The 'Red-board' Discussion!

[atlasaxis]

Note: this discussion originally started in a RDSS Teaching Forum Thread, here --> http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8982&page=3 . I have moved the portion involving 'red-boarding' to this new Thread in order to keep the other thread focused as it originally was on 'teaching' about handicapping Maidens. (...Ted ...)
.
FTL, you're an absolute GENIUS, after the fact. Try posting these BEFORE the race is run without the redboarding. Seriously, ya gotta laugh at this stuff.

[Bill V.]

I disagree
I find before the race presentations a little helpful
The problem with before the fact demos is the presenter
very rarely comes back with an explanation of what happen if his
selection loses. I also want to see race examples with track condition
and scratch's taken into account, this helps me get a clear picture of the match up.
Since I only bet races( for real money ) when I know the scratches and conditions. I find that before the race
sections to sometimes be flawed.
I find FTL's teaching skills to be extraordinary and his after the fact
screen shots and commentary to be something that Doc Sartin would have been
proud to publish in the Follow Up journal

I for one have improved dramatically thanks to FTL's work and guidance
Its a treasure to go back and study the teaching area post,with all his post race analysis

Bill

[vderdak]

I believe what FTL is trying to teach in these posts beyond basic handicapping knowledge is pattern recognition, we have all seen these races before, through repitition, he is pointing out this pattern repeats itself day in day out at every track year after year.

People will see the pattern and still be afraid to make the wager because the odds are high and some of the horses last race running lines show a poor finish, he is also trying to teach some of you to have confidence in your own ability to make the bet when you see the pattern.

Keep on posting FTL!!!!

[Bill Lyster]

Atlasaxis you could not be more wrong!

This is a TEACHING thread. If you followed this thread from the start you would be educated to an eye opening facet of handicapping that few understand.

FTL's continued posts are reinforcement of a method that works well. His thoughtful presentations are welcomed by many.

I went back and reworked all the maiden races from Santa Anita this season. There were 145 playable races and almost 57% of horses either 1st or 2nd at the second call won. In turf races almost 62%. I am just as sure that there are refinements that would make these numbers even better!

Many times you end up with only one or two contenders, but sometimes even with more contenders the relationship of the contenders at the 2nd call is so compelling you begin to understand why SOME low odds horses are great bets even with odds under 2:1

Anyway I encourage you to work races with FTL's guidelines and see for yourself. You might end up apologizing for your redboard comment.

Sincerely,

Bill

[atkinsrr]

Thx for the posts guys..I gotta tell ya that handicapping after the fact is one of the best long term habits that we can get into....great teaching tool...and learning to teach yourself things makes you better..............

[lone speed]

For the Lead presents some guidelines on what to seek in certain races.....

Howard Sartin strongly recommended avoiding races without three North Ameican pacelines to evaluate.....Ftp presents examples after examples of race where one should exploit and to capitalize on....
His guidelines become strong factual regiment to seek out...after so many race examples...it goes in tune with the old adage..."It is best to learn how to fish, then to be given a fish.....'

I for one recommend Ftl's presentation as a great learning tool ad with most of his message posts in other threads....

This is a great thread...hands down....

[atlasaxis]

I disagree
I find before the race presentations a little helpful
The problem with before the fact demos is the presenter
very rarely comes back with an explanation of what happen if his
selection loses. I also want to see race examples with track condition
and scratch's taken into account, this helps me get a clear picture of the match up.
Since I only bet races( for real money ) when I know the scratches and conditions. I find that before the race
sections to sometimes be flawed.
I find FTL's teaching skills to be extraordinary and his after the fact
screen shots and commentary to be something that Doc Sartin would have been
proud to publish in the Follow Up journal

I for one have improved dramatically thanks to FTL's work and guidance
Its a treasure to go back and study the teaching area post,with all his post race analysis

Bill

Disagree all you want Bill. Anyway you want to dress it up it's still redboarding &/or backfitting the results of a particular race, something any one of you here could do and something a few of you here have gotten pretty good at. Heck I could even show you how my ancient Taulbot software had the winner of the last race at Aqu saturday, but what would that prove? Not a darn thing. I know quite a few of you worship the ground this person walks on but it is what it is when it comes to redboarding &/or backfitting. Carry on.

