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

chris · 03-06-2009, 02:43 AM

Of course you're absolutely correct about the cheaper races, it gets even more chaotic when you're handicapping, dare I say it, lesser tracks? Here the physical condition of the horses is a primary concern; more often than not, all we can do is guess about the state of their health. You're aware of this, I'm aware of it, and it's likely everyone on this site knows of it; the "new fans" race tracks are courting are kept in the dark! In fairness to those "new fans" management should reserve a stall in the starting gate for the horse ambulance, it might ignite their curiosity.

It's to easy for me to fire cheap shots, at cheap horses, running at secondary venues. The economics of the game are such that horses are generally run where they can try to earn enough to pay for their oats. And, you're also correct, some handicappers experience success using other approaches.

My concern is with those races at the better tracks. Rather than think of them as cheaper, I catagorize them as the types of races I don't consider; and of course I do miss some good opportunities that look so clear in retrospect, it happens. But I do retain my equilibrium. I believe these races are the "farm teams" where our future cheap claimers develop their craft. They are for me in order of preference. Maiden claimers, non winners of two lifetime, talking claimers here, not preliminary allowance conditions, non winners of a race for specific period of time (often 1 year) and my favorite, because I find them, for whatever reason, the most vexing - State Bred races. It's my list and it works for me.

So if I work two tracks, and eliminate those 'types' of races, I'm left with six, possibly, seven races to consider. For me that's a full load. The best thing about this approach is that I come to those six or seven races with an uncontaminated attitude; I've not wasted energy and emotional currency trying to guess which of the combatants can negotiate the oval without falling apart. This a variable that I can usually waltz aroung when I stay with my six or seven races.

Though I've not responded to your querry directly to "hear" from practioneers who are applying the methodology to the situation you describe, I have, for the moment, found a way around it.

Regards,
Chris

03-06-2009, 02:43 AM	#2
chris Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Richfield, MN Posts: 182	cheaper races and the methodology (continued) Of course you're absolutely correct about the cheaper races, it gets even more chaotic when you're handicapping, dare I say it, lesser tracks? Here the physical condition of the horses is a primary concern; more often than not, all we can do is guess about the state of their health. You're aware of this, I'm aware of it, and it's likely everyone on this site knows of it; the "new fans" race tracks are courting are kept in the dark! In fairness to those "new fans" management should reserve a stall in the starting gate for the horse ambulance, it might ignite their curiosity. It's to easy for me to fire cheap shots, at cheap horses, running at secondary venues. The economics of the game are such that horses are generally run where they can try to earn enough to pay for their oats. And, you're also correct, some handicappers experience success using other approaches. My concern is with those races at the better tracks. Rather than think of them as cheaper, I catagorize them as the types of races I don't consider; and of course I do miss some good opportunities that look so clear in retrospect, it happens. But I do retain my equilibrium. I believe these races are the "farm teams" where our future cheap claimers develop their craft. They are for me in order of preference. Maiden claimers, non winners of two lifetime, talking claimers here, not preliminary allowance conditions, non winners of a race for specific period of time (often 1 year) and my favorite, because I find them, for whatever reason, the most vexing - State Bred races. It's my list and it works for me. So if I work two tracks, and eliminate those 'types' of races, I'm left with six, possibly, seven races to consider. For me that's a full load. The best thing about this approach is that I come to those six or seven races with an uncontaminated attitude; I've not wasted energy and emotional currency trying to guess which of the combatants can negotiate the oval without falling apart. This a variable that I can usually waltz aroung when I stay with my six or seven races. Though I've not responded to your querry directly to "hear" from practioneers who are applying the methodology to the situation you describe, I have, for the moment, found a way around it. Regards, Chris