Pizzolla Video

[shoeless]

He has a new video out about the fulcrum and also talks a bit about his
Pirco days.

[Mitch44]

Could care less.

Mitch44

[darmar]

It's just another hour of my time that would be better spent watching a video from the P&C library
Darryl

[Lt1]

The usual 45 min rehash of old things.
Tim

[Ted Craven]

I skimmed through the sales pitch and technical stuff re Fulcrum, etc, and paused wherever I heard 'PIRCO' and 'history' etc. Can't blame a guy for a marketing pitch (which that video was, not a historical 'memoir').

However, there is a LOT more to the story of his parting ways with Howard Sartin. Anyone who merely accepts his recounting such as it was (did he even mention Howard's name - as if 'PIRCO' was sufficient 'code' for Sartin et al) is missing most of the story. I have no interest in recounting (publicly) what I know of those events. Suffice to say - even if it's difficult to set aside my bias in favour of Howard Sartin - Howard comes across as a 'saint' in his behaviour during those sorry events, and Pizzolla far less so ...

Pizzolla learned most of what he originally knew from Doc and Jim Bradshaw (and 'borrowed' technical expertise from the late Eric Langjahr). As with most of us, the fine details and application of the Matchup was difficult for him to implement, as he says. But the Fulcrum Pace is a simplified (simplistic?) application of Bradshaw/Sartin Matchup concepts, adapted to software. IMO, anyone using RDSS is not missing anything related to 'Fulcrum pace' implemented in Pizzolla's various software.

I'm sure Michael Pizzolla is a good teacher and an even better showman and marketer. Better than me, anyway.

Ted

[dlivery]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

I skimmed through the sales pitch and technical stuff re Fulcrum, etc, and paused wherever I heard 'PIRCO' and 'history' etc. Can't blame a guy for a marketing pitch (which that video was, not a historical 'memoir').

However, there is a LOT more to the story of his parting ways with Howard Sartin. Anyone who merely accepts his recounting such as it was (did he even mention Howard's name - as if 'PIRCO' was sufficient 'code' for Sartin et al) is missing most of the story. I have no interest in recounting (publicly) what I know of those events. Suffice to say - even if it's difficult to set aside my bias in favour of Howard Sartin - Howard comes across as a 'saint' in his behaviour during those sorry events, and Pizzolla far less so ...

Pizzolla learned most of what he originally knew from Doc and Jim Bradshaw (and 'borrowed' technical expertise from the late Eric Langjahr). As with most of us, the fine details and application of the Matchup was difficult for him to implement, as he says. But the Fulcrum Pace is a simplified (simplistic?) application of Bradshaw/Sartin Matchup concepts, adapted to software. IMO, anyone using RDSS is not missing anything related to 'Fulcrum pace' implemented in Pizzolla's various software.

I'm sure Michael Pizzolla is a good teacher and an even better showman and marketer. Better than me, anyway.

Ted

Ends with a finish of not setting the hook

[Mitch44]

Bradshaw specifically stated he did not believe in the Fulcrum. That's good enough for me.

He does have a certain charisma about him as a salesman that many just can't ignore or get by.

Now he has updated his program a few times but when I tested it I just could not believe how bad his pace numbers were which are the foundation of his concept. They can not compare to RDSS Pace numbers and compounded numbers or Factors.

Most buy into that old axiom of "You get what you pay for" As if a high priced program is an indication of value, proficiency or is the path to success. It is not!! Not only is the program expensive so are the other costs such as downloads, forum etc.

There are so many angles that I would not dare to put a specific number to it but everyone will produce longshots if you can hold out for the long run or when they appear. For most angles there is no consistent longshot payoffs. Most tend to be a hap-hazard, they are not all created equal. If they were, they would not pay what they do.

IMO limiting one's self to one specific area such as pace is the wrong approach and a multi faceted approach is much better and more rewarding. They come in many different forms. Within RDSS are several Factors that will produce good prices such as, V/DC, BLBL, Rx factors, CR and even APV, Match Up and deceleration to name a few. Recognizing a legit longshot and making the bet is a complete other story, most fail to see it until after the fact for which there is no payoff or if they do can't pull the trigger.

His rants about big races have been sent to me for sometime and I can't remember the last time he hit one or one on the under card. Imo his concept is nothing more than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Good luck with that horse players.

Mitch44

[ignacio todoberto bernal]

Dancing bananas anyone ?

ignacio

[MJS6916]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

I skimmed through the sales pitch ........

Pizzolla learned most of what he originally knew from Doc and Jim Bradshaw (and 'borrowed' technical expertise from the late Eric Langjahr). As with most of us, the fine details and application of the Matchup was difficult for him to implement, as he says. But the Fulcrum Pace is a simplified (simplistic?) application of Bradshaw/Sartin Matchup concepts, adapted to software.
IMO, anyone using RDSS is not missing anything related to 'Fulcrum pace' implemented in Pizzolla's various software.

I'm sure Michael Pizzolla is a good teacher and an even better showman and marketer. Better than me, anyway.

Ted

Originally Posted by Mitch44

Bradshaw specifically stated he did not believe in the Fulcrum. That's good enough for me. ......

IMO limiting one's self to one specific area such as pace is the wrong approach and a multi faceted approach is much better and more rewarding. They come in many different forms. Within RDSS are several Factors that will produce good prices such as, V/DC, BLBL, Rx factors, CR and even APV, Match Up and deceleration to name a few. Recognizing a legit longshot and making the bet is a complete other story, most fail to see it until after the fact for which there is no payoff or if they do can't pull the trigger.


Mitch44

I watched the video last night too.
Although, I believe his book HM was an overall good (not great) contribution
to the handicapping public, his "Fulcrum technique" re-explanation will help those who won't get near learning the Match-Up or utilizing RDSS.

For them it's better than nothing; for us it should be like what we learned in pre-school or kindergarten.

I couldn't agree more with you guys.

[shoeless]

As he stated in the video the fulcrum is not designed for picking winners
but to get the right horses into the computer. For someone like myself who
still inputs the races manually I find it to be a useful tool.