??? NEW RPM CATALOG ????

[timtam]

I just received the ( new ) RPM catalog and must admit I was totally

disappointed. I know many people on the board could give a darn but most

of the catalog is old re-hashed systems and methods from years ago,

They even have the Beyer Elimination Method by the late Jeff Goldstein

as a ' new ' item. Unfortunately I have most of this stuff accumulated over

the years in various ways so if anyone wants any info on any (new,old)

item let me know. :sleeping:

[Overlay]

I would suppose the Internet has facilitated self-marketing to such an extent, and has a broader reach than any individual listing or catalog could ever have, that there's no longer a niche for that type of clearinghouse of hard-copy information related strictly to handicapping, especially when a would-be seller is paying the middleman 50% of the gross proceeds on every copy sold simply for the publicity, and then still has to absorb the cost of printing and shipping copies to the middleman out of his remaining half.

[lsosa54]

Once I found out that Dave Powers, who runs RPM, and Clint Tracy, were one and the same, and he was marketing methods under both authors' names, I stopped purchasing from RPM. Too strange for me.

Did speak to Dave/Clint a couple of times - nice guy - and he did give me credit once for a method I decided to return. This was years ago.

I think he did have Overlay Handicapping in the catalogue at one time.

[Tom]

Did you man to say "nice guys" :lol:

[banacek]

Did you man to say "nice guys" :lol:

Hey, Clint and Dave went to high school together!

[lsosa54]

Did you man to say "nice guys" :lol:

I should have known that was coming! :D

[Profiler8]

Hello,

can I reach RPM on an internet page ?
Can someone ships me the catalogue ?

I can cover postage to Germany with PayPal.

Thanks...

Greetings
Tim Leonhardt

[lsosa54]

Hello,

can I reach RPM on an internet page ?
Can someone ships me the catalogue ?

I can cover postage to Germany with PayPal.

Thanks...

Greetings
Tim Leonhardt

Tim: This used to be their url but it no longer works:

http://www.wizardstore.com/

His contact info was/is:

RPM INFORMATION SYSTEMS
6965 El Camino Real, Suite # 105-454
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Phone: 1-800-696-0067

You probably can't reach the 800 # from overseas and I'm not even sure if it works. I could not find a business listing in the yellow pages. He had a small office in a strip mall. Sorry.

[Overlay]

I think he did have Overlay Handicapping in the catalogue at one time.

Yes, he did, but we came to a parting of the ways when I had trouble formalizing the terms of our association in writing, as I was advised to do by an attorney. (The only way I could ever communicate with Dave was by telephone.) I also did not have adequate visibility/accountability of his sales of my titles. I eventually decided I had better not put all my eggs in the RPM basket, and so branched out on my own initiative to American Turf Monthly, Gambler's Book Shop, and other outlets, before eventually starting my own direct-sale website. I don't believe I've lost out on any substantial income as a result, especially (as I say) considering that 50% of my gross sales went to RPM off the top.

[timtam]

I have numerous methods from RPM and many are from 'long time subscribers'

who happen to be old and now just happened to sell their methods to

RPM. Do you think the systems and methods in the catalog are from all

these different authors or are a couple of guys writing the methods and

just using many other names? When the systems are actually boiled down

many are maybe one or two pages double spaced the rest is accompanied

by a workout which takes up many pages. I go through the workouts after

I see the rules and many of the systems (even the example races) are

mistake prone. They show how a horse is selected as a win bet but

you notice it is eliminated in the first elimination rule. Thats unfair :bang:

[Overlay]

I wouldn't be surprised if they are in fact by different authors. Of course, the main concern is how a product or method performs (regardless of what its source is). I think it pays to be discerning in that regard. After a while, by applying handicapping experience and judgment (concerning both the products and their developers), you can get a pretty good idea about which approaches are worth exploring further, and which aren't.

[dutchboy]

Did you ever see the "gift horse method" for selecting longshots? If you take that system and look at pp's you will find an amazing number of longshots listed each day. I don't mean they won today but if you would look for a horse that was 12-1 and won at some time in the past.

