Doc gets it again

[Bill V.]

and more recently

from Follow Up 81

[lsosa54]

As I mentioned in my previous post, Docs guidelines as of 2004 were "TO PAY NO ATTENTION TO RUNNING STYLE". While the bulk of his contenders were the late and hidden, he also included the top EPR horse with the best CPR and FX - I guess that could be 2 EPR contenders. He also suggested one monitor the E/L characteristics of the Oaks card and confirm whether they were holding over to the Derby card. He cites the example of Funny Cide winning his Derby after a filly had won the Oaks with a very high e/l. He did not say to necessarily bet the hidden or late runners exclusively.

Bottom line, Super Saver is an early horse that carries his speed well and has shown some fight and came out of the FPLR tandem. Ice Box is a dead late runner (came from 11th at the first call) who came out of virtually the 2nd FPLR tandem, slower by a tick at the first call.

Whether you agree with them or not, here they are:

Here's a repost from Friday, March 26, 2004.

the kentucky derby, sartin programs

contender guidelines:

1) use only horses who have won or placed in grade 1 or grade 2 prep races. no other horses considered regardless of hype etc.

2) distance of paceline should be more than 8 furlongs.

3) don't worry about off track lines here. its not the horses fault that it rained the day of their prep.

4) enter these grade 1 and grade 2 win and place lines into program.

5) ok to start go to corollary screen. keep only the early (epr) horse who has the best cpr(composite pace rating) and fx.

6) he is the first "finalist" to make the final dance!

7) ok now right down the top 3 lpr (late pace rating) and top 3 he(hidden energy) horses on the corrolary screen.

8) these are your contenders. hide everone else. PERIOD.

9) pay no attention to running "style".


some other things:

WATCH and record the winning e/l's from the FRIDAY card and then see if they MATCH during the next day. There have been WIDE variations there in the past few years: A mare NEVER out of the money sprinting FOLDED up last year and then LATE LATE runners predominated in the Derby. When Funny Cide won, the day before in the Oaks, a filly won off a ridiculously high e/l number.

NO colt has done well when it's last three preps show one of two things:

Decreasing total energy steadily in last three, and/or increasing percent median as the distances got longer.

[Bill V.]

Lou are we talking about doc being Howard Sartin
Was this a privatw chat with Howard

[lsosa54]

Bill: You and I know there is only one Doc.

These guidelines were actually posted here by a member, though I don't remember whom. I think they were originally posted in 2004 and then reposted at another member's request in 2007 or 2008.

I tried to find the post but can't, so I'm not sure if we lost some older posts when we switched servers.

These were Doc's words but I don't remember the context. By 2004, Validator had already been around as his last program for awhile.

[Bill V.]

These guidelines were actually posted here by a member, though I don't remember whom. I think they were originally posted in 2004 and then reposted at another member's request in 2007 or 2008

I wondered about your comment I can see how this can happen
The thing about the derby guidelines is that I can only go by what I
read in the follow up or hear on audios or right from the man himself
Anything on Pace and Cap written by Howard Sartin was either relayed from
me or Ted

The point of this thread was never to say "THE ONLY WAY TO WIN THE DERBY IS TO DO THIS"

All I was saying was according to what I saw in the RDSS readouts
Super Saver had the three things Howard Sartin told me to look for
and that I have poted hard eveidence to support

The winner of the derby almost always ...

Is a grade 1 or 2 win or place finisher
Has a Sustained or late running style based on energy distribution
Runs to the late side of the Early Late graph

SuperSaver brought it home . As I said its been 2 years
but this year Doc got it again

Thanks
Bill

[lsosa54]

One should use whatever works for them. I'm not big on "guidelines".

[Ted Craven]

I'm reposting in this thread a post I made yesterday in another one since it relates to this dicussion and my failure to get the KD winner following my understanding of Doc's traditional 'guidelines'.

