Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Binder
<snip>Gee I never considered myself that bad. I did quite well with Synthesis. and I keep very good records Those records consist of 20 race cycles and modeling just one readout The Early/late readout Which was all
Doc said he did and suggested his clients to do
Many of my wager discision forms
from my synthesis days were used in the follow up
What can I tell you? I do better with Val then Synthesis
or Ted Craven's new program Speculator The methodology worked for me
|
It worked for a lot of people, and still does. As you point out, Sartin himself was minimally concerned with "advanced programs," other than because they generated money and provided crutches for insecure clients. One of his most basic ideas was that if he emphasized the applications, his clients would learn decent analytical skills without realizing what they were doing.
Having watched Sartin pick races on a number of occasions, the entire idea of a computer application "selecting the winner" is almost comical. In Sartin's view, the "proper pace lines" (meaning "the pace lines that will rate Horse A higher than Horse B in whatever application the user is using") "loomed up off the page." That scared a LOT of people, who avoided the fact that it was necessary for THEM to pick the winner, not the application (many still avoid that fact).
Given Sartin's training as a psychologist, it is small wonder that he routinely used psychological techniques, not to trick and deceive, but rather to ease the realization in his clients that THEY had to do the analysis, using the programs as tools, rather than using them as crutches to avoid taking responsibility for the decisions.
Good Luck
