Newbie ?s
 

Hello all,

So I'm pretty much completely new to the horse game(about 4 weeks of reading/researching). I may not even use correct teminology, so forgive me if I say something wrong. I came across this board in some of my readings and it seems to fit how I want to approach the game. Mostly, I've been making fictitious bets, along with a few real ones and I've learned very quickly that betting low odds horses will not be profitable in the long term. Anyway, I think most of my focus so far has been on trying to find the pace of the race and then the horses that might benefit from said pace. Mostly right now I just try to get a feel for the race and order the top 4 horses. Most often my choices align with the betting odds but not always. All of this is done on paper with PPs. I'm actually "back testing" as Churchill downs gives free PPs to their historical races. So I download a PP, say for 5/27. Handicap it, and then watch the replays to see how my predictions come out. Anyway, there seems to be a WEALTH of information here, but I'm not really sure where to start. I did download the Follow Up 70-88 pdf and started looking through that. But I'm a bit confused, what exactly am I supposed to be looking for as I read through these? Most of it seems to be old PPs. I seems like there is decades of information, but no distillery to the nuts and bolts for a blank slate beginner. Any help would be much appreciated.

Welcome aboard kevbrim. I would recommend my posts for Beginners, replies to those posts etc., go to the link below.



http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12316


Mitch44

Newbie
 

I've been in the group less than a year. Have learned so much. I'll be glad to answer any newbie questions you might have. To be successful with RDSS requires some effort but it will be well worth it. There is tons of information in the Sartin Library. Also use the Google Site Search to find answers. You are welcome to Private Message me or just post to the group with any questions. You'll find that there are lots of good people here that want u to succeed.

MNL97

Welcome aboard Kev. As suggested by Mike please avail yourself to the library section of the form. There are 2 excellent videos that should be great help[especially the one on one by Doc] plus many excellent audios. I recommend the Brohamer audio series to start with. Keep posting questions since members are always willing to help you out. Wishing you good skill with the Methodology.
Tim

Thanks all for the tips so far. I'm plowing through the "From the Top" series in the Follow Ups right now. I did manage to locate the audio section after my first post and bookmarked that for later. I didn't see any videos LT1. I'll look again later.

I think the reason the Follow Ups not making a lot of sense to you is because they were written as guidelines for using Sartin software.
You are doing eyeball handicapping. The Match Up manual in the library may be just the thing you are looking for.

Read the contender guidelines by For the Lead a lot of good info
in there, also the Match Up lessons done by Richie P with Jim Bradshaw.

I must have read through this thread about 5 times,

took notes for about 4 hours on it too.

Well worth digging into.


Thanks for doing this Mitch. Hope to return the favor real soon.

Mike

Welcome, kevbrim. RDSS contains all the functionality of Doc Sartin's many programs so there is a lot to digest. Nothing wrong with "paper" bets. I do it whenever I'm trying something new.

In the short term, you may want to focus on the Rx page and in particular the "PL" and "BPP" columns. The top four in each will give you about 80% winners. That reduces your contenders to something more manageable.

Kev, you have to decide how much 'theory' and 'history' of the Sartin Methodology you need (or can stand). At any given historical time point, all publications, discussions and seminars at least referred to or in many cases were exclusively related to whatever was the current software tools of the day.

Today, the current software toolset is RDSS. Doc said you could reduce things to ONE screen in RDSS (then, the BL/BL screen) and save people who were coming to analysing horse races much of the mental clutter and paralysis by analysis. As always, even in his final years, he was being kind and somewhat hyperbolic ;).

But, seriously, to get started and enjoy a simplified (though powerful) analysis of a given race in 1 minute (or however much time after that you wanted) - you could do a lot worse than to start with the RDSS Rx+ screen.

Find posts by member rmath (Dick M or Rich M - I've always called him Dick) or entice him to re-post a summary of his 4-number method here. (4-numbers = VDC, CSR, ProfitLine, BRIS Prime Power). There is more on the Rx+ screen, but you could start there. A simple method exists to eliminate down to 4 horses maximum for Win Contenders, while leaving some others as in-the-money Contenders. To begin, use the lines for each horse picked by the software (later, improvise - or not).

It really does take 1 minute or less. If you have time, or want to confuse yourself ;) before you know what you're doing, you can look at each horse's Past Performances and second guess the program. If you connect RDSS to the toteboard (when it works, in the current version :eek:), you get additional info about horses which win or finish in the money a very high percent of the time - the P/W Place to Win pool live money ratio.

