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

Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...) Interactive Teaching & Learning - Race Conditions, Contenders, Pacelines, Advanced Concepts, Betting ...

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-07-2014, 01:20 PM   #1
CaptDon100
Grade 2
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Fells Point MD
Posts: 95
Brohamer Decision Model

I'm reading MODERN PACE, I need some type of Decision Model as in the book.
Well, I think I do, I keep records in 20 race cycles of each track I play, and keep track of all my bets.
In reading the book, I think I need a better idea of how the track is running.
I don't know what track is sustained or early or what, I just work the race and try to see how it will run. Track profiles seen to change.
Is the Brohamer Model outdated, is it still used?

Ok here an example. I handicap a race I have one Early and one Sustained
which running style fits todays track. I look at my track profile and see it there
is no real RS that fits. Something like this, out of the last 20 races, 8 Early,
5 Pressers and 7 Sustained. Not sure how to bet the race. I know that it will depend on how the race will run. I feel like I am missing something?


I found an old post that explains it kind of?
____________________________________________________________

Per Brohamer (per the Sartin Methodology Phase III, circa early 1990's):

Average Pace in sprints = the average of all 3 fractions. Whether you average factors [(F1+F2+F3) / 3] or simply sum them [F1+F2+F3] - you get the same information when you rank them or measure gaps between them. Total Energy (in RDSS) = F1+F2+F3, thus AP in sprints = Total Energy.

Average Pace in routes = (EP + SP) / 2 or (1/2 EP + 1/2 SP)

Early Pace = EP = velocity to the 2nd Call. In RDSS, either 2nd call velocity (SC) or EPR = velocity to the 2nd Call.

Sustained Pace = SP = (EP+F3) / 2 or (1/2 EP plus 1/2 F3)

So restating Average Pace in routes: (1/2 EP) plus (1/2 EP plus 1/2 F3) or 1x EP plus 1/2 F3

In RDSS we have no factor which is 1 times Second call velocity (SC or EPR or EP) plus half of F3. Instead, we have 1x EPR plus 1x LPR (F3) = CPR (or TPR, if you prefer). Thus, CPR has more F3 in it than AP for routes (1x F3 versus 1/2 x F3)

Thus, in RDSS:

Total Energy = Average Pace in Sprints
CPR ~= Average Pace (AP) in routes (a bit more F3)

If AP = FW in Phase III (MPH), it became more nuanced later. In RDSS, FW in sprints = (2x EPR)+LPR. In routes, FW = EPR + (2x LPR).

The MPH FactorX (F1+F3) / 2 = RDSS FX = F1+F3 (same thing)
The MPH Turn Time (TT) = RDSS TT = F2 velocity
%Early EP/(EP+SP) evolved to %Median or (F1+F2) / (F1+F2+F3)

Hidden Energy is not given in MPH, but it is (roughly) F2+F3 = HID (in later Sartin DOS programs and in RDSS).

So that's the map between Modern Pace Handicapping (Sartin Phase III) factors and their equivalents in RDSS (and Speculator, Validator, Synthesis and other programs). RDSS factors other than these evolved since MPH times, covered in many Follow Ups (or by subsequent discussion here). MPH described factors are based on FPS velocity calculations, whereas in Pace makes the Race, EPR, LPR, TPR (or CPR) the calculations are based on a points based difference from a set of par times by distance - but they amount to fundamentally the same measurements.

Of course, in later software (and RDSS) all running times (and velocities and points-based factors) are adjusted by a Daily Track Variant, an Inter-Track variant (DTV and ITV supplied by TrackMaster), a distance equalization to today's distance and a surface equalization factor (calculated internally).
_______________________________________________________________
I wanted to find out if I can do this using RDSS instead of spending time, doing it by hand.
AP= Total Pace (Sprints)
AP= CPR (Routes)
EP=EPR (Sprint)
EP=EPR (Routes)
Is there a SP or is it not in RDSS,

Is this model out dated, or should I try something else?
I do keep a track profile of running times and RS, but it seems to need more.
I was using the Excel import, It was fine. I didn't stay with it, and not crazy about Excel.

Does anyone do this method or is there a better way.

