Letter from Doc 08/09 Val3C - Pace and Cap

admin · 08-10-2006, 04:26 PM

Here is a letter from Howard Sartin
He asked me to post it for him ....

Dear Bill and Websiters
Ted Craven has done a marvelous job of adapting Val3c to the Track master format
He is a brilliant man as well as being a superior computer programmer. He is also very
articulate, Despite his high intellect, He scrupulously followed prescribed
directions in selecting contenders (never more than 5) and in his choice of pace lines.
82% of his winners were ranked 1 or 2 There ave. mutual was $13.81
18% ranked 3rd But were obvious bets with ave. mutual of $14.40
These rankings came from the BL/BL - Bottom Line / Betting Line

The ave mutual of Val 3c [the original Val3] BL/BL was $11.90 when ranked 1 or 2
Something web site users should consider, since BL/BL was criticized venomouslyby "Experts" when I used it to establish a value oriented betting tool.
In addition The complimentary missives you sent me, I'm sure there were many negative ones. Those are from non winners who,unlike Ted Craven refused to follow
prescribed directions tried to mix things like Pars Man made class and adjustments to running lines. Those on your website who do mix and match handicapping methods will never get Ted Cravens results. The tracks he bet were Finger lakes Belmont and Del Mar. As per my own experience, his best results came from FL and Del Mar In addition to his $9 Plus mutual's, he had many winners paying lessthan $9.00
Best Regards to all Sartin (over)

I should add and emphasize that numbers alone, without a positive attitude and focus are virtually meaningless. I know many clients who were winners butafter a year or so, lost focus and whose attitudes were altered by listening to andreading too many diverse opinions. If one is going to use a method He/She mustuse it As described or - get another one.
Howard

P.S. I'm shocked by the fact that in 6 years No one has created anything remotely revolutionary in handicapping, There are several websites out there offering "The Sartin Method" But they are just rip offs of Phase 3 originating in 1975 with formulae taken from Brohammers 1989 book
"Hat" Bradshaw is the only one I know of whose insights are "outside the box"
HS

Ted Craven · 08-10-2006, 04:45 PM

I am grateful for Doc's comments in his latest letter and hope that I can live up to the praise for my programming efforts. I am compelled to clarify a few points:

1. I did not select the races or handicap them. That was done by Rich Pizzicara and Bill Varone, who helped me assemble the study I sent to Doc. All Doc's praise for that effort belongs to them, not to me.

2. The study I sent, and on which Doc comments, was specifically cherry-picked to include mutuels exceeding $9.00, per his request. Though the small study shows you can still get good longshots, I don't feel it should be compared to a cycle of races with a normal distribution of mutuel ranges. Further, the win percentage for a Validator version corrected for TrackMaster's 2006 changes (and by definition, Spec160 and RDSS), shows an even better rate than the classic Val3c. This win percent (by BL/BL tier), is born up by other users who have reported about their experience so far with Spec160. For example today, one user's brief report was that Spec160's top 3 BL/BL win rate is 81%; top 4: 92%, on his last 27 races. I would not be surprised to see the average win mutuel, though, notably lower during a normal distribution of races, including low paying favourites, some of which will beat us, some of which we'll hopefully pass (but don't forget exotic pools!)

3. The success of the BL/BL ranking (and surely other program readouts), is heavily dependent on proper contender selection (and pretender exclusion), and Richie and Bill V have worked very hard on those skills. It makes perfect sense to me that a thorough Match Up analysis of a race is the indispensable prelude to getting the right contenders (at least for win), and thus getting anywhere near the kind of win percentages reported by the programs. Jim Bradshaw and his students are giving lots of valuable help here in teaching this aspect of the Methodology.

Ted

admin · 08-10-2006, 05:11 PM

Here is a work up from the
races that were sent to Doc

This was sent to me from Ted Cravin

You can check this yourself from the Summary, however a reporting of win percentage and average mutuel by tier seems inappropriate since the list was specifically cherry picked for $9.00+ mutuels in the first place! Further, the large mutuel from #11 (your $31.00), skews the tally. I would, however, expect that the win rate by tier should generally hold up over a larger sample, with Val2006 exceeding Val3c, and Spec160/RDSS at least matching Val2006.

Here are Tiers, Win% and Average Mutuel for each of Val3c, Val2006 and Spec160/RDSS respectively:
Tiers 1 and 2 and ties: 63% - $11.90 82% - $13.81 73% - $14.13
Tier 3: 18% - $13.40 18% - $14.40 18% - $14.00

RichieP · 08-11-2006, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by admin

Here is a letter from Howard Sartin
If one is going to use a method He/She mustuse it As described or - get another one.
Howard

Howard,
glad to see you are feeling good.

With all due respect there is NOT one way to do anything in life whether it's racing or anything else. We have some "guidelines" that help us get started. After that we carve our own path.

What helps is having a healthy mind and body so the intuitive process that will help us win is allowed to prosper and manifest itself when it's needed.

Richie

Houndog · 08-11-2006, 08:54 PM

Doc, good to hear from you again and am glad you are feeling well. We have a diverse group here who are knowledgeable about many aspects of your methodology. I think you will find this BBS comes the closest to the real spirit of the Sartin Methodology.

We all have to find our own way which works best for us. We have Synergism, Energy, Validator, and Speculator users. The thing we all have in common is a desire to be winners. This is probably your best contribution you have given us. The desire to be winners which no program can give us as that must come within.

dugoutgold · 08-14-2006, 09:30 PM

Its nice to see Docs post here. I hope that he does indeed post even more. Perhaps he could give some thought into releasing the val 2006. My greatest success still came from both val2, 3 and before that pacelauncher. Used acording to intructions along with the changes the Ted has implemented would be to say the least a powerfull tool in any handicapping arsnel!