I first saw it in the "Del Mar Digest" they used to publish. I was younger and naive so I took a week of vacation at Del Mar to play the system and did not cash a ticket. Got off the plane at home and went to play golf. Checked the results the next day as it was before what you could now do on the internet. I think it had a couple of bombs at del mar and a huge price at saratoga.

It was well written and seemed to make a lot of sense. If anyone would like a brief recap of the system just ask on this web page.

Woodbine R8 on 6-24-07 G1 $1 million purse. Winner pd 32.4 and was a gift h.
Monmouth R5 on 6-23-07 ngs 60k purse. Winner pd 61.8 and was a gift horse

In one of the past PP's a horse at aqu in Jan that qualified and won at 57-1

[timtam]

I think if memory serves me correctly somebody came out with a

Gift Horse 2 and marketed as an entire new system. I think I remember

Gift Horse 1 back in the 80's. Is this the time frame your referring to ?

[Kelso]

It was well written and seemed to make a lot of sense. If anyone would like a brief recap of the system just ask on this web page.

Woodbine R8 on 6-24-07 G1 $1 million purse. Winner pd 32.4 and was a gift h.
Monmouth R5 on 6-23-07 ngs 60k purse. Winner pd 61.8 and was a gift horse


OK .... I'm asking.

(Any feel for how many plays the system would yield in, say, a week at any one track?)

Thank you.

[Harmonicaslim]

Timtam is right, there was a Gift Horse 2. I think it was a bonus to their PHQS software.

[Pcon04]

I could use a gift horse!!!! PCON

[NormanTD]

And I sure would not look it in the mouth.

[dutchboy]

1. Bet the horse at minimum odds of 12-1

2. It is based on the even finish theory. Only look at the horses last 3 running lines. It appears to have started some time around 1950 in Ireland or England by people who would watch and keep track by pen and pencil of the horses finish.

3. Look at the finish position and the position of the horse at the point of call before the finish. The finish position does not matter. The horse could have been second or 10th. Next look at lenghts behind the winner.

4. Use any horse that ran an even finish which is defined by the last two call. It cannot change more than one number. Lenghts behind cannot change more than one.

5. Here is an example from Woodbine R 8 on Sunday June 24th which was the million dollar queens plate. The winners last race on may 23rd looked like 1,1 and 1,1.25 and the win price was 32.40 The second place horse race 2 back on may 13 looked like 1,.5 and 1 1.25 and it paid 16.30 to place. Not sure of the exacta.

Guess the theory is that the beaten horse ran just as well to finish the race as the winner even if it may have finished 8th and 15 lgs behind as long as it maintained the same distance behind the winner and it did not change more than one number. Finish position could be 8/7 8/6 8/8 Beaten lengths could be 10/11 10/9 10/12. It may also be used as a way to color a horses ability. After the horse ran this type of race the trainer may place it in a class or type of race next out where the horse has no chance to win so it will appear to run very poor which may have been the connections plan and then put it back where it has a chance and will win or run second at huge odds.

I think I first saw it in the late 80's. It started with very simple rules then was enhanced which may not have helped. It was no longer published after it went to the computer program. Like a lot of things once the computer/smart guys get a hold of it they seem to make it too complicated with so many rules it no longer is effective. Not sure how many plays per week at a track but it does appear a large percentage of longshot horses that win at 12-1 and above show this pattern. Sorry for the long message if anyone is annoyed by it's lengths. When you may be bored take a look at the form and they should appear.

[Kelso]

4. Use any horse that ran an even finish which is defined by the last two call. It cannot change more than one number. Lenghts behind cannot change more than one.

<snip:>

Finish position could be 8/7 8/6 8/8 Beaten lengths could be 10/11 10/9 10/12. It may also be used as a way to color a horses ability.


Thank you, Dutchboy. Interesting, and the coloring theory makes sense to me.

Not sure what the finish and beaten examples mean. 8/6 and 10/12 are seperated by two. What am I reading incorrectly?

Do any of the past three races count, so long as they meet the "didn't change by more than one" rule? And any idea why improving by more than one eliminates the horse?

Thanks again.

