RDSS vs Synergism--Ted?
 

Ted,

Do you feel like RDSS's ability to make its own adjusted times makes Synergism essentially redundant?

In other words, is Synergism bringing to the table something that RDSS is currently incapable of doing? I have been following this discussion
for some time now, and frankly I feel like I must be missing something conceptually crucial about how both programs work. Thanks.


Jake

Hi Jake,

Actually, I find that the adjusted times from RDSS enhances the usage of Synergism 2. For me, personally, Synergism2 has factors I can easily find, read and relate to. I incorporate RDSS, Synergism2 and the knowledge and methodology I have acquired from my good friend Randy Giles and PaceAppraiser. It is easier to know what to look for if you have a reasonable idea of how the pace of the race sets up and how the race may travel.

Jake, in a word, and in my opinion - NO.

I made the Synergism export (and still working on it) because some people are familiar and comfortable with it, and would like to use the program they perhaps came to the Methodology with, or remembered being quite successful with but just can't manage doing all the data entry to use it regularly. Most of those people (those who signed the Poll saying they did not use RDSS but might if it exported to Synergism) are unfamiliar with the power of RDSS, and its own adjustment set. Perhaps they will become more familiar - and satisfied - in the course of using it initially as a source of SYnergism data exports.

Dr Sartin billed Synergism as the last velocity program, and 'on the cusp of Energy', and indeed the Energy style programs of the late 80's and early 90s (Energy!, Kgen, Thoromation) were where the Methodology evolved (deceleration, incremental energy exertion). That evolution culminated over the 1990s with a fusion of Energy and velocity programs in Synthesis and Validator, which along with Speculator are the direct forbears of RDSS. SO RDSS has the velocity compound factors, the dream race, but also deceleration and incremental energy disbursement (V/DC), as well as the Pace makes the Race style ratings and Early/Late differential, and the weighted lines score which is BL/BL. In short - it is the combination of much of what went before - and it makes use of an industry standard and publicly maintained set of adjustments (from Equibase/TrackMaster). Plus, model making tools, plus tote board integration, plus form cycle analysis, plus info to help analyse First Time Starters, plus maintaining portfolios of race types for focusing on your strengths (My Races).

I believe Synergism is still a fine program, as are all the older programs. If people are comfortable with them and successful, they should use them. If RDSS can enable them to continue to make use of what is familiar and successful (Synergism, Energy, Kgen, Thoromation) then I am happy to be of service.

But RDSS is not lacking anything that these programs provide. In my opinion :)

Hope that helps,

Ted

Thanks, both replies were crystal clear and to the point. I appreciate the thought processes at work here,
and the relevant history lesson, given how difficult handicapping without the proper tools can be these days.
I will take another look at RDSS again.

Jake

Jake,

I am by no means any type of expert using Synergism but the way it
is shown to be used is really defeating the purpose of the program. Myself
and Pino were intially intoduced to it by Richie P who really knew the power
of the program.Later on Pino added more to it with the power of 50 and by
using track records instead of 3 year best.Also through various e mails with
the developer Bob Purdy I learned more.

The main power of this program is the way it makes adjustments to the
horses by a Par Variant.The way it accomplishes this is by putting in setup
times of the various horses using RAW DATA.Once you get your contenders
you setup the race by what distance is the majority of like pacelines you have.

I feel by using adjusted data and only using one setup time(unless that is all
you have to work with) is not the way to use the program.Then again if the people doing it are having success with it more power to them.

My original question was trying to touch on whether or not the adjusted times
from RDSS give you the same relative par variant adjusted times that Synergism
would give you, using its own (Purdy's ) algorithms. If so, then Synergism is redundant,
because the rest of its functionality is already embedded in RDSS. That was why I worded
the question the way I did. You can decide for yourself if you felt the question was directly
answered or not. I have found all the answers very interesting.

To the best of my knowledge and experience the answer to your original question is no, RDSS will not give you the same par variant using adjusted times and Trackmaster adjustments. Additionally, the use of the three year best time is not the same as the track record. Furthermore, using the actual distance of the race as opposed to the most common distance will produce different results.

So, what's the advantage of using RDSS to SYN2? In my opinion the advantage lies in importing the raw data as opposed to manually typing it in. Using it in any other manner will produce inferior results to the way SYN2 was designed to be used. This is my best educated guess, not fact.

Sure, it's faster and easier to do everything automatically. But at what cost? How many winners do you miss this way? How many big mutuels do you miss?

I have posted my readouts using SYN2 manually for comparison purposes, but no one has bothered posting their results using the same contenders and pacelines via the automated process. So why bother? I know SYN2 works well the way it was designed to work. How it compares to the adjusted version is anyone's guess.

Sidebar: In no way am I implying that SYN2 is better than the full version of RDSS. For me personally, using it like The Matchup has been profitable. I have nothing but admiration for those who can use The Matchup by eye. I'm not good at it. The SYN2 "crutch" works for me, sort of like a Matchup Hamburger Helper if you will. LOL

My 2 cents,
well said AD. Syn2 is an excellent tool if properly used. RDSS make Syn2 data input faster that's all. If you try to change the hows Syn2 is to be used you will do it at your peril.
Is anybody here is making money using Syn2 with RDSS adjusted whatever. If so, show me the money, until then don't try to make Syn2 a winner b/c RDSS, it's not.
Syn2 is a stand alone velocity program and doesn't need RDSS to make you it a winner unless you are promoting RDSS as the accellerator.
I have to give credit to Ted for eliminating the tedious the manual input.

Btw, Ted if you read this...have a great time, don't forget to visit Trevignano Romano, and if you don't due to the multitude of family members, enjoy the food, and the Frascati wine.
Have a wonderful time and a safe trip. I wish I could meet you there, maybe next year.
Pino

Thanks for the responses. I would think doing side by side comparisons of the
automated versus manual input, same pacelines and contenders re alydar_David's
comments, would readily answer this. Thought that might have been done, either
privately or publicly. My apologies for stirring up any deep waters here.


Jake

Jake,

No apologies needed


Pino,

Hope next time you go to Italy you will take me with you