Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...) > Previous 'Handicapping Discussion' Forum
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

Previous 'Handicapping Discussion' Forum General Handicapping Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-20-2012, 06:09 PM   #1
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
selecting contenders

I have been listening to some of the old seminar tapes to help pass the
time while Im working.I wanted to know if any folks out there will pick
the contenders before they start running the programs or because of
downloading this is a thing of the past.
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2012, 09:57 PM   #2
dlivery
Grade 1
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Thornhill ON
Posts: 437
Post

Hi

I have listen to some of those seminars and it's helped to keep your direction and not wonder.
But there's one saying I always remember is the handicapping process begins before you turn on your computer.

Lawrence
__________________
May all wagers be Winners...
dlivery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2012, 11:42 PM   #3
For The Lead
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoeless View Post
I have been listening to some of the old seminar tapes to help pass the
time while Im working.I wanted to know if any folks out there will pick
the contenders before they start running the programs or because of
downloading this is a thing of the past.

I do it the same old way every single day.

Pick the contenders, throw out the pretenders, pick lines for the contenders and let the program of choice do its' thing.

Why should it be any different now than back then?

Let's say you are using RDSS and downloading files from Trackmaster.
When you open the race card for today, it's like opening the Racing Form to the track you want to play. When you open one of the races in RDSS, it's like turning to the page in the Racing Form to the race you want to play. So where is the difference?

From what I have seen, it isn't the downloading that is different, it's the "approach" that is different.

Years ago, the idea was NEVER to pick a line for EVERY HORSE in the race and then try to "get down" to five contenders. The idea was to pick contenders, regardless of how many there were. Maybe you would get 8, maybe you would get 1. In other words, you HANDICAPPED the race in order to get your contenders, THEN you picked lines for them, THEN you entered them into the computer program.

There is nothing different today just because you download race files rather than purchase a Racing Form.
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own
For The Lead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2012, 08:51 AM   #4
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
I take a different view. Times do change, sometimes. How do you analyse horses differently from the mainstream? The horse who wins is the horse who sets or best overcomes the fastest pace of race. Different horses in today's race set or overcome (or don't) different paces of race, at different distances, on different surfaces. They are held at less odds than they should, or more than they should.

One way of determining contenders is to look at their raw running lines - just like thousands of your competitors, then make a judgement as to whether they are worthy of a deeper look, of selecting a line for them.

Here are some winners from yesterday at Gulfstream. Looking only at their raw info, do you have the skill (or even the necessary info) to know whether the horse is worthy of 'putting in the computer', of taking a deeper look? I sure don't.

Name:  gp1.png
Views: 2803
Size:  51.5 KB

Name:  gp3.png
Views: 2678
Size:  80.9 KB

Name:  gp5.png
Views: 2693
Size:  82.6 KB

Name:  gp7.png
Views: 2668
Size:  82.9 KB

If your 'racing form' came with a little tick mark suggesting a line to look at to possibly represent the horse, and a summary at the bottom - a 'consensus' pick if you will - all automated - of promising horses based on those little tick marks, and you kept a record of the profitability of such information - why would you not use it? The old racing form (and perhaps even the current one - I haven't seen one recently) didn't provide this information, so you had to work it out yourself, rather laboriously.

Modern tools provide ... modern tools. I would always counsel using your brain, but if you have a tool you can trust (according to your records), then consider using the tool, and trusting it. If you have a tool that enables it, I suggest there is no downside in putting in a line for every horse (or letting the computer do it for starters, for you to investigate further). Sure, some horses in a grey zone (such as some of the above winners, and some losers not shown) will fool you and not perform even if they have have shiny numbers, and you will lose the race. But winning at racing involves anteing up to games where there is a chance to win good money where the public often doesn't think there is, from whatever pool offers the opportunity. Participating in such games (such races) involves losing some of them, but even as in Doc's day, or 20 years ago, we must be prepared to dig deeper than the public digs.