[dutchboy]

Hard to describe but easy to see in the form but here goes. Any of the last 3 races can be used. Look at those pacelines. I found an excellent example in race 8 today 7-14-07 at Hollywood. Look at the #3 horse Tiago. Mdn race on 1-21-07 the pp shows it finished 2nd, a hd behind. The point of call before the finish showed the horse 2nd and a 1/2 length behind. The important thing is that the position changed no more than 1. It could be 3rd to 2nd or 3rd to 4th or same at 3 and 3. If the horse finished 3rd but was 5th or first, pass. If the horse finishes 3 lgs behind it is allowed to have been between 2-4 lgs behind at the previous point of call. It seems like it happens more often within the last 2 races.

The race example mentioned above shows Tiago is second in the mdn race used for this example. The next race he is put in a G2 race and runs 7th which may help explain why he then wins 4-07-07 at odds of 29.3 I guess going from a mdn 48k to a G2 could qualify as "coloring or concealing" the current ability of the horse. I assume the connections have an idea how good the horse may run.

[dutchboy]

Same race as above. Hol r8 today. Look at number 6 souvenir slew. Look at the last two points of call for the races on both 3-14 and 2-17. Then look at the race on 3-30 and you will see the horse win at odds of 24-1 Wierd why the horse would all of a sudden go wire to wire to win after not appearing to have much ability by just looking at past betting odds and not being close to winning it's first two races.

The system might work with an ADW where you could place wagers in advance based on being able to load a specfied min odd. It think the ADW that advertises on this board might be an option if they had a better selection of tracks.

At lunch today the slip of paper in the fortune cookie read "If you can't accept losing, you can't win." True story.

[Kelso]

Gonna monitor this one at some tracks for awhile. Should be fun :) . Might be profitable! :jump:

[Wickel]

How about authors Tom Console and Len Cz (short for long Polish name): Are these two also pseudonyms for Dave Powers, or do they exist? I keep getting stuff from Console through the mail. Most recently, I received the Exacta Selector. Any report on this one?

[Overlay]

How about authors Tom Console and Len Cz (short for long Polish name): Are these two also pseudonyms for Dave Powers, or do they exist? I keep getting stuff from Console through the mail. Most recently, I received the Exacta Selector. Any report on this one?

No comment on any of his handicapping products, but, as far as I know, Tom Console is a separate individual (and a member of PA) based in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Len Czyzniejewski appears to be from Las Vegas, and has a multi-faceted result on Google, including writing film reviews and books on poker, in addition to his work with handicapping.

[dutchboy]

Today in R9 at Hol look at the pp's of #1 Bright Prediction. Won last race at 85-1 Two races back it ran the even style finish.

Today in R10 at Delaware look at the pp's of #3 Hal's My Hope. On feb 3rd at gp it won at 108-1 Then look at the pp 3 races previous on 12-19 at crc you will see the even style finish.

[Wickel]

I just received the RPM catalog a couple of days ago. I agree there is some slim pickings. I've had my eye on the "Pace Evaluation," which uses Sartin-like ratings, and the "Money-Per-Race" software packages. Any critiques on any of these?

[dutchboy]

Race 3 today at Del Mar. # 7 Freedom Class wins and pays 133.80

Check the pp's for last two points of call for the race 3 back on june 29 at Hollywood.

Yesterday at DMR in R4 the #6 qualified: won and paid 40.60

[lsosa54]

Yesterday at DMR in R4 the #6 qualified: won and paid 40.60

I believe the 3,4,7,8 also qualified on the "even finish" and the 4,7,8 would have been plays as they were all over 12-1. Still, betting $8 to get $40 is a pretty nice return.

How did that bomb qualify today 3 back - I didn't get the pp's today. What were it's qualifying calls? Only "even finish" or were there others at 12-1 or higher? Cho doesn't win often, that's for sure.

[Secretariat]

I was just curious. There is a guy named Dave Venturo who got a bunch of 9 ratings from Phillips newsletter. I ran some of his methods which underperformed the claims (what a shock huh?). Connections Handicapping, JOT system, Quick Pick Winners, Solid Gold Handicapping, KISS Handicapping, Consenus Overlay, etc.

I was wondering what others success with this guy was, and whether Dave Venturo and Dave Powers were the same guy.

[Pell Mell]

I believe the 3,4,7,8 also qualified on the "even finish" and the 4,7,8 would have been plays as they were all over 12-1. Still, betting $8 to get $40 is a pretty nice return.

How did that bomb qualify today 3 back - I didn't get the pp's today. What were it's qualifying calls? Only "even finish" or were there others at 12-1 or higher? Cho doesn't win often, that's for sure.

That's the problem with backfitting in that manner. You don't know how many qualifers there were in any given race.

Reminds me of when I bought my first Town Car, I never knew there were so many till I started looking for them.

[Maji]

I was just curious. There is a guy named Dave Venturo who got a bunch of 9 ratings from Phillips newsletter. I ran some of his methods which underperformed the claims (what a shock huh?). Connections Handicapping, JOT system, Quick Pick Winners, Solid Gold Handicapping, KISS Handicapping, Consenus Overlay, etc.

I was wondering what others success with this guy was, and whether Dave Venturo and Dave Powers were the same guy.

I have bought stuff from both the Daves, and I don't think they are the same person, atleast their mailing addresses are from two different parts of the country. By the way, the results are the same, ie, pathetic, for systems sold by both. However, I have to say, it gave me some new ideas to experiment with.

[Dave Schwartz]

I have bought stuff from both the Daves...


Hey, do you think when something like this is posted we could buy a vowel or something? I mean, it's tough enough being me as it is.


:D


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Bill Olmsted]

The Two Daves.....Takes me waaaaaaaaaaaay back.

[lsosa54]

and whether Dave Venturo and Dave Powers were the same guy.

Methinks Clint Tracy might be a bit jealous or confused if it were so........:bang:

[Secretariat]

Hey, do you think when something like this is posted we could buy a vowel or something? I mean, it's tough enough being me as it is.


:D


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Another Dave? Is this Dave Powers? or what about Dave Venturo? Just kidding. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[dutchboy]

DMR R3 July 19, 2007Only qualified horse on odds and type finish was the 7 who paid 133.80
Paceline 3 back on 6-29-07 showed these points of call:

6,4 : 6,4: 3,3 : finished 2nd 2.5 lgs back. If the paceline is correct the horse ran basically the same speed in the race as the winner in the last part of the race. Did not lose or gain more than one position. Did not lose or gain more than 1 length.

Wed and Thurs there were 14 qualified horses at Del Mar. 3 won and they paid 133.80 : 31.60 : 40.60

Today Friday the #1 in race 2 was the only qualiier and ran 2nd at 12-1 Races 4,5,7 have no qualifiers. R7 has not run but it odds are low. R6 too many qualified.

[Kelso]

R6 too many qualified.


DB,
Does the system specify an outside number, or percentage, of qualifiers in a race beyond which the race itself is disqualified?

Also, you wrote that specific finishing position doesn't matter ... "could have been second or 10th." How about a winning race? I've seen several over the past few days where a horse "qualifies" only if a winning race (among prior three) is counted.

Thank you.

[dutchboy]

Does not seem what the finish position was of the paceline considered as long as the last two points of call showed an even finish. Ex: won the race or finished 6th. I have seen examples where a horse wins the last race and wins again at big odds as long as it did not win by more than 1 position or win by more than 1 lenghth.

Not sure what to do if too many horses qualify in a race. Can't bet them all and perhaps too many qualified on odds because the favorite is too good or it is a strange race. I have never been sure of the accuracy of lenghts behind in a paceline. Why would the chartmaker be concerned about the accuracy of a horse beaten by over 6 lengths?

Biggest problem may be playing thru the long losing streaks of no longshots or not being there when they do win. Of course if it was a great money making system why would it have ever been sold for 35.00

[lsosa54]

You can add Gasin The Turbo in today's 5th at DMR to the list - $124.00 cool ones.



Does not seem what the finish position was of the paceline considered as long as the last two points of call showed an even finish. Ex: won the race or finished 6th. I have seen examples where a horse wins the last race and wins again at big odds as long as it did not win by more than 1 position or win by more than 1 lenghth.

Not sure what to do if too many horses qualify in a race. Can't bet them all and perhaps too many qualified on odds because the favorite is too good or it is a strange race. I have never been sure of the accuracy of lenghts behind in a paceline. Why would the chartmaker be concerned about the accuracy of a horse beaten by over 6 lengths?

Biggest problem may be playing thru the long losing streaks of no longshots or not being there when they do win. Of course if it was a great money making system why would it have ever been sold for 35.00

[dutchboy]

Also add from R9 at Colonial saturday. The 1 million g2 virg derby. 2 horses qualified and one of them won and paid 76.00 Seems wierd how the horse can pay 76.00 just based on past odds. The horse was the fav in each of the past 4 races. Basically even money in each of those 4 races. Pletcher trained. 15-1 ML

[BeatTheChalk]

That's the problem with backfitting in that manner. You don't know how many qualifers there were in any given race.

Reminds me of when I bought my first Town Car, I never knew there were so many till I started looking for them.

Absolutely right !!! When I bought my first Rolls ...same thing
happened to me :lol: Just kidding ... Your idea seems to work
more times than not. Even this : A person tells you that they
just bought a certain car. All of sudden ..VOILA ! cheers
Earl aka BTC

[Maji]

After reading these postings, I went back and looked at some old PPs to see how this system works. It is really a very nice long shot system and when it hits it hands some very nice prices. However, there can be extended periods of drawdowns too. Anyway, my manual testing of 25+ cards drew inconclusive results, as the number of races were small. The ROI was slightly negative. Can any of the database wizards run a check on this system and see if it has a positive ROI in the long run?

Thanks.

[dutchboy]

FYI,

I do know how many qualifiers are in the races since they are listed in an excel worksheet I keep. No backfitting is involved.

[Hosshead]

Also add from R9 at Colonial saturday. The 1 million g2 virg derby. 2 horses qualified and one of them won and paid 76.00 Seems wierd how the horse can pay 76.00 just based on past odds. The horse was the fav in each of the past 4 races. Basically even money in each of those 4 races. Pletcher trained. 15-1 MLGee, I had that (P.A.Downs) horse without even using a system.
Not counting that rusty old contraption in my head. ;)

[jwel14]

Don't know if Dave and Clint are the same person or not.
All i know is that I used one of their pen and paper systems on three races one day. I did a $1.00 three horse exacta box in each race. The first race, I got a $21.50 exacta. Missed the second. In the third race, I got a $471.50 exacta. My only regret is that I didn't play a $2.00 exacta.

[goforgin]

Don't know if Dave and Clint are the same person or not.
All i know is that I used one of their pen and paper systems on three races one day. I did a $1.00 three horse exacta box in each race. The first race, I got a $21.50 exacta. Missed the second. In the third race, I got a $471.50 exacta. My only regret is that I didn't play a $2.00 exacta.

Search RPM, Dave and Clint, or Len C above in the "Search". Plenty of old postings.
Good luck.

[jwel14]

It doesn't bother me if this person is that person or not. And, I don't work for any of them. And, I'm not saying that what they have is the hoily grail. The world is full of rumors. But, not only did one of Len's sytems pick that $471.50 exacta. I got another system in the mail last Saturday. I checked it against the data I had downloaded from Brisnet. It picked that $100.50 winner at Aqueduct on Saturday. March 7th. I'm not saying that every day will be like that. But, those two systems did pick those 2 . One software I have, has picked the in the money horse more often than not. That's all I care about.

[Wickel]

What systems or software are you talking about? Don't be shy. We've probably discussed and re-hashed over each one at one time or another.

