|
Google Site Search | Get RDSS | Sartin Library | RDSS FAQs | Conduct | Register | Site FAQ | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read
General Discussion General Horse Racing Discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
08-31-2016, 08:55 AM | #11 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
|
Quote:
Thank you and yes both of your responses helped. However, I must take you to task on post # 9 of this thread. You're making the case that my question "didn't make sense", yet you answered it in your 2nd and third sentence. Mike |
|
08-31-2016, 09:06 AM | #12 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
|
|
08-31-2016, 02:33 PM | #13 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 301
|
Hey Mike,
You question still doesn't make sense to me. I can't for the life of me figure out why you are asking this and what you are trying to determine. Do you think the methodology doesn't work and you are testing to see if anyone is successful with it? Do you think that if you copy the way someone else bets you will be successful? I just can't figure out what you are trying to determine, so ya, the question doesn't make sense to me. I answered your questions, but that doesn't mean I understand what you are trying to get at. Dan |
08-31-2016, 06:31 PM | #14 | |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
|
Quote:
My title and final sentence (in # 4 of this thread) answered this twice but I'll answer it again, just for you: No, I've never considered copying how someone else bets as anywhere near wise ....... ever. I will take this opportunity to thank you and rmath one more time for letting me know it is reasonable to expect to "knockout" what I consider a sizable percentage of pretenders consistently. Mike |
|
08-31-2016, 11:45 PM | #15 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
|
Hi Mike, I have been traveling the past little while, and sometimes my access to or time availability to P&C has been spotty. However, let me reply to your query:
I would say, with the advent of modern Methodology tools, you should expect to get a high percentage of winners across all race classes, surfaces and tracks in your Top 4 (here I refer to the new Rx rating in the upcoming RDSS 2.1). Also, FWIW, a reasonably high frequency of the Place horse as well. This is generally true regardless of field size, though with field sizes of, say, 10+, I may increase my top ranked horses to Top 5. For field sizes of ~5, personally I avoid them unless there's an opportunity for a single in a horizontal wager. Then, concentrate on the Top 2 or 3. Fields of < 7, I am shy of for WPS or vertical bets, but it depends. So, within the Top 4 Rx, you will find the winner LOTS of times. Your job then is to consult the odds board to find if there's a bet, and in which pool. That's my point of view. I am happy for any other RDSS 2.1 testers to comment if their experience differs significanly. FWIW, I hope RDSS 2.1 will be available generally before the end of the year. Cheers, Ted
__________________
RDSS - Racing Decision Support System™ Last edited by Ted Craven; 08-31-2016 at 11:50 PM. |
09-01-2016, 08:16 AM | #16 |
turf historian
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 6,455
|
By LIMITING one's view to the top TOTAL ENERGY lines, one often misses the IMPROVING EARLY speed lines that just did not carry on THAT DAY.
ALWAYS look at early contention to paces of races like todays projected. THERE is no black box fro these decisions
__________________
Albert Einstein:"The monotony and solitude of a quiet life stimulates the creative mind." |
09-01-2016, 09:25 AM | #17 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
|
I knew you were traveling.
Del Mar must have been fun. When I finally get to the west coast, Las Vegas and Del Mar will be graced with my presence (for all who don't know me, that was meant for humor). Thank you Ted, Mike |
09-09-2016, 09:12 PM | #18 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 120
|
Hi MJS.......I was reading through these posts and thought I would comment:
Best to look at the big picture, which is to win races, make money and be happy. If your contender selection process is eliminating the winner more than about 1 out of 10 races, your win percent will suffer, of course. This requires a few things: best to duplicate the mechanics of the entire process the same way over a long period of time so that the following steps can all be measured, and so that improvement will come: contender selection and its percentage of success, win percent of your top 2 horses, average mutuel, and dollars in pocket. Howard Sartin had/has us measuring these things constantly because anything that can be measured can be improved. Otherwise, you won't now where you stand. Once you deal with your contender situation long enough to have a track record, then it will be obvious as to what situations are causing the problem. Then your contender selection process can be solidified and you can move on to making money. This is a natural progression.....once you have the contenders confidently, the pacelines are pretty straight forward. The winners will come based on your models and profiles. Then track your bets betting on 2 horses and strive to double your bank every 20 races. Keeping a betting log is a must if you want to improve. On my Saratoga trip this summer, I played 27 races and had 2 non contenders win. One was a maiden race. So this is just over 90%, which I think most will agree is about right for the method. I am normally in the high 80s with this. If you are in need of guidance on contenders, listen to the Brohamer lecture series right here on Pace & Cap's audio section. This will make a difference if you can apply his guidelines. I adhere to them and it flat out works. It is not mechanical, by the way. I play the races in 3 or 4 day chunks throughout the year. Only about 20 serious days per year. These are trips to Churchill, Saratoga, Tampa, and Vegas. As I go along, I mark non-contenders in my model, go back at night and burn the mistake into my head. So I might stress focusing on the end result of trying to double your win bank in 20 or 25 races as a goal, while keeping track of all the parts of the method. Then you can look back when you aren't quite making it to find out why, and you can look back when you do succeed in order to burn those winning habits into your mind. Continued good luck! Chuck |
09-10-2016, 11:40 AM | #19 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
|
Chuck,
Thanks for taking the time to share your insights. Having some fun with this process too. Mike
__________________
just keeping my trajectory in the positive http://sartinmethodology.com/pubs/RD...d_Glossary.pdf |
09-11-2016, 10:53 AM | #20 |
Grade 1
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 120
|
Hi Mike -
My post was long winded ! Maybe better said this way: in races of 6 horses or less, rate them all and you will have the contender 100% of the time. I can't tell you how many times I have lost to a horse in a short field where I didn't rate him. Example at Timonium's short meet here in Maryland....Friday before Labor Day of last year. I threw out a 30 some dollar winner in a 6 horse race. After I got home, I realized he had a DRF speed rating in the 90s and a pretty good pace line where he was swept up in a fast race. I was using TPR and he turned out to be easy pickings after the fact. Anyway, best of luck! Chuck |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|