[For The Lead]

TO: Bill V, Bill Y, Vderdak, atkinsrr and Lone Speed

Thank you all for you kind comments. I appreciate them very much.

[Dorianmode]

When I was struggling with certain aspects of racing, I quit wagering, and decided for a couple months to "reverse-engineer" what would have produced a winner in the series in which I was having difficulty.
Even if races are looked at "a posteriori", the look can be very educational. It's actually the one main factor to which I attribute my present success. The method which produces a winner, whether done before or after, produces the winner. I learned how, backwards. So a "retro" look at a race is valuable to me. It's the same thing as going over any "miss" you I have. I look to see if I would have done anything differently. The more the answer to that is "no" (once you are firmly in profitable territory), and you see it's "just move on", the more your confidence grows, (IMHO).

[For The Lead]

Disagree all you want Bill. Anyway you want to dress it up it's still redboarding &/or backfitting the results of a particular race, something any one of you here could do and something a few of you here have gotten pretty good at. Heck I could even show you how my ancient Taulbot software had the winner of the last race at Aqu saturday, but what would that prove? Not a darn thing. I know quite a few of you worship the ground this person walks on but it is what it is when it comes to redboarding &/or backfitting. Carry on.

Actually, you have no idea what you are talking about and it appears several others feel the same way.

You don't understand what this site is about.
It is about helping others.
You don't understand what this thread is about.
It is about helping others.
You don't understand what the teaching area is about.
it is about helping others.
And you certainly can't identify red boarding.
So let me help you out.

IF you had taken the time to read my posts, of which there are many, before shooting your mouth off, you would learn that I don't "red board and/or back fit" anything.
In addition, I don't recall anyone who "red boards" LOSERS.

I started this thread with people like you in mind. That's why I took a couple of consecutive days and used every maiden race carded at the tracks I was watching on those days. I used the very same guidelines I always use for contender selection and paceline selection, that way there would be no question as to which horses would be the contenders and no question as to which pacelines would be used. I posted the winners AND the losers. (odd for a red boarder, don't you think)
Before starting this thread I also commented on statistical information taken from my database of more than 600,000 races and more than 5,000,000 horses and stated what I would be looking for in order to find the most logical winning horse.
So if you aren't able to put the pieces together, let me help. Red boarding is taking any given race and "finding a way" to get the winner. That isn't what I do. I lay out a set of guidelines on contender and paceline selection and follow them in every single race. In the end, the winner is either among the contenders or it is not. That's the reason there are some races here where I wrote "the winner was not among my contenders". WOW! Imagine that!! a guy who red boards losers!!!

Most people who frequent this site are pretty much aware of the guidelines I use for picking contenders and pacellines. If you aren't familiar with them, perhaps you should read more of my posts.

And again, most people who frequent this site know that I use my own software. Contender selection and line selection are done on an automated basis. My software doesn't know if the race is in 15 minutes, tomorrow, next month or a year ago, it picks the same contenders and pacelines no matter when I run the program. Last I heard, computers don't red board, they just do what they were programed to do.

On this site you can find the Sartin Library. In that library you can find all the "follow ups" and "manuals" for the Sartin Methodology. Have you ever read any of this material? If you thought my posts were funny, then you will absolutely die laughing at the stuff you will find in the library. It's full of red boarding!!! (by your standards) We call it "educational material" and "things to learn from". And you know what? There isn't one race that is discussed or dissected there that was in advance of the race. Not one! That's because it is presented for educational purposes. Most, if not all, follow ups have what is called "the problem race". It is a race that presents specific problems and it is presented in order for others to learn how to handle races like this in the future should they encounter one like it.

Finally, I don't think there is a person on this site that "worships the ground I walk on" (your words, not mine), but I think there are those who appreciate that I take the time and make the effort to try and help. If, in fact, my posts do help them...then I am happy about that.

