[Ted Craven]

I agree with Bill (and others), and I think we have settled the difference between 'red-boarding' and examples using in the teaching process.

A good example of 'red-boarding' would be to post in the Selections Forum that you got such and such a race after the fact, without much attempt at making a point 'how you did it', what the analysis and wager decision process was. ALL the posts in the Teaching Forum are supposed to help people apply consistent analysis processes to repeating patterns of races.

As such, a person should be able to take any given example, or lesson, and apply it to similar types of races, for example some of the Maiden races described, or races with dominant Early horses, and repeat the pattern - in advance. Whether the analysis wins a given future race or not is independent of the lesson being pointed out. These patterns that FTL and others are describing here - in some detail and at some expense of time taken - don't just fall from the sky untested: we're describing stuff that is the bedrock of the Sartin Methodology. Whether you use RDSS or not to implement them (and FTL only uses RDSS for description purposes: he has his own home-grown Sartin-influenced software) - this is stuff everyone can learn from.

Which is what PaceandCap is all about. I think we can now set aside the 'red-boarding' discussion and move forward with BOTH learning and teaching AND posting Selections in advance (for those who wish to do that) and bragging over correct predictions made!

OK!

Ted