Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > RDSS
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

RDSS Racing Decision Support System – The Modern Sartin Methodology

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-02-2009, 02:56 PM   #1
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
Smile A Disappointed RDSS Evaluator

I received this email following a prospective RDSS user's 30 day evaluation. I sincerely thank that user for taking the time to send me his thoughts, for better or for worse - some folks say nothing. My response to him follows.
Ted,
I have thoroughly enjoyed experimenting with your RDSS software, as well as reading much of the material on your forum and in the Sartin Library. However, the major question is whether or not using RDSS software is profitable. I have heard all the various arguments about "only a tool" before, as well as how it is essential to "use your own handicapping skills," many, many times before.

What I see is a software application that generates values with Sartin-type labels. What I DON'T see is a fundamental difference between this application and dozens of others, or between this application and a laptop with a simplistic app that works by entering selected paceline data from TrackMaster by hand.

I really, really want RDSS to work. Specifically, I had intended to learn enough about how to use it during the trial period to spend the winter in Miami, and at least be able to cover the cost of expenses by handicapping the races there with RDSS. After a month of hours each day exploring the software, developing pace line selections, developing contender selections, I am left with that same feeling of emptiness that many experienced using the Sartin materials.

That is, there are a lot of high hopes and expectations, and after the race is over, it always seems that one COULD have picked the right horse, but didn't. Having spent several years of near total immersion in the Sartin Methodology, I understand the philosophy quite well. I also understand that the majority of users did not bet on races--they cultivated the illusion that they could "turn professional" at any given moment, and make a decent living betting on races.

Of those who actually tried to apply the Sartin Methodology in the real world, most failed and abandoned it. The few that stuck with it were those who believed they were just one step away from pari-mutuel fame and fortune, and maintained that illusion by either not betting, or betting trivial amounts occasionally. Bluntly, the most "successful" Sartin Methodology users wagered primarily on paper, and picked the true contenders and proper pace lines AFTER the race. That is based on my experience with a number of Sartin groups in various locations over several years of intense effort.

Unfortunately, I don't see anything in RDSS that is an improvement on the Sartin Methodology, or that is suitable for professional use. It appears to be--just as the original--a hobby application for true believers and wishful thinkers. If all the application can do is crunch numbers, there are hundreds of other applications that do the same, with equivalent lack of success and profit.

I don't buy into the "you have to work harder to deserve winning" theory. I have paid my dues, done my homework, learned all the processes and procedures, and RDSS still comes up short in the specific department of picking winners. In general, I can pick as many (or more) winners with a perfunctory scan of past performances, and few or no calculations other than rough comparisons of TrackMaster speed ratings. I had hoped for considerably more.

I wish you well with your application, and with your group. I wish even more that the application had actually contained something innovative that could be used profitably.

Thanks
First of all, possibly you feel that you know all there is to know about Sartin's Methodology (since you say, separately, that you spent 3 years studying and using it intensively in the mid 1980's) and therefore there is no need to ask any questions - to me or to the support line or to the general user base here - whether there is possibly anything about the evolution of the Methodology since that time which you have not yet fully grasped. (I acknowledge you did enquire about how to create models, and we talked about the existing Export to Excel feature). I believe you also did download several of the older manuals and several RDSS videos, however no Follow Up Issues. I also observe that you never registered the software or downloaded any current cards from TrackMaster, though you say you did work with the Demo Database of cards from late February 2009 - which is what it's there for.

For the record, the modern Sartin Methodology is a long way from the mid 1980's (or even the mid 1990's). Follow Ups 70 - 88 tell that story. The modern Sartin Methodology is not just what Brohamer described in his book Modern Pace Handicapping, or what was described in Pace Makes the Race, both circa 1991. The modern Methodology involves incremental energy disbursement (deceleration), aggregate factors such as BL/BL and VDC, taking a contrarian approach to contender identification and wagering. We do not pick winners - we pick valuable wager opportunities. Check RichieP's 250 race workup. Check a few others' posted periodic aggregate records.


So, possibly you trust your own understanding from 20+ years ago more than the advice and assistance of those who post here and profess to be successful with RDSS (or Speculator or Validator or other predecessors). I only assume this since you did not ask for any help - and you have now formed the unhappy conclusion that the Methodology does not work, does not produce a reliable profit.

Let me say this, and with all respect possible - I do not care if you use RDSS. There are other fine handicapping software products and methodologies out there: HTR, HSH, Black Magic, Jcapper and others. I believe you voiced almost identical disappointment after studying HTR, and I feel honoured that RDSS seems to be as unprofitable as HTR (though please forgive me if I confuse you with someone else). If you still believe betting on thoroughbred racing holds any promise for profit, and you have given it your all studying RDSS as a modern tool for applying the Sartin Methodology, then consider trying other software: perhaps one of them will work for you, or perhaps another one will better match your learning style.

