P Method Q & A

This page will share with all – in no particular order – the questions that come in regarding the method and my responses. As well, if any of you want to respond – please do via email and I’ll add your comments below. Your questions in blue / my responses in gray / any of your additions in green.

————————

Hi Gary – I’ve enjoyed reading through this, now on at least my third thorough reading.  I get the logic, but feel like I’m missing something.  You mention “2 of last 3” many times throughout the manual, but I’m not getting it and I can’t figure out what “2 of last 3” means.  Could you enlighten me on something that seems very obvious?

I should have been clearer on that . . .

From the Betting Signals section: “In general:  Either we are looking to go against the predominant direction of the last 3 prices – or – we are looking to go against the direction of a larger price ‘spike’ in the very next race.”  So – the direction of 2 of the last 3 races. This a minimum – you could have 3 of 3 or more, but as soon as you have “2 of 3” in either direction – that has become the current “predominant direction” (above the MA lines or below the MA lines).

——

Gary,  Don’t mean to be nit picking, i just want to make myself 100% clear on the betting signals. The “Rocking All” race, where you wrote that you would use the gold line(no green yet) to get the odds bet parameter at less than 9/2, since the black line was lower, wouldn’t you use the black line to get the odds parameter, so less than 4/1? Still got the winner.  Thanks.

——

Yes – you are correct on the black line which was just above $10 – you would have been looking for horses at 4/1 or less – and results were the same.

—–

I sent out some stuff to the mentoring group earlier today – below is a small bit of that – the results of Fg race #6 yesterday:

I hope some of you had updated and had your Fg chart ready to go. The method we will be showing to the mentoring group easily picked out the winner – and the exacta! 

——

Gary  Few questions?   – I assume the tally sheet requires manual updating – yes?   –  What is the 30% error column in the tally sheet suppose to represent?   –  How would the tally sheet be accurate with data entered for days not played but data entered to track say the 27 race moving average? 

Yes, manual updating on the tally sheet, but you simply copy and paste the information over from the track sheets (columns A thru J only). I do it at the end of each day – takes about 20 seconds per track,

The cumulative ROI/ avg pay/ tot / per bet / per day / etc boxes will update automatically, so don’t change those.  The only cell you can change is the middle cell in the second box just to the right of “p-l @”  that amount should be your win average bet amount. This is for projection purposes only – if you have a betting approach that varies the win bet amount – then you will need to set up an exact accounting of those.  

The 30% error column is also for projecting future potential of a series of actual wagers. One needs to err on the side of conservatism, things seem to go against a player at times – Murphy’s Law – so this builds in a 30% reduction of what you have been doing when projecting what you might actually achieve long-term .

All races entered in the columns- are entered into the chart.  The totals tallies count for winning – only the races where there is a “1” entered into the “quals” (H) column. The blanks and “2” cells are counted only for number (you can see the formulas in the formula bar at the top when you left click in any cell).

—–

Gary, am I understanding you that “direction” for last 2/3 really means “position” on chart either above or below 9 or 27 MA lines?  Let’s say MA is hovering around 12 and 3 successive prices are $24 down to $18 down to $ 14. The “direction” for 2/3 is down which would signal an up bet.  But the “location” of each is above the MA line signaling a down bet.   Also on down side if successive prices were $4 up to $6 up to $8 the “direction” for 2/3 would be up signaling a down bet, yet “location” is below MA signaling an up bet.  So it’s the “location” of 2/3 prices relative to MA lines that makes the call right?  

—–

No – it’s simpler than that.  2 or more prices in succession of last 3 below the Ma lines – you are looking to wager on prices above the MA lines // 2 or more prices above the MA line/s – you are looking to wager on prices below the MA lines.

—–

Okay, I’m starting to get this now.  However, I keep messing up the graph when I try to do this: (below from Inst)  

“You can get a clearer idea of where you were at the end of the previous chart by getting a screen capture of the last 15 races or so and inserting that into the next spreadsheet just below where the new blank chart sits.”  Can you tell how to do this?

—–

That only happens after you fill up a 120-race chart.  Use whatever screen capture program you have – Windows has a component for that – I use “Snagit”  – then just take a snapshot of the last 12 or 15 races and paste it into the new spreadsheet you are starting – below the chart, so you can refer to it. You’ll only need for the first 10 or 12 races on the new chart – this so you don’t need to wait for the 9-day and 27-day MA lines to kick in again.  Don’t put it “on” the new graph – but under it – like pasting a photo onto the page.

—–

First day of using “P” method hit a $28.20 horse at Tampa. Bet down from 20/1 ml to 10 at one point, 2/2 at tampa plus a good trainer!  Wouldnt have gotten that without the P method! Ilike the fact that the method NARROWS DOWN the horses to handicap, huge advantage!!    Now looking for a reversal.

