Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > Hat Check - How Can We Help You? > Matchup Discussion
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

Matchup Discussion Matchup Discussion and Practice

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-27-2016, 09:33 AM   #11
Lt1
Grade 1
 
Lt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Valley Stream NY
Posts: 9,041
I was told about that incident while in the bar with Doc Jimmy and others. Sounded like it was ugly. If one listens to the 1992 Vegas tapes you will hear Jimmy stating that Howard was the one who helped him become a winner by explaining to him that horses were like human runners. Since Jimmy was a track coach at the time he grasped the theory and never looked back. Jimmy also told me he didn't believe in the fulcrum stuff since the race starts at the 1st call not the 2nd. He also stated that the race didn't end at the 2nd call. Jimmy also always told us to use the computer programs since the matchup was included in the later programs. In his 1998 tapes Doc leaned heavily on compounded ratings versus the visual matchup. As for Pizzolla and his product I used his Black Magic program for a year and found it lacking when compared to RDSS. In fairness some people do win with it but the downside is you must be willing to withstand long runouts between winners since their definition of value and our wagercapping differs a lot. As stated many times no program will get the winner if the proper contenders and pacelines are not entered. Garbage in garbage out.
Tim G
Lt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2016, 12:36 PM   #12
Bill V.
The egg man
 
Bill V.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
Nicely

Tim
Nicely said, I am not a fan of MP. I have seen his programs and read some stuff of his written after he left Pirco, Heck Doc told me some stories too, but since he did not publish them, and since Doc took the high road , so shall I.
Pirco was a group of methodologist, these were men and women, flesh and blood , as much as we idolize them either as a group or individuals they were human, not gods,
Non of us has ever gone through a nasty divorce ? I know I did I said and things were said and done to me, that neither of us is proud of.

I am not a MP supporter. However The fulcrum method from the book
PMTR works for me , Its from a official part of the methodology. and I use it based concept, not based on the personalities or behavior practices of the author

Peace and love and good skill
Bill V.
Bill V. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2016, 03:19 PM   #13
Lt1
Grade 1
 
Lt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Valley Stream NY
Posts: 9,041
Bill I will defer to you since you have been in longer but when I joined 90 the match up was the in thing. I know that you use the fulcrum very successfully.Like they use to say find what works for you in the Methodology and win with it. I guess it can also be traced to what teaching member that we felt had the approach we felt most comfortable with. I connected Glen Connolly because he was from the East Coast and played the tracks I did so it was easy to talk with him and get good info. Bert Mayne was also helpful.
Tim G

Last edited by Lt1; 09-27-2016 at 03:33 PM.
Lt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2016, 05:30 PM   #14
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
The "Doc" allowed things into print however that does not mean he condoned it or believed in it.
My original post was to clarify a question for one wanting to know the difference. Essentially the fulcrum is a Pizzola technique and has absolutely nothing to do with the match up. Period!! The main contributor of PMTR ( Tom Hamilton) nor any others in the book mention it. My advice to all is to actually test and see if it works for you and if it does then have at it, also test just picking pace lines and compare the difference. TPR is an excellent way to break into the RDSS and the Sartin material. I highly recommend it for those starting out and even old heads can learn from it.

Bradshaw stated; "The race starts when the gates open and not at the second call." If you use a fulcrum for the match up your percentage or success will suffer as the 1st Fr has a tremendous effect on races. "The Hat" never taught fulcrum. The bottom line is that PMTR and the Match-up are two totally different concepts.

Success with whatever fork you take in the road or trail followed.
Mith44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2016, 08:54 PM   #15
shoeless
Grade 1
 
shoeless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,149
You really should read FU 8 on page 5 where Pizzolla is crediting Doc for showing him the fulcrum approach 7 years ago on a phone call.

Funny why would Doc teach the approach if he didn't endorse it


Period!!
shoeless is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2016, 11:12 PM   #16
Mark
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 318
Who cares?

