|
Google Site Search | Get RDSS | Sartin Library | RDSS FAQs | Conduct | Register | Site FAQ | Members List | Today's Posts | Search |
General Discussion General Horse Racing Discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-07-2008, 07:23 AM | #1 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 878
|
Sartin
From a Google search
The greatest strength of the Sartin Methodology (an extremely popular and profitable race analysis approach from the 1980s) was the requirement that users study the race results in conjunction with the ratings generated by the various software applications. Sartin realized, as a psychologist, that the act of "searching for patterns and answers" was a great training method to develop decision making skills. What the most sophisticated Sartin users quickly discovered was that the software was almost irrelevant; there was no "killer app" that would mechanically select enough winners, consistently enough, to be profitable over time. However, the more those users struggled in the assigned tasks of "isolating the true contenders in the race" and "finding the most predictive pace line" for each of those contenders, the better race analysts they became. The more intelligent of the Sartin advocates caught on early; they realized that selecting the "proper pace lines" and "true contenders" essentially forced them to analyze the past performances in a completely new way. The most difficult part of the process for many "experienced handicappers" was the implication that in most cases, the winner was uncovered before the first pace line was entered into the computer. Specifically, the training process developed the skill of pre-race analysis to a sufficient degree that the "computer readouts" became almost irrelevant. Because Sartin's income was derived from the sale of the steady stream of the "latest, greatest" software to "analyze races," the notion that those software applications were training devices, rather than "real" analysis aids was kept under wraps. Unfortunately, the fall from grace of the Sartin Methodology was based on all the wrong reasons; later users argued that the "software didn't really do anything" beyond generating simplistic pace ratings. That was true, as far as it went, but failed completely to explain how Sartin managed to train an entire generation of race analysts, a number of whom have been wagering successfully since the 1980s. |
09-07-2008, 08:23 AM | #2 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC and San Diego
Posts: 627
|
Definitely some truth to it but a rather simplistic summary. I use EXDC with Thoromation and if I do my job of selecting contenders and pace lines that are predictive, this program does an outstanding job of selecting winners and many of them are not apparent through pre race analysis, especially in contentious races.
I think the model back then was to charge for the software as the data had to be hand entered. All software programs were expensive. Once downloadable data became available, the vendors saw the profit was in the data and went in that direction. HDW is a perfect example today. I agree that there is no killer app or magic bullet in handicapping, and even if Doc designed the software to make you really think a race through, unfortunately the majority of folks were looking for killer apps or magic bullets so as not to have to do the work. Doc was definitely a showman but his heart was in the right place. It was a shame to see the infighting that started the downfall and then I guess Shane didn't want to continue running the business once Doc's health wouldn't permit him to, although I have no knowledge that was the real reason. We could use a solid biography but it probably wouldn't sell much unfortunately. Last edited by lsosa54; 09-07-2008 at 08:26 AM. |
09-07-2008, 08:38 AM | #3 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 467
|
When I read this article I thought of The Hat. This, in essence, is how he evolved. After feeding thousands of races into the computer he started "seeing" who the winner would be before he entered the data.
I'm sure this is true of other software practitioners as well. |
09-07-2008, 09:20 AM | #4 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 878
|
This is the paragraph that got my attention.
The more intelligent of the Sartin advocates caught on early; they realized that selecting the "proper pace lines" and "true contenders" essentially forced them to analyze the past performances in a completely new way. The most difficult part of the process for many "experienced handicappers" was the implication that in most cases, the winner was uncovered before the first pace line was entered into the computer. Specifically, the training process developed the skill of pre-race analysis to a sufficient degree that the "computer readouts" became almost irrelevant. If I understand correctly, we must learn the subtle intricacies hiden in a horse's pp, and once this task is accomplished with certain amount of accuracy the software become almost irrelevant. |
09-07-2008, 09:37 AM | #5 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 467
|
Quote:
He realized that in certain situations he could borrow bits and pieces of different races for the same horse and meld them into new lines because somehow that's what the software did on occasion, so to speak, and after doing that over and over he just knew when to apply it and when to discard it. He once told me a good way to learn to pick winners was to look at old races and see who won, and then try and figure out why they won, in a sense reverse engineering. It's still a marvel to have studied with a man who went from not being able to pick a winner to picking nothing but winners. That light bulb "ah-ha" moment must have been momentus. |
|
09-07-2008, 09:53 AM | #6 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 878
|
54,
It is a simplistic summary. You quoted "if I do my job of selecting contenders and pace lines that are predictive, this program does an outstanding job of selecting winners and many of them are not apparent through pre race analysis, especially in contentious races.". You don't give yourself enough credit. The fact that you select a not so apparent winner through a pre race analisys, do indicate a knowledge in reading a horse past performance. EXDC and Thoro didn't select the winner. |
09-07-2008, 10:05 AM | #7 |
The egg man
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
|
Dr Howard Sartin
Thank you Pino
I guess you know what i'm going to add If you read the follow ups -mostly # 70 and beyond till the last issue # 88 I really think that Doc's teachings about not only readouts and race examples. But about learning to live and make decisions about racing and life in everything you do. The overall spirit of the methodology is so much more than programs Steve -Turbulator - hits it well when he mentions the Hat "Getting it" Once you can learn about it and then its there I can do this there it is .. what the author is saying about the total past performance , To me, I hear Doc saying about correct pace line /contender selections looming up off the page GS Bill p.s. Doc made a big part of his income from seminars and the Follow Up and what he wrote in the follow up is there for all to see in black and white I respect the follow up service His words then and now can make you a winner Last edited by Bill V.; 09-07-2008 at 10:08 AM. Reason: took out negative comment |
09-07-2008, 10:10 AM | #8 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Not so fast
I was fortunate enough to have seen Dick Schmidt work in the late 80's and early 90's. He used a methodical step by step approach to paceline contender selection and relying 100% on computer readouts and his models to bet.
He will be the first man to tell you he disdained intuitive working of races in favor of a repetitive application type approach that he repeated day after day. Email him and ask him. He will tell you the same thing I just posted. So while all the intuitive members of Pirco were betting there 3 to 20 dollars a race he was betting 200 to 300 dollars a race and was the biggest money earner in Pirco at the time. He switched from betting thoroughbreds to the markets and makes a killing today in that genre.100% mechanical and 0% intuition. |
09-07-2008, 10:19 AM | #9 | |
The egg man
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Carlsbad, California
Posts: 10,005
|
Quote:
Pino actually I give winners like Lou, Users of the older Sartin program So much credit. Because these programs were part of the methodology when win percentage was the key to success. Entering lines and proper contender selection, Then betting the programs top 2 picks was the methodology But today the name of the game is profit and now we see the value of all Sartin programs to get those higher paying not so gettable horses that most visual handicappers don't see To get those horses with the older programs is very admirable Bill |
|
09-07-2008, 11:40 AM | #10 |
turf historian
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,455
|
Let the program tell you. I have done very well using each horse's MOST RECENT TOP E/EP LINES as their pace lines for the program: works very well.
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
*Pace and Cap* Day at Saratoga | Ted Craven | 2008 | 89 | 09-03-2008 09:48 AM |
The Modern Sartin Methodology... | Charlie D | RDSS | 29 | 08-31-2008 02:12 PM |
Our Phone call to Doc Sartin | Bill V. | 2008 | 3 | 08-19-2008 04:39 PM |
Sartin Workshop 3/19/1989 | admin | Audio Collection | 2 | 05-26-2008 09:47 PM |