Picking Contenders & Pacelines

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by bobsbet

For The Lead:

Thank you for all your inciteful analysis.

I primarily handicap sprint races and would appreciate your comments in regard to which RDSS are most predictive.

Thanks

Bobsbet

I'm afraid I don't understand the question.

What do you mean when you say "which RDSS"?
Do you mean which version?
Do you mean which corollary?

[Alice0607]

Bobsbet, I have broken down my analysis with each of the seven paceline selection category for dirt sprint, dirt route, turf sprint, turf route. The total numbr of races examine was 138, of which 64 was dirt sprint, 38 was dirt route, 3 was turf sprint, and 33 was turf route. the turf sprint selection was not valid, to small sample size. turf route had the highest win percentage using the top 3 energy paceline selection and picking the top two picks from the total preceptor rank -was 73 %( 24 winners out of 33 races.) Next was dirt sprint that was using best of bl/bl last three paceline selection and picking the top two rank in the total preceptor was 52 percent ( 33 winners out of 64 races.)

[PassRace]

OK. What about Dirt Routes?
ALF

[bobsbet]

For The Lead:

My mistake. Left out the key word.

Shoud have read: Which READOUTS in RDSS are most predictive in dirt sprints.

My apologies.

Bobsbet

[Alice0607]

dirt sprint that was using best of bl/bl last three paceline selection and picking the top two rank in the total preceptor was 52 percent ( 33 winners out of 64 races.)

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Alice0607

Bobsbet, I have broken down my analysis with each of the seven paceline selection category for dirt sprint, dirt route, turf sprint, turf route. The total numbr of races examine was 138, of which 64 was dirt sprint, 38 was dirt route, 3 was turf sprint, and 33 was turf route. the turf sprint selection was not valid, to small sample size. turf route had the highest win percentage using the top 3 energy paceline selection and picking the top two picks from the total preceptor rank -was 73 %( 24 winners out of 33 races.) Next was dirt sprint that was using best of bl/bl last three paceline selection and picking the top two rank in the total preceptor was 52 percent ( 33 winners out of 64 races.)

I appreciate the work you have done, but with just 138 races, any results are hardly what you would call conclusive.

I have posted this several times, but for newer members like yourself, perhaps you have never seen this before, so I will repeat it again.

I have a database that has more than SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND, that's 600,000 races in it.
It also has more than FIVE MILLION, that's 5,000,000 horses in it.
When I post statistical findings you can count on those findings being as close as possible to accurate.

[For The Lead]

Having posted the above, I would like to encourage everyone reading this to go back to the very first post in this thread and read forward from there. Why?

I started this thread using examples from "Follow Ups" and/or the "Paceline Manual". Why?

I wanted readers to see that the guidelines for contender selection and line selection came from "Doc" and/or teaching members such as "Tom Brohamer", NOT from me.
I learned from these very same sources and just carried them through into my own learning experience, which came in the form of a rather large database. As a result of my own findings I added to the lessons learned from these follow ups and the Paceline Manual.

Now, I understand there came a point in time when the Sartin Methodology morphed into the Modern Sartin Methodology and I'm not here to argue the reasons for that change. I will only say that I am from the school of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"! I have never found that the original teachings were broke, not back then, not now, so there was no reason to fix them. I think it would be in everyone's best interest to learn those original guidelines for contender and line selection first, then make the decision to move forward to the modern methodology IF you think you need to make that change. Keep in mind, you can always go back.

Someone wrote to me the other day and commented that they can find $10 to $15 winners every day using the guidelines I have set forth (many times). I agree. Neither they nor I want to embellish this claim by saying you can hit $30, $40, $50 or higher winners, even though you can from time to time. You will certainly also find your share of short priced winners.

[Alice0607]

Note I am not saying this definite example, but I was testing to find which paceline selection was the best for dirt sprint, dirt route, turf sprint, turf route. and then find which one was the best in picking win horse's (using the top 2 picks) and the best in picking the exacta (using the top 3 picks for the exacta wager.)

[atkinsrr]

For the lead...thx for the comment about the Sartin Methodology if it ain't broke why fix it??? You are so right...I started in 1991 and still read Follow Ups over and over and still go by the old guidelines....I'm tellin' ya...they will never break mainly because we are wagering against a lot of people who really have some crazy rules for handicapping & betting and as Doc said 95% of the people who bet horses lose. We are so fortunate to have the info that is in our possessions. Doc said that racing goes thru changes approx every 5 years and he always tried to stay ahead of the public...but it looks to me that the public isn't really getting any better at this and if we as investors keep using the Methodology as it was taught to us we will be able to make money at this for years to come without making any drastic changes in our procedures.....just my thinking...good luck to all this weekend with all these delicious stakes races at GP & FG

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Alice0607

Note I am not saying this definite example, but I was testing to find which paceline selection was the best for dirt sprint, dirt route, turf sprint, turf route. and then find which one was the best in picking win horse's (using the top 2 picks) and the best in picking the exacta (using the top 3 picks for the exacta wager.)

You are already on the wrong road.
RDSS does NOT have "picks".
RDSS is NOT a black box.
Here is a quote from Ted, "my software is not a betting black box - but since I could not otherwise rank pacelines or properly identify contenders without the computations and rankings of my software - then I'd have to call winning a race a partnership between my own consistent decision making and the software's number crunching, sorting and filtering."
So as you can see, the man that wrote the software is telling you his software is a "tool" not a black box.
If you would like to see how some of the various tools in RDSS can work for you, I would suggest reading the threads in the teaching section.