But you have not given it your all. You have not (that I can see) asked members here who post both their pre-race selections and screenshots how they analysed a race (or a dozen races). You have not posted, or offered to send me your workup records from your study of the Demo Database races: 20 races per batch, wager selections made, BL/BL and VDC ranks of the winners (i.e. betting 2 horses, did you hit 10 of 20, 11 of 20, at what average mutuel). Did you try hiding a top ranked favourite with odds too low to bet (e.g. below 5/2) and see if the BLBL readout elevates the remaining contenders to bettable status (you can get free detailed Result Charts and closing odds for all races now from either Equibase or BRIS). What about races posted here with Analysis screens, showing either modest mutuels or much higher mutuels? You could download those cards (or just ask for them) and try to work them yourself to understand what the posters understand, and get the success the posters got. But if you think you already know how it all works and don't need to ask for help, well then you get what you expect to get.

I don't know how many (if any) people bet races professionally using RDSS or Sartin Methodology tools. I would be extremely surprised to learn that no one makes a persistent net profit from it, that it's merely a hobby for everybody, or that we are all actually lying to ourselves (and to each other). And several people whom I respect and trust would have to be lying to me for years now. Perhaps no amount of records would be sufficient proof of individual accomplishment (and thus hold promise for your own similar achievement) - since perhaps they might be fabricated. Though perhaps you would care to state what proof of profitability would satisfy you, sufficient to answer for you: "well, if 'someone' can do it with hard work and correct study, then so can I". But if you are already certain that it can't be done, that you cannot semi-retire to Florida with RDSS (i.e. that 'the grapes are sour - I don't need to try them'), then no amount of proof is sufficient: you know what you believe you know. But perhaps it will take more than 30 days to master the modern Sartin Methodology.

I post your email and my response here so that others may reply if they want. They might choose to answer whether they are profitable or not, whether it is merely an enjoyable (but not profitable) hobby, or whether they just enjoy being part of a club. Undoubtedly some will indeed empathize with you that they suspect there is something to this, and that they feel they are perennially 'just around the corner' from making it big time. Perhaps some will have advice for you as to what course of study or action you can take to gain a handle on RDSS and make it profitable for you. Possibly you are wanting to know if there is any long-term potential here, and if so - then you are ready to roll up your sleeves and dig in. But if not - then why waste more time? I can't think of another way to do that than to let the users speak, if they care to.

I have lots of plans for RDSS, which I wrote you about. Record keeping (wagers and models), ADW connections, wager decision advice, even better numbers, etc, etc. Check back later if you feel like it (but you'll still have to learn then what the tried and true analysis concepts are). When I started this project in late 2005, no-one needed another horse-race handicapping program, least of all by some guy named Ted Craven. What was needed, though, was a modern rendition of Sartin's final work (and the worthy Speculator follow-on program), based on Sartin's own code. My first goal was to replicate Validator and Speculator - as is - identical numbers, identical (or better) usefulness. And see if anyone would buy it (and would Sartin endorse it), AND, was it an interesting and enjoyable thing for me to spend my time on. I've done that, answered that. And now I am working on what I think the true promise of Sartin's work has been - an integrated system for contrarian velocity/energy/deceration/matchup analysis, coupled with mostly automated wager and model record-keeping and live tote and ADW integration. It won't ever do more than a very dedicated person could do and has for years done already, but it will be easier.

Maybe that's what you are waiting for, though I contend there remains work for you to do now. Feel free to check back. Also feel free to respond here if I've misrepresented your view, or if someone posts something that inspires you or challenges your understanding.

Best wishes!

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™

Last edited by Ted Craven; 12-02-2009 at 03:57 PM. Reason: formatting, spelling
Ted Craven is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 03:30 PM   #2
Bill Lyster
Grade 1
 
Bill Lyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
Dear Ted:

Nice controlled response. Hope he hears you. I started with the Methodology about the same time I got married and 23 years later I have the same wife and 23 years of great shared memories and a still evolving understanding of the methodology. I would never be so bold as to say I understand either my wife or the methodology totally, but anytime I discover something new, it makes the experience of both of them better.

My handicapping is always evolving and the best part of the evolution was your directing me to this site and all the guys who sincerely share info towards a common goal of getting better, making fewer mistakes, etc.