I don't doubt than some among us have the skills to recognize some of the above horses as true contenders without velocity or energy figures. But I don't.

BTW, all the above winners ranked well enough to be bet (at the odds offered) based on automated line selection (or even manual line selection).

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2012, 10:48 AM   #5
froggy
Grade 1
 
froggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bullhead City Az
Posts: 921
Amen Ted,

Using Perceptor I pick a line for every horse except those that look terrible. Then after scratches I eliminate down to 5 or 6 using the line score. The winner is there for you to select.
This is a race I won.
No I didn't back up my bet.
Attached Images
   
froggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2012, 11:53 AM   #6
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
You guys make some valid points.Im still in the dark ages and use the old programs to hand enter my lines so I need to look at the racing form.
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:03 AM   #7
For The Lead
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Craven View Post
I take a different view. Times do change, sometimes. How do you analyse horses differently from the mainstream? The horse who wins is the horse who sets or best overcomes the fastest pace of race. Different horses in today's race set or overcome (or don't) different paces of race, at different distances, on different surfaces. They are held at less odds than they should, or more than they should.

One way of determining contenders is to look at their raw running lines - just like thousands of your competitors, then make a judgement as to whether they are worthy of a deeper look, of selecting a line for them.

Here are some winners from yesterday at Gulfstream. Looking only at their raw info, do you have the skill (or even the necessary info) to know whether the horse is worthy of 'putting in the computer', of taking a deeper look? I sure don't.

Attachment 25750

Attachment 25751

Attachment 25752

Attachment 25753

If your 'racing form' came with a little tick mark suggesting a line to look at to possibly represent the horse, and a summary at the bottom - a 'consensus' pick if you will - all automated - of promising horses based on those little tick marks, and you kept a record of the profitability of such information - why would you not use it? The old racing form (and perhaps even the current one - I haven't seen one recently) didn't provide this information, so you had to work it out yourself, rather laboriously.

Modern tools provide ... modern tools. I would always counsel using your brain, but if you have a tool you can trust (according to your records), then consider using the tool, and trusting it. If you have a tool that enables it, I suggest there is no downside in putting in a line for every horse (or letting the computer do it for starters, for you to investigate further). Sure, some horses in a grey zone (such as some of the above winners, and some losers not shown) will fool you and not perform even if they have have shiny numbers, and you will lose the race. But winning at racing involves anteing up to games where there is a chance to win good money where the public often doesn't think there is, from whatever pool offers the opportunity. Participating in such games (such races) involves losing some of them, but even as in Doc's day, or 20 years ago, we must be prepared to dig deeper than the public digs.

I don't doubt than some among us have the skills to recognize some of the above horses as true contenders without velocity or energy figures. But I don't.

BTW, all the above winners ranked well enough to be bet (at the odds offered) based on automated line selection (or even manual line selection).

Ted
It should go without saying, but I will re-state what I have said many times before, you do an excellent job with your RDSS software.

In my post here, at no time did I make an attempt to compare the information within the Daily Racing Form publication to the information contained in your RDSS software.

My example comparison was that downloading a Trackmaster race file was like buying a racing form.
That the act of opening a Trackmaster race file was like opening a racing form to the track you want to play.
That opening a Trackmaster race file was like turning to the page in the racing form where the race you wanted to play was located.

The original poster simply stated that he had been listening to the old tapes and asked the question, “has downloading changed that?” And the simple answer is “NO”!

Anyone reading between the lines in my post can see that RDSS has the flexibility of being used with the original methodology guidelines, the modern guidelines and everything in between.

I will stand by what I did say in my post. Downloading files and working races with a computer verses working races with a racing form has not changed anything. You can do the same thing with downloaded files, today, as you did with a racing form, yesterday.

Nowhere in my post did I attempt to draw a comparison between the “use” of the old and the “use” of the new. Having been a handicapper for more than 45 years and also having developed my own software, I’m quite aware of the differences in that regard.

