I tip the hat to HP for the contest results and anybody else who did well.
In real life, with ability to weigh post time odds and scratches, today was a great day for the Sheets. I don\'t know how TG players did but -- and I\'ll rub it in a bit -- I cashed 4 IRS tickets, including the Belmont tri (and a small win bet on the longest winning price in Belmont history), and the tris for races 3, 11, and 12. Total profit -- and no syndicates here, was over $14,000. And I do have witnesses, some Rag. players who were waiting with me to cash their IRS tickets.
The 12, Quiet One was a huge play on both pattern and numbers in race 11. In race 12, the 5 had the best turf numbers and was a good key in that race. It helped, of course for a 24:1 shot to get put up by DQ.
The reason why the Sheets were so valuable today was not just that there were several horses that were very fast who went off at good odds, but the Sheets allowed me to toss out several horses getting lots of money who did not have a chance -- 3rd race One Tuff Fox and the 8 were tosses; Yankee Gentleman was a toss; War Emblem was a toss, and the favorite in the 12th was a toss on the Sheets -- ugly patterns make for ugly results by the horses making those patterns. BTW, per my previous post that some doubted, MDO\'s pattern did apparently signal that today was likely a day he would run well. I don\'t know how he looked on the TG sheets, but I did post yesterday that his Rag. Sheet pattern was a familiar one (see Quixote\'s Hope on May 18 at Pim) that signalled a good effort.
There\'s been a lot of trash talking by a couple people on this board (not by you HP), and I\'ll be glad to photocopy my W2s for you Alydar if you doubt me -- and sure it\'s just one day, but, when it\'s this good a day, your ROI will look pretty good for the rest of the year.
Well, that\'s all the gloating for now. I hope that HP and others did better in real betting than we did in the contest.
Add to that Judge\'s Case, which was a great bet at 29 to 1.
Unfortunately, I did not do nearly as well as David (even though I bet to win on Sarava and had the exacta, I did not have him on top in my tri), but I still had a pretty good day.
I don\'t know what JB had to say about the day. Friedman\'s analysis would not have directly led you to the winner. However, when you have a bunch of horses with crappy patterns primed to run terrible at short prices (e.g. War Emblem and Proud Citizen), combined with horses that have good patterns at huge prices that are a little slower than the rest (e.g. Sarava), you have the potential for a big score.
BTW, speaking of Proud Citizen. How many nice horses does Lukas have to break down before people stop calling him a genius.
Firstly, War Emblem is a Holy Bull of sorts. A very headstrong horse. I wouldn\'t be gloating upon my fine analysis if I \"won\" due to a starting gate mishap. If I won I\'d count my lucky stars. Maybe even look up to the heavens and say \"Thank You Horse in the Sky.\" OH..but wait a minute. You didn\'t win! Then what was all that Sheets \"find the up and comer\" Bla Bla Bla? Oh you say you won, but unless I\'m reading your selection inaccurately on the board you picked that turd of an animal \"Perfect Dread\". It was clear pre-race Sarava was gonna be 50-1 plus so don\'t try and pull \"The race odds led me to the bet\". You selected the gelded,third place clunk up, lose leads late, crappola bred for the distance, no chance in hell to win Perfect Dread. And he ran without legitimate excuse for the dismal showing he made. They run that race 100 more times and Dread never cracks the top two spots.
I lost too, but not as badly as you. My horse had a big chance.
Pitiful
I posted my on track picks just for fun, and I only did it because I came out just about even with my non posted picks. I stand by my posted picks, which were decent but not great. I must, however, introduce a rule for contest #2. If your posted picks lost, YOU LOST!!!!!!!!!!! These contests don\'t prove who is the best handicapper, but everybody seems to blast the professionals when they pick incorrectly. Well, the professionals have to pick the day before as well. So next time, no after the fact \"I swear, I really did have it, I will come to your house and show you the ticket before I cash it\". It was fun though. I could do it live up at Saratoga if anybody is interested.... (and yes, DP, I do believe you, but every pro picks the day before, and it is on those picks how they are judged)
I doubt 4 IRS cashers on the basis of your demonstrated acumen and take you up on your offer to post them. No way in the world I want additional inane email blather so copy them and post them here. To your credit you didn\'t toss Sarava but your picks in no fashion demonstrate any kind of evidence you thought he had a prayer to get up. And pre-race his odds were certain to be very high.
