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 06-15-2019, 12:04 PM   #31
raceman5
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Largo Fl.
Posts: 2,295
Question Mitch

So if a horse finished 2nd or 3rd and was beaten 8 lengths or more you would not use that line? Not being picky here, just curious.

Bob
raceman5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2019, 12:39 PM   #32
Bill V.
The egg man
 
Bill V.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
Hi Bob

The 7.5 Beaten lengths limit is based on using the dos program Validator, Val,II
and Val 2006/4

If you use RDSS2 in the default setting than the 7.5 BL limit is not needed.

If you are using RDSS in the Val 4 mode , The 7.5 BL limit should be followed

Ther are exceptions, If as in your example the line is a + line and the total energy and adjusted speed ratings and or TPR are comparable to the best horses in the race, then I would take the line if it were close
I favor Plus and ( + ) races over positions and beaten lengths
Bill V. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2019, 03:24 PM   #33
Lt1
Grade 1
 
Lt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Valley Stream NY
Posts: 9,036
I would use it.
Tim
__________________
Trust but verify
Lt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2019, 07:10 PM   #34
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
Correct Bob,


In feet per second the time and beaten lengths are what is important. Not finish position. A horse could finish 2nd and not meet Sartin's guidelines. At some point in the stretch when a horse is well beaten, jockey's tend not to persevere and kill the horse. They have a feel when a horses is all out and perhaps spitting the bit. They put away their whips and coast home.


There is a significant difference finishing 2nd beaten by a 1/2 length verses finishing 2nd beaten by say 8 lengths. Originally back in the early 90,s Sartin guidelines was never use a line where it was beaten 9 lg. or more. He cut this back based on records and states in the article it only cost them one winner. It's designed to capture the most winners.


Of course it goes without saying if that's all it has than it could be used.


Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2019, 07:34 PM   #35
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
This is another area(BL at finish)in which you must apply a consistent procedure in order to get consistent results. I favor the Preceptor over close calls or doubtful lines. Its also very easy to run both lines through the program and see which is best on BLBL to erase any doubt.


Beaten lengths are much more accurate in todays PP's and charts than when this article was written. And because of that I trust them to be what they say they are.

Mitch44

Last edited by Mitch44; 06-15-2019 at 07:50 PM.
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-2019, 07:36 PM   #36
Bill V.
The egg man
 
Bill V.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
Thanks as always

Much appreciated Mitch

Bless
and
Good skill
Bill V. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2019, 11:34 AM   #37
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
FU # 47:


Sartin states that; "As a concept Modeling is still quite valid." However far too many turned it into an Early or Late dichotomy. They watch a race where a horse goes wire to wire and automatically assume the horse and the track is favoring Early or speed.

The visual ESP is not an accurate depiction of how horses actually run.
Sartin cites 7 examples where horses went wire to wire and none had a E designation. The visual is only good to recognize Need To LEAD horses and determining if it needs the lead at the 1st call or the Second call.

He also says that a track profile made from results charts are "highly misleading." One reason is because those keeping them use the Pace of the Race instead of the Pace of the Winner. But the main reason is that today it'll face a different Match Up. Todays race will have a different dream race based on the contenders within the race. The ESP as designated by percentage of Energy Exertion are what you should use and not the visual ESP.

I use % Med. only to determine NTL horses and a quick review to determine if a horses runs 70.00 % Med or too fast for the distance. I'm in the Bradshaw camp in that I seldom use a track profile and haven't kept one in many, many years. Sartin and Bradshaw said that 80% of a race is determined by the Match Up and not the by the track itself. Based on my experience I believe it to be even higher than that. The RDSS program sorts all that stuff out using the Dream Race and its incorporated within the BLBL and V/DC readouts.

Counter Energy: This is used for EX. and or TRI. plays because the counter energy horse places 60% of the time and only 25% of the time has the same Energy distribution as the winner. The other 15% comes from high class horses(CR rating) and what I find is horses that are in very sharp form as indicated by their last race as compared to its other 9 races.

Sartin states that to get the counter energy horse one must know the Energy Parameters by track,surface and distance. Or in other words maintain a track profile. That is a huge undertaking. I don't do this at all. Once I have my two win contenders I can than tell who the counter energy horses are. Also I pick good contenders so most of the time the Place horse is within my contenders along with the Show horse.