—–

Gary,  Just wanted to let you know that I am using L&B to separate my contenders and so far it’s working out extremely Well! Haven’t had a losing day yet!  Best regards

—–

Gary, Have a question about this graph at Tampa. There are 3 results above all lines, yet there is a greater than 9 point drop 30 to 15.6. Question, does a 9 point swing take precedence in this case going for a rebound up swing vs going for a down reversal considering there are 3 above all lines?  Thanks (chart below)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.
In the charts shown above – your chart is on left – my chart for the same period is on the right (I had just extended form a full Tam chart, so no 27-day MA line is showing there – the one on your chart is approx where it would have been). Precedence is given to the “last two of three” main guideline.  Since there have been 3 in succession above the MA lines – we are looking for a “down” price below the green line at less than 5/1. When that hit at the $9.80 race, we are in a “wait” mode – until we again until a new 2 of 3 signal – which happened in the next race which came in below the MA lines at $10.60 to give us a new “up” signal . This signal failed in the following $9 race.

By the same guideline – the wait symbol on my chart at the $5 winner race at lower left was a “wait” because 2 of last 3 prices (those shown as $30 and $13) were above the lines – our $6.40 low signal had hit, so we are waiting for a new “2 of 3” signal – which we got when the $5 race came in also under the MA lines. There were two maiden pass races, and then the $21.2 successful up signal.

—–

 Still working with this Gary.  Just read one of the posts about direction and you mentioned 2 in succession.  I had not seen that before.  If that’s the case then what’st the “3” in two of three really for?  If you’re waiting for 2 in succession either above or below the MA the third race back would be irrelevant wouldn’t it?  

Also, based on the guidelines in the spreadsheet “any time you have a spike of $9 or more up or down“- then go for the rebound play in the next race regardless….  Your answer to the the question (after the charts) seems to conflict with the guidelines.  I’m ok with that because most of the time guidelines are just that and I try to do what I feel comfortable with.  However, I also try to follow things to a T when I feel like there is some excellent logic, which I think this method has.     Thank you for your time and efforts.

—–

I see the confusion – I have grayed out the “in succession” part of that answer above (and added the yellow highlighted) – the second half of that statement was worded correctly.

– You can have an up/down/up situation – which I mentioned in the manual as being a very common pattern – in which case we are looking for the next race to be a “down” – below the current MA lines.

As long as the 3 price points of the swings have not fallen within $3 of the MA lines – which happens when the lines are close together and when prices and MA lines are all ‘tightening” down.  If the MA lines are farther apart, then you will end up with a price falling between the two main lines, and that brings the “wait” guideline into play.

 – Or  you can have an up/up//down – in which case you would wait for another down for a new “up” signal – or if the next race were an up spike of $9 or more and fell above the high MA line , you would have a new “down” signal

– Or you can have a continuing x number of prices falling on one side of the line ( for ex: up/up/up) in which case the pressure is building for the spike in the opposite direction.

– Or you can have the above three in reverse of course.

Charting is easier done than explained – the visual connects with our innate capacity to see patterns – whereas reading the written word invariably opens up the potential for confusion.

—

 Hi Gary.   Regarding the Tampa chart question that you answered previously.   Why is there a wait signal for the $ 10.60 race after the successful down signal at $9.80 race?   The trend going into the $10.60 race is up/up/down suggesting another down signal, right?  Is it because the swing into the $9.80 race is less than $9, therefore the rule is to wait 1 race?   I do understand that if the swing into the $9.80 race was $9 or more, it would have been an up signal for the $10.80 race.  Thanks

—

Yes – you had a successful down signal – so because it wan’t a $9 spike down (in which case you’d play for the immediate rebound), You are waiting for a new signal (verification): either a spike up (you’d then play the “down”) or another price below the MA (you’d then play the “up”). I don’t usually try for two successive plays in the same direction – there may be handicapping factors that over-ride that now and then on the “down” signal side (small field, two stand-outs in Graded Stakes race, etc.), but as sure as you start ‘second-guessing’ the up signals – you miss one of those big payers.

—

I suggested to the mentoring group that if your charts show the 27-day (green) MA line dropping below $9 – you should either drop that track until it rises above that again, or play only down signals until it changes.

—

Hi Gary,   I don’t believe I’ve seen any example races in the mentoring program for this particular set-up. It was a 2 up and 1 down, but there was a $9 or more spike down on race 47. Because the spike down from that race was above the MA lines, I went with an up-signal on that price and above (6.50 odds & above.) RDSS had the horse. Would that be within the guidelines? Screenshot below. Thanks!

Yes – I agree with your ‘usig’ choice . . .

The other alternative – when you are in a situation on the charts that is puzzling – is of course to simply wait until the charts are giving a clearer indication of where the ‘pressure’ is building or subsiding.

In those less-clear situations, I would suggest going ahead and handicapping the next race (or re-checking the race if previously h-capped) – if everything is pointing to a horse or horses that are also in the direction you feel the charts will go – then go ahead.  If say though that the trainer/s are poor, or the figs aren’t convincing on the contenders whose odds are in the direction you are anticipating – then a pass would be more prudent.

—