@!#$ happens in horse racing and its always good to be the beneficiary of it, but War Emblem\'s failure to hit the board was not a result of your cherished patterns. Taking credit for it once again demonstrates you\'re naivete. Mr. Patient you hammered the wise guy horse without a prayer or legitimate excuse and you showed your fine handicapping ability by wheeling him in every possible way. I\'m surprised you didn\'t fourth place Superfecta Wheel him. Now that's handicapping.
But what topped off was your inability to really understand a pattern was your belief Boat Hollow was regressing. Especially regressing on a victory laughing, in a marginally slower time, what complete lunacy!
It was a marginal win, but HP and Thorograph take the Belmont and The Sheets lose a notch in credibility. Not so much on the results, but on the sour grapeing. \"It\'s ok I lost, my patterns are really better and I\'m really a whiner. I mean winner.\" Stick around you\'re good for a laugh, maybe a Travers Day rematch is in order. And maybe, just maybe Perfect Dread can earn back some of those horribly invested cyber dollars for you. We\'ll see who the better loser really is. David M. Patient or War Emblem.
lol
Tabi
David I\'m glad you did so well. I would have let this drop, given the results, but this post takes the cake.
The only thing you\'re rubbing in is your own bad taste in past-posting wins that you gave no mention of whatsoever despite having plenty of time to put them up. I lost yesterday. How you did at the windows is almost entirely irrelevant, because it involves factors that had nothing to do with this challenge. The challenge was all about two guys sitting around the night before the race, looking at the card, and making their points using their respective products. Given the results, and the fact that we each cashed the same race, I would say this hardly demonstrates superiority for either product. However, with all things being equal, when you used the Ragozin SHEETS, and I used the TG sheets, you LOST this heads-up battle, and everybody saw it. I would agree that this is hardly worth $14,000, but it is less than great for you in terms of your credibility regarding your endless blathering about methodology. A couple of additional points I must mention.
Your bad taste here is equalled only by your bad taste in the way you post (which is what started this whole thing in the first place), where you buttress your arguments over here with one-sided slams (hilarious jokes) on the other board. Your big day at the track changes nothing on this count, and your post here reveals that this kind of thing (you can\'t just make your points without propping yourself up or patting yourself on the back) consistently informs your character.
The way I played in the contest was pretty much how I played the card, except for a few instances where unanticipated prices indicated a few extra plays.
We agree completely on the tosses of One Tuff Fox, War Emblem and Yankee Gentleman.
In the 3rd race, you included like 6 or 7 horses and most pointedly did NOT include Sherpa Guide, so the horse couldn\'t have looked that good on the SHEETS. On TG he fell in range with every other competitive horse except for Thunder Blitz (who had a faster back number), Personable Pete (I thought he would back up) and Prime Customer (who I think also had one back number that was better). To me it looked like about 7 horses had a shot. Jerry was more in line with you on Personable Pete. I tossed him, which is obviously why I didn\'t cash the race, but the field was so competitive I just took a stab at the longshots in exotics, not seeing how I could take Personable Pete at 2-1 in such a closely matched field. Used Sherpa Guide, who on TG was as good as any and ridiculous value at 33-1. Next.
Would agree that Judge\'s Case was huge value and used him, again failing to back with a win bet. I didn\'t like El Gran Papa.
Your points on the Belmont are self-serving in the extreme. You had all the time in the world to study the race and blew it like everyone else, and now you\'re blowing your horn that you hit. Mazel tov, but mark my words, posting this kind of thing will come back to haunt you somehow. I\'m sure you used the SHEETS to come up with Sarava, and you didn\'t know if he would be a price so you didn\'t throw him in. Is that about right, Dave?.
Your subsequent hits (11 and 12) were made on the fly, so they must have looked so good on the SHEETS that you were keeping them a secret to help your prices. I used Quiet One too.
