Next generation of Sartin / Young People
 

We need to embrace and welcome young cappers to the method. THEY are the next generation of users and implimentors of Doc's methods. Their minds are also OPEN and have not been contaminated.

let's look at some FACTS pertaining to TODAY'S racing:

1) reduced field sizes
2) Rebates
3) Swimming and competing more and more against "sharks". Less and less "dumb money" in the pools.
4) "racinos" with their inflated purses throwing "apv" for a loop
5) Detailed pace/trainer/track bias information available to anyone willing to click a mouse and pay a few bucks.
6) Increasingly advanced software that ISOLATES races for possible wager automatically.
7) ability of software available NOW to tie into wagering pools to wager

There are many more but I will stop here for now.

In the early to mid 90's Sartin software WAS years ahead of the competition.

TODAY we are falling years BEHIND.
Once again FACTS only:

1) STILL in DOS mode
2) NO modeling
3) NO ties to wagering service
4) NO ability to ISOLATE spot plays
5) NO "inprogram" ability to call up old races to see patterns that produce/ fail.

Again there is much more but I will stop here.

We need to WELCOME new ideas and YOUNG cappers here with OPEN arms.

In YOUTH there is FREEDOM to WONDER and ENERGY.

There is also ability to PROGRAM in today's advanced languages that ENABLE much more creativity and USER flexibility. ( If you want to see a CURRENT example of using outdated language to try and do advanced things TODAY and see it fall flat on its face email me privately. I can PROVE again with FACT what I say here. I am NOT going to do this in an open forum).

MUCH RESPECT to the people and programmers who have gotten us this far. Without YOU we are nowhere. THANK YOU.

21st century cappin REQUIRES 21st century THINKING.

YOUNG ONES: You are WELCOME and NEEDED here on V/dc

Come and participate HERE. Speak up with your ideas. No idea is gonna be made fun of or mocked HERE ok?

Richard Pizzicara

interesting concept
 

Advances in MOST fields are due to the work of those EXPERIENCED and TESTED in the practical application of theory. Granted young people are innovative....Would seem a partnership of ideas (the uncontamianted pool you speak of) + experience would be a more practical approach. The inexperienced might have a breaktrough idea and NOT know how to apply it.

Richie, In plain old English I agree with you 100%.None of the Sartin programs offer what you have mentioned and I doubt none will until some fresh blood enters the arena. Shoeless

another problem
 

The interent and the proliferation of "clued in" people. It now takes real work to find venues where they only have a mild clue, because, up to a point, you cannot elucidate any more to a race beyond what is there EVEN with "new ideas."

Tawee, Your not fooling anybody here who you really are, the way you phrase your posts are a dead giveaway.I think if you used your real name instead of an alias people might respect your opinion more.Dont worry Dylan wont take away your Alums membership card just because you are posting here.Besides if he does you are always WELCOME HERE ON VDC.Your loving pal Jeff

leave it alone
 

really have a fecolith in your Circle of Willis don't you??

Richie,

Thoughtfully written first of all.

I understand what you are saying regarding youth. My niece is 7 years old and is up on this programming thing. Amazing. 7 years old. HOWEVER a blending of experience along with youth would serve things better if this is workable.

After all us elders learn a lot from the young and vice/versa!

Regards
CN

Racing Today
 

None of these things will come to pass. There is no one to listen, people write software they want with limitations set by ability of programer. Racetracks are large in size and only want slots to add to the bottom line, if they do not get the slots, they go the way the drive in's went. So if you want to have better software (Windows) you have to pay $140 a month for files or buy the current Dos offering. To really enjoy the racing one must do it from home in order to only play a few that you know you can beat. Also while enjoying a few good races things can be done that are needed at home. I also agree with shoeless on a few things as I think most do. But I think we all can agree that this is a better format that Yahoo was, and we should try to make it all that it can be.

