Southwell 16:00

Caged Lightning 4/1.

5th cusp trines 12th Leo Moon, Lady of the 12th and Jupiter in 12th, applying to Mars and etc.

I have looked at tomorrow's Scottish Grand National 3:45 AYR.

From the viewpoint of Sepharial's Eclipse method this is an interesting race as it highlights some ambiguities and uncertainties in my understanding of the method.
I hope tomorrow's outcome will resolve these.

However for now the indicated horses are two of these five:
SAM WINNER
ROYAL PLAYER
LIE FORRIT
WIESENTRAUM
BENBENS

Looking at Addey's method I am not sure if Mercury in Taurus is the Significator as it is already separating from the 5th.
But with the 12th cusp in Leo
WAYWARD PRINCE
ROYAL PLAYER seem to fit the bill.

As a dark horse suggestion, Saturn Retrograde in Sagittarius is in exact (to 4 minutes) sextile to the Part of Horsemanship at Aquarius 03:53.
CAPE TRIBULATION

skyrack wrote:From the viewpoint of Sepharial's Eclipse method this is an interesting race as it highlights some ambiguities and uncertainties in my understanding of the method.

Like you, I have some uncertainty about exactly how the method works - primarily the Ascendant v First Cusp question and so the position of the Point of Fortune.

My understanding gives me two possibilities: Lie Forrit and Sam Winner.

Looking at the race chart in general, the striking thing is the almost New Moon, just two and a half degrees from exact, and highlighted by the sesquiquadrate from the Ascendant. The other striking factor is Saturn a degree from the IC (in the third).

I shall spend some more time thinking about this

In a detailed example Sepharial gave providing date, time , location and the position of the Sun, Moon and Part of Fortune, it is quite clear he did not use the ASC in the calculation.
The cusp of the 1st, replacing the ASC, gives the exact position as stated by Sepharial, although he only gave figures to the nearest degree.

However I came across this quote in my notes:

Sepharial next tackles directions under Poles, which were a favorite of R.C. Smith, the first of several men known as "Raphael".
Then, the resolution of problems unique to Primaries:

• The proper method to calculate the Part of Fortune (Oblique Ascension/ Descension, rather than simple zodiacal longitudes),
  various unique challenges with primary directions and the moon,
  and the true way to calculate directions to house cusps,
  along with some novel shortcuts.

It may well be that this calculation was the one used, and which just happens to match an approach using the cusp of the 1st in the particular example I studied.

Another uncertainty is what set of weights to use.
Weights, for handicaps, are allotted according to the horse's handicap mark, and they then may receive an allowance(according to age or sex).
Penalties may also be applied in terms of extra weight to carry, for example, for winning a race after the entry date.

The published weights for the race day, are the allotted weights less any allowance and plus any penalty.
The weight actually carried may be different: jockey allowances are not incorporated into the published weights, as riders may and do change at the last minute.

In today's race the minimum allotted weight is 10st but one of those allotted 10st is booked with a jockey receiving a 7lb allowance.
So the published scale of weights is 26 and the carried scale, barring any jockey changes, is 33.

This makes a difference in arriving at the Proportions to use.
It also makes a difference when matching horses with indicated weights.

I am inclined to use carried weights rather than published weights.
But that is the primary uncertainty that I have.

Another uncertainty is when to "flip" the Proportions which should be done when the two non-significators are a similar distance to the same Angle.
The same degree? Two degrees? Or?

In today's race the two non-significators are the same Measure from the same Angle, and I now take that to mean the Proportions for this race should be flipped.

Using published weights, this means taking 13lbs from the top and adding 0 to the bottom.
LIE FORRIT and the 9 bottom weight horses are indicated and Lie Forrit is not the closest match.

Using carried weights, we take 17lbs from the top and add 0 to the bottom.
ROYAL PLAYER and BENBENS are indicated.

Not sure how I managed to take 17 from the top to arrive at ROYAL PLAYER when I should have found WIESENTRAUM (but not Al Co).

Maybe someone was trying to tell me something...

I have found Sepharial's Eclipse Key online:

www.scribd.com/doc/33339801/Sepharial-1 ... 0-p#scribd

It is clear that he uses equal houses from the MC. His PoF calculation does seem to use the first house (even though he describes it as the Ascendant.

PoF = (MC + 90) + Moon - Sun

Yes and he does say:

Thus if Leo 23 were on the Midheaven then Scorpio 23 would be rising.

I take that to mean, by this method, that this is the Ascendant.
And that the Angles he Measures to are those of the method and not the not the usual Ascendant and Descendant.

I think that BENBENS a close 3rd at 33/1 was a good result for the method and that using actual weights rather than notional weights is the best option.

Using, my understanding, of Addey's method found the winner WAYWARD PRINCE 25/1.
It also produced a 14/1 winner at Thirsk 15:20 yesterday.

Looking at Addey's method I am not sure if Mercury in Taurus is the Significator as it is already separating from the 5th.

Using Addy's method, one keeps the planets and all other points still and rotates the 5th cusp anti-clockwise until you reach the first aspect.

Using, my understanding, of Addey's method found the winner WAYWARD PRINCE 25/1.
It also produced a 14/1 winner at Thirsk 15:20 yesterday.

Wayward Prince, i think, was the oldest in the race - Saturn on 4th cusp.

It also showed the winners of the 16:00 at Newbury - Mr. Singh 9/4, Redstart in the 14:15 @ 12/1 and a nice e/w (3rd) 13/2 shot Field of Fame in the 13:15.

Maybe someone was trying to tell me something...

I've yet to meet a single person who doesn't believe there's some sort divine inspiration behind their choice of bet! I suspect that it's more to do with neptune - the fantasy (of winning) - rather than messages from on high!

Today, Monday (20th April), I have been testing the Sepharial method on the races at Kempton as there were a number of handicap races.

I am becoming increasingly sure that using the actual ridden weights is the correct method. There were a number of correct predictions, including the winner of the 4.00 at 14/1, giving a clear profit on the day

There are a number of tests still to do, but I suspect a key factor in deciding which predictions are correct is if the race chart is radical. The last two races did not have a radical chart, and the predictions were completely wrong.

We will see how things work out later this week.

Yes. I just checked that race and agree with your findings.

And, as you say, it furthers the case for using actual weights carried.

The Radical test sounds logical. I wonder if Sepharial's choice of examples suggest he too was using this. I will try and check that out.

Back to non-weight methods.

This weekend sees the first two of the English Classic races, both at Newmarket. Saturday 2 May at 3.45 BST is the 2000 Guineas and on Sunday 3 May at 3.40 BST is the 1000 Guineas.

There are still quite large fields in both races, but I suspect there will be a few withdrawals.

I had forgotten these races were this weekend, so I need to get to work on them quickly.

Further to my post - in Saturday's 2000 Gns I like Gleneagles (dob 12 Jan 2012) , which is the favourite.
The main aspects are: Asc(race) -0- MA(horse), MA(r) -120- MA(h) and -120- SU(h).
MC(r) -90- MA(h) and Asc(r) -144- JU(h).

GB