[atlasaxis]

Actually, you have no idea what you are talking about and it appears several others feel the same way.

You don't understand what this site is about.
It is about helping others.
You don't understand what this thread is about.
It is about helping others.
You don't understand what the teaching area is about.
it is about helping others.
And you certainly can't identify red boarding.
So let me help you out.

IF you had taken the time to read my posts, of which there are many, before shooting your mouth off, you would learn that I don't "red board and/or back fit" anything.
In addition, I don't recall anyone who "red boards" LOSERS.

I started this thread with people like you in mind. That's why I took a couple of consecutive days and used every maiden race carded at the tracks I was watching on those days. I used the very same guidelines I always use for contender selection and paceline selection, that way there would be no question as to which horses would be the contenders and no question as to which pacelines would be used. I posted the winners AND the losers. (odd for a red boarder, don't you think)
Before starting this thread I also commented on statistical information taken from my database of more than 600,000 races and more than 5,000,000 horses and stated what I would be looking for in order to find the most logical winning horse.
So if you aren't able to put the pieces together, let me help. Red boarding is taking any given race and "finding a way" to get the winner. That isn't what I do. I lay out a set of guidelines on contender and paceline selection and follow them in every single race. In the end, the winner is either among the contenders or it is not. That's the reason there are some races here where I wrote "the winner was not among my contenders". WOW! Imagine that!! a guy who red boards losers!!!

Most people who frequent this site are pretty much aware of the guidelines I use for picking contenders and pacellines. If you aren't familiar with them, perhaps you should read more of my posts.

And again, most people who frequent this site know that I use my own software. Contender selection and line selection are done on an automated basis. My software doesn't know if the race is in 15 minutes, tomorrow, next month or a year ago, it picks the same contenders and pacelines no matter when I run the program. Last I heard, computers don't red board, they just do what they were programed to do.

On this site you can find the Sartin Library. In that library you can find all the "follow ups" and "manuals" for the Sartin Methodology. Have you ever read any of this material? If you thought my posts were funny, then you will absolutely die laughing at the stuff you will find in the library. It's full of red boarding!!! (by your standards) We call it "educational material" and "things to learn from". And you know what? There isn't one race that is discussed or dissected there that was in advance of the race. Not one! That's because it is presented for educational purposes. Most, if not all, follow ups have what is called "the problem race". It is a race that presents specific problems and it is presented in order for others to learn how to handle races like this in the future should they encounter one like it.

Finally, I don't think there is a person on this site that "worships the ground I walk on" (your words, not mine), but I think there are those who appreciate that I take the time and make the effort to try and help. If, in fact, my posts do help them...then I am happy about that.

Blah, blah, blah blah....just try posting some of your selctions BEFORE they run mr hot shot teacher. BEFORE they run, you do understand what that means don't you???

[atkinsrr]

FTL...I'll bet that guy has never read a Follow-Up...he'd probably make fun of "Doc" too

[Bill V.]

Hey everybody lets stay within the code of conduct

I don't see how personal attacks are any good. I suggest if you don't like the teaching area
and the teachers methods that you just go down to the selections area and post
your races how you feel they should be presented

Bill

[Ted Craven]

I agree with Bill (and others), and I think we have settled the difference between 'red-boarding' and examples using in the teaching process.

A good example of 'red-boarding' would be to post in the Selections Forum that you got such and such a race after the fact, without much attempt at making a point 'how you did it', what the analysis and wager decision process was. ALL the posts in the Teaching Forum are supposed to help people apply consistent analysis processes to repeating patterns of races.

As such, a person should be able to take any given example, or lesson, and apply it to similar types of races, for example some of the Maiden races described, or races with dominant Early horses, and repeat the pattern - in advance. Whether the analysis wins a given future race or not is independent of the lesson being pointed out. These patterns that FTL and others are describing here - in some detail and at some expense of time taken - don't just fall from the sky untested: we're describing stuff that is the bedrock of the Sartin Methodology. Whether you use RDSS or not to implement them (and FTL only uses RDSS for description purposes: he has his own home-grown Sartin-influenced software) - this is stuff everyone can learn from.