Tawee, I really dont understand what you are talking about or all of the animosty.I twice privately e-mailed you to extend an olive branch to you and it was rejected.I think it's because you dont like it when people disagree with your words of wisdom.I remember how upset you got when I disagreed with you about how you put in a 4.5 paceline into a 6 furlong race.I suggest you stop taking all of this too seriously and get a LIFE.Instead of trying to impress everybody with your words of wisdom chill out my man.Sorry VDC members for taking up space here I will refrain from doing it again. Shoeless

Can we please stay on topic here? PLEASE.

Thank you
Richie

would be nice wouldn't it???

Please don't mess up this topic
 

I feel we have the ability to work as a group

To show people (who come to us) that you can win
Just because I am stuck in the old ways doesn't mean its the only way

We as a strong group can working together Can make the needed tools to
strengthen our skills and provide the methodology for the next generation

That's why we are here

Bind

Fast,I think you are also right about if you want better software you have to get a program that you have to spend $140 a month for data.Unfortunately for me that's a lot to spend for being a weekend player.At one point I was thinking of buying SpecPa but from what I have read it sounds like it's just a souped up version of Synthesis.It seems like a lot of cash to put out for something like that. A discouraged Shoeless PS:Binder if you think this messes up the topic go ahead and delete it.Im really not sure anymore.

How to find out if software works
 

I think this issue has been touched on before (about a hundred times), but in my case, when I heard there was something subsequent to Validator, and there was an online Sartin Community (SA and V/DC), what I did was download all the emails from both sites, read everything, ask to evaluate Speculator from Guy, spend about 4 intensive weeks doing about 200 past races and also in realtime (done in the evenings after work and on weekends). From this effort, I concluded that Speculator was at least as profitable for me as Validator, so I bought it from Guy. I don't handicap very much currently, but over the course of 2004, I made enough profit (and more) to pay for the cost of the software, so I was happy.

I was unable to only rely on others' reports about new software - I had to test it myself. Similarly, I'm unable to rely on others to make money at racing - I have to make it myself.

Something about self-reliance, doing the grunt work, setting aside the crowd's opinions. It always was and always will be thus, that one succeeds, and not only at racing.

IMHO.

Ted

different approach needed
 

with all of these programs, the handicapping has become something of a "no brainer"...the real challenge is to consistently make $$$$ from that knowledge rather that continuing to search for some Holy Grail of handicapping that really does not exist no matter how you slice up the 'capping information.

For me handicapping a race is far from being a no brainer. "Tu salute" if it is for you!

I think there is a difference between tools and the search for a holy grail.

For instance a lot of people like the f3 and f4 features of speculator to see some things about the paceline right? Isn't that a tool?

Well I feel a need for other tools so I put it out there. RESPECTFULLY and with no wise cracks.

1) Windows platform
2) addition of tpr #'s to be used for form cycle analysis and projecting improvement
3) modeling/ profiling module
4) wager tracking module
5) analysis of shipper pacelines to detect lines/ tracks that always project but fail to deliver on their "promise"
6) tie in with online results charts to help decipher and locate tracks with racing cycles leaning toward good payoffs today based on past few days of chalk winning.

Just a start. Hey gotta dream big. It's all good

All the best
Richie :)

in a nutshell
 

1) about 50% of all races have NO Logic to them no matter the handicapping tools due to layoffs, first timers, too many shippers, surface changes, "herders" (full fields of animals where NONE of them has shown to be a pace setter) etc.
2) the program(s) are so good at finding the contenders that another 30% of the contests will locate the GROUP to consider.
3) the last 20% are elucidated as stand outs by the program.
4) simply keep records and be patient

find venues where there is money to be won (HINT: NOT the big ovals) and there you have it. The only tough part left is the wagering decision

TaWee wrote:

"about 50% of all races have NO Logic to them no matter the handicapping tools..."

That all depends. The overwhelming majority of races that I handicap (I know, that's a 'dirty' word) have my logical contenders finishing in the top five positions. So I have to disagree with your assertion. At least when it comes to the exotics.

