Rex E Bills is modern rulerships mainly and the Lehmann book is traditional - both are very useful.

Well done with your 4th.

I made a complete mess of that - 1st aspect was Quincunx to Leo Jupiter dispos. of 3rd Sag Moon - trip to Paris
I'm at work using my phone - hate these small screens. Still, backed Gabriel's King e/w, so got my money back!

Thanks for clearing that up, GB. The various schemes you frequently and readily apply means that it's often difficult for me to keep up with your current lines of sporty astrological investigation. May i enquire, are you a Gemini?

While waiting for some results this evening (or even just the exit polls) I thought I would raise a few points about the discussions we have been having on horse race prediction.

There seem to be a number of possible ways of approaching prediction, and perhaps finding two or three methods giving the same prediction would be the safest way before betting.

1. The Birth Chart Method.
The chart for the race is compared with the birth chart of each horse and the 'best' fit taken as the winner. We know the problem with the birth time, so we can not use birth angles, Point of Fortune or the Moon's natal position. In addition we need to be careful about applying/separating of very close aspects to the inner planets.
We do not have a clear, tested, set of criteria about which aspects are important, and which planets are important. In addition, as we need to look at each natal chart, it is only really practical for races with less than about 10 or 12 horses.

2. Addey's Campanus 5th Cusp Method.
The Campanus 5th cusp for the race is moved forward within the race chart until it makes an aspect with a planet. This planet by its nature and position indicates the name of the winner.
We do not have a clear idea which aspects to use, which planets to consider, do antiscia count, and to what extend do be just use the planetary rulership or also take into account its sign and house.

3. Sepharial Weight Method.
I posted this link earlier in this thread, but here it is again:
www.scribd.com/doc/33339801/Sepharial-1 ... 0-p#scribd
This is only applicable to handicap races, where there is a wide range of weights. The big issue is that it gives two possible weights for the winner, a high weight and a low one. We do not know how to chose between them - should we use the one that is closer to an actual weight, or are both possibles? In addition, Sepharial suggested a number of variants of the method over the years.

4. Best fit to the race chart.
The race chart as a whole is taken to describe the winner. So the dominant features of the chart are considered, perhaps the closest aspects, the chart ruler, the ruler of the hour (using which method?) and so on. People have also suggested that the owners colours that the jockey wears should also be considered: a strong Mars fits red colours. Again, we do not really know which factors are important in describing the winning horse.

The way forward -
Perhaps we need some detailed analysis of a number of races using different methods for the same race to see how they compare, and particularly what happens if a number of methods agree (or they all differ!).

Any thoughts most welcome.

Graham

It has occurred to me that I may seem to be flying against group interest, because I'm not personally interested in testing out other methods, so maybe I should explain that when I initially opened this thread, I didn't expect it to be the one thread in the forum that explored all elements of looking at horse races astrologically - my intention was to open a thread where I could record my own experiences of a technique I particularly want to test out as part of a wider, ongoing astrological investigation. I don't mind at all that the thread has become more open than I thought it would be, and hope it is understood that my own focus being limited to one approach is not meant to imply criticism or rejection of any method any other member is using. It is just that I have particular reasons for doing what I am doing, so for the short term, in what little time I have available, I need to keep my focus on that. Happy to join in with general conversations of course, whenever I can. Hope that is OK with you GB.

GB,

A good summary of the methods available.
I am not aware of any other approaches.

Re Sepharial Weight method, you say "The big issue is that it gives two possible weights for the winner, a high weight and a low one.
We do not know how to chose between them - should we use the one that is closer to an actual weight, or are both possibles?"

Sepharial says this, for the Eclipse variant : "Note: Always follow the horse nearest the indicated weight."

Sepharial has (at least) 4 methods, which are quite distinct in terms of their operation.
I have automated my understanding of Sepharial's Eclipse method and will look to do something similar with his other methods.
Although his concept of a Nonal Series has me totally baffled for the moment at least.

I am now working on developing my own approach to matching horse natal charts to the race event chart, but taking quite a different tack to the one outlined by Deb.
This approach is one based on what Frawley has to say on such matters in the Astrologer's Apprentice.

The idea of putting things to the test is one I had thought of too, although defining the rules of engagement may be a challenge.
For example, astrogooner suggests the Addey method works best with Maidens and similar (I think), whereas Sepharial's Eclipse is in most cases limited to Handicap races.

If anyone else is up to the challenge, I suggest the following:

• a minimum of 30 race selections over 30 days,
  any number of selections in one race,
  each race has a standard unit wager,
  (so if multiple selections in one race, each selection carries the same proportion of the standard race wager),
  all selections to be posted in advance of race time,
  selections may be amended at any time up to the scheduled start of the race,
  only wins (and not places) are counted and valued at returned SPs,
  overall performance is valued as Return on Investment, i.e. Profit / Outlay.

This would not be proof of the pudding for any of the methods, but more some kind of measure of an individual approach to a method.
It may be illuminating.

If anyone is up to the challenge, I suggest a separate thread and the first thing would be to establish the ground rules.
Perhaps GB would like to officiate?
I am happy to stand my corner with my interpretation of Sepharial's Eclipse method if there are any takers.

We do not have a clear idea which aspects to use

I'm sorry Graham. I've been explaining the importance of the quincunx for several months now, but yet again, you ignore my comments. And it's not the first time either. Frankly, i find that's a fairly immature attitude at best. It's time for you to get over my debunking of your "Aries Moon indicates an above average of draws in the PL" theory.

If you don't want me to contribute here, that's fine, I'll go else where. But it will be your loss. I personally give up a 20 year career in the national press to work in the betting industry to further my own studies in sports astrology. I have, for example, valuable data concerning Moon phases and betting patterns that no one else could possibly obtain, which is one of the reasons why i called for this thread to be made members only. Aside from that, I've been predicting winners of horse racing for a long time, as John from Midheaven Books would testify to my selection of Red Marauder in the 2001 National.

I'm all for the advancement of our understanding of astrology, especially with it's application to horse racing, but we'll all have a much better chance of achieving our common aim by forgetting our insecurities and petty ego concerns.

Astrogooner - I am very happy for you to comment and am sorry if I have seemed to ignore your suggestions. Far from it, I have book looking at your advice on the quincunx and testing it out. It does seem to be quite powerful. What I was trying to say is that we do not know all the aspects to use and which not to use. From your comments about the quincunx I do not think that you were suggesting it as the only aspect to use., but that it is powerful. I agree.

I am very happy to acknowledge that my attempts at prediction are in no way certain. I'm just exploring the possibilities and trying to point out areas where we need to try and achieve more certainty about the methods to use.

Skyrack - Sepharial does, as you say propose a number of methods and it id not clear, at least to me, if later ones are meant to replace the earlier ones. Also he can be maddeningly unclear at times. The problem with the two weights is that he might mean that both are valid and for each one you find the horse with the closest weight, or he might mean that you find the horse with a weight closest to either of the two weights. I have been looking to see if I can work out which is best.

I think with all this that experimenting and testing is the best course.

GB's comment was about the Addey method, not your take on it Astrogooner.
And I think it was a fair comment. Frawley says something similar about it too.

Do you. astrogooner, have any source material on the Addey method?
Anything similar to the ScribD reference GB provided for Sepharial's methods.

I ask because I would like to study it further.

Thanks

GB,

Yes, Sepharial is ambiguous on a number of points.
And yes, it could mean take the nearest of both indicated weights.
But if that was the case why spell it out with a Note?

For my part, I have noted the ambiguities I have found with Sepharial's Eclipse method, and made my own interpretation of what was meant. That way I can reconsider the assumptions I have made if such proves warranted.