Penn Natl Race 5 12/18

[Charlie D]

Howard Sartin used to say that there were three things you had to do to win:

1. Pick the right contenders.
2. Pick the right pacelines.
3. Interpret the readouts (i.e. model) correctly.


I have found this to be wise council.

IMHO the most representative paceline is the race where a horse won or lost by a nose. If he was any better he would have won (or won by a larger margin). This race represents just how good the horse really is when he runs.

That "when he runs" part is important. Will he run well today? That should be a function of your contender selection.

Dave Schwartz

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...t=64732&page=5


Hat

how does this horse like to win

Seems to me Dave Schwartz and The Hat are saying the same thing.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...t=64732&page=5

Seems to me Dave Schwartz and The Hat are saying the same thing.

And, of course, there is the end of that quote you used by Dave:

"Of course, Howard also said that 90% of the time you should use one of the last two lines, and I totally disagree with that. That is not really "pace" handicapping; that's "recent form" handicapping because the big recent race will almost always be your play(s)."

Just my opinion.

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

So, in order to win, we start with:

1. Pick the right contenders.
2. Pick the right pacelines.
3. Interpret the readouts (i.e. model) correctly.

Followed by:

1. choose one of the last two lines 90% of the time (Doc)
2. choose some other line further back (Dave)
3. the same old problem of, which is correct?

In the library you can find Doc's guidelines to line selection in the Paceline Manual in the Follow Up section. I find it to be a fairly straight forward approach. They are NOT "best of last three distance/surface". What they are is: "last line unless there is a 'valid' reason to go back farther". Since Doc appeared to be a stickler for using the last line, I can only assume that his use of the word "farther" means the second line back, not 9 lines back!

In addition, it also does not say to use a sprint line in a route race or a route line in a sprint race. In fact, "wrong distance" is a "valid" reason for going back. Although Doc does not say it, I can only assume that if he did not find a pace line using the guidelines he set forth, the horse was eliminated. I did not see in these guidelines where he suggests the manufacturing of a pace line.

It is a matter of record that the first and second choices win approximately 58% of all races every year. It doesn't matter if you choose line-1 or line-10, that is the way it is going to end up at the end of the year. And yet everybody, including Dave, is going back for lines in order to "catch" a price horse. Believe it or not, using Doc's guidelines, the prices will come to you! You can't make a price horse win just because you chased after it! They win, when they win, not when you want them to win! If you don't believe it, why not give "Doc" a shot? Follow his guidelines for a while ( not a day or week) and see what happens. You might be pleasantly surprised!

[Charlie D]

I'm quite happy using Hat concepts thanks FTL and so was Doc i believe.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

I'm quite happy using Hat concepts thanks FTL and so was Doc i believe.

While I am quite sure YOU are happy using "Hat's" concepts, I'm not that sure that "Doc" was. In fact, somebody recently posted, that although Doc and Hat worked together, Hat did his thing and Doc did his thing, separately and apart from each other. I can't say that for sure, I wasn't there.

[Charlie D]

I was not there either FTL, so i use stuff posted on here and generously donated to the library from which to draw conclusions.

Stuff like this from our former leader and teacher of Sartin Methodology concepts.

Mike I have to agree with Jeff

The effort of every Sartin program was to do what
Mr. Bradshaw could do in his head

the stuff is built in ..

In almost every seminar tape that Mr Brashaw spoke on
he mentions how he tells clients to use the computer programs

From Doc himself .. the day I left to go visit Jim
"listen to what Jimmy teaches you about contenders and line selection.
Then enter your lines and use the Bottom Line Betting Line
It has the match up built in"

Mr Bradshaw called Doc and spoke to him on the phone when I was at
Jim's house . Jim told me Doc said make sure Bill uses his computer

I believe them when they say the match up is in the readouts

[JimG]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

In fact, somebody recently posted, that although Doc and Hat worked together, Hat did his thing and Doc did his thing, separately and apart from each other. I can't say that for sure, I wasn't there.

FTL,

Neither was I. But I think therein lies the beauty of the Methodology. For some it is gospel. For others, it is a foundation from which to build from. The important thing. in my opinon, is to fully learn the concepts and then decide what tweaks, if any, you want to apply to your own way of betting in order to be profitable.

From what I have seen, Doc was forever changing (improving) the Methodology to go with the times. He left us a legacy which has been put together by Bill, Ted, Richie and many members of this site. This legacy provides a solid foundation to build our pari-mutuel house.