[jwel14]

The 2 exactas, I used the pen and paper Super-x. But, I boxed three horses and not two. The Millionaire and Super Chalk software has a couple freebies. One of them picked the $100.50 horse Saturday. My Dan Greer's Pro rated longshot program also picked that horse. The other program I have is the X-Minus, Cashin program is the one that does a good job of finding in the money horses. One thing about those two is that the X-Minus might give a horse a zero. And, the Cashin has it in the top 2. Several times the horse in that situation wins. So, of course there is some thinking involved. Using those two programs, I have never done worse than 3 out of 4 in the Grandslam. The funny thing was last Saturday< I played the GrandSlam. But the wrong races! It was always races 5-8 when I played it before. But, since the track had 10 races, it was 6-9. Anyway, I still got 3 out of 4 races including the winner in the 9!
What I've noticed about systems is that people need to give them a chance. people being what they are, try it one day lose money and give up.
The Super chalk software has days where the track doesn't have any picks at all. But, going through some of the days I played earlier. Out of 4-5 plays, the horse never did worse than second.

[Mike A]

Judging from my experience with trying systems, I'd say to anyone whose experience with them is of short enough duration to make them seem profitable, "you need to give them more of a chance"...to fail, which is what they will eventually do.

Computer program-based "black box" systems actually do exist, and I don't know how or if the program-based variations of the systems sold by RPM differ from the paper+pencil versions, however I would be extremely leery of any version of any of the "systems" sold by them.

I am genuinely surprised they haven't been sued into oblivion for blatant misrepresentation of goods sold ages ago.

Be careful out there...especially when dealing with anyone who calls himself Clint Tracy, or Dick Eastwood, or Elvis Bronson.

[ryesteve]

And, I don't work for any of them.Well, you had me fooled for a second...

Seriously, if any system sold by RPM actually shows a profit over an extended period I've time, I'll eat it (including the staples)

[headhawg]

I am genuinely surprised they haven't been sued into oblivion for blatant misrepresentation of goods sold ages ago.My guess is that they have access to a giant database. They run a few statistical algorithms to find some factors that work well together over a particular time frame. So, when they show the consumer the "proof" of 32% winners at an average mutuel of $14.47 it's legit -- over those series of races. Basically backfitting, then selling the system based on the backfitted results.

I never read the fine print but maybe somewhere it says that past success does not guarantee future success.

[jwel14]

To mention another "System" I was using the Pro Rated Longshots for several weekends. I hit 1 -2 longshots a day on 2 dollar bets. So, for one weekend, in this case, Friday-Saturday, I did $5.00 bets and didn't hit one. Then, the next time I did $2.00 bets and got one for $34.00. There are alot of bad systems out there. But, also, I have seen that there are alot of people who when they get one, they don't stick to it and learn from it long enough. They want a "I want to make hundreds by spending a few dollars way of doing things. My other 2 "systems" I have are Ray Taulbot's Pace Calculator and the Diamond System put out by Sharphorses. I have learned from all of them.
Have had no complaints from any of them.

[craig chapman]

Stay away from money per race. It does not work. I have spoken to Len Cz over the phone in vegas. You just Can"t trust what he says about his methods. I would say a very tiny % of what RPM sells Will help a horseplayer.

[jwel14]

I will say that all of the ones I've mentioned have helped me. A system is just a starting point. It isn't the final say-so. The Pro rated Longshots is great if a person wants to put the most likely longshots in their Trifectas and superfectas. Since it was created in 1975, it has picked at least hundreds per year. I know it isn't an RPM product. But, I wanted to mention it, to make the point that what the person does with any "system" is what counts. For anyone who hates a particuar system. There could be an equal number that likes it.

[dav4463]

If you could get one super-program that put all the RPM systems in at the same time, you would probably have a system that picked every single horse in a race to win.

The trick would be to know which system will hit a particular race.

[timtam]

Pro Rated Long shots was actually part of a program sold by Mel

Shrawder using Chuck Blaskower's methods. It was called Power Zap and

was out in the mid-late 80's under the DOS setup. He had different

methods and each produced their results for each race. Doing this from

memory there was Pro Rated Longshots, Hidden Profits, Place Your Bets,

Secrets of ?? Fit and Formful. Dave is somewhat right because after

you used all these methods for one race you did come up with lots of horses.

Pro Rated Longshots held its own even back then and I always checked

those horses closely but I don't know if it made a profit by itself over the

long haul. I had the system on diskette but it required a password and when

I contacted Mel to upgrade it he said it would take alot of time and effort

to upgrade it to windows. At the time he had his own project he was working

on but he did put Win Generate on windows for me so I was thankful for that.