From the book: A Decision Model-constructed from the figures and ratings of races previously handicapped.
Thanks
Don
CaptDon100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2014, 07:38 PM   #2
DaveEdwards
Grade 1
 
DaveEdwards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: England
Posts: 489
Was about to post something on this issue

Don,

First off, you say you aren't mad about Excel so sorry if I'm saying something now you already do. What works for me with the Excel export is pasting the winners line onto a spreadsheet that I have set up that then automatically takes the data that I want to keep into another line. If you want a copy of it send me a pm with your email address & you can have it no problem. Once you see how I got it set up you can then adapt it to your own needs.

This leads me onto the point that I wanted to raise about the Brohamer Model. It is a reflection of where winners are coming from in relation to the individual's own handicapping style. This is where I think there could be some limitations by keeping one overall model.

In the words of Jim Bradshaw the Match-Up supersedes everything. Not only that you'll notice I'm sure the outstanding chapter on the negative class drop in MPH. When applying these principles it is possible to have a horse as one of the contenders that wins that has mediocre numbers in the model of the race due to the fact that a negative class dropper and multiple earlies were included, but had no real chance of winning. But taking them out of the model wouldn't leave enough runners to form a model.

Sorry, I'm rambling a bit now, but getting to my point. My plan this summer is to keep multiple models, where possible for Finger Lakes. There is a long season, dirt only and not too many distances. I'm going to keep different models for different Match-Up scenarios and track condition. This may prove difficult at times, but hopefully not insurmountable. I'll discuss my findings at the end of the season.

I'm not claiming to be an expert in the use of the model by any means, but I think there is scope for further dividing the overall model that may possibly provide further insights into the advantages some horse might have in certain situations.

If anyone has done similar I'd be delighted to hear how things went.
DaveEdwards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2014, 08:34 PM   #3
CaptDon100
Grade 2
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Fells Point MD
Posts: 95
Thank You Dave for the reply, I do have an older version of Excel, I was kinda waiting for the new version of RDSS to come out and upgrade to a new computer and latest Excel. I might like the new one better.
I have done all the searches here of old posts and am trying to learn as much as possible about models. Just like handicapping, I need to find a way that works for me.
Reading you post, I'm going to give the Excel import a try again,
and going to read the Negative Class Drop chapter tonight. I'll send you a PM, Thanks for the help.
Don
CaptDon100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2014, 04:24 PM   #4
DocSartinLearner
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 207
Tom Brohamer MPH

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptDon100 View Post
Thank You Dave for the reply, I do have an older version of Excel, I was kinda waiting for the new version of RDSS to come out and upgrade to a new computer and latest Excel. I might like the new one better.
I have done all the searches here of old posts and am trying to learn as much as possible about models. Just like handicapping, I need to find a way that works for me.
Reading you post, I'm going to give the Excel import a try again,
and going to read the Negative Class Drop chapter tonight. I'll send you a PM, Thanks for the help.
Don
Hi, Don Please have your users guide for MPH, but the good news is that Trackmaster are working on an upgrade to the MPH program, which will be web based and in-line with current technology. Look for that release later this summer. Tell Dave Edwards by PM. -- DSL
DocSartinLearner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2014, 11:22 PM   #5
CEW
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 120
Captain Don -

Greetings and a few comments on the model. Dave is right on when he says your model is a reflection of your own handicapping. Although I use an ancient program (Synergism 2 !), the same things should apply in terms of the model with the latest programs (Dave, please correct me if I'm wrong on that).... Keep track of your winners' readouts by track, distance, and surface. Then let your model guide you.

The more races you handicap, the more you will hone in on your own personal style of selecting pacelines for your contenders. And the more consistent you get, the more you can rely on your models. If you have a mix of early and late winners, it may be telling you that Average is dominating. I heard Brohammer say this one time, and I can still hear him say it every time I get burned by it: 'It takes an extreme bias, either early or late, to ignore Average Pace". With my program, I did that very thing in the Derby on Saturday and lost both my win bets! Chrome had the best average, but was only 3rd early and 4th sustained, so I passed him. He was still best average and beat my 2 horses.

Also, and this may not be a party line type of comment, but not all Sartin players worry about E, EP, Pr, SP, and S designations and how that plays into the model. A horse may visually be an early horse in the Form, but comes out of the computer program as a more sustained horse, for instance. My opinion is, you have to decide which way to designate your horses and stick with it. I use my readouts as my designated way to call out a horse's running style. If you are 'match up' guy, the opposite pertains - you want the horse's visual running style out of the PPs.

In the end, your main goal is to handicap the field in a manner that will allow the winner to float to the top or near the top of your readouts. And that will come from experience mainly. You may be trying to get too scientific on the model.

