Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up - View Single Post

mufasa · 09-17-2007, 08:09 AM

Rich:
[I did not want to start a new thread so I apologize in advance if this is not the right place for my question.]

I have seen this problem before but it was made clearer to me this past Saturday (9/15) at Belmont. I utilized as always the RDSS/Spec 160 BLBL output for my preferred win selections on the race card but attempted to tweak the output choices as to the final win bets by way of the Match Up Methodology. Assuming that in my case I was using the MU correctly (no guarantees) I managed to talk myself out of some pretty good winners. Had I just stuck with the BLBL top tier choices I would have won for the day but instead I lost.

During my last 4 day visit to Saratoga when I was not able to utilize the RDSS or Spec 160 programs (no access to computer) I just went with the DRF and the MU methodology as my basis and actually did well. At other times when first just using the RDSS/Spec 160 programs as my basis at Belmont I have faired much better when just selecting among the top tier grouping without any other considerations.

After all that I have said my point or question to you and “The Hat” is have you ever been able to successful utilize the Sartin based computer program outputs with the MU methodology? I know Jim does not use computer programs but has he ever heard of anyone being able to successfully combine these different methodologies?

Thanks,

Robert

09-17-2007, 08:09 AM	#17
mufasa Grade 1 Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 310	Rich: [I did not want to start a new thread so I apologize in advance if this is not the right place for my question.] I have seen this problem before but it was made clearer to me this past Saturday (9/15) at Belmont. I utilized as always the RDSS/Spec 160 BLBL output for my preferred win selections on the race card but attempted to tweak the output choices as to the final win bets by way of the Match Up Methodology. Assuming that in my case I was using the MU correctly (no guarantees) I managed to talk myself out of some pretty good winners. Had I just stuck with the BLBL top tier choices I would have won for the day but instead I lost. During my last 4 day visit to Saratoga when I was not able to utilize the RDSS or Spec 160 programs (no access to computer) I just went with the DRF and the MU methodology as my basis and actually did well. At other times when first just using the RDSS/Spec 160 programs as my basis at Belmont I have faired much better when just selecting among the top tier grouping without any other considerations. After all that I have said my point or question to you and “The Hat” is have you ever been able to successful utilize the Sartin based computer program outputs with the MU methodology? I know Jim does not use computer programs but has he ever heard of anyone being able to successfully combine these different methodologies? Thanks, Robert