Wednesday, January 14, 2009

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

Aqu 9

A couple of E in here and my thinking is they'll do for each other and with that,

Another old wives tale as often, VERY OFTEN, when two or even three go out front, the best of the three takes off and hides.

PROJECTING early simply means EARLY even though OFTEN they are not in a duel JUST BECAUSE the project early

[Charlie D]

Were there a couple of E - Yes

Did they duel - NO

Result - One of them never gets took out of it's comfort zone and pees in

It's so simple AFTER the event innit

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

It's so simple AFTER the event innit

No after 50,000 contests it is easy to say it having observed it so often with all of those times again and again and again.

The early part of a race has been my specialty for years now and the dynamic that a "speed duel" will ensue is just tunnel thinking again as Quirin's studies have shown based upon thousands of races at dozens of tracks that early is where it's at in North American dirt contests.

See Winning at the Races: Computer Discoveries in Thoroughbred Handicapping

[Charlie D]

after 50,000 contest it is easy

These have NO bearing on TODAYS Match Up

Each race is different, the Pace changes, ability of horses change and so and so and so on


J

[Charlie D]

The only value in looking at a horse's performance is in the field it competes NOT some arbitrary subjective horse VALUE

Your words, so why are trying to tell me different??? Because your trying to score brownie points i reckon - Now give it rest FFS as i'm getting bored and it does not help the board tick along nicely

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

These have NO bearing on TODAYS Match Up

Each race is different, the Pace changes, ability of horses change and so and so and so on


J

yup and that is heading toward sample error.

Whenever a rational test of an idea transpires, the results of a single episode are fraught with the specificity of the distinct situation of that day. No experimental evidence I have every read, seen, or been a part of allows for decisions to be made on a single observation. In racing we are projecting a performance on to today and basing it, as so many incorrectly do, on a single episode, is asking for a quantum leap in error.

I have made this parallel before. Lets say I like a good basketball player like Jordan but I happen to see him one night when he was SICK but played anyway and on another night where he dad was ill and he still played. BOTH of these times he was sub-par.......so one then extrapolates Jordan's' abilities or for that matter, a horse's abilities on sample error observations?. Don't think so.

This idea is not anything new as the classic tale of the blind men and the elephant demonstrates. Each blind man only touched Part of the elephant and ON THOSE SAMPLE ERRORED observations, extrapolated the entire beast. The one who had touched the trunk thought it was much like a snake, the one touching the leg thought it much like a tree trunk etc etc.

I often see people here pick the third line back and base their entire evaluation on that single line as if it somehow functioned in a vacuum.
If you had ever actually been back in the barns following a race, you would have an idea at how much a race takes out of a horse, how they often go off their feed for days. the nicks in their hide from stones kicking up in the course. No single performance is without effect and to iron out the reality (the performer) from the sample error (the performance), requires multiple lines, like ANY scientific procedure dictates.

It is only when one UNDERSTANDS how a horse reacts to multiple pace pressures can the evaluation point to the performance that is most likely to present itself today. It is like saying Bret Farve will pass based upon a single observation. It just is not reality.

[Charlie D]

Yoou just don't get it do you

Each race it a seperate

YOU handicap TODAYS race, OUR decisions are based on what we see in TODAYS race

If we make the RIGHT decisions TODAY, we win TODAY , if we dont, we lose TODAY

Tomorrow we start AGAIN


We REPEAT this process over a period of TIME and if we have made more MORE RIGHT decision than WRONG at the RIGHT prices we beat the GREAT GAME


Your analogies, parrarells are meaningless as they have NOTHING to do with the GAME we are trying to BEAT

[Tim Y]

you have a lot to learn.

Science has it's rules and they have persisted for a long time before either or us showed up here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

[Charlie D]

You have a lot more to learn than me my friend from what i've read on here


Now, do what you do and let OTHERS get on with what they do

[Tim Y]

you really need to purchase and read Mark Cramer's book Thoroughbred Cycles, 1990 William Morrow.

One of my favorite lines in there covers the rigidity of a singularity in looking at a race, p. 13 "The more I bet and see others bet, I am convinced that there is an attitudinal relationship between lifestyle and handicapping style," and then goes on to show how looking at a rigid set of RULES on every race will send you to the poor farm

or p. 15 "Both continuity and change play important roles in the dynamics that produce race results......the projection of change is superior, in terms of investment, to the identification of continuity.To project is dynamic; to identify is static."

A good book you deserve to become enlightened by