Not being an RDSS user, I am not aware of the little “bells and whistles” contained in your software, so there is no way I can address those issues, therefore I did not attempt to. However, as I stated, the biggest difference I see between the “old way” and the “new”, is the approach. That means handicapping the race, picking contenders, picking the lines for the contenders and then entering those horses and lines in the software, as compared to picking a line for every horse in the race on the basis of “best of last three distance surface”.

The most successful people using the “old way” would be those who have the best understanding of horse racing and handicapping, as my screen shot indicates. This was said about Tom Brohamer in a comparison to the other charter P.I.R.C.O. members. Naturally, the “old way” doesn’t have “mass” appeal. The new way requires no knowledge of anything, so it does have “mass” appeal. Which is more successful? I guess that is up to the user…in either case.

The bottom line here is, it seems you read more into what I said in my post than what was intended. If that is the case, I apologize for my less than clear presentation.
Attached Images
  
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own
For The Lead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 05:29 PM   #8
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
Looking back I think my original post was dumb because as you you say FTL when your looking at the pacelines in RDSS it is the same as looking at the racing form ahead of time.
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 08:04 PM   #9
pktruckdriver
Grade 1
 
pktruckdriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,547
For The lead, good stuff, but I am most jealous of your pacelines, they have red and blue on them, wow , that is awesome, did you put that there, manually, or did it come that way.

I read MPH , and first time it was tough to grasp, 2nd time years later it was eye opening, amazing stuff, but here at RDSS I feel I am very very good at current paceline selecting , it is narrowing down Contender's and Wagering that I am still working on.

I just got 3 seminar tapes, but with PL seclection, it is being consistent, over and over, as it is the only way to check yourself properly. But you most likely know this, problem is finding races that fit my preffered selection process, so many different races and surfaces, to find a whole race with great PL to choose from, not impossible, just a little bit tough, and I guess certain tracks have less issues with this, as some tracks, Like Saratoga/DelMar/Keeneland, and such are so short and tough to get good solid PL's to pick from, my opinion.

Still fascinated by the REDand BLUE Paceline thingies, awesome dude.

Patrick
pktruckdriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2012, 09:04 PM   #10
For The Lead
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by pktruckdriver View Post
For The lead, good stuff, but I am most jealous of your pacelines, they have red and blue on them, wow , that is awesome, did you put that there, manually, or did it come that way.

I read MPH , and first time it was tough to grasp, 2nd time years later it was eye opening, amazing stuff, but here at RDSS I feel I am very very good at current paceline selecting , it is narrowing down Contender's and Wagering that I am still working on.

I just got 3 seminar tapes, but with PL seclection, it is being consistent, over and over, as it is the only way to check yourself properly. But you most likely know this, problem is finding races that fit my preffered selection process, so many different races and surfaces, to find a whole race with great PL to choose from, not impossible, just a little bit tough, and I guess certain tracks have less issues with this, as some tracks, Like Saratoga/DelMar/Keeneland, and such are so short and tough to get good solid PL's to pick from, my opinion.

Still fascinated by the REDand BLUE Paceline thingies, awesome dude.

Patrick
Your post took me by surprise and made me look twice.

My own personal racing form that I print for my own use IS color coded AND is color coded with red and aqua. I didn't think I posted my printout.

Although I appreciate the kudos, that was TED'S post, not mine. You would have to ask your question of Ted as well as provide the kudos where they are due.
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own
For The Lead is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2009 BC Contenders seattlesnake Previous 'Handicapping Discussion' Forum 8 10-28-2009 08:23 PM
Contenders and Pacelines RichieP Audio Collection 0 09-15-2009 02:25 PM
Re-projection from true contenders VoodooFan Matchup Discussion 1 06-13-2009 05:28 AM
Kentucky Derby Contenders Bob Cochran Selections 2 05-05-2009 11:25 AM


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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:52 PM.