Which is what PaceandCap is all about. I think we can now set aside the 'red-boarding' discussion and move forward with BOTH learning and teaching AND posting Selections in advance (for those who wish to do that) and bragging over correct predictions made!

OK!

Ted

[atlasaxis]

I agree with Bill (and others), and I think we have settled the difference between 'red-boarding' and examples using in the teaching process.

Ted I’m not sure who “we’ is but it certainly doesn’t represent the 5 people who emailed me and thanked me for saying what I did in my first post.

A good example of 'red-boarding' would be to post in the Selections Forum that you got such and such a race after the fact, without much attempt at making a point 'how you did it', what the analysis and wager decision process was.

Red boarding is also a post race analysis as to why the horse should have been played.

ALL the posts in the Teaching Forum are supposed to help people apply consistent analysis processes to repeating patterns of races. As such, a person should be able to take any given example, or lesson, and apply it to similar types of races, for example some of the Maiden races described, or races with dominant Early horses, and repeat the pattern - in advance.

If the forum is in fact “supposed to help people apply consistent analysis processes to repeating patterns of races”, then the one teaching should be able to demonstrate an in depth analysis BEFORE a race is run, no?

Whether the analysis wins a given future race or not is independent of the lesson being pointed out.

Then what was the purpose of the in depth analysis (redboard) if not to win future races? If it’s valid AFTER a race then the same indepth analysis should be provided BEFORE a race and not just throw up a screen shot of a missed, but could have had if you only played it THIS way, $50 winner.

I’m not the only one seeing it this way but hey, it is your messageboard. Just don’t get upset when someone calls redboarding/backfitting when it’s apparent to more than one person.

Out.

[vjmastrey]

This is my first post on this board or any board. I have been a member for less than one year. I have learned a tremendous amount from this website and the people on it. I see no reason to tear someone down who is trying to help others. So THANK YOU FTL, BILL V, TED and anyone else I have missed who posts interesting and thoughtful presentations of the races. You have made me a better handicapper and I am grateful for that.

[noddub62]

You don't seem to understand the purpose of the "teaching thread". It isn't to "red board" as you say --- it is too teach. And it does do that.

I'm sure that you have read several or maybe many handicapping books that show examples ( I think I have all of the older best sellers) and they all show examples of "after the fact examples"! Is that in your opinion "redboarding"? I doubt it, but that is all that has been done that you are so critical of.

FTL has opened a new door for me and I'm sure others on the thread that you are so critical of proclaiming "redboarding". I'm in the process of checking the maiden play out and I can say right now that it's putting $$$ in the bank for me.

You need to chill and learn from it so you will profit from it as well. Don't be so harsh on our good teachers.

Thanks much FLT as that was a very, very good lesson.

Take care Altasaxis,:)

Budman

[pktruckdriver]

WOW, this goes on without me, amazing.

I thought I was was the one who stirred up things around here, and so I took a break.

This site does teach you things, sometimes the teaching is "off centered", but never-the-less it is teaching still the same and the intention is to make others better, plain and simple.

People take time to post here and others may only read here , lurking for years and never posting, just learning, would be nice if they said Hi once in awhile, becaue it would make the teachers feel better, no matter what they say, a compliment once in awhile does the soul good.

Ok, I am done,(here)

Patrick

[dlivery]

Seems we have gotten a little off topic let's get this thread back on topic as I have enjoyed this thread lets move on to the topic at hand. We can all learn and earn as we go along.

[chris]

Am not unsympathetic to any of the comments about "The Learn to Win" posters and their detractors. Many ways to go about this. If there is a concern, it's that it does not involve real bets! I don't know how to get around that, it seems to be built in.

Resolution of the tension, that comes with betting real money, is what I believe keeps many handicappers from experience finanacial success at the betting windows. Believe this is one you'll have to find your own way around; knowledge alone will not work here.