Let me make it perfectly clear that I do not play to Win. My forte is the exotics, namely Trifectas and Superfectas. I've always been less than proficient at picking the winner (using one horse) of a horse race but VERY proficient in isolating one Key horse and the accompanying other four horses that'll finish in the top three or four positions. So that's where I specialize. PERIOD.

My line of thinking is this: it's a lot easier (for me anyway) to isolate a group of horses that'll finish in the top three or four slots than it is for me to isolate a single horse (who could very easily lose by a nose, head or neck) that'll win the race.

Picking a winner of a race (for me) requires more acute time consuming (and mentally draining) analysis. But that's just me.

Regards,

Jon

nothing wrong with that logic and the return in better

randomness
 

Folks can figure CORRECTLY to the cows come home who SHOULD be there at the end but cannot handicap randomness: 1) rider gets in tight, drops the whip, 2) pace horse suddenly backs up in front of your choice, 3) horse breaks down.....CAN NEVER FACTOR in those things so a "shotgun" approach is the way to go for any long term profits.

I'm not sure what you mean by a 'shotgun' approach and I think you overrate the amount of randomness in horse racing.

Sure, any number of things can happen in racing as in life itself. Some of these things can be accounted for and some can't. I still bet mostly two horses to win, I don't pick winners, I pick reasonable contenders at a reasonable price, consider what I can and let the rest go. I do better the more I am able to focus on what might happen. If I can't beat the favorite, I pass. If there are much more than two other logical contenders, I pass. I find the number of races that have outcomes that are totally unforseen to be much less than 50%.

Dick...

bull rings
 

depends on the tracks you follow

not being able to discern first, second, third from fourth logically one connects them in variations of exotics, hence SHOT GUN

Hi Tim
 

How many winners do you get on average 20 race cycle?
I get around 9 wins I always am around there, Never very much below or above 9
I bet 2 horses to win
I was wondering if you got about the same .


Thank you for your time
Binder

differnet bookkeeping
 

ROI only no cycles

shotguns part two
 

just now hit me: talking about the wagering side when I mention that 50% of races are NON- bet affairs. Sure they have LOGIC but was talking about the wagering

Hi again Tim
 

Thats a very good answer
Like I just heard Doc say on the audio tapes I was listenig to.
"Its not the amount of winners but the amount of profit "

What in the last 2 weeks was your biggest win price
or in your case exotic bet payoff

My Top win - That I actually bet not just posted was $26.00
My Top Exacta was $90.00
No Trifectas
DD $74.00
Pick 3 $578.00 0r $289.00 for $1

Binder

very different bookkeeping
 

The biggest bet and return was not a GREAT odds return (paid about $8.80) but an overall "per dollar return" or OVERALL big return ...a two line better than the field job that I UNLOADED on, so any single price winner is missing the point.

ROI is based upon TOTAL money wagered and TOTAL returned NOT on any specific choice.

Tim
 

Very interesting
The $8.80 winner to you offered quite a reward.


Do you bet from home ?



Binder

That's true. If I find tracks that are as much or more than 50% random, I quit following them.

Dick...

As strange as it may sound, THAT is what runs away a lot of the knowlegeable dollars. They races that ARE logical in between are UNDERBET by a less than sophisticated crowd without benefit of wagering services, OR, it would seem, ANY INKLING of pace evaluation. Found that I was betting too often for chaulk prices and SOUGHT out courses that (on paper) looked nearly impossible. There is an odd "order within chaos " (akin to Gleick's study of the same phenomenon) which requires investigation. Always tell folks that the races there are camoflaged but are still there nonetheless. It is hard sometimes to be patient.

overlays are still overlays
 

when ANY horse, boxer, or baseball team goes off at 3/1 and should be 1/1 isn't that a bit of an overlay?? Two lines better than the field, the ONLY speed on a speed favoring track, rider switch to a VERY hot apprentice who is riding the Hair off any thing he gets on... AND should have been LESS than even money yet it was as it is so the largest bet of three weeks went on that one.