Then, read everything posted by rdiam (Richard D) about betting, wager construction and passing races.

Of course, there are many other excellent members' posts to go over and digest their advice and usage practice, including Mitch44, Lt1, Bill V, For The Lead, even me ... and several others for sure.

The historical Follow Ups documented the history of things and taught those at the time. Today, this Forum is the Follow Ups and we are all trying to help each other.

I know you're just getting started, and so far are hopefully pretty free of 'expert knowledge' and 'received wisdom'. That puts you ahead of most of the crowd, who already KNOW ;) what doesn't work and what should work (but doesn't).

RDSS can be had for cheap on a 3-month subscription, and you can download data 1 card at a time, so the cost of entry for tools is low. There's TONS of back data available to test. But more important, if you work CURRENT races, and the SAME races which some other experts have worked and posted in their Daily Selections, you can model their behaviour and usage patterns. In a much shorter order than agonizing over guidelines from 1986, you can be making bets, keeping models, tracking your decisions, sharing and learning with others here.

Then you can go back and get a PhD in the historical Sartin Methodology! Or, understand the concepts and principles that the software enables. In other words, test drive the Ferrari first, then gradually appreciate what's under the hood and how all the magic works

Welcome, and wishing you all the best!

Ted

ROTFL Like he said, in fewer words! (He's a writer, and Hemingway to my Proust).

Ted

Ted, I enjoyed it anyway. :D

Nobody could write like Proust, which is a good thing. I remember reading one of his sentences that ran for almost two pages. I've never seen so many semicolons. Growing up in the South though, I had to read Faulkner until it was coming out my ears. He was almost as verbose as Proust. (No, I take that back. Proust is in a league by himself.)

Faulkner and Hemingway, fellow Nobel laureates and polar opposites in writing style, did not like one another and the insults flew back and forth. When asked what he thought of Faulkner's work, Hemingway was reported to have replied, "Well, it's good. But so much of it is unnecessary."

And none of that had a darn thing to do with horse racing. My apologies. :rolleyes:

Thanks again all for the welcome and advice. I'm a high school science teacher. So with my science background I'm always interested in the "why". All of the historical information is great and has helped a lot. I read through all the "From the Tops" yesterday. Skimming through the yellow manual now. I haven't downloaded the software yet. I need to have a conceptual understanding first before I take that plunge. Ted I'll be sure to search for the post you recommended.

MJS6916;
Glad you enjoyed the post. I tried to go through the evolution of Sartin stuff for background while letting the new and old know what was still relevant while giving an explanation of the same. Yes even those around for years still don't get it or some of this stuff.


Sartin's style of writing can also be a challenge however it does come into focus after years of experience and practical application. Some never get it. My post was to remove some of the obstacles to get you out of the gate much faster and on to the wire to be a winner. Some very good nuggets in there for those that listen, some just have too much stubborn resistance to change to be successful.


Wishing you best of health and success. BTW Sartin had a teacher of these methods from NY that was a Chaplain who built a church from his winnings. His name was Bert Mayne.


Best of luck,


Mitch44

Bert still uses RDSS. Retired from preaching a few years ago. Joined us in Saratoga a few years back with his daughter Jenny, gave a talk at one of our seminars and hosted Mum and me at his farm for a nice dinner and chat.

Lovely and complex gentleman.

Ted

So happy to here Bert is still around Ted. He was a complex man for sure, into meditation and things somewhat before they came in vogue. At least much of it was way before I ever heard of it.

He wrote some stuff for Sartin who was attracted to great minds. Bert had an air about him of confidence and calm, where as Bradshaw at times was all over the page. Now that could be a Ying and Yang show, simple and complex.

I'll never forget when Bert Mayne was guiding us through a race and someone asked about a horse in the race to which Bert said;" Now why would you ask about that horse, he couldn't run around a dog dish let alone a racetrack." Ha ha ha


His favorite and local track was Finger Lakes. Tim (Lt1) rode the train back to NY with him.

Mitch44

I found this (October, 2018) from rmath:

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11919
10-25-2018, 03:04 PM #1
rmath
Grade 1

Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,306
Contenders
I have recently completed a 1000 race study on getting the win contenders in the race.
1. )Playable races are non Maiden, no Turf , 3yr. olds and up with a minimum of 3 North American running lines for each horse,
AND at least 8 betting interest in each race.
2. ) Only races run at 5.5f, 6f, 1mile. mile and 70 yds. , and 8.5 f were used
since these are the most common distances run at the tracks I play.

