What factors do Longshots show?

[CheckMark]

Sorry Mitch and Pook, I didn’t mean to get you guys in trouble or off topic of Longshots. Feel bad now...

[The Pook]

No worries Conley. We aren’t in trouble. Things went off topic. Thats all.

Pook

[CheckMark]

Originally Posted by The Pook

No worries Conley. We aren’t in trouble. Things went off topic. Thats all.

Pook

Ok that’s good. I caused parts to get kicked off the thread for my actions

[gandalf380]

No Conley, parts got himself kicked off. You did not do it.

[Ted Craven]

Conley (CheckMark), no worries. You got good answers above.

Bill H (Partsnut) wrote me that he expected to be suspended, yet he did it anyway! Sheesh! Do I have to say this for the 1000th time? You can disagree or argue or even express frustration with the views of other members but you can't be disrespectful or call people names. Some people do not know how to not escalate disagreements, and in such circumstances sometimes must also have the LAST word, which is difficult if there's more than 1 such person in a discussion.

Please check the date on the Code of Conduct post by Bill V. This is not a new requirement of members.

I do not believe that the majority of P&C members want me to allow any and all name calling, belligerence, disrespectful dispute. FWIW, I do not want to post on or be responsible for a site where that is allowed, which explains why I barely post on some other handicapping sites.

Mitch, Pook - sorry to disappoint you regarding a prospective handicapping match, but IMO, that was never going to happen and if it did, it would be for the wrong reasons.

And to forstal criticism that I am favouring RDSS clients - a majority of posters in this Thread do not use RDSS. I would refund someone's money before I let them behave inappropriately here.

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

And to forstal criticism that I am favouring RDSS clients - a majority of posters in this Thread do not use RDSS. I would refund someone's money before I let them behave inappropriately here.

Ted

Correction - a slight majority do use RDSS.

Ted

[MikeB]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

Correction - a slight majority do use RDSS.

Ted

And a slight minority of us fall into the distant cousin category of "The Match Up" !

[Ted Craven]

The DNA of The Matchup is at the core of all Sartin programs and concepts: we're all kissin' cousins


Ted

[MikeB]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

The DNA of The Matchup is at the core of all Sartin programs and concepts: we're all kissin' cousins


Ted

I like my DNA straight from the horse's mouth. Or The Hat's.

[Mitch44]

I have found that there is no one size fits all when it comes to longshots. As an example a horse that won its last race and stepping up in class which is logical or repeating. Repeats while bucking the percentages to do so. These are the results as an example :1 the horses loses and runs to the percentage with over a 80% lost, 2. the horses wins and pays $5.60, 3. the horses wins and pays $50.00. Actually I've seen this in the last two weeks.

Is it the result of one stable being a betting stable and the other not a betting stable?
Or is it the result of a public mistake? I lean more to a public mistake which occurs much more often. Even a horse paying 5-2 or $7 could be a public mistake and a overlay.

While there are many hundreds of angles,I hesitate to put a number on it and used a conservative approach of hundreds, almost any angle can and does produce longshots. This includes the factors within RDSS.

Almost all longshots go against the norms such as long layoffs (over 90 days) or repeat winners.When one observes these angles and the odds are long they become a red flag in the make up of our thinking process and decision making process. Hence many can not pull the trigger or pass them up as non-logical.

I have also seen many times where there are 3 or 4 horses with the same angle within the same race. One usually wins but separating them is frustrating.

The best advice I can give is: if you want to know about the unknown than you must investigate the unknown. And even then its a very difficult assignment but it allows you to turn a nothing burger into a decent burger to your liking. I've been doing just that for the last 4 years or so and its tedious work but there are some nuggets to be found.

Lastly in previous posts to this thread there was much discussion about large data bases. With RDSS and some other Factors out there a data base is not needed. Within RDSS Sartin has already done all that work for us.

He developed forms on new Factors and programs and hundreds of devotees sent in feedback. Our LT1 on this site along with others such as Rmath did this and some of their feedback and results were published in Follow Up's. One reason he did this was to see how something worked across the board and not rely on only his local track of SA.

Also Bob Purdy kept a computer containing over 50,000 races which they used to test new ideas, programs and Factors within those programs. As an example to hone and obtain the very best variant adjustments etc. they could develop. Incidentally those Variant adjustments changed dramatically over the years from the Meridian Variant one that first appears circa 1982-1988 in the original Yellow Manual.

The factors within RDSS have already been tested and data based to death by Sartin therefore forget about it. He did this for you. Neither I nor you need to take on all this work and monster task. PERIOD!!!

Now if your new to RDSS and are unfamiliar with the program do a small study to see for yourself, it will boost your confidence. In fact many of us say and freely talk about the best factors within RDSS.

Thank you Doc Sartin.

Mitch44