[Mike A]

As a new member, and thus someone who has never used RDSS (or any of the other Sartin programs), I have kind of a comment and a question....something to say which hopefully will help someone, and simultaneously help me learn something about the program.

As someone who HAS at least read some of the books written by former PIRCO members, and can definitely say my understanding of and ablility to utilize pace was strengthened as a result, I can really appreciate the importance of keeping the other handicapping factors looked at to a manageable, even minimal, amount.

...Which brings me to the main point of my post: To achieve the maximized efficiency of the methodology, I've "heard" it talked about, especially on this board, that a certain amount of unlearning is usually necessary to pare factors down to this minimal amount.

I was wondering how transferable one's pattern recognition skills concerning the form cycle are to RDSS, (IF they have been used successfully, otherwise I wouldn't think you should have TOO tough of a time convincing someone to change.)...say if one was used to using the Form, AND given an already simplified style mainly focused on competitive speed figure range, pace analysis, and the form cycle (and by "form" I mean basically projection of improvement or decline based upon 1: performance/exertion and recovery race-to-race, 2:[I]apparent[I]form cycles caused by pace, and 3: the basic distance/ surface preferences of the horse. And I already don't pay much attention to jockeys, or trips or trainers.

And to narrow my point hopefully a little further...we obviously need some way of choosing..I won't say a particular "paceline" to evaluate a horse, but since we are ultimately choosing to bet one horse(s) rather than another, but not just relying on who has, say, the biggest 2nd call number last race, have the experienced members noticed that their pace and form analysis transfered well to using RDSS, or did they find that the software offered them a "look into" the race that got them to change substantially what they were already doing? Especially if they were already successful?

I know this may seem like a lot to say, and then to lead up to maybe a silly question, but I don't want to take anything for granted, and would like to learn from the actual experience of those successful with the method.

Thanks guys!