963 winners were ranked in the top 5 on one of these 3 ratings: CSR- Profit Line or Prime Power.
919 wins had at least two of the 3 ratings.
Rmath


I thought these were the numbers Ted was reffering to.


Hope this helps,

Mike

I remember being in Docs' room at the 95 Meadowlands seminar asking him questions. Any way at 1 point he looked at me and stated "you know you don't have to be a mechanic to drive the car". In other words you don't need to know how everything in the program works to be a winner. All you have to do is follow his guidelines and keep records and you will be well on your way to success.
Tim

Indeed, those. I spent a couple of hours going over these with Dick again this week, seeing what was new, how I could help enable or improve their use in upcoming RDSS, plus some other ideas.

In fact, for those who attended last year's Saratoga Friday night seminar, Dick spent an hour or so reviewing these ideas and handicapping a couple of Alabama Stakes day races. Followed by a talk by Richard D (rdiam) on betting best-practices. Then Charlie B (Gandalf380) leading us in analyzing with RDSS a couple of the Stakes races. All with pizza!

I invite Dick to elaborate or clarify his ideas here or in a new Thread.

Ted

I'll go the next time you guys are at The Spa.

I live less than 3 hours away.

Welcome
 

To all the old and new members.
Regarding that 2018 post on getting the contenders using the 4 Factors,
I have several thousand more races and the Stats I posted are still just as accurate now as when I first posted them.

If anyone has any questions feel free to contact me here or privately.
I always enjoy sharing with others just as Doc Sartin did .

Richard
Rmath

He is a great guy and he means it when he says he'll help you. He is "old school" Sartin in that regard, like Lt. Tim and Mitch and Ted and Bill V. and others. The Doc featured him several times in the Follow Ups. His approach using RDSS is unique and effective.

With that said, if anyone else ever came up with a better starting point

than what Richard (aka rmath) just handed all of us, I can't fathom it being any better.

The combo of CSR, BrisPrime, and PL involves no input from the handicapper.

I'll figure out how to get used to that. Thanks once again Richard.

Mike

A little Tip
 

Mike, if you go to the RX3 screen all 4 factors are right there.
The top 3 or 4 contenders jump right out at you with a little practice.
Richard

Folks, I have created a new Thread to begin documenting Dick's 4-factor method.

Here: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpos...61&postcount=1

I'll start documenting my understanding of the method, with Dick's ongoing guidance and feedback, along with screenshot illustrations and documenting his Selections using the method in an Excel sheet.

Starting next week.

Ted

New question. Boy my head hurts. I may be putting the cart before the horse here. But, I'm reading in FU 80(page 25). In one section he is hiding horses that are low-odds but also have good ranking. Why would you hide those kind of horses?

It was a form of wager capping to get better prices Kev.


I don't believe in it because winners are the springboard for all bets. If a horse is only going to pay $3.80 than I'm looking to find a good paying EX. or DD etc., if I determine its a legit favorite and the best horses than its the key to other good returns or profits. If I can't do that I pass.


Mitch44

Kev;


IMO wager capping or hiding horses is for betters that are obsessed with short-term gratification or instant gratification. Make the most out of your analysis.


Mitch44

The Doc said hide the low paying horse if the 2nd or 3rd choice offered better value and had corollaries. BUT, he said keep those high rated low odds in mind for exactas and other exotic bets!
Wager Capping is not instant gratification cause there days when fvs win and win but don't make any money. Players who are after just winners no matter the price are the ones seeking instant gratification. Just my 2 cents...

So question about 20 race cycles Are these 20 races handicapped or 20 races handicapped and bet? Do you include passed races in the 20 races?

I'm not after just winners, I'm after the best horse. If its the best horse it than becomes a key to hit other bets such as EX DD etc. I'm not hiding it, or playing a horse just because it has better odds. I'm after the best horse and it isn't only the favorite, it can be the 2nd.3rd or 4th horse if my analysis places it number 1 for me.


Mitch44

So I'm continuing reading through the latest follow ups as well as searching up topics here on paceandcap. Maybe I just haven't gotten to the appropriate follow up yet. But, can someone explain Tiers to me in relation to the BL/BL. I understand that it is not meant to be a ranking system, but I'm still confused on how it IS a tier system.

Kevin

I've done it both ways. Haven't done one in awhile but if I was trying something new, I would do a cycle or two with just "paper" bets. When I was comfortable with what I was doing, I would bet real money. Initially I included passed races but eventually left those out. For me, the actual record keeping was the most beneficial thing. Even with paper bets, it will really build your confidence. I still keep records (boy, do I keep records!) but the format is tailored to the way I play now, which is mostly vertical exotics.