Better
 

Hi Tim

So You will one horse win bet on low price horse
with a hot Jockey?

Binder

I'm sorry, but I've been rereading your whole line of posts on this thread (I realize that's not fair), and I just don't see any sort of coherremt logic there. I'm dazzled, but I don't find any substance.

You claim to have found tracks with a degree of randomness that I've rarely seen outside of the extreme small time state fair circuit, you are shotgun betting, loading up on low odds horses, not keeping 20 race cycles and invoking Gleik and order within chaos.

But, if you add it up, and 50% of the races are totally random, then allow a third for winning favorites, that only leaves you with one or two bettable races on a card. Do you then shotgun bet one and load up on a low odds horse on the other?

I won't question whether you are making a profit, though I think a few 20 race cycles might be a good idea. I do question though what value all of this smorgasbord of handicapping wizardry is to anyone else.

Are you trying to impart anything useful for others, or are you just tap dancing as fast as you can for the pure joy of it?

Dick...

Hi once more Tim
 

Please excuse me, I am trying to
follow this
I asked you a direct question,
I
Do you bet online ?
or do you go to a racetrack/OTB ?

Thank you for your time

Bill - Binder

personal stuff
 

The wagering side of the equation is as individual a thing as one is going to find. There is no "cook book" method that works for anyone, but, there is one as close to a no brainer as I have ever found.

"Two lines better than the field" angle is the best CONFIDENCE wagering apporach I have ever seen. In over 155 examples, it is hitting about 82% winners and and in the money percentage over 95%, It has failed 6 times with 5 of those in maiden contests so I leave them out. Admittedly one finds LOWER prioces horses but the confidence level is so high that LARGE wagers or keying these in exotics MORE than compensates for those lower odds. They are STANDOUTS, but then given this they are usually at lower odds, and I am NOT the only one who finds them. These are the ONLY ones I unload on, but given the numbers they are a GIFT. The $8.80 winner I described earlier was in this category so a very large wagering was the order of the day. ROI is reached by many different paths and given the percentages I am not letting this angle pass.

The second RANDOMNESS idea is just the descriptive word I use on speed favoring tracks (there are a lot of them there everyday) where the top 5 EPR are there in the trifecta all the time ONCE you eliminate the FALSE early horses (lower total energy and very high E/L). The reference to Gleick just means that there is ORDER in chaos and that is it. A poster tried this method at Philadelphia and found it profitable. Still works.

"Two lines better than the field" angle is the best CONFIDENCE wagering apporach I have ever seen. In over 155 examples, it is hitting about 82% winners..." -TaWee

You've repeatedly made reference to this "Two lines better than the field" angle, but I've yet to read what that means specifically.

What exactly does that mean and how do you arrive at that conclusion?

Please explain.

Thank you.

Two lines better than the field
 

Was always looking for SAMPLE error: when the best line chosen is an aberrant one. In a effort to see if that was the case, I often went back and put in a RECENT 2nd line to see if the sample error was there or not. SOMETIMES after running the calculations, these TWO lines ranked 1st and 2nd to EVERYTHING else in the race, provided that they were reasonably close to the profile for the track (i.e wouldn't accept them if they was sustained and an e/l of -12 when the profile for THIS race was e/p and e/l average of +8)

The caveat is to be aware that this has NOT proven to be as predictive in maiden races.

Found that these HIT often (rarely higher than 4.5 to one) since they were doubly advantaged but the confidence level on these was TREMENDOUS and these samples are about the ONLY ones that are stand alone wagers or KEYS to exotics. i.e the first at Philly today 7/19 (number 8) is two lines better but this is a field of OLDER maidens so I would really take THAT example with a grain of salt.

ok so this is today's 8th race from philly the # 8 has its last THREE lines as better than the field the e/l on all the lines are fine is THIS what u are looking at ?? 9/5 ML

the bl/bl same race: