For many yrs it has been & remains an article of faith(one repeated on this Bd) that lower level clming races are the least formful. The belief has not been shaken despite the fact that approx 2 yrs ago Steve Klein of DRF did a broad based & statistically valid study which proved that just the opposite is true. To my way of thinking, one aspect of Alydar\'s defense of the use of weight to split hairs among closely matched horses is essentially the same thing. The fact that an opinion has been repeated many times over many yrs & is believed by many people does not make it true.
It compounds the felony,as it were, to simply assert, without offering any proof at all, that weight has been used \"profitably\" during this undefined period. Simply assuming the validity of what has long been held as traditionally correct avoids the question through \"a priori\" reasoning, such as when religious scholars argue that a particular text cld not possibly be false because God would not allow His church to use an imperfect text over many centuries. It\'s also why the original formulation of Darwin\'s theory cld not pass scientific muster because who is fittest is determined by looking at who survived.
The results so far of one part of the research I have continued off & on since 1st raising the weight Q are mixedd: The good news is that it appears possible to quantify the precise impact of weight, which seems to have already been done for race cars. The bad news is that to do so is going to require that we find, hire & pay a top notch physicist who is willing to spend the necessary time. My initial thought was that Alydar & I cld split the cost at 1st, with whoever turns out to be wrong responsible to pick up the entire tab when the study is complete. However, you might have noticed that I have a tendency to consider bets very carefully, which triggered the trip to my racing library which should have made at
the outset.
I was interested to learn that weight handicaping may have originated in Roman chariot races, which makes me wonder why the subject was not discussed in the great scene where the owner uses Massala\'s arrogance to goad him into overlaid odds on Ben Hur. More to the pt, it appears to me that the idea that a certain amt of wght can be translated into a different no. of lenghts at different distances probably originated with a British Racing Official by the name of Admiral John Francis Rous, who in 1850 produced a scale of wghts which was adopted by the British Jockey Club in 1878. That, which has been adjusted over the yrs, is the precursor of the scale of wghts used in the US. In other words, it is the scale of wghts, and not any statistical survey or study of physics, which provides the conceptual framework for what to me now falls in the category of opinion. However, in Chap 15 of his groundbreaking work, \"Winning At The Races-Computer Discoveries in Handicapping\", Quirin reports the results of a no. of sound statistical studies(one including 30k pps) of the impact, or rather for the most part the lack of impact, of wght, a dependent variable. Without going into all the details(which I trust you will do or yourself because I have this crazy idea that you\'re capable of thinking for yourselves), I now consider it beyond argument that there is a lot more than my opinion which supports the argument that it does not make sense to use small wght differences as if wght was an independent variable to split hairs between evenly matched horses.
This is gonna be a good one, and I\'m gonna stay out of it asong as possible. A couple of things-
1) Yes, the judge in \"Anatomy Of A Murder\" was the lawyer(Welch?)who nailed McCarthey.
2) I\'m glad someone has pointed out Ragozin was far from the first to figure out weight matters. Time-Form has been adjusting it\'s figures for weight since WW 2.
3) \"Beyer On Speed\" has in it a study concerning weight/figures- he was shocked at the outcome. Incidentally, seeing Andy on speed would be pretty funny.
4) Everyone who voted for \"Gladiator\" for Best Picture should be made to watch \"Ben Hur\". Trivia- the original novel was written by Civil War General Wallace.
5) I was discussing the screenplay I wrote with a potential producer once, and explained the racing scenes would have to be shot live- they wouldn\'t look realistic if they were staged. She said the chariot race in \"Ben Hur\" worked out pretty well. I pointed out that no-one alive had actually seen a chariot race...
what chapter in the book is beyer\'s study? there are chapters devoted to australia, sartin, trips/pace, and exotic wagering...but i can\'t recall anything about a weight and figure study.
i also don\'t remember him talking about sheet methodology in a very favorable light. i think that he mentioned that horses aren\'t susceptible to some form of \"determinism\" after efforts, but that subsequent poor performances were more a function of biases/pace/trips.
just out of curiousity, would you say that he has become more receptive to certain sheet concepts (i.e. form cycles/bounces), or does he still kind of view these ideas as some weird calvinistic notions?
(regardless of whether he\'s on amphetamines or not)
by the way isn\'t jimmy stewart the lawyer to whom you\'re referring in \"anatomy of a murder\"?
Hey Charlie, I don\'t know where my copy of the Beyer book is- maybe someone else can help. As I recall, he actually came up with a weight adjustment himself based on the study he ran, although he doesnt want to use it, which is fine by me. I haven\'t talked to Andy in at least 5 years, so I don\'t know if his views have changed. By the way, if you ever run into someone who was at the Vegas Handicapping Expo where Ragozin and Beyer shared a podium, get them to tell you about it.
The lawyer from the McCarthey hearing played the JUDGE in the movie.
After indicating that he did not believe in it himself, Beyer says that those \"hell-bent\" on making weight adjustments might reasonably subtract .4 from a horse\'s previous Beyer fig for each additional lb & add .4 per lb if he is carrying less weight.
Far more interesting is the extensive discussion of JB, his handicapping approach & a TG instructional video which I did not know existed. Although this is the book which is usually cited as containing Beyer\'s \"mea culpa\" to sheets players, it is easy to see how someone might come away with an entirely different conclusion.
The video is word for word the same as the seminar found on this site, except I did the video, and Chip Vinai did the audio one, and he added some stuff about the profiles. Chip wrote it in \'92, and I edited it and taped it while I was doing \"Post Time\". Don\'t call to buy one- we only have a couple left, and we use them at seminars. In fact, if anyone has one we\'ll trade you a set of sheets for it.
Speaking of seminars, we\'ll be giving some to kick off the new product. First one is at Gulfstream, Florida Derby Day. Vic Stauffer will host.
i guess you only do them in places where you sell them mostly uh?? Will never come to louisville derby week uh??
We have given them there before, and we might do it again.