Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentRun
Ted,
The point that you made about not being privy to the race records of this
disgruntiled RDSS user is valid. Although he maintains that he has expierence
with the Methodolgy, only by reviewing his records, paceline selection and
other decision making criteria could you understand where is he coming from.
So my viewpoint is, SHOW ME what you did and we will discuss it from there.
Regards,
Ernie
|
Proceeding from a superior role is not useful for either of us. In a test trial, it is reasonable to assume that the learning materials provided would have been sufficient to cover the topic, and that the potential (if not the capability) of the software would have been revealed.
Because RDSS is the information source--not the prospective subscriber--it is also reasonable to assume that the SHOW ME should be on the part of RDSS. Specifically, sufficient instruction should be provided to enable the prospective subscriber to clearly see the potential (if not the capability) of the software.
Application of a software application to race analysis at a professional level requires a reasonably consistent approach. It was that consistency I thought I would find in RDSS. Not a black box, miracle cure to each and every handicapping problem encountered, but internal algorithms that generate predictive values that are more sophisticated than the conclusions that can be reached by (relatively unsophisticated) pencil-and-paper analysis.
Rather than wasting time dissecting how potential subscribers did or did not "pick the proper paceline" or "isolate the true contenders" in a specific race, might it not be more useful to put those ideas into a coherent, consistent body of knowledge that all can benefit from?
I find the "rush to judgement" that analysis of my race records will reveal my shortcomings as an analyst a little misguided. I am the buyer, not the seller. In this world--camaraderie and group spirit aside--the primary responsibility for establishing the value of the product lies with the seller. I am unlikely to have been the only prospective subscriber who found the software coming up a bit short in the prediction department, and even more so in the instruction department.
I have been involved with the Methodology long enough to understand the basic strategy of "you failed to do thus and so, and if you had picked this paceline from a year and a half ago at Golden Gate, it would have predicted today's results" that seems so clear after the race, and so obscure before the race. Unless you are using a consistent, repeatable, stable method of contender selection, paceline selection, and wagering selection, you are not really "handicapping" a race--the process is more accurately termed "scrambling."
This is in no way intended to be demeaning to RDSS or to the Sartin Methodology (the latter of which has formed the basis for my modest success as a bettor). I am fairly certain that other prospective subscribers would have the same questions, the same concerns, and the same reluctance to use a software application that does not seem to be appreciably better than pencil-and-paper methods.
Best Regards