------------

I had trouble this year using Howard's traditional Derby guidelines. Super Saver certainly qualified off a very close finish 2nd in the G1 Arkansas Derby, and certainly distributes all his energy Late (as do most horses running routes), but using reasonable lines for the main contenders, as you show, and even adding in #1 Looking for Lucky, Super Saver does not rank highly in any Late Energy rankings, or in Hidden energy. Rather he ranks highly Early (F1 and to the 2nd call) and 'looks' like an Early horse (positionally). So how did he run: - 6-6-4-4-2-1 (positions by quarter mile). Given all the other Earlies: Line of David, American Lion, Conveyance, Sidney's Candy - you'd think there'd be a lot of work to do for an early running, early energy distributing horse, and that the race would set up Other Than Early as it typically does - hence my choices of the best Late Energy horses: Looking and Sidney.

If I had looked rather at the better Early Energy horses, I'd have been looking closer at Super and Ice Box... Is this a one-off situation (which can certainly happen), or are there changing trends?

------------

Here are a few supporting screens from my workup.





Super Saver was certainly a contender: he finished very close in a G1 event his last race, he distributes his energy on the Late side of the E/L graph.

But, compared to the other also legitimate contenders (most of them probably listed in the screenshots), he was not a high ranked Late energy horse, nor high ranked Hidden. He was Early Energy, Early positional. Even his #1 ranked CPR rank was earned ONLY from his F1 figure, nothing else.

Hence my question/rumination in my earlier original post: was Super Saver's KD win an aberration to Doc's traditional 'guidelines', or have I missed something entirely.

Incidentally, I know one could make the case this year that 2 legitimate contenders were disadvantaged by their #1 and #20 post positions (though consider Big Brown), but post position has never been among the 'traditional' guideline factors to consider.

I know, I know - everyone will say I had the winner in the top 3, the odds on whom were 6-1, 25-1 and 8-1 - so just bet them all. And good advice! I'm not complaining here about having missed the winner - I'm dissecting the traditional guidelines which have so ofter predicted the winner (and paid me very well in the past).

Thanks in advance!

Ted

[lsosa54]

Ted: My feeling is that the explanation lies in the matchup. The Arkansas Derby tandem had the fastest pace of race (raw times) at the 1st and 2nd calls, while the Florida Derby was close, a tick behind at the first call, of any race over a mile on the dirt/poly. Devil May Care's last race matched the 2nd call but was 5 ticks back at the 1st call. Nothing else was close.

The 3 from the Arkansas Derby went around the track 1-2-3 in that race and Super missed by a neck and Dublin by a 1/2, so a reversal was possible. The 2 from the Florida Derby came more from midpack to the rear, esp. Ice Box.

The pace of the Derby early ran 46.0-110.2, a bit faster than the Arkansas/
Florida tandems. 4 of the 5 were in position at the mile call. Line of David never got out to the lead and never really grabbed the bit. Conveyance had never set that kind of pace above a mile and the Sunland Derby raised a ? about his distance ability. Sydney had never set that kind of pace either.

Remember that Mine That Bird had run against the fastest pace of race last year in the Sunland Derby and had stayed fairly close the whole way. Last year's Derby ran 47.1-112.1 in the slop. Join In The Dance had never set that fast a pace (not that it was fast) and Regal Ransom had never pressed that kind of pace successfully. Pioneer of the Nile, who finished 2nd, had won off that exact early pace at a mile and a sixteenth. Who knows what effect the slop had.

[Vinnie]

Originally Posted by Bill V.

and more recently

from Follow Up 81

Bill:

Greetings! Thanks for posting message #11. I am the Michael Vincent (Vinnie) that he mentioned in that Follow Up. My Lord, I will never forget how Synthesis completely crushed that race. With the exception of the 4th and
5th horses being interchanged or reversed, Synthesis literally crushed that race for me straight away, and I called Doc a short time thereafter to let him know of how proud I was to be a member of the Sartin Methodology. Whenever I think back to that race, and a countless number of others before and since, it gave me an incredibly proud feeling to be associated with Doc Sartin, the Sartin Methodology and all of the others who are associated with the same goal or likewise pursuit in mind.

Thanks Bill.

All the BEST to you and your family.

Vinnie