Regards,
chris

[Ted Craven]

I have observed some indisputable truths about horse racing (and other things) over the years:

1. you can't please all the people all of the time

2. 'it is difference of opinion that makes horse races (http://www.twainquotes.com/Difference.html)'

If I understand you right Tom (atlasaxis), I don't think you feel that there should be NO post-race analysis, only that you believe that the credibility as a teacher of For The Lead in particular, is diminished by only posting the lessons he does AFTER the race has run.

If I got that right, I thank you for your concern, and suggestions, about how to improve the Teaching aspects of PaceandCap. I know For the Lead is a serious person who for reasons of his own has chosen to share in an articulate manner (good grammar, use of periods and paragraph breaks) and illustrative detail (posts pictures, which equal ~1000 words each). Having done this a few times myself, I know a bit about how much work goes into doing this. I don't know FTL personally, and perhaps he spends much of his time counting his retirement checks or shooting varmints on his ranch and thus has lots of spare time to put into his attempts to help others and is just too lazy or scared to do it ahead of time.

But I suspect, rather, he spends a LOT of time handicapping and betting on horses and doesn't NEED to spend ANY time on a website passing on some of the knowledge he has learned over a lifetime of listening to Sartin teachers and doing his own research, programming and hard work. And possibly doesn't CARE whether anyone thinks he is good at it or not. Perhaps that is one reason why he tries to be efficient in waiting until scratches are known, bet-time odds are known, surface conditions and potential changes are known - before spending his (to him) valuable time putting a few lessons down for posterity. Why do it twice if the point is not bragging, but rather teaching!?

I understand you do not use RDSS (and as you know, I have absolutely no problem with that whatsoever), and possibly also have no need to learn any new lessons about handicapping, compared to some of the rest of us who do (and perhaps this is also the case for the 5 people who wrote you privately).

But getting back to the 'difference of opinion' idea - in my earlier reply to you I was actually referring to the folks who chose to post in public here who expressed that they personally thought the teaching by after the fact examples (aka 'red-boarding') has been very valuable to them, has improved their game, has put dollars in their pocket. I would say that most (not all) of those comments came from RDSS users, which is not surprising given the title of the Forum where FTL was posting 'RDSS ... Teaching and Examples)'. FWIW, I don't know of another horse-racing website where so much detail is expressed in public describing how to use a handicapping software tool, both BEFORE and AFTER the fact (check the 6 months of 'Learn to Win' Contest posts, some of which attempted to teach as well). Perhaps the 'red-boarding' debate is indeed not settled, as you suggest, but it appears that a LOT of people like it the way it is, and are not damaged or unimpressed.

I leave it to FTL (and and anyone else individually) whether he wishes to post detailed analysis also BEFORE the race as well as after. But I don't fault him for not doing that when so much value appears to be conveyed the way it works right now (according to those who have responded here).

If anyone wants me to take RDSS away from FTL and prevent him from Teaching anything unless it is BEFORE the race, just send me a note :) Meanwhile, I guess I just continue to have a 'difference of opinion' but also respect your right to believe differently than me (and others). If his posts annoy you too much (and those others who wrote to you), you could put him on your Ignore list, or avert your eyes.

Ted

[atkinsrr]

