Just what is the Sartin Methodology?
 

OK, the title sounds naive, but my point is I have seen so many methods of play used under the all encompassing title of "Sartin Metholdology," that I'm not even exactly sure when I'm using it.

I mean I use AP and Hidden Pace on occasion as well as energy concepts (not used like Sartin preached but that's where I first heard about it == I've just adapted it to my own style of play.)

But I have not used Thoromotion or Validator or TPRs, etc. I read a couple of manuals but never used the exact methods preached in them.

I don't consider myself a Sartinist but maybe I am?
I mean, just who or what is a Sartin player?

:confused:

THE SARTIN METHODOLOGY: in the beginning there was a group of
compulsive gamblers treated by DOC SARTIN and he thought he
could turn these "DEGENERATES" in to winners{he did}......oh well,not
long after that SARTIN NATION,not to be confused with the
RAIDER NATION{not once did a SARTIN devotee throw a battery
at a jockey}started showing up at SANTA ANITA....BEYER covers the SARTIN "MOVEMENT" in BEYER
ON SPEED.

Ever heard the story about the 12 blind men and the elephant?

Blind Squirrel--
I wonder why no one has ever heard from any of these 100+ truck drivers with the gambling problem. I don't go out to a whole lot of boards, but I have never seen anyone come out and say "I was one of those in the original group".
Andi has the perfect avatar for the Sartin Story! Dunno if that is just coincidence or not........

There is also debate about whether the Doc was really a certified doctor...of any persuasion.... I am not debating his intelligence....PT Barnum was an intellect as well!

Actually, that is a good example, D.

The methodology evolved over 7 phases:

1 Baiscally, the TPR stuff
2 Harness
3 The fps velocity stuff aka Brohammer's stuff
4 Ultra Scan
5 Energy
6 Deceleration
7 Synthesis


There were multiple programs, even at the same step - entropy, Kgen, T-mation, etc.

Overall, it was a way to use various types of pace analysis, but the real thing was the pyscological approach - find a way for people to accept winning, or a prescription to win. Howard used the analogy of jugglers - some people were not comfortable having to many balls in the air so Phase I was for them. Others were very gifted and could keep many balls in the air, so they were apt to use Decel or Synthesis. Whatever the prescription, record keeping was a pre-requitsite to winning. To keep track of your progress, he also recommended 20 race cycles - this way, you had mileposts to review your approach.

So, I consider myself to be using the metodology even when using HTR velocity or CJ pace numbers because I still keep the records, the 20 race cycles, the form cycle analysis (+,0, N races)

(I only recently started to explore the Validator stuff - and I am very impressed with it. The early/ late examples 46 posts about frequently are very strong at some tracks.)

There are at least two sites devoted to the metodology - perhaps others will chime in here.

It is alive and well and living on the internet.

Thanks tom.


OK, I don't need the whole history or mythology of Sartin. I KNOW all the stories of the alleged truck drivers and about his philosophy, etc. I do NOT want this to turn into an attack on Sartin or a debate on his methods.

I am honesting looking for what users consider to be the "Sartin Method."

There are so many branches of Sartin -- are you using Sartin if you use TPRs?
Pizzolla started with Sartin so he has roots there. Is his stuff Sartin-esque?

Again, no Pizzolla attacks, etc.

shooting the messenger
 

Still amazes me that people won't investigate for themselves ideas that permeate many other software packages, but are in a big hurry to denegrate the fellow who has his name on the idea. The methodolgy borrowed from many other sources, but brought it all together into one systematic approach that is working still today (since about 1982) as well as ever. I began with it in 1986 with a program called Phase III and it does take a long study period to "get it," but once you do, it never stops amazing you. However one may characterize Howard Sartin, he revolutionized the way races are evaluated and he referred to his ideas as the Handicapping Revolution in his magazine The Folllow Up. Many in the original group of instructors (Brohamer, Purdy, Pizzola, Dick Schmidt) once away from the parent organization PIRCO, used the method as their base, and them imparted their FLAVOR to it. The origianal early TPR (called a "smoke screen) was released in the book Pace Makes the Race.

It is simply a incremental velocity/deceleration evaluation of a race with the idea that MOST horses are "stuck" in a certain style of running, or energy distribution (short or long) that cannot be changed that much by the rider or trainer and one looks for mis-matches: whenever a horse is forced to run in a energy distribution where it has NOT done well in the past, once can usually eliminate them. The cheaper the horse, the more they are locked into a single style (there are exceptions in classy sprinters, i.e. Groovy a need to lead monster).

I have discovered an idea that Tom refered to as early/late relativity and at some speed favoring tracks, one can refer to that energy distribution almost by itself to elucidate the winner.

