Sorry, Richie but I Beg to Differ

[Bob Cochran]

I thought this was a 2 horse race . In view of the large class edge of the #2
horse, and the speed of the #3 horse. The other "early" pretenders had the
opportunity to make the #2 run a bit faster, but it was unchallenged.

The "big" difference in this race was John Valesquez. 113-3 to the 2nd call. The horse was walking. It ended up as a paceless race.

IMHO

[admin]

I hope I am not sounding contradictive I know what Hat and Rich are doing has value
and I respect that they can do it I feel in my head its better for me to go back

I take bits of the Match Up and try to blend it with what I have read in the follow up for years
I am a big believer of going over races till I get it right
This is what Doc and I did when I went to work with him using Validator 2

Yesterday in race 7 at Philadelphia is a great example of getting a positive out of a loss

Here is my BLBL I was using Spec160 since the laptop I use for RDSS is down
at the moment

My bets were the 7 and the 10 what!! look at the 3!! 20-1 on the morning line
Nope I didn't think the three was a true contender based on APV and the pace line

I bet the 7 as my top choice then using my binder method I now had to choose between the
10 and the 11

I bet the 10 - why? It was ranked 3rd oh yeah go back and check Bill
The 3 10 and 11 were all tied at 18.3 on the line score, Plus my records !!!
and I had just been reading in the pace launcher manual about keeping current records
said that for me at Philly The top 2 LPR were winning at 5.5 furlongs
Why then did I ignore the 11
I watched the race with my dad Brooks at Monmouth simulating
The 10 and 7 were both pressing the 8, 5 and 1 They both made beautiful outside moves and blew past
them. I was sure I had it. Dad I'm in!! I have the 10 and here comes the 7... But wait!!! then here comes
another horse HELLO its the 11 blows past both the 7 and 10 and wins and pays $14
I was done. I shut down and just watched the rest of the races
I went back and checked the race when I got home It was a mistake, I used the program
correctly. My lines and contenders were solid. I made the call on the 3
I was sloppy with the my analysis of the race Looking back I got a plus from a loss

Bill

[emilio840]

Hi Turbulator.

If you saw the race, you would have seen that the #3 ran a real bad race. Everytime he got whipped he would steer to the right. He ran most of that race GREEN. Maybe he just didn't feel like running. I don't think there are lessons to be learnt when a horse does not run his race. MAYBE THIS IS WHY WE SHOULD NOT LOOK BACK AND RE HCP THE RACE. IN THE NEAR FUTURE WHEN THESE 2 HORSES MEET AGAIN THE RESULT WILL PROBABLY BE DIFFERENT.

emilio

[RichieP]

Originally Posted by admin

I hope I am not sounding contradictive I know what Hat and Rich are doing has value
and I respect that they can do it I feel in my head its better for me to go back

I take bits of the Match Up and try to blend it with what I have read in the follow up for years
I am a big believer of going over races till I get it right
This is what Doc and I did when I went to work with him using Validator 2
Bill

You are 1000% RIGHT to contradict. You are BLENDING software with your matchup stuff. Also factoring in what Doc personally instructed YOU to do when working races together using SOFTWARE.

If however you are going to go back and repeatedly look at races lost when matching ONLY from the pp's and then rely ONLY on the pp's when going forward you are setting yourself up for ...... well let me just stop here man.

To each his own. It's all good.
Richie