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

General Discussion General Horse Racing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-17-2018, 02:09 PM   #1
mick
Grade 1
 
mick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nashville
Posts: 458
Dave Schwartz comment and rmathie's big-field requirement

I'm watching some instructional videos from Dave Schwartz, an old Sartin guy, about his "1-2-3 System" which he asserts can be implemented with CPP (calculator, pencil and paper), no software required. Maybe. Maybe not. Regardless, I find all of his videos informative and he frequently makes statements that will stop me dead in my tracks.

Today's comment was, "There's not much difference between a 7-horse field and a 12-horse field." (Lesson 3, 0:19:21)

I had to pause the video and replay it, several times actually. The context is the dependability of handicapping factors and it was an off-the-cuff remark that he made while discussing his par time charts.

It immediately brought to mind rmathie's requirement of big fields. Richard won't bet a race unless there are 10 betting interests or more in it. He's adamant, too.

Richard has developed a 4-factor system though years of statistical research and like a Seal Team sniper, he's deadly with it. The reason for his insistence on big fields is that the payouts are better because there's more confusion among the bettors and the money is spread over more horses. And his system is just as good whether it's a big field or a small field. So, why not play just the big fields with their more generous payouts? he argues.

And that was the clap of thunder I heard with Dave's remark. If your approach is solid, you want to play the bigger fields.
__________________
mick

"May you always have a clean shirt, a clear conscience, and enough coins in your pocket to buy a pint!"
- An Irish acquaintance in a Dublin pub

Illustrated Glossary
mick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2018, 03:12 PM   #2
Lefty
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 112
better but?

Yeah, bif fields are better, but getting fewer and far between. So I look for
value in smaller fields also, don't always find it, but no one says I have to play every race.
Lefty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2018, 01:40 PM   #3
rmath
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 998
Thanks

Thanks for the compliment Mick.

Lefty you are right; 10-12 horse fields are getting harder to find.
On average I get 3 or less plays per day during the week and 5-6 on Saturdays,looking at 8-10 tracks.

I do run races with 8 or 9 horses but rarely bet them .
I use these shorter fields when I have a 10+ field with a DD on either side of my main play.

Playing the top 2 in each race ( cost 4.00) I am hitting 50% on my DDs.

Rmath
rmath 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


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:30 PM.