question concerning the last 3 - Pace and Cap

porkchop · 05-11-2009, 07:02 PM

Hey guys and gals, I've just gotten started with the Sartin Methodology, and RDSS in the last few days. I've so far read the Yellow Manual, and Follow ups #80-85. Along with those, I have also watched all the videos concerning RDSS I can find here on the site.

I have been practicing using RDSS and the demo races that are available for download, and with what little I know, I have been having pretty good success with these practice races. I have a spread sheet that I use to keep track of my wins/losses/and RDSS readouts in 20 race cycles, and after working a race, I go to calracing.com to watch it and see how it goes. Obviously I'm working everything just on paper, haven't done any live races with RDSS yet, still trying to get the hang of it.

So, onto my question:

Lets say I'm working a 8.5F turf race with a 10 horse field. I'm picking the best of the last 3 comparable lines, going back a little further if need be. What do I do when I come to a horse that has ran on turf, but never in a route? Or if the horse has ran the distance, but never on turf?

I had a situation like this last night, where the horse had only ran a few races...all of them dirt sprints, and this was a turf route. Do you throw him out? Do you just take the best performance of his last 3?

Also, how far do you go back to get a comparable race? If you have to go back 6 races to get a similar distance/surface, do you go back that far?

On races where this happens, I get the feeling that I should just pass the race, to avoid those unknown variables. However, while working these practice races I'm trying not to pass any races, so that I can build up a sample size of my own and see what does and doesn't work for ME.

Thanks for the help

Tommy

Ted Craven · 05-11-2009, 08:40 PM

Hi Tommy - welcome to Pace and Cap, and to RDSS!

I like your approach to research: study some hundreds of races first to get the hang of it, get concept, before spending money wagering with an unfamiliar tool. Keep records, ask questions. Good template for others. There's lots of time to do this correctly, professionally.

Tommy, what race do you refer to in your example, BTW? Might as well deal with specifics.

Where there is uncertainly, public get confused, or, unknown things happen. This is a double-edged scenario: sometimes it is we ourselves who may be the confused ones

, but sometimes the price is better and we need only hit a few of these 'chaotic' events to make money. In all things, we strive for consistency: take a consistent approach using the toolset (but perhaps using different tools, as required) to each of the types of events. In this stochastic game (or, order within chaos), we don't know with certainly when we'll hit, but we strive to know, by our records, that we'll hit at a certain rate, at a minimum price, to achieve profit. Now would be an excellent time to read The Mind for Consistent Results, if you have not already done so.

Personally, my consistent approach to the scenarios you mention is something like this: if a horse has proven itself capable in Turf sprints (or perhaps poly), if it is a fast sprinter (fast sprinters beat slow routers), I'll accept the route projection. I will be cautious if the projection towers above the other proven Turf routers, and even ask a price (i.e. seek insurance against uncertainty), but accept the numbers. Sometimes they will be wrong, or the horse which the numbers represent will just not run his Turf route today for whatever reason. I am even more ginger if it's the first time on Turf, and you'll have to decide for yourself if poly performance qualifies it for Turf (I err on the side of not). In other words, I am shy about subsidizing a horse's first try on Turf (with my wager), but less so about a proven, fast Turf sprinter's first route.

That is my consistent approach, and you can borrow that one, if you like, but only until you have enough of your own experiences with these tools (including where they bite you) to formulate your own consistent approach.

Name the race and let's take a look, though!

Cheers,

Ted

porkchop · 05-11-2009, 09:58 PM

Thanks for the response Ted.

The race was actually one I did yesterday, and earlier today the idea popped into my head to ask the question here on the forum. Tonight, when I get off work, I'll try to find the race and post some screen shots.

Again, thanks for the help.

porkchop · 05-12-2009, 03:28 AM

alright, here we go. This is Tampa Feb 21 Race 10, here are the horses I had in question.

#4 - Onwingsandaprayer - Do I use line 4 back because it is a comparable race, despite the horrible finish?

#6 - Dee's Rose - Go 5 back to get the comparable distance, dispite the finish?

#8 - Taylor Madison - Use the last race because its the only turf?

RichieP · 05-12-2009, 08:06 AM

Hi Tommy and welcome

For each of the horses you show I would consider going back to each race and treat each sprinter as an individual case.

What I mean is consider checking these things (among others):
1) What is the speed rating range for your top contenders that DO come from today's surface/structure. Many times the sprinter is way short here and doesn't fit with todays contender mix.

2) Check the E/L graph as sprinters that can stretch successfully often have E/L "sticks" on the left side (late) of graph or very close to the center line. This is a graphic representation of how the horse distributes energy.