[JCB]

Power Zap didn't have the same system as Dan Geer did. I used Power Zap. Cost $200 then, about 2001 I think. It was a windows program then and it had a modler.. I modeled it over three months. Almost 12,000 races. Every system was a loser. None better than 15 cents on a dollar loss. Some thirty cents per dollar loss. Found a few that worked at this track or that track for the three months. Stopped working after that. High priced junk.

Bob Pitlak made a new variation of Geer's pro rated longshots. It also takes into account the number of horses in the race. The idea being that a horse who was first in a twelve horse field is better than one who was first in a five horse field. It doesn't have a modeler, but it does pretty good.

[timtam]

What is the throw in system that accompanies Super Chalk/Race Track

Millionaire? I know it isn't Dan Geer's program it is by Chuck Blaskower.

It is the same one that was included in Power Zap. What were the

program titles on Power Zap? I can only remember a few.

[JCB]

These were the methods in Power Zap 3, copied from the help file

TSC - Turbo Stretch Challenger
PFQ - Profits from Quitters
PSM - Power Spot Method
PPL - Profts Pattern Longshots
HOE - Horses on Edge
DDrop - Double Drop Spot Play
S-WO - Secret Workouts Equals Longshot Method
DRI - Dividends from Racing Investments
RR - Reliable Runners
HFL - Hidden Form Longshots
PYB - Place Your Bets II
ATH - Atomic Horse (Use top 5 ML or top 5 Sweeps picks for contenders)
RW - Secrets of Repeat Winners (Use top 5 ML or top 5 Sweeps picks for contenders)
FAF - Formful and Fit Method (Use top 5 ML or top 5 Sweeps picks for contenders)

It also had a Consensus play.

[timtam]

Thanks for the list The system I was referring to was Profit Pattern Longshots. I remember Place Your Bets totally stunk but I did get a
few nice prices from Horses On the Edge. The problem was after you
looked at all the horses picked many times you had over half the field as
contenders. Thanks again but by doing it from memory I was only half
right one third of the time. Almost like POWER ZAP :)

[JCB]

That was the problem. The grid would come up for a race and it would show what horses had what systems going for them. Almost every horse in every race had some system going for it. People could rationalize that they only had to figure out which system worked. Backfit by track and class type. Somebody obsessed enough could go on for years thinking they could find something that works.

They could do the same for Focus from ADPA. Same for Steve Wolson's Powerline. Same for Len C's TIPS program. Same for HTR, HSH, JCapper, Netcapper, or any program with multiple ratings. The winner is found somewhere.

[exactaplayer]

thanks for the chuckle. I remember years ago on the old Prodigy horse board there was a guy called B.Zettler , he used to brag about how "All-in-one" had the winner in that race, paid double figures too.

I finally had to tell him. "Now i know how it works Bill, All-in-One picks all the horses and one of them wins."

[jwel14]

I was refering to Dan Greer's program. American Turf monthly shows some of the horses won from the method each month.

[Lefty]

Yes, they show a nice list of winners but omit the losers and fail to give an ROI. Guess why?

[goforgin]

I was refering to Dan Greer's program. American Turf monthly shows some of the horses won from the method each month.
I have the program also and have used it in the past. The problem was there were too many playable races. Even with Al Smallman's updated rules, still too many plays and long run outs. Since your post sparked some interest, I decided to check recent PRL winners and see if there is any pattern to limit the number of plays. I checked only Clm's and MdClm's. No Alw, OptClm's, Stakes, etc. Here's what I found from a very small sample.
- Early speed (ES) in the last race. 1st, 2nd or 3rd; and/or within 1 or 2 lengths of the leader at the first 2 calls.
- ES last race plus a drop in class today (saw several of these). ES last race plus 2nd time Lasix today.
- Up in class last race and now dropped in class for this race lower than the 2nd race back.
By limiting plays to Clm's and MdClm's, plus adding the above rules, the number of plays is lowered, but still several hits. Again, a very small sample and a database test may return a negative ROI. I did not check for place or show. Overall, just a thought since I saw your post. If you're checking or finding any patterns and/or restrictions, would be interested to hear back.
Good luck.