Jim

[Charlie D]

Nice post Jim imho.

[For The Lead]

Thanks for the responses and good luck to both of you.

[justin13892002]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

Thanks for the responses and good luck to both of you.

Charlie,

Back to my idea to ignore class, and FTL, back to my idea on ignoring layoffs. Look in the Hat Check.

Post By Richie....

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1628


Here is the EXACT POST.

I have been learning the matchup from Jim for appx 5 months. Learning it from the CREATOR only. I will say there are 2 key things that MUST be done to have ANY chance to actually become a successful " Matcher".

1) Completely IGNORE trainer/jockey/class/layoffs/trackbias. PERIOD.



Now, can somebody shed some light on this topic. The whole class, and layoff issue is really making things a little foggy?? How do some of you other matchers use these??

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by justin13892002

Charlie,

Back to my idea to ignore class, and FTL, back to my idea on ignoring layoffs. Look in the Hat Check.

Post By Richie....

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1628


Here is the EXACT POST.

I have been learning the matchup from Jim for appx 5 months. Learning it from the CREATOR only. I will say there are 2 key things that MUST be done to have ANY chance to actually become a successful " Matcher".

1) Completely IGNORE trainer/jockey/class/layoffs/trackbias. PERIOD.



Now, can somebody shed some light on this topic. The whole class, and layoff issue is really making things a little foggy?? How do some of you other matchers use these??

Well, I wrote a post thanking other posters for their responses and wishing them good luck. I had no idea in doing so that I would create a fire storm.

So, I will begin by thanking you for posting Richie’s EXACT POST and also for providing a link to the post. The problem seems to be, that in showing the EXACT POST which indicates there are “2 key things”, you went on to show only one of the keys. Perhaps this was an over site on your part or perhaps it is because it fit with that part of your approach to the match up that says to ignore “layoffs” and “class” among other items.

However, in the interest of “full disclosure”, I feel compelled to show the “second key thing” from that post.

“2) MUST use the horse's ENTIRE past performances shown REGARDLESS of how long ago some of the pacelines might be. This enables us to:
a) match lines and overcome any track variant and shipper/ track to track issues.
b) identify strongly WINNING running styles and the POSITION at the FIRST call a horse can WIN from.”

I can understand that you missed this “second key thing” since it is in opposition to your approach of selecting a single line, using the most recent line at today’s distance or if not available the best Beyer number from the last 4 races, none of which is a part of Jim Bradshaw’s “match up”.

Personally, I don’t care if you follow Jim Bradshaw’s match up “to the letter” or not. If what you do, works for you, then best of luck to you. However, I feel it is disingenuous to point out ONLY that part of his match up that coincides with your procedures, while you flagrantly dismiss other areas of his match up.

I am not, nor do I profess to be, “a matcher”. I am not an “angle” player. I do not play “jockeys” although I prefer to have a jockey who shows he is getting winning horses to ride. I do not play trainers, although I prefer to have a trainer who shows he is capable of sending out winning horses. I do pay attention to class, which is one area where I differ from Jim Bradshaw. I do pay attention to “layoffs”, since 13 years, plus thousands of dollars in download expense and countless hours of work tells me, among many other things, what time frame since a horses last race, the majority of winners come from. Naturally, there are isolated instances where the “average” horse (not a top of the line horse) wins in spite of being off for extended periods of time. I do consider what is characterized here as “track biases” and I will offer just one illustration. For years PEN was an early speed favoring track. Every year PEN closed for two weeks in September in order to winterize the track, without any change in how the track played. However, in September of 2008, PEN shut down for 5 weeks and completely re-surfaced their track. Since that time, it no longer is an early speed favoring track. Seldom do you find two tracks that play exactly alike. So I contend that there are differences in how tracks play and that must be taken into consideration. So I suppose Jim Bradshaw and I are on opposite sides of that issue. I agree that each horse should be evaluate from its’ total past performances. In other words, I am a handicapper and I find the Sartin Methodology to be a useful toll in my arsenal, although I may not agree with it in totality.

In closing, the nice thing about this site, is that people can come here and post their ideas. I believe that for the most part, this is done in the spirit of helping others. It doesn’t mean they are right and it doesn’t mean they are wrong.

So, again, I wish you well in your endeavors.