3) If you are dealing with a sprinter who has tried a route ONCE and failed look at the line/race closely and consider asking some questions of THAT race:
a) What class was he entered there
b) look at how he was bet(or wasn't)
c) look at the pace calls of the route and see where your sprinter was. Down and dirty way is take a second off each of the first 2 calls in the route race and use that as a sprinter time. Use those times and compare against similar pace calls in the sprints shown.

4) Check layoff patterns leading up to that route try and then see if any similar pattern is leading to todays race. Or maybe something very different is going on today.

Best of luck

mikesal57 · 05-12-2009, 08:58 AM

Hi Tommy...

What I do with races like this that you cant figure out...

SKIP IT!!!!

There are plenty more that can be capped intelligently

mike

raceman5 · 05-12-2009, 09:15 AM

Hi Tommy,

agree with Mike 100% where there is alot of uncertainity in your mind about a race skip it.

Bill V. · 05-12-2009, 07:36 PM

Hi Welcome to Pace and Cap

speaking for the basic methodology folks

The Validator series of Sartin programs had a key stroke that put a little question mark notation on the horses readouts.
There was also a way to hand enter your own comments
Looking at your readouts I would have many question marks and comments like No turf No routes No turf routes
and I believe Doc and Aline Best in one of the audio tapes suggested
the best thing to do with races with more than 1 or 2 question marks is to PASS the race

GS
Bill

noddub62 · 05-12-2009, 07:59 PM

Good avice Tommy. Although we tend to want to play every race, and this is something I struggle with at times, you do not have to. Pass the race and go on to a better race that have no questions.

Bud

porkchop · 05-12-2009, 08:14 PM

Thanks for all the responses, I guess my gut feeling was right, and I should PASS races where I have so many unknown variables.

Thanks for the advice guys!

05-11-2009, 07:02 PM	#1
porkchop AlwNW1X Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 19	question concerning the last 3 Hey guys and gals, I've just gotten started with the Sartin Methodology, and RDSS in the last few days. I've so far read the Yellow Manual, and Follow ups #80-85. Along with those, I have also watched all the videos concerning RDSS I can find here on the site. I have been practicing using RDSS and the demo races that are available for download, and with what little I know, I have been having pretty good success with these practice races. I have a spread sheet that I use to keep track of my wins/losses/and RDSS readouts in 20 race cycles, and after working a race, I go to calracing.com to watch it and see how it goes. Obviously I'm working everything just on paper, haven't done any live races with RDSS yet, still trying to get the hang of it. So, onto my question: Lets say I'm working a 8.5F turf race with a 10 horse field. I'm picking the best of the last 3 comparable lines, going back a little further if need be. What do I do when I come to a horse that has ran on turf, but never in a route? Or if the horse has ran the distance, but never on turf? I had a situation like this last night, where the horse had only ran a few races...all of them dirt sprints, and this was a turf route. Do you throw him out? Do you just take the best performance of his last 3? Also, how far do you go back to get a comparable race? If you have to go back 6 races to get a similar distance/surface, do you go back that far? On races where this happens, I get the feeling that I should just pass the race, to avoid those unknown variables. However, while working these practice races I'm trying not to pass any races, so that I can build up a sample size of my own and see what does and doesn't work for ME. Thanks for the help Tommy Last edited by porkchop; 05-11-2009 at 07:15 PM.

05-11-2009, 08:40 PM	#2
Ted Craven Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada Posts: 9,251	Hi Tommy - welcome to Pace and Cap, and to RDSS! I like your approach to research: study some hundreds of races first to get the hang of it, get concept, before spending money wagering with an unfamiliar tool. Keep records, ask questions. Good template for others. There's lots of time to do this correctly, professionally. Tommy, what race do you refer to in your example, BTW? Might as well deal with specifics. Where there is uncertainly, public get confused, or, unknown things happen. This is a double-edged scenario: sometimes it is we ourselves who may be the confused ones , but sometimes the price is better and we need only hit a few of these 'chaotic' events to make money. In all things, we strive for consistency: take a consistent approach using the toolset (but perhaps using different tools, as required) to each of the types of events. In this stochastic game (or, order within chaos), we don't know with certainly when we'll hit, but we strive to know, by our records, that we'll hit at a certain rate, at a minimum price, to achieve profit. Now would be an excellent time to read The Mind for Consistent Results, if you have not already done so. Personally, my consistent approach to the scenarios you mention is something like this: if a horse has proven itself capable in Turf sprints (or perhaps poly), if it is a fast sprinter (fast sprinters beat slow routers), I'll accept the route projection. I will be cautious if the projection towers above the other proven Turf routers, and even ask a price (i.e. seek insurance against uncertainty), but accept the numbers. Sometimes they will be wrong, or the horse which the numbers represent will just not run his Turf route today for whatever reason. I am even more ginger if it's the first time on Turf, and you'll have to decide for yourself if poly performance qualifies it for Turf (I err on the side of not). In other words, I am shy about subsidizing a horse's first try on Turf (with my wager), but less so about a proven, fast Turf sprinter's first route. That is my consistent approach, and you can borrow that one, if you like, but only until you have enough of your own experiences with these tools (including where they bite you) to formulate your own consistent approach. Name the race and let's take a look, though! Cheers, Ted __________________ RDSS - Racing Decision Support System™