Best of luck to all!

CEW
CEW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2014, 07:03 AM   #6
CaptDon100
Grade 2
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Fells Point MD
Posts: 95
Thanks for all the helpful info. I have been putting off keeping a decision model and track profile, just because I wasn't sure where to start and when it came down to it, what to include. Well since I did this post and with the help from replies from this posts and a few books, I found (like I didn't know this already) the best way is to just jump right in, and build it from there. Im sure I will change the way I do it a few times.
Thanks
CaptDon100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2014, 10:38 AM   #7
CEW
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 120
Capt. Don -

A more straight forward answer on getting your models going is to just jot down the winner's main readouts by distance and track. Keep turf separate as well. May be best to limit the number of factors in your model. The more variables you have, the more indecision it could cause. When you decrease the number of readouts down to what really matters, your win percent should go up. And experience will guide you on that.

If you keep a place model, that could be an eye opener. First of all, you'll find out the number of times you've tossed the place horse. And you'll see the counter energy place horse characteristics more easily.

An example on place horses from Tampa Bay Downs. I was there for 3 days some years ago and played trifectas on every race the first day. I cashed none....when I got back to the hotel, I made a quick model of the win, place, and show horses for all the races. All I did was mark the race with C or NC for each slot (contender or non-contender). So say I had the winner and the show horse in my part wheel, but not the place horse, the model would be "C / NC / C". After all 10 races I saw I had no place horses. Of course I said to myself that I can't pick a place horse to save my life. So to catch up in hurry the next day, I played my 2 best win horses over all the non contenders for place, then added my main contenders for show. In about the 4th race,the winner paid about 23 bucks with a non contender place bomb that keyed off a serious trifecta.

Although that is not a standard Sartin model to use, and neither is wheeling non contenders, its a way of exploiting the information on any model you are using.

Lastly, when you model something that few people have access to - like sustained pace - particularly in turf for example, you'll hit horses with a lot of confidence and get paid for it.

By the way (hopefully its ok to post this), I'm in Maryland as well in Westminster.

Best of luck!!

CEW
CEW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 02:09 PM   #8
CaptDon100
Grade 2
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Fells Point MD
Posts: 95
Hey CEW, Thanks for the post, Great advice, I have started a model and profile. I just started it, as I get more info into it, I will start to use it, it may take a while.
I am splitting it up by track and distance. Its coming along, just finding my way right now.
Thanks
CaptDon100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2014, 03:47 PM   #9
Procefus
Grade 3
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Gun Barrel City, Texas
Posts: 71
Don,

Did you get the answers to your questions at end of your first post in this thread?

Procefus
Procefus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2014, 04:16 PM   #10
atkinsrr
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 507
Hey CEW and CAPTDON...I'd like to add some thoughts about modeling and profiling. Doc Sartin stated in follow up #79 page 40 paragraph 3....The old concept of Modeling and Profiling(to which I once adhered) is no longer valid or valuable using the computer programs of TODAY'S SARTIN METHODOLGY....WITH THAT BEING SAID..we have to decide what is best for us to do by keeping records on various things especially the "Wagering Decision Form" (WDF). When I keep an RDSS model sometimes it helps and sometimes it doesn't....to me models don't work on cheap horses. I only hcp and wager the better horses ...mostly stakes and mostly turf...I am very familiar with most of the Graded stakes horses around the country so that's what I specialize in. Also know the higher class turf runners and am deadly with 5 and 5 1/2 turf sprints. But specializing can have it's drawbacks because you can go thru long periods of time without a wager...but my main purpose for doing this is to make money not bet a bunch of races. My advice is to keep records on what decisions you make and why you made them ...very time consuming and takes a long time to get yourself into a pattern where you are making good decisions...with or without a model....hope this was helpful...Randy A.
atkinsrr 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 Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Modeling Giahorse Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...) 17 11-10-2013 12:35 PM
Making Track Models porkchop Previous 'Handicapping Discussion' Forum 19 05-26-2010 02:04 PM
Original Brohamer Model RichieP Manuals 0 09-24-2009 10:11 AM
Original Brohamer Model Audio 1985 RichieP Audio Collection 0 09-20-2009 09:54 AM
RDSS Update + Decision Model Workbook - Rdss RichieP RDSS 28 07-20-2009 08:20 PM


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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:58 AM.