[Fingal]

For some reason I stopped getting the catalog, & I even bought a few things so it wasn't a case of
" no buy, no send .":confused:

[timtam]

Just look at an old catalog or better yet 2 or 3 older catalogs because there

aren't many new items in the "new" one. ;)

[Triopstor]

I Just got off the phone with Dave at RPM 15 minutes ago.

He said a new Catalog for 2010/2009 will be in the mail in 30 days.


Sincerely Triopstor.

[Tom Barrister]

I Just got off the phone with Dave at RPM 15 minutes ago.

He said a new Catalog for 2010/2009 will be in the mail in 30 days.


Sincerely Triopstor.

Thanks for taking the time to make an account here and tell us that in your very first post. We appreciate it.

Sincerely, Santa Claus.

[Triopstor]

You are welcome Tom!

One of the great purposes of life and this can change a person's point of view is
to seek & provide to EMPOWER people. EMPOWER means for one to be able to self motivate and self power from within. As the Chinese proverb goes:
"Give a man a fish he will eat for a day, But teach a man to fish..."

[llegend39]

You are welcome Tom!

One of the great purposes of life and this can change a person's point of view is
to seek & provide to EMPOWER people. EMPOWER means for one to be able to self motivate and self power from within. As the Chinese proverb goes:
"Give a man a fish he will eat for a day, But teach a man to fish..."

I thought it went like this:
Give a man a fish he will eat for a day,teach a man to fish and he will sit in the boat and drink beer all day!

[Robert Goren]

I thought it went like this:
Give a man a fish he will eat for a day,teach a man to fish and he will sit in the boat and drink beer all day!:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Warren Henry]

I Just got off the phone with Dave at RPM 15 minutes ago.

He said a new Catalog for 2010/2009 will be in the mail in 30 days.


Sincerely Triopstor.
While you were on the phone, did you get to talk to Clint?

[ryesteve]

While you were on the phone, did you get to talk to Clint?Dave probably had him conferenced in... :)

[banacek]

Dave probably had him conferenced in... :) It's nice that he's working with his old high school buddy. :lol:

[Triopstor]

Some people think Dave Powers is Clint Tracy. Just as some think Dan Pope is Clayton Harding. I don't know. That was the first time I spoke with Dave.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

The great question of Dave Powers and Clint Tracy...to be continued.

[Tom Barrister]

Some people think Dave Powers is Clint Tracy. Just as some think Dan Pope is Clayton Harding. I don't know. That was the first time I spoke with Dave.

Some people think you really did just get off the phone with Dave Powers and felt the overpowering need to create a new account here to tell everybody all about the RPM catalog's status. Just as some people (the other 99.5%) think you're another in the long tiring line of RPM first-time-poster shills. I don't know.

I spoke to "Dave Powers" and "Clint Tracy" on separate occasions, a couple of months apart. I can understand why these two bonded in high school; they are probably remarkably similar.... their voices, for instance.

This is old news, though.

Commercial gets old after while.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Some people think you really did just get off the phone with Dave Powers and felt the overpowering need to create a new account here to tell everybody all about the RPM catalog's status. Just as some people (the other 99.5%) think you're another in the long tiring line of RPM first-time-poster shills. I don't know.

I spoke to "Dave Powers" and "Clint Tracy" on separate occasions, a couple of months apart. I can understand why these two bonded in high school; they are probably remarkably similar.... their voices, for instance.

This is old news, though.

Commercial gets old after while.

Tom,
Thank you for the info...you're word and explanation is good enough for me as I have had dealings with RPM for years and began questioning Powers/Tracy debate.

[Triopstor]

I learned a good lesson from Tom.

Always know the answers in life or keep quiet.

And the other matter I learned is when you don't know something, that just means one needs to investigate further.

I shall increase my efforts for understanding henceforth.

[Wickel]

Dave Powers=Clint Tracy, Tom Console, and maybe Len C, IMHO.