[Ted Craven]

Hello folks,

Bill V and I have been talking and it seems like a good idea to pause the RDSS Learn to Win contest for a few months after December's contest is complete.

Among the reasons for this, in no particular order are: the Contest Manager (Bill V) needs a bit of a break; we want to pause to discuss alternate ways of presenting a Contest focused around learning; we want to know if more than the same dozen players are really interested, or can we entice new players by changing things.

With this in mind, could we have a discussion to help us renew a version of this Contest in the upcoming new year? What worked, what was valuable about the 2012 Contest? What drawbacks were there to the rules and format we used. Did LEARNING actually happen? Did the players and spectators improve their understanding of applying Sartin Methodology concepts; did people learn how to better use RDSS?

Was the betting structure too limited (e.g. need more pools, such as Exacta)? Was there just too little analysis about most contest picks? Were the consistency rules useful, or just irritating? What were the drawbacks of limiting players to RDSS users? Did reuiring screenshots just scare people away? Were the prizes too much, too little, irrelevant?

Any and all thoughts will be much appreciated and help us devise something new to foster the learning and mastery of our tools.

Here are some of my thoughts, FWIW:

1. I owe a big debt, as I believe we all do, to Bill V who stepped up immediately in the beginning to offer his time and inspiration to manage the contest. He did a LOT more than simply record the scores and enforce the rules: he actively worked and gave feedback and insight to many, many races and helped both newcomers and us old dogs see a little more clearly the gold lying within our RDSS readouts and processes. It was not easy work for him, though he has told me often how much he loved and benefited from it. Also, thanks in recent months to For the Lead for stepping up to give his valuable insights into Contender and Paceline selection. And to everyone else who has taken the time to document their decision process and help us understand - and give feedback on - how they approach race analysis and betting.

2. Thank you to Ray K (Buffaloxp) for suggesting the contest in the first place and for providing prize funding every single month. One of Ray's concerns was that any contest emphacize consistency, not just swing for the fences like a gambler; and that it help him learn how to be a better analyst himself by requiring players at least minimally explain how they came up with their contenders and bets. Hence the core aspects of documenting your analysis with a RDSS screen (if not also further detailed descriptions) and rewarding consistence with a bonus.

3. Any future similar contest here, for me, should have teaching/learning at its core as well. There are lots of other places to play in Contests (PaceAdvantage, for example) where simple bragging rights or striving for personal excellence (and some prizes) is the focus - but not necessarily helping others to learn how to be better at their game. Howard Sartin's work always had a 'helping' orientation - and that has always been the foundation principle of Pace and Cap as well.

4. I think there is a strong requirement for teaching and learning about RDSS, specifically. It need not be a contest format, but detailed discussions and illustrations help enormously. There are roughly a dozen new people each month who take up RDSS (though not that many choose to persist with it). New outreach will NOT focus on using Synergism, EXDC, Thoromation, Validator or any of the older programs - because they are no longer available. Regardless of my personal bias in favour of RDSS - people need tools to work with to implement their understanding of Sartin Methodology concepts. RDSS is a modern tool, with a future. For better or for worse, it's ongoing use and success is what finances this website, the Library, the discussions we have here - the outreach which Howard Sartin hoped would continue to happen.

5. I myself bet Win Win/Place, Exacta and increasingly Doubles and Pick3s. Perhaps a future contest situation could incorporate some alternate betting options.

6. Perhaps it does not need to be a contest at all - perhaps with the momentum and familiarity of what we have been doing for the past 6 months, people will simply continue to make similar posts in the Selections Forum, explaining their process and requesting feedback.

However, I do favour a Contest format - it enforces a discipline (got to work a certain number of races per month, measure your success over a long enough period to smooth out the short term randomness; got to explain to others, and thus to yourself, why you do what you do). The daily record keeping of your bets and betting style (and what works and what does not) is an invaluable discipline.

7. Maybe 20 races per month is too much though; maybe the notion of a monthly contest is too relentless ?

8. Would anyone participate if there were no prizes?

These are just some thoughts so far. I'm sure I'll have more.

cheers,

Ted