The Tandem Concept:

"The Tandem Race is one in which two or more contenders come out of the SAME race;preferably the last; but any of the last THREE at a comparable distance." The tandem race must rank in the top2 when evaluating it against other contenders. It takes advantage of the fact that only 17% of horses repeat. Therefore the winner is downgraded and the place horse is moved up. It must have finished within 4.5 lengths to be considered.

I use to employ the Tandem Concept many years ago but no longer use it. I found it to be a hit or miss scenario and not a consistent factor or tool. That's not to mean that its worthless. raceman on P & C employs it better than anyone else I know of. He even won a contest here on P & C using it. Perhaps Bob can enlighten us more on how he uses it and records of its hit or fail rate.

Lastly all the Tandems for a race your working are already noted in RDSS. Just click on the Tandem tab.

Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2019, 05:32 PM   #38
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
Previously we talked about the Dream Race and the Match UP. This quote is from the Master himself and when Sartin speaks I listen. I also echoed these same facts in the so called Fulcrum thread.

Sartin-Follow Up # 48 pg. 43

"Handicapping a race is Holistic. If we learned anything from the Match UP concept it is to view a race as the WHOLE, not just a single portion, fraction or running position. As Bradshaw tries so hard to explain, the Match-Up doesn't begin and/or end at the Second Call or the sadly MIStermed "Fulcrum." The Match-Up begins when the gate opens and ends at the finish line."

Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2019, 06:19 PM   #39
Lt1
Grade 1
 
Lt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Valley Stream NY
Posts: 9,036
Another Jimmy point "They don't pay off for whose in front at the 2nd call,''
Tim
__________________
Trust but verify
Lt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2019, 10:08 AM   #40
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
FO # 48 Evolution of Modeling

pg. 23 "Both the Modeling AND Probability are based on the individuals ability to choose appropriate pace lines for viable contenders." Once again we that the spring board for success is picking appropriate contenders and pace lines. These two things have a tremendous effect on a model, track profile and without saying getting winners.

pg, 24 Tom Brohamer with the help of Sartin came up with the Brohammer which at that time modeled the key elements of the present program at that time .(Phase III)

"Modeling is a valid and time- honored scientific process for determining numerical PARAMETERS- NOT Pars." In other words they are not exact and instead should be thought of as a range of numbers to capture the most winners.
Many had success with the Brohamer model and others failed because they didn't follow instructions and left out Factor w which at that time was the most important factor of all. They also got hung up on only modeling Early and Late.

pg. 25 "Probably the worst use of the Brohamer Model was in making AVERAGES incorrectly. Averaging RANKS over a large number of races produces results that are virtually meaningless." Races that are abnormal need to be throw out that are abnormal as they destroy the results.

" Long term or extended AVERAGES in anything, but especially Handicapping, are worthless and misleading." In other words the model must be current to be effective, it needs; "to fit immediate realities" or in other words be current to be of any value.

To solve the problem of correct modeling Sartin came up with FACTOR EVALUATOR. You can read about it in FU # 48. However this is useless to the present day RDSS program and the examples given are based on outdated programs. Its only beneficial to those still living in the stone ages. Sartin would have us modeling different factors with the president day RDSS if he was still with us.

So where does that leave us? Of course we could model the 7 Primary Factors which would be more of the old school modeling that took place but not necessarily current. High on my list would be V/DC, BLBL, RX1, POR ,POH, & CR. Others may disagree with my choices and this is a subjective endeavor. Bottom line is to keep records on what is winning for the distance and surface's your playing. If your starting out dirt races in routes are more predicable than other races.

There are so many factors that can be modeled within RDSS that it confuses many. Sartin said that the average ranking of factors for winners is in the top 3 for all factors. So right there is a proven model for many factors. Some factors prove to be better in that more winners are ranked higher up and this is what you need to find out. That and separating those say top 4 to get it down to your two horses for betting.

To be honest with you I don't use a model at all. I'm successful without it because I employ FACTORS that are generic or universal to all races, distances and surfaces. Those came about for me through keeping records and hard work. They don't change so I'm not caught in the switches of this so called early and late theory.

Mitch44

Last edited by Mitch44; 06-19-2019 at 10:25 AM.
Mitch44 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
Beginners / Refresher Teaching Thread PeteC Matchup Discussion 29 10-23-2014 06:56 PM


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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:59 PM.