To sum up, David, the $14,000 changes nothing, you demonstrate nothing here except your lack of character, and you lost. HP
His last 3 Rags nos starting with the most recent were 11.75 9.75 14.5, with an 8.5 top as a 3 yr old. Unless there is a new Rags theory which I don\'t know about, SG was close to an impossible Rags play in a race where it appeared that a Rags 6 or lower was needed to win. His last three TG nos were 4.5 7.75 9.25 where it looked like a 3 or 3&change would win. Like I said, contender on TG & toss on Rags.
Looks like the same people here that were congratulating JB for his past-posting syndicate score in the Derby are whining about some nice Sheet scores.
HyPocrites....same old story
\"His last three TG nos were 4.5 7.75 9.25 where it looked like a 3 or 3&change would win. Like I said, contender on TG & toss on Rags.\"
maybe if you had used him in the contest, you wouldn\'t be a zero.
Jerry Jr.,
There is NO comparison to the present instance, where Patent is claiming scores with horses HE DID NOT MENTION. At least Jerry cited the horses that came in, and then your brilliant comment was along the lines that he \'boxed the field\', which is nonsense coming from a Raggie (home of the \'use most of the field lightly in exotics\' school of handicapping).
Nobody is whining about Sheet scores. I congratulate Patent on his wins. However, since he didn\'t post them before the races, they are the meaningless equivalent of anyone else\'s claim that they scored after the fact. HP
\"It was a marginal win, but HP and Thorograph take the Belmont and The Sheets lose a notch in credibility.\"
I don\'t know how this gets to be a sheets vs. tg thing, when neither party participated, but if you think the sheets didn\'t score here, you must be drinkin\' mall\'s bathtub moonshine.
I\'d like to point out that I used the sheets to bet 10 races(?), and cashed $1400 ---- burying HP.
Mike only beat me by a little, and the 2 big winners I\'ve seen so far were a guy who had 30 bucks of his thousand on 70-1 sarava, and a guy who bet 2 horses.
I hardly even look at the racing form.
Supe, you lost, by plenty. You can split anytime now. HP
David and other Raggies,
You say that the sheets led to Sarava. The people such as Robes that run Ragozin must be idiot since reading their own sheets they decided that Sarava had absolutely no chance. As always, Rags players have a great day handicapping after the results are already posted. Good handicapping - could you please tell me who is going to win the presidential election between Nixon and Kennedy using the Rags sheets. Thanks for your always insightful and unbiased observations.
Sarava: Hero of the Preakness day card is somewhat overmatched here. Too many races in short time span and no current forward movement make him unlikely to me.
Read the above quote: the proof is in the pudding.
HP the only difference is that Jerry posted an anlysis of the race instead of a possible play (though he may have posted that too). Depending upon how deep you went (eight horses in this case), you could have had War Emblem in the Derby from JB\'s \"analysis\". You had no idea from that \"analysis\" that War Emblem could be used on top.
You said, \"...where Patent is claiming scores with horses HE DID NOT MENTION. At least Jerry cited the horses that came in...\"
Ahh, but you are mistaken HP, Patent did mention them - the results were 12-8-5, they were all mentioned (8 horses, just like Jerry)
Race 10 -- $1 tris
6 with 2,4,5,8,9,11,12
2,4,5,8,9,11,12 with 6 with 2,4,5,8,9,11,12
2,4,5,8,9,11,12 with 2,4,5,8,9,11,12 with 6
$3 exactas 5,6,8,11 with 4
5,6,8,11 with 12
C\'mon HP, I know you have it in you to be more gracious - there\'s no need to be HyPoctrical.
Waste of time. It\'s a losing play keying Perfect Drift. Have it your way. HP
Oh well, just another day on the TG board.
Jerry, Jr.
David, you\'re the kind of lawyer that gives lawyers a bad name. Congratulations on any scores you might have made, although I don\'t think you have a lot of credibility with anyone who has been following your posts. On the \"IRS ticket\" thing, the question is what kind of return you get on the race. You and Friedman spread out a lot (even when keying short price horses like Personable Pete), and a $1000 return on $200 is no different than a 4-1 win bet.
As for Sarava, I personally know 3 TG players (including one in this office, not me) who bet him to win (mostly savers), and he definitely looked better on TG because of the forward movement (and possibly his top relative to the others). For that discussion (and a lot of others) I will wait until both sets of Belmont day sheets are posted, with the numbers run that day in all races.
hey, I was at the otb, and a guy I know showed me his winning ticket --- I think he usually bets on horses w/the same name as his cat.
