Shane Ivie is a remote viewer that developed a protocol to identify the “Optimum Winning Horse” for horse races. The “Optimum Winning Horse” isn’t necessarily defined as the horse that crosses the finish line first. Instead, the “Optimum Winning Horse” is a horse that finishes first, second, or third, but delivers the largest payout among the top three finishing horses. In many instances, a longshot horse that finishes in third place pays back a higher return on investment than a favorite that wins the race. Understanding how to select the “Optimum Winning Horse” can be a more lucrative and safer bet, especially for amateur and occasional handicappers.
Shane published his experiences with this protocol in the Spring/Summer 2014 edition of the International Remote Viewing Association’s magazine, Aperture. He conducted 219 sessions, with 62 of those producing cash payouts (28% win rate). These results underestimate the success rate of his protocol, because he had counted sessions in which he had not fully refined his methodology. Once he refined his protocols, he reported cashing in tickets on 15 of 24 sessions in calendar year 2014 (62.5%) -- better odds than flipping a coin.
In 2016, I asked Shane if I could participate in some operational horse handicapping sessions. He had given me a blind task to conduct a remote viewing session to identify the name of the ‘optimum winning horse’ for a race for which I knew nothing about. I only knew the track location and time of the race, but I didn’t know the horses, the jockeys, the trainers, the condition of the track, or the history of the race, factors that would normally influence my bet.
As I proceeded to conduct a session, I simply started to describe what first came to mind. One of the fundamental rules in remote viewing is to ‘describe, don’t identify.’ Remote viewers learn that our subconscious is more accurate at recognizing gestalts (e.g., the ‘isms’) of a remote viewing target and its characteristics (e.g., color, shape, size), rather than identify the correct ‘noun’ to describe the target.
Upon starting the session, my subconscious immediately spit out a symbol of a manmade object. I then proceeded to describe what I saw in my mind was a deflated gumdrop. The images I received during my session felt like absolute nonsense, but I just continued to describe what came to mind and submitted the session to Shane.
My actual session can be seen in this blog post.
After my submission, Shane gave me further instructions and sent me the list of horses’ names running the race. If I felt my description closely related to any of the horse’s names, that would be the selection for the ‘optimum winning horse.’ If there was no relationship between my description and any of the horses’ names, he’d advise me to pass.
As I scanned the entries, one horse immediately stood out - a horse named Bad JuJu. Any candy lover knows that Jujubes are a form of gumdrops. It would be a logical and reasonable conclusion to consider a deflated gumdrop as a Bad Juju. It was clear as day – my choice for the ‘Optimum Winning Horse’ was Bad Juju.
When the race was run, Bad Juju broke from the gates in 3rd place. He never challenged for the lead, staying middle of the pack. However, Bad Juju held on for 3rd place, beating the 4th place horse only by a neck.
Because Bad Juju finished in third place, anyone with a ‘show’ bet would have collected money. The “show bet” gives bettors three chances to win (a horse must finish first, second, or third), while a win bet only gives bettors one chance to win (a horse must finish first). The payouts indicate Bad Juju was indeed the optimum horse for a ‘show bet.’ A “show bet” on Bad Juju paid more than a win bet on the first place horse.
In other words, Bad Juju was a safer investment that produced a higher rate of return than betting on the favorite horse to win. More chances to win with a higher payout…who wouldn’t want that?
This experience blew my mind, as it’s very difficult for the rational mind to explain or comprehend. It’s difficult to develop rational reasons why you would ever want to place a bet on the 2nd longest shot on the board in an 8-horse race without any good reason.
This experience reinforced how the subconscious is far more powerful than the conscious mind, provided that we learn how to communicate and engage with it in the proper way. The session yielded information that would never emerge if we didn’t take the time to open our minds to such possibilities. It also demonstrated that it is possible for the subconscious to communicate concepts, such as names, in graphic form.
Anyone who wants to join me this summer in these voyages in consciousness with operational handicapping can follow these 4 easy steps:
To view the 72 minute recording and be eligible to participate during operational sessions during 2023 beyond the Kentucky Derby, a one-time fee ($25) applies to support ongoing administration of the experiments. You are then invited to participate in sessions with me throughout the entire spring and summer at no additional fee. Bring your sense of curiosity and fun, learn more about your subconscious, and let’s see what we can win together!