Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up - View Single Post

Mark · 08-05-2016, 07:59 PM

As I tried to point out, different people have different tolerance for risk. I realize that you are a staunch advocate of Doc Sartin and adhere to his teachings. I have been firmly in the Jim Bradshaw camp the last 3 plus years. Although they formed a dynamic team and are largely responsible for the current state of handicapping art, still today, 20 -30 years after much of these things were written, they held completely different views on a number of subjects. The Doc was a teacher and as I understand had a group of gambling addicted truck drivers as is first set of clients. His view was to alter behavior from destructive to constructive. So I found in the Follow Ups and attending the seminars that the Doc's method of betting two horses 60 -40% and his in my opinion conservative practices were geared to prevent his clients from disastrous losing streaks. If I can paraphrase, "The cure for losing is winning!" Well, as you are probably aware this did not set too well with the Mental Health community who advised abstinence.
Jim Bradshaw used the racing form and a pencil and recommended reviewing all 10 past performance lines for consideration as predictive of today's performance. Features of his methods remain viable today because they don't lend themselves to computerization. And in my view that is why you can make real money following his teachings. I am a risk taker. At 47, I invested every dollar I had in the world into a business I co-founded and even though I retired 3 years later, I have lived well on the proceeds of the equity interest I retained as the company has grown to produce revenue exceeding $20 million annually.
As individuals we have to find our comfort zone in an endeavor in which we are wagering our money for a hoped for profit. I would bet you that 85 to 90%of today's handicappers pick pacelines from the last 3 comparable lines. Any horse that stands out from these selections gets hammered at the windows. That is a little different from the time that the Doc was most active and doing the type of research you cite. You have to invoke very subjective "Hides" and still end up betting the tote board to make two horse wagers today. My point is that it is up to each one of us to determine 1) if we are going to invest our time in wagering on the horses and 2) how we are going to do it? Are we going to bet alongside the big betting sydicates and the majority of horseplayers that are feeding the Pari Mutuel system or are we going to investigate a method that is somewhat contrarian? After all, one of the things that the Doc always talked and wrote about was his contrarian approach.

08-05-2016, 07:59 PM	#5
Mark Grade 1 Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 318	No offense intended Bill As I tried to point out, different people have different tolerance for risk. I realize that you are a staunch advocate of Doc Sartin and adhere to his teachings. I have been firmly in the Jim Bradshaw camp the last 3 plus years. Although they formed a dynamic team and are largely responsible for the current state of handicapping art, still today, 20 -30 years after much of these things were written, they held completely different views on a number of subjects. The Doc was a teacher and as I understand had a group of gambling addicted truck drivers as is first set of clients. His view was to alter behavior from destructive to constructive. So I found in the Follow Ups and attending the seminars that the Doc's method of betting two horses 60 -40% and his in my opinion conservative practices were geared to prevent his clients from disastrous losing streaks. If I can paraphrase, "The cure for losing is winning!" Well, as you are probably aware this did not set too well with the Mental Health community who advised abstinence. Jim Bradshaw used the racing form and a pencil and recommended reviewing all 10 past performance lines for consideration as predictive of today's performance. Features of his methods remain viable today because they don't lend themselves to computerization. And in my view that is why you can make real money following his teachings. I am a risk taker. At 47, I invested every dollar I had in the world into a business I co-founded and even though I retired 3 years later, I have lived well on the proceeds of the equity interest I retained as the company has grown to produce revenue exceeding $20 million annually. As individuals we have to find our comfort zone in an endeavor in which we are wagering our money for a hoped for profit. I would bet you that 85 to 90%of today's handicappers pick pacelines from the last 3 comparable lines. Any horse that stands out from these selections gets hammered at the windows. That is a little different from the time that the Doc was most active and doing the type of research you cite. You have to invoke very subjective "Hides" and still end up betting the tote board to make two horse wagers today. My point is that it is up to each one of us to determine 1) if we are going to invest our time in wagering on the horses and 2) how we are going to do it? Are we going to bet alongside the big betting sydicates and the majority of horseplayers that are feeding the Pari Mutuel system or are we going to investigate a method that is somewhat contrarian? After all, one of the things that the Doc always talked and wrote about was his contrarian approach.