I also knew a guy a few years back who told me he bets every horse in the race (no joke) --- I\'m sure he had it too.
nice work, everybody.
Where is the guy who had the win bet on Sarava? I thought he won this thing easily. And superfungus, I did beat you by a small amount, but we will need the battle of Saratoga to determine the real winner. And DP, just turn off your computer for the rest of the day, it was a real bad performance.
David Patent wrote: \"There\'s been a lot of trash talking by a couple people on this board (not by you HP)and I\'ll be glad to photocopy my W2s for you Alydar if you doubt me...\"
David: I have very little interest in message-board handicapping contests, and I did no \"trash talking\" about who would win, who would lose, or who was a better handicapper than who. Why did you write this?
What I did do was write that your comments about figure-making were idiotic. I also wrote that you were inept, that you contradicted yourself constantly, and that you didn\'t have the slightest idea what you were talking about. And now I would like to add that you are a complete disgrace. Plever has been topped by a cretin who will say anything, no matter how imbecilic, if he thinks it will hurt another man\'s business. You are sickening, David. Go back and read our old exchanges, the ones you said you didn\'t want to go over because you didn\'t want to lose your son. If you have an ounce of conscience or intelligence, your words will sicken and embarrass you.
And maybe if you had a better understanding of the game you wouldn\'t ridicule the winner because he \"only\" made two bets. And maybe if you had a modicum of skill you wouldn\'t be so frightened of the possibility of entering a contest where, gasp, real money & actual wagering was involved. And maybe if you were a man of your word you would have disappeared gracefully by now. And maybe if you weren\'t a cyberpunk who has nothing to offer other than snide comments,etc,etc.
And then Superfreakicus was run over because he unwisely got between Patrick Morgan and some free sheets.
I know its stupid for me to even speculate, but stupidity has been following me around the last couple days. But Jerry Jr. can\'t be Jerry Brown\'s son. The acorn never falls that far from the oak.
I didn\'t really mean that. I\'m just in a foul mood again. It happens when I lose.
bring it oooooonnnnnnnn, buttercup!
we\'ll keep running and separate totals.
ps
I\'m not sure if sarava fan won --- I didn\'t add his entry, but the $28 to win isn\'t clearly better than nunzio\'s bet on it\'s own.
I think nunzio had $500 to win on 4-1?
\"And maybe if you had a better understanding of the game you wouldn\'t ridicule the winner because he \"only\" made two bets. \"
well, we\'ll see which one of us has a better understanding of what they\'re talkin\' about.
there aren\'t any impartial judges around, so I\'ll settle for a very partial one.
HP can decide the case --- just because he\'s partial, doesn\'t mean he\'s dishonest.
HP:
my understanding of this contest was that it was to be an exchange of handicapping selections --- a comparison of different approaches to the card.
personally, since there was no real prize, I would add that it was for the fun of comparing picks.
I am in NO WAY denigrating nunzio\'s entry --- I encouraged everybody to participate, and they should all go their own way.
HOWEVER, I ask HP\'s HONEST opinion:
between nunzio and myself, which of us do you feel more embodied the spirit of this contest as you intended it.
(go check my entry, if you haven\'t already)
I believe nunzio\'s was:
$500 to win apple
$500 to win gyg (or whoever)
if you can\'t give an honest answer, you can always simply decline.
again, congrats to nunzio, and if he only wants to pick one horse next time, god bless him.
A couple of comments about some of the inane comments that have been posted. It is true that professional handicappers give picks the day before and that is how they are judged. But anybody who listens to professional handicappers is an idiot. Why do any of you bother buying the sheets if you are concerned about what a professional handicapper thinks? The point is that the sheets are tool to do well at the track. Regardless of what anyone posted in the handicapping contest, the sheets were invaluable that day.