05-12-2009, 08:06 AM	#5
RichieP Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 7,019	Hi Tommy and welcome For each of the horses you show I would consider going back to each race and treat each sprinter as an individual case. What I mean is consider checking these things (among others): 1) What is the speed rating range for your top contenders that DO come from today's surface/structure. Many times the sprinter is way short here and doesn't fit with todays contender mix. 2) Check the E/L graph as sprinters that can stretch successfully often have E/L "sticks" on the left side (late) of graph or very close to the center line. This is a graphic representation of how the horse distributes energy. 3) If you are dealing with a sprinter who has tried a route ONCE and failed look at the line/race closely and consider asking some questions of THAT race: a) What class was he entered there b) look at how he was bet(or wasn't) c) look at the pace calls of the route and see where your sprinter was. Down and dirty way is take a second off each of the first 2 calls in the route race and use that as a sprinter time. Use those times and compare against similar pace calls in the sprints shown. 4) Check layoff patterns leading up to that route try and then see if any similar pattern is leading to todays race. Or maybe something very different is going on today. Best of luck __________________ "Grampy I'm talking to you!"

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Richie Question	shoeless	Matchup Discussion	6	05-03-2009 06:41 PM
QUESTION for the group	Tim Y	General Discussion	6	03-29-2009 11:04 PM
New User Question	scgmhawk	RDSS	3	01-03-2009 04:32 PM
Question concerning RDSS screen captures	Dallas4lr	RDSS	3	10-31-2008 10:19 AM
Question for Bill and Ted et al	Turbulator	RDSS	10	08-08-2008 07:20 AM

05-11-2009, 09:58 PM	#3
porkchop AlwNW1X Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 19	Thanks for the response Ted. The race was actually one I did yesterday, and earlier today the idea popped into my head to ask the question here on the forum. Tonight, when I get off work, I'll try to find the race and post some screen shots. Again, thanks for the help.

05-12-2009, 03:28 AM	#4
porkchop AlwNW1X Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 19	alright, here we go. This is Tampa Feb 21 Race 10, here are the horses I had in question. #4 - Onwingsandaprayer - Do I use line 4 back because it is a comparable race, despite the horrible finish? #6 - Dee's Rose - Go 5 back to get the comparable distance, dispite the finish? #8 - Taylor Madison - Use the last race because its the only turf?

05-12-2009, 08:58 AM	#6
mikesal57 Grade 1 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Staten Island, NY Posts: 3,952	Hi Tommy... What I do with races like this that you cant figure out... SKIP IT!!!! There are plenty more that can be capped intelligently mike __________________ Never bet a favorite doing something for the first time-Harvey Pack

05-12-2009, 09:15 AM	#7
raceman5 Grade 1 Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Largo Fl. Posts: 2,363	Hi Tommy, agree with Mike 100% where there is alot of uncertainity in your mind about a race skip it.

05-12-2009, 07:36 PM	#8
Bill V. The egg man Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Carlsbad, California Posts: 10,005	Feel it Hi Welcome to Pace and Cap speaking for the basic methodology folks The Validator series of Sartin programs had a key stroke that put a little question mark notation on the horses readouts. There was also a way to hand enter your own comments Looking at your readouts I would have many question marks and comments like No turf No routes No turf routes and I believe Doc and Aline Best in one of the audio tapes suggested the best thing to do with races with more than 1 or 2 question marks is to PASS the race GS Bill

05-12-2009, 07:59 PM	#9
noddub62 Budman Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 801	Good avice Tommy. Although we tend to want to play every race, and this is something I struggle with at times, you do not have to. Pass the race and go on to a better race that have no questions. Bud

05-12-2009, 08:14 PM	#10
porkchop AlwNW1X Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 19	Thanks for all the responses, I guess my gut feeling was right, and I should PASS races where I have so many unknown variables. Thanks for the advice guys!