|
Google Site Search | Get RDSS | Sartin Library | RDSS FAQs | Conduct | Register | Site FAQ | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read
Matchup Discussion Matchup Discussion and Practice |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
12-22-2012, 07:21 PM | #11 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Saratoga Springs
Posts: 1,547
|
Would this help you to learn, if not , then why not?
In the workbook I saw this.
__________________
http://pktruckdriver.blogspot.com/ |
01-06-2013, 08:17 AM | #12 |
AlwNW1X
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8
|
From the video context I got the impression this is about beating the pace of the race. When it wins the beaten lengths on the 3rd fraction would not be so inaccurate (one of the criticisms of pace by Beyer who is also mentioned in the video). Taulbot used pace of the race only and the Doc thought highly of that approach I think.
|
01-06-2013, 12:02 PM | #13 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 130
|
My Thoughts on RDSS and the numbers
It always comes down to interpretation of the readouts and of course as others have said decision making on your part. I'm sure most can always get the race down to 4 horses or so, then the crucial rubber meets the road thingy, deciding the final one or two contenders which can actually win the race.
I always have to chuckle when someone posts a comment and asks for the race to be explained and why RDSS was way off, do they not realize we are only working in estimates at best with the readouts, these are horses running, not machines, you have as Andy Beyer likes to point out at times pinhead jockeys riding them, they are numerous reasons why a horse doesn't run it's race; slow off the break, doesn't feel good today, poor jockey, doesn't like to run inside or outside, pace to fast, to slow, to high of class of race, to short a race, to long a race, on and on and on. The numbers we get with RDSS do a wonderful job of breaking down the fractions but again times and beaten lenghts are best estimates, not finite absolute in stone 100% accurate numbers. As others have said, not a black box, you can take any race after the fact and point out which factor led to victory, but it's after the fact, the trick of course is to say with certainty before the race which factors will lead you to the winning horse. Nothing wrong with post analysis, it needs to be done but understand once you know the winner it's much easier to see why he won. I won't be responding to this post, just wanted to point out some observations I've had recently from posts I've seen since I've been on here. |
01-07-2013, 02:27 AM | #14 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,292
|
Quote:
I'm not even sure what the point was. Is there anything in this post that someone didn't already know? With regard to "post race analysis", Doc once wrote... Moreover, I don't recall any "follow up" that included an example race or problem race that was "in advance" of the race actually running. So I have posted a race in the teaching area that shows how "the numbers" DO NOT point to the winner, not even after the race....unless you "know something" BEFORE THE RACE! Here's the link to that post. http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8953
__________________
"It's suppose to be hard. If it was easy, everybody would do it." Jimmy Dugan, A League of Their Own |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Learning The Sartin Methodology | Houndog | Welcome to the Sartin Methodology | 24 | 03-01-2017 09:06 AM |
Answering Mike's Question - My Learning Experience With Richie P. | barb craven | RDSS | 14 | 11-26-2011 06:54 PM |
Just learning at mountaineer | mrhug | General Discussion | 4 | 05-28-2011 07:43 AM |
Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to learning the Matchup | RichieP | Hat Check - How Can We Help You? | 1 | 05-25-2009 09:52 AM |
learning something new about track surfaces | Tim Y | General Discussion | 1 | 12-18-2008 02:55 AM |