The handicapping contest only allowed the betting of $1,000. Obviously, DP keyed Perfect Drift in the contest because he did not want to blow half his money on the Belmont. But if you believe that an even money favorite is going to run out of the money, but have no strong opinion on the other horses, then you should be willing to spend a lot of money to make a lot of money. On the sheets, Sarava had a good pattern, but was a little to slow to be competive. Any sheet player who says he was the most likely winner in the race is probably lying. But I considered him to be the only horse in the race with a positve pattern, and I often bet horses who are not the most likely winner if the odds deserve it. Sarava at 70-1 definitely deserved it, as did MDO for that matter. I thought Perfect Drift was the most likely winner, but at 5 to 1, there were better bets in the race. That is why pre-race handicapping contests are stupid and certainly not a test of the quality of the respective sheets (Even though I did post a contest entry because everyone else did, I was on record as saying these contests are stupid before the race. This day confirmed that).
As both DP and I have said on different occassions on this board well before this contest ever arose, the ability to throw out horses is at least as valuable as the ability to pick winners, and often more so. JB\'s comment about ROI is pretty lame. A $15,000 tri and a $145,000 super (eminently hittable if you were willing to spend the money) will make any ROI look good.
I love how people always say that a horse \"would have won\" if he only had a good start. Touch Gold would have won the Preakness a few years ago, but for his bad start. He ran a huge race despite his almost fall, which was worse than WE\'s, and almost won. Touch Gold then came back to win the Belmont. WE stumbled and then ran like the bounce candidate he was, and I will be surprised if see him running again anytime soon. So, he only would have lost by 10 lengths if he had not stumbled. Big deal. Only Secretariat has ever run a good Belmont off of a pattern similar to WE\'s pattern (actually, I should say similar to Secretariat\'s Derby and Preakness, Secretariat had a much stronger pre-derby pattern than WE), and as we now know, WE is no Secretariat.
Look, just about everyone did pretty badly in the handicapping contest. There were many important scratches and one race was taken off of the turf, wich rendered any contest results suspect to begin with. Maybe some of you spent the time to handiap each race for scratches and surface changes, but I doubt most spent the time. Further, declaring victory because you lost less money than the other guy is kind of lame. If any of you took the results of this handicapping contest as evidence of what sheets to buy, then you deserve whatever choice you make.
If you don\'t want to believe DP, fine. If you think it is tacky to post about hits at the track when you made picks ahead of time, fine. But if any of you think the Ragozin Sheets were not effective on Belmont day, then you guys are even more myopic than I thought. Personally, I can\'t tell you whether the TG sheets were also effective, as I have not seen them and the handicapping contest certainly told me nothing. I will be interested in comparing them when JB posts them.
It\'s like comparing what amateurs & professionals talk about after a round of golf. One group talks about how far they hit the ball & what clubs they used, & the other talks about the only thing which matters in golf & horseracing, final score. My point, which I\'m not surprised was lost on you, was that the overall approach Nunzio took in the contest is much more likely to result in a long term positive roi, which in the end is all that matters.
Supe, I don\'t know what \'embodied\' the contest means. Nunzio employed his betting strategy and won. That\'s part of the deal. I can\'t make the argument that the way you chose to play was inherently in the spirit of the contest, and Nunzio\'s focused win bet approach wasn\'t. Maybe you should reconsider your attitude a little bit, as this sounds a little like sour grapes, and given your results you should have had nothing but a positive experience, both here and at the track. It would be great if your posts could reflect that.
If I can give you an HONEST opinion, when the game is over and you lose, the thing to do is show some class, congratulate the winner and see if there is something of value for you to learn from his performance. They taught me this in Little League, and maybe it\'s time for you to learn.
Nunzio has class all the way, and if you can\'t learn anything from how he bets, maybe you can learn from how he posts.
I think Nunzio\'s performance provides a valuable lesson and it will have some impact on my approach. Money management and maximizing your wins is as big a part of this game as handicapping. I think I need to focus more on win bets (when I get my price) and use exotics to support them as opposed to my current approach which is doing it the other way around.
Jason, I have to wonder who you are talking to. I don\'t think I\'ve seen one post that said the Ragozin SHEETS were not an effective handicapping tool in this challenge or any other day. I posted as much on their board. I can only imagine what tune would be sung if Patent had trounced me in the contest.
As for your other point, quite a few people had a positive ROI in the contest, and despite your comments, I think it does have value and reflects in a positive way on those involved. It tells me that both products can be used with some effectiveness. I wasn\'t looking for an either/or scenario, where Rags or TG would come out ahead. If anything, I think the challenge demonstrates that other factors (i.e., betting strategy and personal views of handicapping) may have as much of an impact as the product you happen to use, which should quiet some of the more vocal partisans on both sides.
For example, Nunzio took a certain betting approach and he took a more favorable view of Gygistar than I did given that horse\'s last big race. If this tells you \'nothing\', I have to wonder what you\'re looking for. HP
\"I often bet horses who are not the most likely if the odds deserve it. Sarava definitely deserved it, as did MDO for that matter. I thought Perfect Drift was the likely winner, but at 5-1, there were better bets in the race.\"...... Another guy who bet Perfect Drift BEFORE THE RACE, then has Sarava and MDO as the best bets AFTER THE RACE. I especially love the \"definitely deserved it\" confidence for Sarava AFTER THE RACE. My friend, there were at least four on-line polls BEFORE THE RACE that gave us all a good indication of the odds. Now help me understand this, are you saying that you did not like Sarava at all on top when you thought he would be 50-1 or 60-1, but if you had only known that he would be 70-1, then the horse \"definitely deserved\" to be bet on top? Please stop this nonsense. I realize that \"day before\" handicapping contests do not prove a lot, and I am sure if we did it again next week, you could beat me and everybody else. I do, however, have a favor to ask for next time. If you are going to back away from your PRE RACE selections, and claim you loved the winners AFTER THE RACES, don\'t bother getting involved.
1- I\'ve gone on record here maybe 10 times as saying we strongly suggest that players learn how to use the data, instead of the analysis. Also that the analysis doesn\'t figure to show a profit, but should do better than non-sheet players would do--that\'s what it\'s for. Soup (and others) intentionally misrepresent this point, and will continue to do so. It\'s their nature.
2- $1000 is plenty to play as many combinations you need in a contest.
3- If you liked Sarava on Rag, you would have loved him on TG--check it out in a couple of days. My problem was not my opinion of him--in my comments I said he had a \"nice pattern\", one of only 4 whose PATTERN I said was positive (4 neutral, 4 negative)--my problem was that I had a positive opinion on 2 horses who were much faster, and I was wrong.
4- If you really thought my ROI comment was lame you didn\'t understand it. Patent spreads out, and even assuming he did hit those races, the fact they were signers doesn\'t mean anything. I hit the Pick 6 at Belmont yesterday--and lost money. But I will be signing.
5- On the \"stumbled\" issue--my view is that a horse who is coming off a big effort or series of efforts is more likely to spit it out if given an excuse (short rest, slop, trouble). Anyone who \"knows\" the horse would have run poorly without the trouble is being just as silly as someone who \"knows\" it would have run well, especially since the Raggie analysis \"knew\" the horse would run badly in the last 2 starts, too.
6- I\'m not aware of anyone offering an opinion on the Raggie sheets on Belmont day, other than Mall\'s point by point. The comments were about Red Boarding.
Just thinking that anyone would think that is true is going to keep me from sleeping tonight.
...nunzio\'s, (and my), CONTEST entry, or his real life play of \'the GAME\'?
> \"It\'s like comparing what amateurs & professionals talk about after a round of golf. One group talks about how far they hit the ball & what clubs they used, & the other talks about the only thing which matters in golf & horseracing, final score. My point, which I\'m not surprised was lost on you, was that the overall approach Nunzio took in the contest is much more likely to result in a long term positive roi, which in the end is all that matters.\"
that\'s exactly the point ---- wait\'ll you sober up and think through the implications of what you and I have just said.
get back to me when you\'ve figured it out.
(I\'ll leave you a hint, it involves \'cherry picking\')
also, we amateurs will most likely be doing this again --- feel free to join in.
this ain\'t the pga.
ps --- nunzio
since this place is such a morass of bitterness and bile, I\'d just like to make it clear (again) that I\'m not bashing your entry, before all the negative spinsters and trouble makers start their work.
hey, if neither you nor HP want the prize, you might want to consider scott v. who generously volunteered to add up a gazillion entries.
1. I really don\'t have a problem with you providing analysis. It takes a long time to become a proficient sheet user and this is obviously a service to some of your customers. I do have a problem with comparing your analsyis to Friedman\'s, as they are done for different purposes and are irrelevant in any event to the determining the quality of the sheets.
2. I am not saying that $1,000 was not enough for the contest. My point was that unless you spent half your money on the Belmont in the contest, you were unlikely to hit that trifecta. On Belmont day, it was worth spending several hundred dollars to hit that trifecta. (As one who got cheap and shaved a few horses off of the top of my tri, I wish I had bet a little more).
3. I believe you on Sarava. Some Ragozin people did not think he had a positive pattern. I liked it more than others, and thought he had a good shot to hit the board. But many here keep missing the point. The key to that race was not Sarava per se, but in confidently throwing out War Emblem completely and being very negative on Proud Citizen. I will agree that Friedman did not make these comments, but that was my reading of the sheets. That only left about 6 horses who had any chance to finish in the tri, Sarava being one of them. Also, as Sarava was the best value in the race (Perfect Drift ended up being no value), I bet him to win.
4. The ROI comment was lame because, the tri was a $15,000 one. Further, it is a generalization that minimizes the value of the sheets. In some races, you have a strong horse that you bet to win and key in exotics. Those races obviously have the best chance of hitting and certaily a more predictable ROI. Some races, are races like the Belmont where you throw out an even money favorite in an 11 horse field. There, you may bet dozens of races before you hit one. If your only point was that stating that you hit a tax ticket does not mean you made money, then we are agreed.
5. I don\'t disagree, but it is often also true that the series of efforts is the reason for the excuse. As an owner of a few horses over the years, if a horse is sore, it not unusual to stumble at the start.
6. Well, this debate keeps shifting. I will reiterate that I don\'t see any point in determining who are better handicapers. We are trying to determine who makes better sheets. By constantly criticizing Ragozin\'s methodology, you are arguing that his sheets are not a good handicapping tool and yours are better. That is how this contest started. My point is that the Ragozin Sheets did very well that day. I am open to comparing TG\'s when they are posted. Also, I would be interested in hearing other TG\'s users big scores on the day and their reasons for playing them, as I really do not know whether Ragozin patterns work the same with Thorograph.
Supe, this reply is incoherent, even for you. Apparently it eludes you that Nunzio\'s GAME play would have worked out nicely at the track as well.
As for the prize, since you didn\'t win, you don\'t have to concern yourself with who gets it. It\'s up to Nunzio, and Jerry can take it from there.
I thought you were leaving? HP
Supe, this reply is incoherent, even for you. Apparently it eludes you that Nunzio\'s GAME play would have worked out nicely at the track as well.
As for the prize, since you didn\'t win, you don\'t have to concern yourself with who gets it. It\'s up to Nunzio, and Jerry can take it from there.
I thought you were leaving? HP
\"Supe, I don\'t know what \'embodied\' the contest means. Nunzio employed his betting strategy and won. That\'s part of the deal. I can\'t make the argument that the way you chose to play was inherently in the spirit of the contest, and Nunzio\'s focused win bet approach wasn\'t. Maybe you should reconsider your attitude a little bit, as this sounds a little like sour grapes, and given your results you should have had nothing but a positive experience, both here and at the track. It would be great if your posts could reflect that. \"
now, I\'m afraid to say, but you apparently aren\'t being very honest.
considering that the format of my entry mirrored your own, w/o having seen yours beforehand, I think you have a pretty good idea what this contest was all about.
loooooong ago, I stated that, since this was for fun and an exchange of opinion (no prize), I\'d just worry about betting my opinions, and only put a very slight sprinkle of contest strategy in.
hey, if nunzio had no opinion about the rest of the card, fine w/me.
I\'d think this would sound a LOT like sour grapes if I was the one who was spinning this as a comparison of me and nunzio --- it never was.
since this is just for bragging rights, you see fit to compare your entry w/DP, and I certainly have the same options.
I might\'ve been beaten by a couple, but I beat a WHOLE LOT more, using The Sheets.
I racked up $1400 betting TEN RACES, which you and mall have both reminded me is NOT THE WAY TO MAXIMIZE RETURN.
considering the circumstances, I have the right to brag.
