Missed 85k P-6 by a head today
 

Today was a killer for me at Belmont. I guess it's clear that I like to play Pick-6 carryovers. Belmont had one today, resulting in a 778k P-6 pool. I blew it when one of my picks lost the 9th race by a head. What's really amazing about this was that I only played a $96 ticket. Can't complain though - had the conso, the 6th and 10th to win, and the 10th exacta 5x. A good day rather than a great one.

The reason I'm posting is that, once again, TE was a big factor, not only in winning but in helping to cut down the size of the bet. Three winners were TE -1, 2 winners TE-2. Unfortunately, the race I blew was won by a horse with no previous lines at the distance (although he was a wiseguy pick). This is the reason I think taking down this bet is well within the capabilities of many of the excellent handicappers who post here, but would not ordinarily play this bet. For those who feel doubtful, I'd just try doing this card without first looking at the results. The money is waiting for you.

Cheers,

B Jennet

What a bummer but glad you were at least able to hit something.You really seem to do well with the TE horses.

Great Job
 

All on the TE alone? Me thinks that I will try it and test it out.

Happy Punting,
JL

Little difference between primary factors
 

Hi JL,

Thanks for the positive response. However, I think it's worth repeating something I've brought up a number of times - all the primary factors, TE, BL/BL, TPP, FW, etc. are so highly correlated as to be virtually interchangeable. As Guy Wadsworth and others have explained, Doc often like to make the programs look more complicated than they are - Mark Cramer described this as the P.T. Barnum/huckster side of his personality.

I use TE because the Energy screen features a granular version, rather than just a ranking, which is extremely useful for separating horses, and because I've found it to have slightly higher ROI than the other factors. In all the races on the Belmont card I mentioned, the horses were ranked on BL/BL in TPP in almost identical order as TE.

I do also pay attention to the e/l, especially when it seems to be extreme, but especially at a track like Belmont, it's a secondary factor.

The main point I was trying to make in posting is that there's special about anything I'm doing - it's the same simple method Doc outlined in the late Follow Ups.

Cheers,

B Jennet

Correction
 

The last should read 'there's nothing special about anything I'm doing'.

Thanks for sharing ..
 

B Jennet - could you possibly show a screen print of one of the races that you mentioned you won using TE ... I would like to confirm I know what you are referring to ... thanks so much.

False assumption
 

Hi malickdo,

Since I'm using Spec 160 and I'm guessing you're using RDDS, I'm not sure a screen shot would be relevant. Whatever screen in RDDS has the 5-figure (granular) TE would be similar to 'Energy' the one I usually refer to in Spec 160. However BL/BL would also usually rank the horses in the same way.

The point I was trying to emphasize is that there's nothing I'm doing that's not typical Sartin practice. If you do any of these races using the standard Sartin method, you should be coming up with the same horses. If this isn't leading you to winners, and you want to put up a race or two from that card, I can show you what I did.

However, I don't agree with the practice of using one race, or even a series of races as a teaching tool, except to rule out the most obvious mistakes. It's important to remember that the outcome of one race or even a month's worth of races doesn't mean much. For example, even if the top TE horse wins .38 of the time, it's still going to lose .62 of the time, even if you are playing absolutely correctly. And further analysis of your losing races won't produce a higher win rate. If you continue playing within the guidelines, and eliminate low-odds horses, you will win.

Cheers,

lansdale