Thanks and looking forward to revisions to come. And speaking of those revisions, would you care to crystal ball a future publishing date, so we can razz you when last minute details delay its release?!

Thanks for all you do,

Bill L
Bill Lyster is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 03:39 PM   #3
dlivery
Grade 1
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Thornhill ON
Posts: 437
Evaluation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Craven View Post
I received this email following a prospective RDSS user's 30 day evaluation. I sincerely thank that user for taking the time to send me his thoughts, for better or for worse - some folks say nothing. My response to him follows.
.
.
.
Ted
Hi Ted

Every one has there right to stardom Having said that I am still using the old traditional daily racing form and still coming up with winners. I have not read enough to convince my self I would need to step it up to rdss as this is a big step for me as I am still a recreational type player.

Keep up with all of your hard work Ted I just can not get enough reading up on rdss

dlivery
__________________
May all wagers be Winners...

Last edited by Ted Craven; 12-02-2009 at 04:00 PM. Reason: took the liberty of cutting back the long quoted post a bit
dlivery is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 04:15 PM   #4
SilentRun
Grade 1 Aspiree
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 678
Ted,

The point that you made about not being privy to the race records of this
disgruntiled RDSS user is valid. Although he maintains that he has expierence
with the Methodolgy, only by reviewing his records, paceline selection and
other decision making criteria could you understand where is he coming from.

So my viewpoint is, SHOW ME what you did and we will discuss it from there.

Regards,

Ernie
SilentRun is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 09:05 PM   #5
J2EEDeveloper
AlwNW1X
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16
Modern Sartin Methodology

Ted,
I appreciate your lengthy reply, and I will certainly take your advice seriously. To avoid any misconceptions, I am not a confirmed loser attempting to validate my losses by declaring everything impossible to win with.

On the contrary, I have had a healthy profit every year for the past eight years, using past performances, hand methods, and simplistic calculations. Whether or not it is possible to win is not the issue; almost anyone can turn a profit if they are willing to do the work of pre-race analysis, race observation, and post-race recordkeeping. My problem with that approach is that I am limited to a very small number of bettable races each day, and that the amount of time required is substantial.

You are correct that I did not ask the advice of others on your forum. That should not have been necessary. The software is fairly simple, the video seminars are well prepared (if a bit lengthy, considering the material covered), and I think I have studied each issue of the Follow Up at least three or four times. In addition to virtually everything else available on the Sartin Methodology--new, old, or in-between.

Similarly, I did not ask for advice on the forum because I have never found "sample races" to be much more than filler material. The lessons learned, if any, apply only to that race, or an exact replication of that race, neither of which is particularly useful in analyzing future races. An extensive dissection of the thought processes used to select a winner in a specific race is intellectually interesting, but does not help much in analyzing future races, other than pointing out areas that might be worth noting.

The only value in knowing the thought processes of another analyst is contingent on the consistent positive return of that analyst. That, in turn, implies consistency in the decision-making process. It does no good whatsoever to receive advice from someone who selects A in a given race for one reason, then B in another race for another reason, and so on, and the re-works the same race a month later only to select different cointeders, and a different finsih scenario.

If the analyst is consistent, he or she can work a race, then work the same race a month later and reach the same conclusion. If the analyst is consistent, he or she can be modeled, and in short order algorithms can be created that outperform that analyst. With all due respect to all the seat-of-the-pants handicappers in the world, structured decision-making processes will outperform unstructured processes every single time. This is horse racing, not rocket science.

If the analyst is inconsistent, but still wins, he or she is making selections intuitively, and the software readouts are simply accessories. That is, the intuitive analyst makes a superficial examination of the available data, makes a selection, and then searches the readouts for confirmation that his or her selection is a "good" one.

Finally, my question about whether or not your software could create models was not made lightly. I think race models are an invaluable aid in race analysis and wagering. HTR makes pretty models that seem a lot better than they actually are, but are not very useful unless seriously tweaked to cleanse the data. I was unfortunate enough to argue in behalf of short-term "Brohamer" models in a graduate class in descriptive statistics. The professor explained in excruciating detail exactly what the conceptual (as well as practical) flaws were in that approach, and directed me to a very readable explanation in an article by Tversky and Kahnemann called The Law of Small Numbers.

Best Regards,
J2EEDeveloper is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 10:22 PM   #6
trotman
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 259
Smile Sartin Methodology

Ted, very nice reply to this unsatisfied trial client. I found one part of their statement that does not make sence to me. If they we're as they said fully versed on the Sartin Methodogy then why did they give up,as that is the one of many things I got out of the Methodology, was if your figs don't jive dig deeper,adjust. And as many have said here why not a post asking for help? Again as always to you and Ritchie nice job on the Library.
trotman is offline  
Old 12-03-2009, 10:35 AM   #7
Rverge
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: pittsburgh, now! Lancaster, CA.
Posts: 2,531
http://pirate.shu.edu/~hovancjo/exp_read/tversky.htm

this is the paper, if the link worked
__________________
i love every single minute of life, and, if one is lucky,then you must give it to others.
Rverge is offline  
Old 12-03-2009, 10:53 AM   #8
J2EEDeveloper
AlwNW1X
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentRun View Post
Ted,

The point that you made about not being privy to the race records of this
disgruntiled RDSS user is valid. Although he maintains that he has expierence
with the Methodolgy, only by reviewing his records, paceline selection and
other decision making criteria could you understand where is he coming from.

So my viewpoint is, SHOW ME what you did and we will discuss it from there.

Regards,

Ernie

Proceeding from a superior role is not useful for either of us. In a test trial, it is reasonable to assume that the learning materials provided would have been sufficient to cover the topic, and that the potential (if not the capability) of the software would have been revealed.

Because RDSS is the information source--not the prospective subscriber--it is also reasonable to assume that the SHOW ME should be on the part of RDSS. Specifically, sufficient instruction should be provided to enable the prospective subscriber to clearly see the potential (if not the capability) of the software.

Application of a software application to race analysis at a professional level requires a reasonably consistent approach. It was that consistency I thought I would find in RDSS. Not a black box, miracle cure to each and every handicapping problem encountered, but internal algorithms that generate predictive values that are more sophisticated than the conclusions that can be reached by (relatively unsophisticated) pencil-and-paper analysis.

Rather than wasting time dissecting how potential subscribers did or did not "pick the proper paceline" or "isolate the true contenders" in a specific race, might it not be more useful to put those ideas into a coherent, consistent body of knowledge that all can benefit from?

I find the "rush to judgement" that analysis of my race records will reveal my shortcomings as an analyst a little misguided. I am the buyer, not the seller. In this world--camaraderie and group spirit aside--the primary responsibility for establishing the value of the product lies with the seller. I am unlikely to have been the only prospective subscriber who found the software coming up a bit short in the prediction department, and even more so in the instruction department.

I have been involved with the Methodology long enough to understand the basic strategy of "you failed to do thus and so, and if you had picked this paceline from a year and a half ago at Golden Gate, it would have predicted today's results" that seems so clear after the race, and so obscure before the race. Unless you are using a consistent, repeatable, stable method of contender selection, paceline selection, and wagering selection, you are not really "handicapping" a race--the process is more accurately termed "scrambling."

This is in no way intended to be demeaning to RDSS or to the Sartin Methodology (the latter of which has formed the basis for my modest success as a bettor). I am fairly certain that other prospective subscribers would have the same questions, the same concerns, and the same reluctance to use a software application that does not seem to be appreciably better than pencil-and-paper methods.

Best Regards
J2EEDeveloper is offline  
Old 12-03-2009, 11:14 AM   #9
BJennet
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 311
Models

Quote:
Originally Posted by J2EEDeveloper View Post
Ted,
I appreciate your lengthy reply, and I will certainly take your advice seriously. To avoid any misconceptions, I am not a confirmed loser attempting to validate my losses by declaring everything impossible to win with.

On the contrary, I have had a healthy profit every year for the past eight years, using past performances, hand methods, and simplistic calculations. Whether or not it is possible to win is not the issue; almost anyone can turn a profit if they are willing to do the work of pre-race analysis, race observation, and post-race recordkeeping. My problem with that approach is that I am limited to a very small number of bettable races each day, and that the amount of time required is substantial.

You are correct that I did not ask the advice of others on your forum. That should not have been necessary. The software is fairly simple, the video seminars are well prepared (if a bit lengthy, considering the material covered), and I think I have studied each issue of the Follow Up at least three or four times. In addition to virtually everything else available on the Sartin Methodology--new, old, or in-between.

Similarly, I did not ask for advice on the forum because I have never found "sample races" to be much more than filler material. The lessons learned, if any, apply only to that race, or an exact replication of that race, neither of which is particularly useful in analyzing future races. An extensive dissection of the thought processes used to select a winner in a specific race is intellectually interesting, but does not help much in analyzing future races, other than pointing out areas that might be worth noting.

The only value in knowing the thought processes of another analyst is contingent on the consistent positive return of that analyst. That, in turn, implies consistency in the decision-making process. It does no good whatsoever to receive advice from someone who selects A in a given race for one reason, then B in another race for another reason, and so on, and the re-works the same race a month later only to select different cointeders, and a different finsih scenario.

If the analyst is consistent, he or she can work a race, then work the same race a month later and reach the same conclusion. If the analyst is consistent, he or she can be modeled, and in short order algorithms can be created that outperform that analyst. With all due respect to all the seat-of-the-pants handicappers in the world, structured decision-making processes will outperform unstructured processes every single time. This is horse racing, not rocket science.

If the analyst is inconsistent, but still wins, he or she is making selections intuitively, and the software readouts are simply accessories. That is, the intuitive analyst makes a superficial examination of the available data, makes a selection, and then searches the readouts for confirmation that his or her selection is a "good" one.

Finally, my question about whether or not your software could create models was not made lightly. I think race models are an invaluable aid in race analysis and wagering. HTR makes pretty models that seem a lot better than they actually are, but are not very useful unless seriously tweaked to cleanse the data. I was unfortunate enough to argue in behalf of short-term "Brohamer" models in a graduate class in descriptive statistics. The professor explained in excruciating detail exactly what the conceptual (as well as practical) flaws were in that approach, and directed me to a very readable explanation in an article by Tversky and Kahnemann called The Law of Small Numbers.

Best Regards,
J2EED,

After reading both your e-mail and the later post, it's still not entirely clear what you expect from RDSS. As Ted says, you may be happier with database software, but you expressed unhappiness with HTR, which is used by at least a few pro handicappers, and is highly regarded.

If you're looking for black-box software, there are none commercially available, although there are some successful proprietary programs of which William Benter's logit model is the most famous and undoubtedly the most successful. All developers of the latter describe having invested years of time and labor in the development of their programs. It took Benter five years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to get his into the black. I think it's easy to understand why these programs they won't be available commercially.

In addition, a number of people with graduate-level training in statistics have described, on the Paceadvantage website, their many failures to come up with a successful model, and the grueling nature of their investigations, despite their knowledge. The dangers of backfitting and multicollinearity are two frequently mentioned issues.

From the tone of your questions, I'd say you somewhat underestimate these difficulties, since only a very few people have succeeded. And if black-box-like performance is what you seek, you'll probably have to develop your own.

Re the Sartin methodology, it sounds as though you always had difficulties with it, so one wonders why you've returned. However if you give it a chance, and follow the instructions, the program works as claimed. In my experience, the top 3 choices win 80% of the races, but as many have noted, the low-hanging fruit of the early years is gone. This is why, as Ted points out, Doc Sartin adopted Dick Mitchell's method of betting only on overlays, a process that he describes in detail in the last dozen or so issues of the Follow Up. In my experience, the wager value of the Sartin pace figures continues to hold up, and although you probably wouldn't believe my own results, I think that an ROI of 15% is within the range of what a moderately successful user can expect.

Apparently Ted is working on a software package that will provide an additional degree of automation for this process, which may be closer to what you're looking for.

Whatever you decide, I wish you the best of luck.

Cheers,

B Jennet
BJennet is offline  
Old 12-03-2009, 11:14 AM   #10
J2EEDeveloper
AlwNW1X
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by trotman View Post
Ted, very nice reply to this unsatisfied trial client. I found one part of their statement that does not make sence to me. If they we're as they said fully versed on the Sartin Methodogy then why did they give up,as that is the one of many things I got out of the Methodology, was if your figs don't jive dig deeper,adjust. And as many have said here why not a post asking for help? Again as always to you and Ritchie nice job on the Library.

There is a tacit assumption in the Sartin Methodogy that in every race, there is one particular combination of pace lines for one particular set of true contenders that will accurately predict the outcome of that race. The (often stated by Dr Sartin) objective is to train pattern recognition skills to locate the correct combination. In reality, the assumption that a correct combination exists is based more on faith than fact. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as one doesn't take it too far, and let their ego get in the way of their good sense.

There are some races in which the proper pace line cannot be divined until after the fact. After the race is over, it is relatively easy to find a correlate to today's performance in the past performances of both winners and losers. Those correlates do not necessarily apply to future races that are similar--they may have applied to this specific race, but may not extrapolate well.

Best Regards
J2EEDeveloper is offline  
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RDSS 2.0/Happy Holidays/Thank You! Ted Craven RDSS2 / FAQ's 4 01-09-2010 06:03 PM
Release Notes - Version 0.98.7 Ted Craven RDSS Info, Reference 2 07-17-2009 11:09 AM
RDSS Subscription / Forum Re-organization Ted Craven RDSS 1 03-07-2009 01:35 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:40 AM.