Mark Cramer article

[tlinetrader]

An amazing site you have all put together here. I must have browsed through posts and articles for at least 4 hours last night. I was particularly intrigued by the Cramer article on BL/BL as a path to a mechanical approach to betting. I'm just introducing myself to the RDSS thru the tutorials and have a couple of questions.



1.

Is the BL/BL calculation dependent on the pace line that's selected for the runners in a race, and if so wouldn't the results of Cramer's test vary depending on those paceline selections?


2.
Where pacelines selected automatically by the software for the purpose of the test discussed in the article?


Thanks

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by tlinetrader

An amazing site you have all put together here. I must have browsed through posts and articles for at least 4 hours last night. I was particularly intrigued by the Cramer article on BL/BL as a path to a mechanical approach to betting. I'm just introducing myself to the RDSS thru the tutorials and have a couple of questions.

1. Is the BL/BL calculation dependent on the pace line that's selected for the runners in a race, and if so wouldn't the results of Cramer's test vary depending on those paceline selections?

2. Where pacelines selected automatically by the software for the purpose of the test discussed in the article?

Thanks

tlinetrader -

1. BLBL is dependent on the line/s chosen to represent a horse this race. Results then (and now) would vary, HOWEVER, there were (and are today) pretty regular guidelines for representing a horse which are based on a) automated line selection, OR - one's own consistent line selection rules, b) demoting from contention on consistent rules. Any 2 handicappers (unless using automated line selection) might select slightly different lines and thus get slightly differently ordered BLBL line scores but with the wealth of tools and guidance these days, I think true contenders are ever easier to establish.

It's the betting strategy which I believe was the core of that Cramer/Sartin test (aka 'wagercapping'). And wager construction (including passing) remains today as important as 25 years ago.

2. In the mid/late 1990s at the time of that Cramer article, there was no automated line selection in any software - it would have been manually chosen, though from standard principles which Sartin espoused at the time (many of which still are appropriate today). Per the thoughts above, we do have some more modern readouts to help identify best efforts against best pace of race (i.e. Perceptor rating). Sartin also developed the V/DC rating subsequent to that Cramer article's era which fine-tunes what the BLBL line score identifies. In recent years, we have the Rx collection of ratings which involve the high-level of Sartin ratings (BL+VDC, Composite Speed Rating CSR, a good Class Rating, plus external high-impact oddslines in BRIS Prime Power and ProfitLine). With the exception of BLBL+VDC, all of the foregoing ratings are non-paceline dependent. If one accepts (mostly) the software automated line selection which produces BLBL, then all of the ratings are automated. Sometimes the added human touch in line selection can improve things - and sometimes make it worse ...

I think Sartin would have used all these tools 25 years ago if they were available and Cramer and the 'Maryknoll Sisters' (?) would have been pleased. I also think they would need these updated insights to obtain today the level of mutuels they enjoyed back then, when insights such as Brohamer's, Sartin's and others were less proliferated than today.

Here are links to that collection of articles by Mark Cramer and followup commentary by Dr. Sartin: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpos...35&postcount=1

Ted

[tlinetrader]

Thank you Ted. Came to this site while working my way through Modern Pace handicapping. Knew nothing about RDSS. Reviewing the excellent tutorials. I'll be signing up by the end of the week.