Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up - View Single Post - LIVE - TAM 3rd

Jeebs · 04-27-2017, 09:50 AM

Hiya Mark!

Thanks for demonstrating how this winner was gettable. Upon review, it is clear as day how keeping a consistent, even keeled approach and an open mind will keep one from getting lost.

This was a moment where subconsciously, I "changed" my swing if you will. I focused my lines too much on the E/L graph, but got myself too wrapped up in the actual numbers. In short, I was matching up lines based on LPR and Energy ESP. The fact that this horse's spread changed in recent times, coupled with declining LPR, was the factor that got me off that one. With the horses left, I trusted nobody at all at those prices and moved on.

Here's the problem with the approach I laid out above: it is not the approach that I had been achieving consistency with. With some assistance from Mitch, my strategy had transitioned to using the best perceptor of the last three comparable races. Comparable meaning like distance/surface structure, energy profile that it consistently runs, avoiding muddy/sloppy/soft/yielding surfaces and avoiding trouble lines. Examining the Total Energy pace it faced as well as ran is also part of the procedure. From Day 1, I have used visual run style analysis.

Is this process perfect? Far from it. But it was consistent and the contenders were jumping off the page.

My match-up is the Energy screen and top to bottom sort of each horse's Total Energy. I prefer getting a race down to 4 horses to reduce the noise pollution. I would then look at TPR to see if that sort order remains the same or changes. A greater emphasis in EPR or LPR within a line can drastically alter the horse's standing on TPR over TE. I want to know why. I will look at velocity and the respective fractions to see for myself if anyone has an edge in various areas. It eventually boils down to Bottom Line tiers.

Back to the race. As seen on the screens, 3rd line down was top perceptor and TE over distance and surface. Visually, you can see that this one passes horses but nothing else beyond that. I hate to admit it, and I posted about it the other day, but I still struggle using lines that visually are either not 1-2-3 finishes or speed/tired out. Old habits die hard. In any event, the winner lands in the array and would have been worth the risk in that field.

04-27-2017, 09:50 AM	#4
Jeebs Grade 1 Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 909	Consistent procedure Hiya Mark! Thanks for demonstrating how this winner was gettable. Upon review, it is clear as day how keeping a consistent, even keeled approach and an open mind will keep one from getting lost. This was a moment where subconsciously, I "changed" my swing if you will. I focused my lines too much on the E/L graph, but got myself too wrapped up in the actual numbers. In short, I was matching up lines based on LPR and Energy ESP. The fact that this horse's spread changed in recent times, coupled with declining LPR, was the factor that got me off that one. With the horses left, I trusted nobody at all at those prices and moved on. Here's the problem with the approach I laid out above: it is not the approach that I had been achieving consistency with. With some assistance from Mitch, my strategy had transitioned to using the best perceptor of the last three comparable races. Comparable meaning like distance/surface structure, energy profile that it consistently runs, avoiding muddy/sloppy/soft/yielding surfaces and avoiding trouble lines. Examining the Total Energy pace it faced as well as ran is also part of the procedure. From Day 1, I have used visual run style analysis. Is this process perfect? Far from it. But it was consistent and the contenders were jumping off the page. My match-up is the Energy screen and top to bottom sort of each horse's Total Energy. I prefer getting a race down to 4 horses to reduce the noise pollution. I would then look at TPR to see if that sort order remains the same or changes. A greater emphasis in EPR or LPR within a line can drastically alter the horse's standing on TPR over TE. I want to know why. I will look at velocity and the respective fractions to see for myself if anyone has an edge in various areas. It eventually boils down to Bottom Line tiers. Back to the race. As seen on the screens, 3rd line down was top perceptor and TE over distance and surface. Visually, you can see that this one passes horses but nothing else beyond that. I hate to admit it, and I posted about it the other day, but I still struggle using lines that visually are either not 1-2-3 finishes or speed/tired out. Old habits die hard. In any event, the winner lands in the array and would have been worth the risk in that field.