I have my own aspirations and goals for handicapping Thoroughbred horse races. My preference for the Match Up began when I saw this gentleman in a cowboy hat at a Sartin seminar and was just overwhelmed by his abilities. I once saw him handicap a race in the gift shop outside and down the hall from the conference room with a racing form and a roller ball pen. And this with the meeting just about ready to begin. Amazed is putting it lightly. At that moment I knew I wanted to handicap like Jim Bradshaw. Well, hell, that was probably 25 years ago and I am still working at it today.
Does it really matter whose teachings or handicapping philosophy one follows? Most of the originators are dead now, unfortunately. So they can't answer any of these questions.
No Pizzolla's Fulcrum has nothing to do with the Match Up. They are completely different and stand alone. I am convinced that Jim Bradshaw's association with Doc Sartin lead to the Match Up. Or should I say that the pace methodology that Doc promoted gave Jim a framework of analysis to define his Match Up. In the red manual there is a chart that he suggests that you photocopy and use. This plots the curve created by the internal fractions of a race based on the pace calls. It was said that Jim charted by hand 1000s of races. Later in Aodds98SuperGold the program would do this for you. What it showed was Acceleration > Deceleration and I believe was the source material for visual Running Styles. Early horses expended their energy in the initial segment of the race reaching their top speeds most quickly and therefore beginning their deceleration first etc. This work led to Kgen and Thoromation when they found someone who could map the curves through the use of Calculus. Today we use these same 20 -30 year old advances all wrapped up in a very user friendly program, RDSS2. I don't know where Pizzolla got the idea for his fulcrum concept but I know when I first read about it and explored it, it seemed too much like one of those handicapping systems you would get in the mail 30 -40 years ago.
Enough said, whatever floats your boat! Maybe TPR whose creator Tom Hambleton was a good friend is a good starting point to enter the world of handicapping. It is not overly sophisticated and gives new people to the handicapping world some structure to approaching a wager that is certainly better than nothing. However, it should not be touted as a means to instant riches. Those attracted to gambling as a means of making easy money can be mislead. All you have to do is count the number of new guys just in the last couple years that have come on this website and then just disappear when their money is gone. Eventually they start asking for horses just before they drop out of sight. Why do you think the best handicappers are middle aged or older? The learning curve is very steep and it takes years usually before you can even overcome the track takeout.
TPR, just as with Matchers or those that use Pizzolla's programs have to invest the time to gain proficiency. In the hands of an experienced handicapper who not only knows his program but also has acquired money management skills and is blessed with patience and personal discipline can make some money betting the horses. Maybe not as much as the old days but enough to make it an enjoyable and rewarding pastime.
Mark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2016, 12:37 AM   #17
Bill V.
The egg man
 
Bill V.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
all

Mitch and Mark

There seems to be conflicting themes to this thread

I agree, the fulcrum method used by MP in the book Pace Makes The Race
has nothing to do with the match up , It really is more of a contender identifier
Simply put , who can run competitively against today's expected 2nd call POR
Its simply a tool, or step . A beginning step from a book that is clearly an all inclusive rather simplistic introduction to of Sartin Methodology .

As Shoeless pointed out, It is written about in Follow Up #8
I also refer to the article in Follow Up 11 about PBS numbers.


Imagine that, Bradshaw having something to do with the second call and final time!.

This is a clue that leads me to my conclusion that stuff happens. Friends or co workers break up and move on, But I feel Mitch misspoke to say the fulcrum was never was part of the methodology, That was clarified
Mitch has replied in post #3 that technically the fulcrum is part of the methodology
Which is all I wanted to clarify right from the beginning.
I use parts of the Match up and the steps of PMTR including TPR but I use RDSS software and depend on many factors.




