't respond to the issue of pool size, which rules out the smallest venues for me.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[BJennet]

3) The "Power of Tier 3". Pay close attention to what tier YOUR longshots are usually in. Doc Sartin has written MANY times about the THIRD ranked horse on the Bl/Bl being a magnet (paraphrasing here please) which attracts the longer priced horses.

This is a direct quote from Rich P on another thread. Look in the thread "how to use rdss". It will give you some feeling for the third and fourth tiers.

Charlie B

Gandalf,

Appreciate your advice, but if you read my original post, this is the wagering advice of Doc Sartin's which I believe may now be outdated. I asked for some statistical evidence to back it up, but it has not been forthcoming. I've been familiar with this wagering advice since its inception, I believe about 15 years ago. I think that at the time, when pace handicapping was still less widely understood by the average player, this advice still had a positive ROI -
ignoring the Tier 1 & 2 horses at low odds at going with Tier 3 - and I still think (in fact I know!) that value can be found there. I just don't believe that the horses can be played as mechanically as Doc recommended they should. I incline toward Jeff Platt's notion that true overlays occur less frequently than the average handicapper believes.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[Ted Craven]

BJennet,

Can you suggest what would constitute a good statistical study of the in/effectiveness of Sartin's wagering advice, e.g. sufficient to answer your question. 10 cycles of 20 races from 10 people, showing ROI by BL/BL tier? 20 cycles from 20 people? I get ad hoc reports from RDSS and some Spec users regularly, some who say they have a consistent long term profit betting from these Sartin readouts - 1st, 2nd and 3rd tier as required situationally. Should I doubt their veracity? I understand that such ad hoc reports don't constitute statistical proof, but even my own (sporadic) wagering sessions over the past 3 years produce a consistent (modest) ROI from win and some exacta betting, and I pretty much follow Doc's recipe.

And with all due respect to Dave Schwartz (and I do accord him great respect) - he is not in a position to evaluate the ROI from Sartin numbers and wagering strategy. Maybe circa 1990 Sartin numbers, but not circa 2009.

I hope that one day, RDSS will track one's wagers and tag them by BL/BL tier as per Sartin's old Wager Decision Form software, so that anyone who cares to can show themselves - or all of us - just what their ROI is, sliced and diced anyway they want. Until then, maybe someone will share with you their ad hoc wager books to answer your query about whether the wagercapping strategy still works. I think it certainly does.

Ted

[Bill V.]

I do 20 race cycles 3 ways

1. I Bet the two horses who I believe will win the race. whatever odds
betting 60/40 low and high odds

2. hiding the low odds horse and betting the two best overlays
of the top 3/4 tiers

3. I bet one horse in the top 3/4 tiers over 4/1
W/P or W/P/S

Each way almost always shows a profit. I give Howard Sartin and
all the teachers and winning clients who helped me with instructions
from the Follow Ups, seminars and manuals. There instructions
are the base of any success. Because of this instruction each method wins.
I must admit method # 2 does show the best ROI. and method 3 gets me some nice prices. but watching only one horse is too stressful for me.
Its time to get serious.
I should force myself to using method 2 100%. Life and emotions
have a way of turning my head towards the need for a few more winners.
and time to spend betting on low price favorites seems foolish
sometimes

I can only speak for myself but what Doc suggest is what I find does
make the most profit and its not as stressful as the other 2 methods.
However If you have any doubt of the POW
You will stuggle with method 2 or winning any way that you feel is best

Time to get serious for me

Bill

[Jonathan Steele]

Tim Y said:

"it is the out of the way venues without the high powered analysis where the longer prices remain."

Amen brother! But please...not too loudly.

Jon :)

[BJennet]

BJennet,

Can you suggest what would constitute a good statistical study of the in/effectiveness of Sartin's wagering advice, e.g. sufficient to answer your question. 10 cycles of 20 races from 10 people, showing ROI by BL/BL tier? 20 cycles from 20 people? I get ad hoc reports from RDSS and some Spec users regularly, some who say they have a consistent long term profit betting from these Sartin readouts - 1st, 2nd and 3rd tier as required situationally. Should I doubt their veracity? I understand that such ad hoc reports don't constitute statistical proof, but even my own (sporadic) wagering sessions over the past 3 years produce a consistent (modest) ROI from win and some exacta betting, and I pretty much follow Doc's recipe.