Sometimes people agree and sometimes disagree with each other but the bottom line is:
are you showing a long term profit betting horses PERIOD. As humans we go about different ways of doing things, but it's the end result that counts...but from my experience with the Methodology since 1991 is if you don't read, understand, and put into practice what "Doc" Sartin presented to us in the Follow-Ups..then you are gonna remain a non-winner for a long time...which brings me to my message for the day. Today is my Follow-Up study day...looking at F.U. # 46 pages 59-68 titled THE PSYCHOLOGY OF WINNING...POSITIVITY (Winning through Meditative Visualization). You all can read this for yourself but I want to make a short comment. On page 67 "Doc" mentions the name Dr. Dennis Waitley. This gentleman (I believe) is from San Diego, CA and I saw him in 1979 in Indianapolis at a Positive Thinking seminar along with other speakers. A lot of what Dr. Waitley talked about can relate to handicapping and wagering. I purchased his cassette package of self-help tapes that I still listen today.
They are titled: POSITIVE SELF: Expectancy, Motivation, Image, Direction, Control, Discipline. Throughout this course he keeps saying "PRACTICE FROM WITHIN, WHEN YOU ARE WITHOUT. From his program I put together one of my own to help me stay focused when I'm involved with racing. MY PLAN OF ACTION IS: 1. Meditate 2. do visualization exercises focusing on patience, winning attitude, using desire to conquer fear. Seeing myself in the act of: A. preparing properly to win B. Wagering properly to win C. Collecting the money. "PRACTICE FROM WITHIN, WHEN YOU ARE WITHOUT". Also using visual aids to help my subconcious memory to retain the things that I want to achieve..such as winning races from the 20 race cycle report.. winning pictures of races along with RDSS print outs of winning races. Also pictures of $100 bills help out too. "Doc" always said that what we do is 90% mental and he gave us the tools and resources in the Follow-Ups..Dr. Dennis Waitley, Dr. Robert Anthony, Dr. Deepak Chopra (F.U.#52 pages 64-65)...ok...people guess I've said enough...Good reading everyone!!!!

[sureshotlink]

Let's show photo copies of winning and loosing tickets or phone wagering screen shot's along with winning or loosing readouts from RDSS, validator or any other handicapping program the poster is using with an explanation why certain horses are picked as contenders along with choice of paceline. I know more than my share of professional " on paper handicappers". it's a whole different ball game when serious money is riding on making the correct choice.

[Bill V.]

I feel its not a good idea to place a restriction of teaching
area post that they must be posted before the race
and now that proof of a bet validates such lessons.

What amount must be bet ? Who are any of us to judge what
another person feels is his betting level ?
So now a teaching area post must contain proof of a bet?
So lets say a person bets $2.00 on his race
is this a joke or is the person being honest in that that is all he/she
can afford to bet ?


I take this issue to heart, because for over ten years I could only make
$2 and $3 bets. My skill level did support that I should bet more,
But the pressure of life's circumstances did not.
Every week after child support alimony 2 tax problems
loans from a failed business and the fear that if I failed at betting I would have
nothing to live for caused me to live and die on $20 vouchers and
$2-$3 dollar bets.

No matter how well I did any winnings over the $20 went toward
paying off debts. Winning $200 and more on a weekend from that $20 voucher
happened on many occasions But all it meant was now I was
$180 less in debt. But I had another $20 voucher, and a ticket
to go on and bet again the next weekend.
Some of you out there may think this is stupid, Some out there may think a person in my predicament was a fool.
That I should have quit, but the whole time I had a dream, that some day my two sons would graduate college
and I would be out of debt. and I would have done the honorable thing for my
fellow US citizens and I would make my payments to the IRS as promised
each and every week. That my ex wife would have the help she needed
after all she should get some reward after being stupid enough to marry me in the first place.
It was not all bad I had lots of fun but the tears and fears of tapping out
paid a high toll on me mentally. Now I can and do bet as a professional
But I never will look down on those who can not afford the benefits of
being able to bet more than a few dollars a race.

Lets keep Pace and Cap friendly, Lets keep from making everything
about I'm better than you are ... Lets continue to help out freely
and with only good intentions to all.

[noddub62]

A big thumbs up for doing the right thing.

I agree that it would not be appropriate in the teaching thread.

Bud

[atkinsrr]

Bill V. Dollars...great post, I for one completely understand your story because I went thru some bad experiences also and for a long time made smaller wagers than I should have. Now that I'm retired, don't have to work or support anyone other than me things are different....and in 2010 when I joined RDSS and retired the same year things started changing...my confidence level increased and all of the mental practices that I had been working on started paying off...mostly thanks to "Doc" Sartin and his P.O.W. articles in the Follow-Ups...I will forever give him the credit for helping me to be better.

