TOTAL VICTORY AT THE TRACK: The Promise and the Performance
 

Anyone have test results of the full methodology of this book or individual elements comprising the methodology, i.e. Performance Class Ratings(PCR), Ability Times (as revised in this book), Form Factors, Adjusted Variants, Class Adjustments etc.) ?

Calculation and rating of the key data manually is no simple task .:bang:

I wonder if any software exists for the whole system or key elements shown in the book.

According to the author, interpretation of the data produced for each horse individually and in comparison to the rest of the field is necessary (Gee, what a surprise!) . :rolleyes:

Does the book meet the expectations of its subtitle or come anywhere close?

Comments please on any or all of the above.

In my opinion...
 

The book is a work of FICTION...especially the system in the book which the author saw fit to call "Social Security"...or something similar. A better name for it would have been, "Prelude to a Bankruptcy".

As a handicapping author...the late Mr. Scott, was a very good lawyer.

up until lately, i have never read a book about horse race handicapping. recently i bought how to handicap longshots from Pandy and thought it was pretty good. i haven't put it into practice though.

i also bought the complete series from Overlay publications and found it very useful.

basically i am not a reader or a listener to anyone as far as horse race handicapping goes. i do my own type of unique work to come up with my larger plays. the way the game is structured, i have to bet a lot to get a top rebate these days so i am constantly looking to improve upon the plays that i am making strictly on guesses, meaning handicapping. i am learning that i am one of the very worst handicapper's known to man. don't feel sorry for me, i do pretty well with first time starters, layoff horses and horses that work in between races.

another thing i want to get out of the way, i watch TVG constantly and i can honestly admit that they do something that nobody else does. they will tell you when a horse doesn't look good in the paddock or on the track. yesterday i heard them say in the 4th race at Santa Anita that AUTUMN TWILIGHT was all washed up. i had already bet $1000 to win on the horse, so i saw the horse going to the gate and saw the filly looked washy. i cancelled my bet, she happened to have run second and i saved $1000. that's what i like about Hong Kong racing as well where Jenny looks at the horses in the paddock, on the track and going into the gate, she has saved me a lot of money as well. i swear TVG must have saved me over 100 times on bets that i have made on horses that didn't look right.

I used Scott's methodology for several months as an alternative to Pace handicapping.
For me it worked just fine and was particularly helpful in playing 3x4x5 triacta plays.
However, I was doing all of the work manually with a paper and pencil.
It was a very tedious process for sure.
I was taking at least 45 minutes a race to do all of the additions and calculations suggested by Scott.
Certainly, I can't knock the book.
Some years later I was in the Gamblers Book Store in Las Vegas.
On one table were about 12 copies that had been returned that were for sale at reduced prices.
From that I concluded that other players must have found his system to tedious as well.

That's why I titled my initial post here "In my opinion"; I wanted it known that what I said was based strictly on my OWN experience. I am not one of those who gets turned off by tedious handicapping. I enjoy handicapping...whether it's tedious or not. I tested extensively the systems of BOTH of Mr. Scott's books -- this, and also the system in "Investing at the Racetrack" -- and my results were nothing like the results that the author had reported in his books.

Can William L. Scott's work be successfully improved upon...or, can parts of it play an important role in a horseplayer's EXISTING handicapping method?

Of course!

But Mr. Scott does not present his work as a non-systematic array of handicapping ideas, which could be picked apart and reassembled by the reader; he presents his work as ready-made and profitable handicapping SYSTEMS.

And as such...his work does not withstand intense scrutiny.

What failed to withstand testing, the handicapping factors he presents or the interpretation of them or both (assuming one can be separated from the other in theory or practice?)

And wasn't Mr. William Scott (a pseudonym) the father of a fairly well-known figure in the horserace handicapping field?

Software
 

Thomas Racing System employs the ratings

Mickey,

There is a program called Fast Fred Pro that will give you some or most of the numbers from Scott's books. Link below. Also there was a manual entry dos shareware program called Victory that helped in the calculations of the numbers.


Fast Fred Pro

"Investing At The Racetrack" didn't cut the mustard for me
 

After I got out of the Air Force, I had some "free" time to try out Scott's ability times and other concepts back in 1987. Since it was before full-card simulcasts, I had a limited experiment involving mostly Fairmount, Sportsmen's, Hawthorne, and later on The Birmingham Turf Club after I moved to Alabama later in the year.

I don't recall the exact numbers, but it was something like 190 races wagered, and an overall return of $1.70 for every $2 wagered, which pretty much reflected the takeout. I came to the conclusion that it was an awful lot of work for a little bit of loss. I also came to the conclusion, that the main premise of his "ability" times, must have been reflected more in the odds than his book would leave you to believe, and I simply thought maybe the harness crowd (with their focus on last 1/4 times) was betting these "superior" animals. I was also disappointed in the short prices, as I don't recall a winner over 8-1 from the sample. YMMV. After reviewing the "workout" of the method, I finally concluded that he cherry-picked his week at Belmont in 1980, showing profits every day.

It's interesting that out on Amazon, his first two books "Investing at the Racetrack" and "How will your horse run Today?" can be purchased used for under a dollar, but the "Total Victory at the Track" will cost you $15. Though it has some updates, I'm not inclined to invest in it....

Author Finley's sons are William and Scott :)... Scott was apart of the original staff at the late, great The Racing Times, and Bill is a long-time turf writer who probably could be found at both The Blood Horse magazine and The New York Times.

Not exactly sure what Scott Finley is doing currently but was told he's still in 'the business'.

a stumbled across a selection service based on "total victory at the track" on the trackmaster sight in their winners circle package. They have previous days reports for free if you want to check it out.

I used the method for a few years in the late 80's when I was learning the game. It did fine as a selection method with plenty of ticket cashing on favorites and low odds contenders, but really no way to make money long term with it. I believe he recommended only rating the three favorites in the race and betting one of those.

It teaches discipline and system play which has value.

Scotts Form Ratings
 

I used the successfully in the mid 1980's when the new Garden State open Horses the had a "0" last race running line and a "0" for recency simply didnt win. I rated the whole field , not just the 1st 3 public choices. Then i found as the years went on and the game /training/trainers changed they werent as effective

Pandy's
 

Pace shape spot play method from Pace Handicapping Longshots when it arises and you can zone in on the pace horse is a source of some nice overlays..... good stuff

There's a third: How Will Your Horse Run Today.