Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > General Discussion
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

General Discussion General Horse Racing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-31-2016, 08:55 AM   #11
MJS6916
Grade 1
 
MJS6916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanBoals View Post
Hey Mike,

Your question doesn't really make sense to me, since it all depends on how good YOU are at picking pacelines as to whether you can get the winner in your top few horses.

I have been picking pacelines for about 20 years now and I am getting the winner in the top 5, 9 out of 10 times. I get the winner in the top 4 about 8 out of 10 times, and since I mostly play exactas and trifectas, this works for me.

TE works for some people, once I get the pacelines I like, I use SR and BL/BL. I love BL/BL because it is a composite of important factors. But if you don't use the same pacelines I use, these factors might not work for you. That is why it is so important to keep good records. As you advance in the methodology, your handicapping and paceline selection will evolve and you will find different factors leading you to the winner.

Hope this helps some,

Dan

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
MJS6916 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2016, 09:06 AM   #12
MJS6916
Grade 1
 
MJS6916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmath View Post
I am responding to your question on contenders.
1.) I do not play races with less than 8 entries.
2.) In fields of 8 or more I get it down to 4 or 5 final contenders
at least 6 of 7 times.
Rmath

Thank you rmath,

Mike
MJS6916 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2016, 02:33 PM   #13
DanBoals
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
DanBoals is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2016, 06:31 PM   #14
MJS6916
Grade 1
 
MJS6916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanBoals View Post
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
Dan,


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
MJS6916 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2016, 11:45 PM   #15
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
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
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™

Last edited by Ted Craven; 08-31-2016 at 11:50 PM.
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2016, 08:16 AM   #16
Tim Y
turf historian
 
Tim Y's Avatar
 
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."
Tim Y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2016, 09:25 AM   #17
MJS6916
Grade 1
 
MJS6916's Avatar
 
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
MJS6916 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2016, 09:12 PM   #18
CEW
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
CEW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2016, 11:40 AM   #19
MJS6916
Grade 1
 
MJS6916's Avatar
 
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
MJS6916 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2016, 10:53 AM   #20
CEW
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
CEW is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:40 AM.