[mick]

I'm watching some instructional videos from Dave Schwartz, an old Sartin guy, about his "1-2-3 System" which he asserts can be implemented with CPP (calculator, pencil and paper), no software required. Maybe. Maybe not. Regardless, I find all of his videos informative and he frequently makes statements that will stop me dead in my tracks.

Today's comment was, "There's not much difference between a 7-horse field and a 12-horse field." (Lesson 3, 0:19:21)

I had to pause the video and replay it, several times actually. The context is the dependability of handicapping factors and it was an off-the-cuff remark that he made while discussing his par time charts.

It immediately brought to mind rmathie's requirement of big fields. Richard won't bet a race unless there are 10 betting interests or more in it. He's adamant, too.

Richard has developed a 4-factor system though years of statistical research and like a Seal Team sniper, he's deadly with it. The reason for his insistence on big fields is that the payouts are better because there's more confusion among the bettors and the money is spread over more horses. And his system is just as good whether it's a big field or a small field. So, why not play just the big fields with their more generous payouts? he argues.

And that was the clap of thunder I heard with Dave's remark. If your approach is solid, you want to play the bigger fields.