Thanks
Bill
Bill V. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2016, 06:37 AM   #18
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
Hey Shoeless I'll read FU # 8 and reply today. I'm tied up till later this afternoon.
Mitch44
Mitch44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2016, 10:15 AM   #19
MikeB
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill V. View Post
Mitch and Mark

There seems to be conflicting themes to this thread

I agree, the fulcrum method used by MP in the book Pace Makes The Race
has nothing to do with the match up , It really is more of a contender identifier
Simply put , who can run competitively against today's expected 2nd call POR
Its simply a tool, or step . A beginning step from a book that is clearly an all inclusive rather simplistic introduction to of Sartin Methodology .
Exactly. Pizzolla's fulcrum is the functional equivalent of the FPLR in the Match Up. In his book Handicapping Magic, Pizzolla says "Very simply put, the Fulcrum Pace is a conservative estimate of what second call pace the horses in today's race must run against to compete successfully."

Horses that can run competitively against that pace are contenders. Others are tossed.
MikeB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2016, 05:01 PM   #20
Mitch44
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: The Villages, Fl.
Posts: 3,705
Having read FU #8 I can clearly see where someone can be confused with the match up by Bradshaw and the fulcrum, also not get the same contenders.
Pizzola on pg. 5 par. 3 line 3 specifically states “It’s is my approach. . . “

On pg.5 par 6 appears to me to be very vague as to the meaning or exactly what the paragraph is saying. Does he mean the preceding paragraph (#5) for selecting contenders, pace lines, adjustments, etc. I have absolutely no idea what this vague paragraph means as its not specific and contradicts his statement in par #5 “ It’s my approach…” I know it’s not Bradshaw’s approach because he has said; “The race starts when the gates open and not at the SC.” Also he told me he doesn’t believe in the fulcrum.

Pizzola on page #7 par. 4 states he’ll look at races within 1/5 of his projected pace, or fulcrum. I for the life of me do not think this is a valid concept because it would eliminate as contenders EP, SP & S types horses. This is a false narrative because we all know these types running styles win at tracks every day. If this SC and 1/5 rule is followed you become nothing more than a speed handicapper.

Now Bill V. from what I have observed has taken Pizzola fulcrum to new heights because Bill doesn’t use it for contender selection as he puts all the horses in, uses the Doc’s guidelines for pace line selection. He doesn’t use the last line for every horse as the selected line, only an initial step. Additionally he eliminates by Sartin class (TPR) for eliminations and employs the advance concepts that are in PMTR, particularly deceleration. At least that’s my observations and he can correct me or elaborate more if he like to.

Pizzola also falls short in that he doesn’t carry it through the 3rd Fr. And this is because of the HUEY factor as explained on pg. 9 par. 8. His explanation on pg. #9 par.6 is really the match up but done by the computer within the Energy program or Thoromation. Bradshaw match up carries through the 3rd FR which is where the 2 for 1 BL comes in etc. In fact the matchup is in the later programs and readouts.

Mark brought up a good point about old heads that have been around a long time. They have an understanding when reading old Follow Ups as to what’s current and what has been improved on or superseded. Lt1 and I have talked also about this. It very for a new comer to sift through old FU and do that. I believe this is why Ted recommends reading the later Follow ups as they reflect the current RDSS etc.

The fulcrum and the match up of Bradshaw’s are two different approaches. Bradshaw said the match up will stand the test of time and it has. I can’t say that for the fulcrum. Sartin said if it didn’t have 3 fractions its not pace, Bradshaw’s match up includes all 3 Fr.’s. “The race starts when the gates open.”

Success can come from testing and keeping records. Conclusions from your own work are lessons never forgotten and more valuable than someone else’s opinion. Best of luck.
Mitch44
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
New Matcher GeorgeC5614 Matchup Discussion 14 05-19-2015 05:19 PM
Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to learning the Matchup RichieP Hat Check - How Can We Help You? 1 05-25-2009 09:52 AM
Patten Match; 2Jan9Aqu; that's today chris Selections 4 01-02-2009 04:10 PM
The Match Up and destrcutive interference Tim Y General Discussion 0 12-06-2008 09:10 PM
The Match Race that never was Tim Y General Discussion 0 12-04-2008 08:34 PM


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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:49 PM.