And with all due respect to Dave Schwartz (and I do accord him great respect) - he is not in a position to evaluate the ROI from Sartin numbers and wagering strategy. Maybe circa 1990 Sartin numbers, but not circa 2009.

I hope that one day, RDSS will track one's wagers and tag them by BL/BL tier as per Sartin's old Wager Decision Form software, so that anyone who cares to can show themselves - or all of us - just what their ROI is, sliced and diced anyway they want. Until then, maybe someone will share with you their ad hoc wager books to answer your query about whether the wagercapping strategy still works. I think it certainly does.

Ted

Hi Ted,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I am not a Stat. and Prob. guy but I will try asking those who specialize in this what they think would be a valid measure.

Maybe it would be clearer if I put it this way - the tier structure of the BL/BL somewhat misrepresents the differences between and among horses, a point I think you've touched on youself in trying to create a more granular representation of these differences in Spec 160 and RDSS. To wit: as we all know, some races are contentious, with competitors tightly bunched, in others, one horse dwarfs the competition. The projected win probability percentage more accurately reflects this reality, I think, than the notion of tiers, and I think everyone probably adjusts to it. In a race where all three top horses have a 20% probability, what does Tier 3 really mean? Also, the BL/BL, which is essentially an ordering according to line scores, does not take account of track bias, which makes even these win projections somewhat more inaccurate than could be.

What I would really like to see answered is pretty simple, and is the same question that people like William Benter and Jeff Platt ask themselves - do horses win at the rates I project for them - does a 20% horse win 20% of the time? How good is my line? This seems to me to be the key question for all handicapping, and my feeling about the BL/BL is that its projections are somewhat higher than the reality, which leads me to make my own line. And although I'm doing well, I still wish I had a more accurate idea of what the true winning probabilities of the horses I'm finding with Spec 160 are.

BTW, I hope what I've posted here doesn't imply any disrespect for the Methodology or the work you and Guy have done in developing its software. Clearly both are considerable achievements which all of us have had the good fortune to share.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[BJennet]

I do 20 race cycles 3 ways

1. I Bet the two horses who I believe will win the race. whatever odds
betting 60/40 low and high odds

2. hiding the low odds horse and betting the two best overlays
of the top 3/4 tiers

3. I bet one horse in the top 3/4 tiers over 4/1
W/P or W/P/S

Each way almost always shows a profit. I give Howard Sartin and
all the teachers and winning clients who helped me with instructions
from the Follow Ups, seminars and manuals. There instructions
are the base of any success. Because of this instruction each method wins.
I must admit method # 2 does show the best ROI. and method 3 gets me some nice prices. but watching only one horse is too stressful for me.
Its time to get serious.
I should force myself to using method 2 100%. Life and emotions
have a way of turning my head towards the need for a few more winners.
and time to spend betting on low price favorites seems foolish
sometimes

I can only speak for myself but what Doc suggest is what I find does
make the most profit and its not as stressful as the other 2 methods.
However If you have any doubt of the POW
You will stuggle with method 2 or winning any way that you feel is best

Time to get serious for me

Bill

Hi Bill,

Sorry I overlooked this post the first time. I agree with you that the most important thing is that everyone should handicap in the way that is best in tune with their personality. I think Doc emphasized the importance of avoiding stress, and as Richie P. pointed out, even being in a positive mood when handicapping.

One of the reasons I've posed the questions I have, is partly that I'm coming from the blackjack world, where everything is about numbers, and it's possible to achieve great precision in bet-sizing. This kind of precision is much harder to come by in the horseracing world, but, just for my own purposes, I would like to see how much can be done in that direction. There is no question in my mind of the excellence of the Sartin Methodology when it comes to handicapping, and no question that the ROI is there - I'm just looking to gain a greater precision in bet-sizing, similar to what is available in blackjack.

BTW, thanks for your many excellent instructional posts on this site.

Cheers,

B Jennet