[Mitch44]

FO # 48 Evolution of Modeling

pg. 23 "Both the Modeling AND Probability are based on the individuals ability to choose appropriate pace lines for viable contenders." Once again we that the spring board for success is picking appropriate contenders and pace lines. These two things have a tremendous effect on a model, track profile and without saying getting winners.

pg, 24 Tom Brohamer with the help of Sartin came up with the Brohammer which at that time modeled the key elements of the present program at that time .(Phase III)

"Modeling is a valid and time- honored scientific process for determining numerical PARAMETERS- NOT Pars." In other words they are not exact and instead should be thought of as a range of numbers to capture the most winners.
Many had success with the Brohamer model and others failed because they didn't follow instructions and left out Factor w which at that time was the most important factor of all. They also got hung up on only modeling Early and Late.

pg. 25 "Probably the worst use of the Brohamer Model was in making AVERAGES incorrectly. Averaging RANKS over a large number of races produces results that are virtually meaningless." Races that are abnormal need to be throw out that are abnormal as they destroy the results.

" Long term or extended AVERAGES in anything, but especially Handicapping, are worthless and misleading." In other words the model must be current to be effective, it needs; "to fit immediate realities" or in other words be current to be of any value.

To solve the problem of correct modeling Sartin came up with FACTOR EVALUATOR. You can read about it in FU # 48. However this is useless to the present day RDSS program and the examples given are based on outdated programs. Its only beneficial to those still living in the stone ages. Sartin would have us modeling different factors with the president day RDSS if he was still with us.

So where does that leave us? Of course we could model the 7 Primary Factors which would be more of the old school modeling that took place but not necessarily current. High on my list would be V/DC, BLBL, RX1, POR ,POH, & CR. Others may disagree with my choices and this is a subjective endeavor. Bottom line is to keep records on what is winning for the distance and surface's your playing. If your starting out dirt races in routes are more predicable than other races.

There are so many factors that can be modeled within RDSS that it confuses many. Sartin said that the average ranking of factors for winners is in the top 3 for all factors. So right there is a proven model for many factors. Some factors prove to be better in that more winners are ranked higher up and this is what you need to find out. That and separating those say top 4 to get it down to your two horses for betting.

To be honest with you I don't use a model at all. I'm successful without it because I employ FACTORS that are generic or universal to all races, distances and surfaces. Those came about for me through keeping records and hard work. They don't change so I'm not caught in the switches of this so called early and late theory.

Mitch44