Quote:
Originally Posted by BJennet
Dave,
I have a four-year old nephew who likes to put on a small cape and run around the house announcing that he's a super-hero, although, fortunately he hasn't destroyed any skyscrapers lately. Your tiresomely hyperbolic claims for a product whose value is absolutely unproven brought him to mind.
I have a suggestion: buy a clue and drop the endless sales drivel about the profound handicapping discoveries of you and your rocket scientist colleagues and start posting large data samples of the ROI performance of New Pace, if you expect to persuade anyone of its value. A 3k sample would be a good start. Better yet, send the algorithm to Jeff Platt, the gold standard for quality and integrity in the field of software handicapping, and let him run it through his 300k race database, since this is an option he offers for free.
You probably think I'm being unnecessarily harsh, but think about it; you're offering an unproven product, which is nothing more than a simple algorithm, which is extremely user-unfriendly, without free trial period for $77, and of course now additional charges. The landmark works of handicapping by Beyer, Brohamer, Davidowitz, Quirin, et. al., which contain enormous amounts of valuable handicapping information, are available for about $25. Cool scam.
Cheers,
B Jennet
|
BJ,
I'll presume (feel free to correct me though) that you also believe I have either been duped or am in collusion with Dave to either shill his product which may be harmful to one's bottom line, or else willfully distract Sartin Methodology practitioners from their tried and true tools. After having worked so hard for years to build up what I have done so far, and having gained Doc Sartin's respect, I can't imagine why I would want to do either of the foregoing. So I'm confused there. Make no mistake - Dave did not just
parachute into PaceandCap shamelessly self-promoting NewPace -
I invited him, I
asked to include NewPace as another tool among many in the modern Methodology. And like all tools, users must make it their own, bet according to the feedback from their records, meld it with their other approaches. That's the process I see happening here.
In very short order, you will see larger and larger scale studies and ROI proofs using RDSS and NewPace. Some folks have not been doing nothing with this for the past several months. But I expect
everyone's mileage to differ: RDSS' BLBL or VDC screen also gives you 4 or 5 contenders, and some folks have this process automated (either in a canned, private software routine) or mechanically by hand. But there is a very wide variance in how one exploits that intelligence in wager decisions. So a 3000 race study of BL/VDC output would show different ROI results for different folks - and different wagers won and lost.
And the same with NewPace. It's up to Dave to answer for his choice to not supply the large scale studies you require. I got no time to waste on that debate - I'm too busy programming the damn thing, co-ordinating users' research presentations (i.e. spreadsheets of whole season runs using Newpace) and helping folks figure out how to use the rest of RDSS. We're moving on, we're doing it. If the whole thing turns out to be a sham, a hoax, I'll tell the world and take responsibility for having wasted people's time. You may participate or snipe from the sidelines, but at any cost you should not give up what is currently working well for you.
Meanwhile, may I recommend just a tetch less antagonism in your next post. You may critique and disagree with anyone, but you know the decorum required here.
Cheers, and stay tuned ...
Ted