For all practical purposes, it's really just a ranking. Frankly, I never understood the distinction either.

Re 'tiers', don't worry about the term. If there are tied ranks (e.g. 2 rank #1s, or 2 rank #2s) treat them as equal. If a co-equal ranked BL rating, or VDC rating, or Rx3 any other rating for that matter, offers better odds than the another co-equal ranked rating - accept the gift from the betting public. More so if you can make a case for vulnerability in one of those co-equal ranked factors (per the other thread you resurrected today :)).

To be fair to Sartin re the term 'tiers', I think the foregoing comments re co-equal ranks might be a hint to his original thinking, perhaps especially re VDC tied ranks or 'tiers'. In a sporting league or in groups of racetracks, there are groups of teams or tracks which are roughly equal and those others which are clearly unequal, clearly in a 'different league' or cohort or 'tier'. Though the BL/BL screen is sorted by BL rank, there may be multiple VDC rank #1s (by design). If one of those VDC rank #1s has a corresponding BL rank noticeably lower than the same rank #1, then those 2 horses are in the same #1 VDC 'tier' or group despite not being of the same BL/BL rank. For example, VDC co-rank #1 but BL/BL rank 3 or 4.

We have an affectionate name for these 'out-of-order' VDC tied ranks - the so-called 'Binder improver' after our late founder Bill V (aka 'Binder'). Often the co-equal (co-tiered) VDC rank #1 (or could be tied rank #2s) is at better odds thus more interesting to include in a bet, Win or exotic. It earns its higher than BL VDC rank because of the extra 'deceleration' secret-sauce included in V/DC (Velocity relative to Deceleration, tempered by BL).

So - tiers of tied-rank factors wherever found but particularly re BL/BL, VDC, Rx+ screen factors: give them equal consideration (or, conversely, ignore them at a potential loss of betting opportunity).

Ted

Thinking of 'newbie' questions, and the foregoing discussions re Methodology factors and their relative value, and also re ties, and from another discussion I've been having privately over the past several days, here is a link to an excerpt article from a couple of Follow Ups written in the late 1990's by mark Cramer - one of horse racing's 'luminary authors'.

Mark writes about his research using the form of BL/BL (Bottom Line / Betting Line) available in Sartin software at the time and how he fared following 'the rules' given by Sartin. (He profited and donated the winnings to a monastic order!).

BL/BL was later added to a subsequent deceleration formula (=V/DC). Later still (last 5 years with RDSS), VDC (including its BL/BL heritage) gets added into CSR and some external (thus non-correlated to pace) ratings like public Morning Line, BRIS ProfitLine and Prime Power, plus internal an non-pace, non-line-dependant Class Rating (CR+) and a positional Early/Late speed tendency formula (EL+) to become the array of newer Rx factors (Rx1,2,3).

It all began with BL/BL, which in turn came from still earlier Phase III/Modern Pace Handicapping ratings and TPR ratings (Total Pace Ratings). Aka evolution ...

Mark Cramer's BL/BL articles from Follow Ups 69 and 70: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6229

Ted

Ok another question about paceline selection. Lets say you have a 6.5f dirt race. What do you do if a horse (or horses) doesn't have a comparable. For example, all of its' previous dirt races are routes and all of its' previous sprints are on the turf. Is it better to pick a line with common distance but wrong surface or common surface but wrong distance?

Doc said if you take a route line against sprinters to make sure the router has a comparable 6f fraction that make it as fast as the sprinters. Paraphrasing but that's the gist. Personally, I never mix dirt and turf.

kev:


One size here doesn't fit all. In your example 6.5 F race, I would be extremely interested in how it handled the route races on the same surface, if it handles it well it tells me the surface is not a problem. As far as distance it also depends on how it handled those internal fractions of those route races.


I find distance is more important than surface, I may use the 6F turf or the dirt route, that's not a cop out. It really depends on what I'm seeing and without an actual visual I can't answer your question. If you put it up I'll do that . Of course someone else may disagree.


Horses run slower in route races so looking for a competitive internal time of other sprinters in the race is not the answer. An internal time in a route race must be adjusted.

Another question; is the horse even a contender?


Because of how races are written etc., horses don't always fit into a one rule or one guideline fits all. Jimmy "The Hat" Bradshaw said; "You must you what's there."


Mitch44