[sureshotlink]

Black out the $$$ wagered...Your right it's no ones business how much the wager is whether it be 2.00 or 200.00..Proof is in the pudding as the saying goes. I believe it was James Quinn who stated sartin follower's are cowards at the windows even though they had in there possession one of the most powerful tools in thoroughbred handicapping...Are you kidding me Doc loved printing in the follow-up copies of winning tickets, W2-g forms produced from winning readouts. All I am saying is when doing a post-hoc analysis of a race it would be somewhat beneficial to know there was an actual wagered made regardless of the outcome. As memory recalls before you could even make a appointment with doc the first thing he would ask you for is send me YOUR readouts from races YOU actually lost.Re-working lost races that I actually bet was the fastest and most proficient way I learned. Let me tell you after a few loses with a few bucks on the line you learn to follow direction very quick!!

[lone speed]

In regards to posting a post-race analysis, I can clearly see all the reasons for posting wagering slip confirmations and the actual wagering choices/amounts of the presenter. This manner of presentation keeps false "prophets" or false boasting of a prior race "after the fact."

But I writing about the well being of the person who is TEACHING UNDER THE THREAD titled Teaching. FTL does not gain anything but his own satisfaction of helping others use the tools available to dissect certain races. It is his own kindness and his own willingness to share his vast knowledge with new users of RDSS and experienced users with an open mind to learning new things. It takes a great deal of personal time and forethought to gather one's thoughts to make a well-written post especially if the topic is fresh and unique. You will not find any written materials in any Follow Ups of the Sartin Methodology about playing maiden races especially if they have entries with less than 3 North American pacelines to evaluate.

Can you imagine if one of us would demand of Howard Sartin or Jim Bradshaw to show us their proof of wagering before they make any presentations before us or in the Follow Ups....Malarkey is Right!!!

I will always remember an incident that happened at the San Remo in Las Vegas when Howard Sartin was presenting a seminar.. Some disgruntled associates of the Sartin Methodology interrupted his speaking session before us, calling him a fake, etc...I do not recall vividing the exact remarks that were shouted at Sartin....But we were all saddened to see a great thinker disheartened and reduced to tears....

Sartin was deeply heartbroken that people that he once helped/tutored/or worked together with in some aspects of the methodology, revolted to rebel against him in this public display to belittle Sartin.

Bottomline, the teaching section is what it is....To Teach and To Teach with Past Examples. At Harvard Business School, students studied case studies of successful business practices. Here at PaceandCap, we study past races with the desired goals of improving our skillsets or to improve our paceline selections or to improve our skills in using the computer program that we choose to exploit our edge in our chosen field of endeavor. We want to study successful handicapping practices from those willing to teach.

Are you willing to take the time to teach?? Are you willing to share ideas that you might have taken years to exploit or discovered? Are you willing to take your own precious time from your daily life to write a well-written message post to share freely without any compensation???


Or do you want to be given a fish daily??? A free analysis of a race before it is run even with your "self-proclaimed Magic Box"??? The best software program will not get one to the "promised land" without the proper input and the correct mindset and money philosophy to capitalize on the opportunity..


Good Luck

[Hoof 11]

I for one enjoy reading FTL's breakdowns and insights, i think they are invaluable. I couldn't care less if they are before the fact or after the fact, from a personal standpoint i always go back after a race and try and figure out where i went wrong, thats how we learn, by our mistakes.

FTL, pay no attention to the jaded hater's, please continue with your fine work, for this thread is a giant waste of bandwidth.

I always find it funny that the one's that are the most critical, are the one's that have very little to contribute. You know what they say..... "If you're not part of the solution, then get out of the way."