I moderate a yahoo group called Sartin Alums and there is another called Pace and Cap and at BOTH, various people discuss ways that they use the software. Being a born iconoclast and "fidgeter" I experiment constantly and have found many new correlations, particularly in FORM CYCLES. (I have written here about a horse having a three race drop in total energy and an increasing % median as often going off form). The lastest version is called Speculator 160 and there is a Windows based one in the works. The original programmer (Guy Wadsworth) passed away early this year and another programmer is working on the next generation, so it is alive and well.

The message is far more important than the messenger.

My TWo Cents Worth
 

Its a way off looking at a race as it unfolds. A final time of 1:10 for 6f is not the end all of the story. My favorite example is

Horse A: 21.4 44.4 1:10
Horse B: 22.2 45.1 1:10

Even with the same final times horse A would beat horse B in most situations. Horse B would need a track bias (a late running track , a turf track or some bias to aid his 3 fraction run). If A were a confirmed front runner B would need help from other horses.

So a 1:10 must be explained, how was the 1:10 earned

Off course this is a continuation of the work of Ray Talubot and Huey Mahl. There are more such as energy disturbtion, and two horse betting but A and B horse is the basic.

Tom-
Hopefully no one takes that post the wrong way. The Sartin stuff is heady stuff, and very effective for the person who can apply it properly. But much of his early stuff can be traced back to earlier works by other individuals. Much like one of the books I will be selling is EXACTLY what Pizolla touts in his Handicapping Magic book. The book I have is from I believe the early 1980's. And Pizolla DOES mention that what he is presenting is nothing new.

But the marketing of these concepts is the key to successfully taking this stuff to market. How many people woulda been interested in the Sartin stuff if we weren't fed the story of 100 degenerate truck drivers with a gambling problem? Kinda "glamourizes it, doesn't it? In no way am I saying the methodology doesn't work. I know it does....I used to tote a Radio Shack pocket computer to the track with the original Sartin stuff programmed in BASIC in it. If it were not for the Sartin stuff, I woulda never given a look at Massa's program.

My point is everyone who now employees velocity to ANY degree drop the name Sartin and they become part of the METHODOLOGY. Hence Andi's confusion over what is the Methodology and what is not. But your post shows that the true methodology has evolved, in some cases into just more convoluted permutations of the same concepts, while in other cases forward strides have been made. We all need to adapt what works for us. But I think for many newbies it is getting harder to seperate the sheaf from the wheat.

more to the method than madness
 

a MAJOR part of the methodolgy which does not get much attention was Dr. Sartin's approach to (as the warden in Cool Hand Luke would say) "getting your mind right." The Follow Up contained many suggested readings OUTSIDE racing (many dealing with Eastern philosophy and how I got my start in studying the Tao and Buddhism by the way) books like Chaos by Gelick, the Chinese I Ching, Complexity by Waldrop, Silva Mind Control (he was big on meditative practices) ALL designed to work on the psychological aspects of wagering in what he referred to as Win Therapy. At one point he even suggested putting a rubber band around one's wrist and "popping" the band hard against the wrist everytime you won as feedback.

Zilzal----exactly!

In no way am I demeaning Sartin or Pizolla or anyone else. If it helps who cares who brought you to the dance?

Donnie, I knew Doc was a salesman - a darn good one.
I also know that using Aqua Velva will not bring scantly clad women rushing to rub my cheeks, but I still use it! :lol:

Donnie, Sartin CONSTANTLY gave credit to Ray Taulbot, Huey Mahl, Sam Sedgewick and others.
Sartin was the first guy I know who compounded pace ratings. First guy I know who talked about horses coming out of same race and often reversed. He called them Tandem races.
First guy I now who said the 2nd best win horse usually wasn't the place horse. etc, etc etc.
I know you weren't demeaning Sartin but lots do, and yet they steal from him.

here is an example of the e/l relativity at it's best.

1st race - Ellis Park - August 10, 2006
Pgm Horse Win Place Show
4 Sweet One 51.00 13.20 4.80
6 Trick Shot Gal 2.40 2.10
1A Lady Luluann 5.20

In a sprint, one looks for those horses in the positive range (+10-16) which denotes they will be closer to the lead. TWO of the top three e/l ranked horses run 1-2.

I don't know much about the Sartin methodology, but I am happy Ray Talbot is getting some credit in this thread.

One of the first books I ever read about horseracing was by Ray Talbot. It was primarily about pace figures and form cycles. When I read it (in the 70s) it was already a pretty old book. So his ideas about pace had been out there for quite a long time already.

It's funny because in the 70s Beyer was telling us that pace doesn't matter at all and most TG/RAGs players still believe that it rarely matters.

Sure the charts have improved and the insights have been refined, but Ray T is one of the most underrated authors out there. He was way ahead of his time even if some of the charts and rules for systems seem dated now.

I wish I still had that original book, but unfortuantely it disappeared into a black hole somewhere. I'd love to read it again.