Best as always, Doug

08-10-2006, 04:45 PM	#2
Ted Craven Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada Posts: 9,241	I am grateful for Doc's comments in his latest letter and hope that I can live up to the praise for my programming efforts. I am compelled to clarify a few points: 1. I did not select the races or handicap them. That was done by Rich Pizzicara and Bill Varone, who helped me assemble the study I sent to Doc. All Doc's praise for that effort belongs to them, not to me. 2. The study I sent, and on which Doc comments, was specifically cherry-picked to include mutuels exceeding $9.00, per his request. Though the small study shows you can still get good longshots, I don't feel it should be compared to a cycle of races with a normal distribution of mutuel ranges. Further, the win percentage for a Validator version corrected for TrackMaster's 2006 changes (and by definition, Spec160 and RDSS), shows an even better rate than the classic Val3c. This win percent (by BL/BL tier), is born up by other users who have reported about their experience so far with Spec160. For example today, one user's brief report was that Spec160's top 3 BL/BL win rate is 81%; top 4: 92%, on his last 27 races. I would not be surprised to see the average win mutuel, though, notably lower during a normal distribution of races, including low paying favourites, some of which will beat us, some of which we'll hopefully pass (but don't forget exotic pools!) 3. The success of the BL/BL ranking (and surely other program readouts), is heavily dependent on proper contender selection (and pretender exclusion), and Richie and Bill V have worked very hard on those skills. It makes perfect sense to me that a thorough Match Up analysis of a race is the indispensable prelude to getting the right contenders (at least for win), and thus getting anywhere near the kind of win percentages reported by the programs. Jim Bradshaw and his students are giving lots of valuable help here in teaching this aspect of the Methodology. Ted __________________ RDSS - Racing Decision Support System™ Last edited by Ted Craven; 06-08-2010 at 09:23 PM. Reason: clean up spelling, typos

08-10-2006, 05:11 PM	#3
admin Administrator Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,643	Work up Here is a work up from the races that were sent to Doc This was sent to me from Ted Cravin You can check this yourself from the Summary, however a reporting of win percentage and average mutuel by tier seems inappropriate since the list was specifically cherry picked for $9.00+ mutuels in the first place! Further, the large mutuel from #11 (your $31.00), skews the tally. I would, however, expect that the win rate by tier should generally hold up over a larger sample, with Val2006 exceeding Val3c, and Spec160/RDSS at least matching Val2006. Here are Tiers, Win% and Average Mutuel for each of Val3c, Val2006 and Spec160/RDSS respectively: Tiers 1 and 2 and ties: 63% - $11.90 82% - $13.81 73% - $14.13 Tier 3: 18% - $13.40 18% - $14.40 18% - $14.00 Last edited by admin; 08-10-2006 at 05:19 PM.

08-10-2006, 04:26 PM	#1
admin Administrator Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,643	Letter from Doc 08/09 Val3C Here is a letter from Howard Sartin He asked me to post it for him .... Dear Bill and Websiters Ted Craven has done a marvelous job of adapting Val3c to the Track master format He is a brilliant man as well as being a superior computer programmer. He is also very articulate, Despite his high intellect, He scrupulously followed prescribed directions in selecting contenders (never more than 5) and in his choice of pace lines. 82% of his winners were ranked 1 or 2 There ave. mutual was $13.81 18% ranked 3rd But were obvious bets with ave. mutual of $14.40 These rankings came from the BL/BL - Bottom Line / Betting Line The ave mutual of Val 3c [the original Val3] BL/BL was $11.90 when ranked 1 or 2 Something web site users should consider, since BL/BL was criticized venomouslyby "Experts" when I used it to establish a value oriented betting tool. In addition The complimentary missives you sent me, I'm sure there were many negative ones. Those are from non winners who,unlike Ted Craven refused to follow prescribed directions tried to mix things like Pars Man made class and adjustments to running lines. Those on your website who do mix and match handicapping methods will never get Ted Cravens results. The tracks he bet were Finger lakes Belmont and Del Mar. As per my own experience, his best results came from FL and Del Mar In addition to his $9 Plus mutual's, he had many winners paying lessthan $9.00 Best Regards to all Sartin (over) I should add and emphasize that numbers alone, without a positive attitude and focus are virtually meaningless. I know many clients who were winners butafter a year or so, lost focus and whose attitudes were altered by listening to andreading too many diverse opinions. If one is going to use a method He/She mustuse it As described or - get another one. Howard P.S. I'm shocked by the fact that in 6 years No one has created anything remotely revolutionary in handicapping, There are several websites out there offering "The Sartin Method" But they are just rip offs of Phase 3 originating in 1975 with formulae taken from Brohammers 1989 book "Hat" Bradshaw is the only one I know of whose insights are "outside the box" HS Last edited by admin; 08-10-2006 at 05:02 PM.

08-11-2006, 08:54 PM	#5
Houndog Grade 1 Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,258	Doc, good to hear from you again and am glad you are feeling well. We have a diverse group here who are knowledgeable about many aspects of your methodology. I think you will find this BBS comes the closest to the real spirit of the Sartin Methodology. We all have to find our own way which works best for us. We have Synergism, Energy, Validator, and Speculator users. The thing we all have in common is a desire to be winners. This is probably your best contribution you have given us. The desire to be winners which no program can give us as that must come within.

08-14-2006, 09:30 PM	#6
dugoutgold Grade 1 Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 206	Its nice to see Docs post here. I hope that he does indeed post even more. Perhaps he could give some thought into releasing the val 2006. My greatest success still came from both val2, 3 and before that pacelauncher. Used acording to intructions along with the changes the Ted has implemented would be to say the least a powerfull tool in any handicapping arsnel! Best as always, Doug