[Ted Craven]

People, people ...

On the east coast (and the forests of Muskoka, Central Ontario), the New Years eve party has already started. In DaveEdwards England it's already New Years, in our Aussie friends' world - it's tomorrow and already a brand new, brave New Year.

I am certain that horse racing is predictable, but my certainly ranges from 0% to about 80% or so in any given race. When I am less than 80% certain, I ask for a good price, and when about 50% certain (just estimating 'certainty' here - I presume everyone accepts that) I ask for a very good price, in either the Win/Place pools or in the Exacta pools (personally, and currently).

I think human beings crave certainty, like they crave security: we don't want to be cold, or hungry or imperiled, and we prefer to know for sure if our job is safe, our children safe, our spouses loving, our political leaders sane. But no one can grant us these certainties, or the absolute security we likely felt as newborns. So horse race betting then becomes a contest between deeply felt (and often poorly understood) emotions of greed for the 'prize', fear of loss (or appearing foolish), mixed with degrees of aversion to uncertainty and risk, spiced with desire to feel 'vital', brave, fearless. We want to feel certain in our analysis and bets, and in our life decisions, but no horse race or life situation can offer us this certainty. So we make the trade-offs of accepting relative uncertainty for relative financial compensation (or insurance) for being right or wrong.

Horse race betting is none other than a reflection of human society, human nature - like all other financial markets wherein people vie for advantage, for power, for success.

Trotman - you must feel VERY confident in the tools you have grasped: in Ray Taulbot's methods, in BLAM, in Doc Sartin's and Jim 'The Hat's' teachings - and perhaps (blush) the power of RDSS to get the job done. If everyone felt like you feel, analysed and bet a horse race exactly the same way as you, KNEW in their soul there was no other worthy way to play in horse racing - then there would be no horse racing. There would be no difference of opinion to capitalize on, no one else's money to win in any race.

And I'm not just talking about careless, mindless weekend punters or unilateral adherents of Beyer figures or other public and widely disseminated information - I'm also talking about another strata of intelligent, some very hard-working individuals who either use the very same tools and methods you do but interpret the conclusions differently, or use other serious tools which they are in the process of (hopefully) mastering, or perhaps they witness others having presumably mastered (i.e. to the point of demonstrable, consistent profit).

Decisions like: is that horse returning from a layoff really in form today: is the money bet on it 'smart' or merely 'hopeful' money (some things we cannot know - so we guesstimate: you one way, your friend using the same tools another way). Do you criticize your friend for having a different opinion than you? Do you criticize him for using a different tool than you if you have seen him with your own eyes pull amazing selections out of his bag of tricks, where perhaps you yourself lost the same race? If not, it is because you know and respect the effort your friend makes daily in his passion for racing - a similar passion that you feel?

My point - you tend to not criticize someone you know and whose effort you respect, even if their approach differs from you own. It is also (sadly) natural to criticize (dare I say fear?) what you don't know, someone whose approach is strange to you if you have not closely counted the hours they spend on their craft, or seen the gleam in their eye when they succeed, shared their joy at unraveling the mystery, even if each in your own ways.

OK, I got to go soon, it is New Years eve and I shouldn't be waxing eloquent on a horse racing site. But you cannot say you know the desire, and the sincerity in the hearts and minds of the people you criticize here for trying different tools (perhaps several of them). Your zeal is enviable - BUT, this is not a neighbourhood where we convince our neighbours of their errors by blunt language. We each are not responsible for convincing any other human being of ANYTHING - only for pronouncing our own truth (as I think you said). What we want to do at Pace and Cap, remembering the example set by Howard, and Jimmy and others - is to demonstrate what we know, repeatedly, answer questions, be helpful. To each online community their own, but at this one the tone will be helpful, respectful - or else it will not persist.

You are a blunt, honest (you believe) person, and in person I also know you to be a sincere and capable teacher. But please cut it out with the direct confrontation, or else take it private. Help me make RDSS and the modern state of the Sartin Methodology a driving force in educating new comers, in cutting through the clutter of myriad confusing data. Help me with a Spring 2013 Woodbine seminar. Let's start some planning, how about January, how about at Whitlocks in The Beach, in Toronto. Call me, or write - let's set it up.

I also ask you to respect every member here, if you respect me. I respect JimG, I respect Budman - they are my friends, not because I have met them or toasted with them, but because they have shared their passion with me and left me a little more eager as a result. As have you, my friend. Don't leave Pace and Cap (and don't let yourself get kicked off). You have too much to offer.

Of that I am 100% certain.

Wishing everyone at Pace and Cap a joyful New Year. Teach the newcomers something about why you love horse racing. Grow your own love.

All good things,

Ted