[atkinsrr]

Hey Hoof 11 good analysis...you sound like my first boss when I got out of the Air Force.
He always told us to either "LEAD, FOLLOW, or GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY"

[atlasaxis]

Very good Hoof, that's exactly the point of a post race analysis, you went back AFTER you did a pre race analysis, to see where you went wrong in the event that you didn't win. How in the world would you know where you went wrong WITHOUT a prerace analysis? You wouldn't! If you won, what did you learn? Very little! Why? Because you got paid for that which you already knew! Each failure (lost race) offers a handicapping lesson. Winners do a post mortem after losing a race to find out why they lost. Post race analysis WITHOUT a prerace analysis IS simply redboarding/backfitting/cherry picking and has VERY limited value. It is VERY misleading and dishonest to the new person looking to find his/her way. Why? Because it's only PART of the truth and part of the truth not seen in the context of the whole, is a lie (see - you too could have had this $50 winner if you just did this and this and this and this..).

As I said before, any one of you with even just a limited understand of your methodology (ALL of which is found in your Follow Ups) could take ANY race after it's been run and give reason for choosing contenders and pretenders, why a horse won or loss. That doesn't make you money. What does is being able to correctly do it BEFORE the race is run.

I am not negating the importance of a post race analysis, I'm just putting it in its proper place, AFTER a prerace analysis and BEFORE the race is run.

You all can flame away all you want, Apparently I've struck a nerve with some of you on both sides of the fence. That's good, people need to think for themselves and not just blindly follow a part truth.

This will be my last post on this topic, hold the applause please!`:) If you all are happy and making money, then that's all that matters, just keep on keeping on.

Peace.

[Hoof 11]

You make some very good points and i understand what you're are trying to say, it's the way you went about it that bothers me. There aren't a lot of people willing to share their knowledge, and when someone flames the one's that do post, it usually stops them from posting, and that's not what this site is about. We are all here to become better at this game, not to get sh*t on.

If you would have posted what you stated above in the first place, people would not have gotten all bent out of shape. Calling FTL a joke and all that other stuff was uncalled for, and really doesn't help anybody in the end. FTL is simply sharing some good knowledge of the game and the methodology, and he is not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes.

I think a valuable lesson was learned here, and Atlas makes some good points, for future reference it might be a good idea to post (pre) and (post) analysis of a race. Whether someone is betting the race or not, is irrelevant, it's the learning process that is important in the end.

By the way..... how are you making out in the PAIHL contest? ;)

[atlasaxis]

You mean the one kicking my @$$ right now? lol Don't know if this saying has made it to the north of the border yet but ya win some, ya lose some and some get rained out! ;)

[Mark]

I'm almost 63, won my first bet at 15 at Del Mar, a $180 Daily Double that my grandmother had to place for me. Like many handicappers I have struggled over the years to make a consistent profit whether I used my own method or anyone of 10 different software programs. However, I learned from every handicapping book or software program and group I used or was involved with. Alot of that changed in the early 90's when I started attending Sartin Seminars. "The Doc", "The Hat", Tom Brohammer, Dick Schmidt, Tom Hambleton and many others each had some impact on me. The fact that the Pace and Cap website has chosen to carry forward the traditions of these authors and handicappers and that it has developed a following is a testiment to their legacy. It is not so much the content as it is the forum for those who feel they have something to contribute that I feel is important. The teaching threads are outstanding and the Hat Check has allowed me to understand and utilize "The Match Up" as I always wanted to but never could.
For those who would object to the free offering of someone's elses thoughts or findings to others is something I find hard to understand. No one is forced to read these threads or to undertake to register to contribute comments on this site. I find it selfserving and intellectually corrupt.
I offer my appreciation and congratulations to those that continue to post meaningful information in light of these attacks. And while all should have their say, I feel there is no place for repeated derogatory comments and personal attacks. Those that have pychological issues that foster this behavior achieve their control and attention getting goals. The forum management should not enable this behavior as it is destructive and counter productive to building trust and sharing of ideas, in my opinion

[Bill V.]

Well said Mark

Welcome to Pace and Cap

Bill

[DaveEdwards]

That I particularly appreciate the time FTL and others take to share their knowledge in order to help.

For me looking at an event after the fact is perfectly fine in order to demonstrate a concept. The issue isn't one of backfitting, more one of pattern recognition for future use. Well for me at least anyway, although I'm happy to concede that different people do have varying learning styles.