Quote:
Originally Posted by J2EEDeveloper
I am well aware of the difficulties involved in generating a positive return, especially with a software application. I am also well aware that the solution (and the profit) is in zigging when everyone else is zagging. It is not so much that the low-hanging fruit of the years past is no longer available, but rather that it is no longer available using the same approaches that worked then.
I have had a considerable amount of success with the Sartin Methodology, and pace analysis in general. It would be misleading to think I have always had problems with it. I think other factors are involved in race outcomes, but I am in no way dissatisfied or disgruntled with the Sartin approach.
My renewed interest in the Sartin Methodology is directly related to the fact that an associate is using Bob Purdy's Synergism application with modest success, and I thought RDSS would be an improvement on that. However, my understanding (which could easily be wrong) is that contender and pace line selection is pretty much automated in Synergism.
How many tracks/races do you customarily wager on?
Best Regards
|
JSEED,
This is much clearer, if I'm understand it correctly. It sounds like your simply find a more automated style of play to be able to make more bets. This is exactly the problem I have been trying to solve, and it's possible that Ted's future automated paceline selection might be the answer. I usually check the card of three or four, and sometimes five tracks, and find, on average, one bettable race per card - that is one with at least a 50% overlay. It's for this reason that I'd like to be able to automate the handicapping process. You mention Synergism, with which I have no experience, but as you say, it does offer automatic paceline selection, Bob Purdy has a very good reputation, and the product has been recommended by Dick Schmidt.
You seem particularly hung up on the notion of paceline selection. If you're interested, you might try a mechanical paceline selection that's worked well for me: after eliminating obvious horses (NL types who lack the speed to lead, herd horses that never win despite good figures) use the line for each horse that has best Total Energy figure in its last three races at a comparable distance and surface. For turf races, you can go back six deep for the best line, as Jim Quinn recommends, or use the entire PP record, as Mike Pizzola does. It might be useful to compare this with results your friend gets, if he uses Synergism's autopaceline feature.
Richie P. demonstrated how effective and autopaceline can be in a recent exercise with RDSS. As a stat guy, you might prefer a larger sample - Kahneman and Tversky were right - but you might still want to check it out.
Cheers,