I\'m sure we\'ll be doing this again, and when we do, we\'ll see if nunzio\'s one pick will run, and if sarava fan can catch another 70-1.........
based on your contest entry, you don\'t seem like much of a prognosticator.
and to think the weathermen always get a bad rap....
Supe, the contest was bet $1,000 however you want. For your benefit, since you apparently can\'t read or understand English, any ANY WAY YOU WANT would include two $500 win bets. If it didn\'t, the rules would have been \'no $500 win bets.\' Your style of play is no more \'honest\' or \'dishonest\' than any other, including Nunzio\'s, given the rules. If we were talking face to face, I\'d be saying this VERY slowly, so you could understand it, but even then, I don\'t think you would. I\'m sorry you can\'t face the fact that solid win bets at fair odds may carry the day over betting ten races worth of exotics. Take a math class.
I did not remind you that playing ten races is not the way to maximize return, and I don\'t know what you\'re talking about. As I pointed out, you did well. If you want to brag, be my guest. It\'s not like I can stop you.
You said you were leaving. I know exactly how good I am at prognosticating. About 5% better than David Patent. You\'ll have to continue this without me. Continued good luck to you. HP
A bunch of things here:
HP -- I saluted you and Nunzio and anyone else who bested me in the contest and I make no excuses. I lost. And I\'m sorry you don\'t like my character but if that\'s the price I have to pay for celebrating a little on the message boards, then so be it. BTW, I have previously taken stands on horses (usually against) and publicly eaten crow when I was wrong (e.g., Fusaichi Pegasus in the Derby), so I am not at all ashamed to post when I have some big winners. Besides, do you really think that we\'d have half as much fun on these boards if it weren\'t for some good needling here and there?
Finally, for the record, my post on this board Sat. night was not just the \'Icky Shuffle\' writ Internet. I asked several TG/Rag. related questions and peppered the post with handicapping observations -- almost all of which have gone ignored in the wake of a lot of whining and crying by several others on this board.
Alydar -- Sticks and stones. You did you not have the guts to take a stand on any horse in any of the races. That says enough about you.
Jerry -- My ROI for the Belmont Stakes was 976%. For the day it was 486%. I bet 7 races and cashed 4 of them.
Let\'s get a few other things taken care of:
Handicapping contests:
1) I agree completely that we should not hold the public handicappers to the same ROI standards as we hold ourselves. But I don\'t recall bashing any handicappers for their ROI, just for their reasoning.
2) The way you bet in a handicapping contest is fundamentally different than you bet in real life, and depending on what kind of contest you are in, your strategy will be different. For example, in a 500 handicapper field, one has to take a Nunzio-like approach and try to make a big score. If you spread and hit a few races, it\'s almost impossible to come out on top. I took a middle ground in this contest, given that there were about 10-15 entrants, playing about 1/2 the races and skewing my bets toward the exotics and hoping that the \'go-for-brokers\' like Nunzio were wrong.
3) Odds make the play and you don\'t know the odds until the race is run. Race 3: True I did not have Sherpa Guide in my contest tri. True he was not a magnificent looking horse on the sheets. But my approach to the race was to make sure I hit the tri if Personable Pete was in the top three, given that I had tossed the two overbet 2nd and 3rd choices. At 34:1 I had to use SG \'defensively\'. If you play the races too fine with exotics you will lose a lot of sleep. In the Belmont I ended up betting 3 horses to win at the track: Sunday Break, MDO, and Sarava. Since I had Sarava at 30:1, I needed at least 60:1 to bet him. Given that only 1 or 2 horses out of the 31 that ran in the Derby and Preakness went off at 50:1 or more, he was not a cinch as of Friday night to be enough value for me. PD got bet down too much on Sat. to be a bet.
4) Bankroll matters -- With $1,000 dollars and a desire to spread, I limited my Belmont plays somewhat (27% of my bankroll). In reality, I had a significantly larger bankroll (about $3,000) so was free to make more plays. I keyed PD in supers and took the opportunity to toss WE and the hopeless Artax Too and Like a Hero, leaving me with 8 horses. Given what happened to me in the Derby, where I left WE off the top of my ticket I was not going to make that mistake again, especially when you have a 6:5 shot that you think is a clear toss.
As for races 11 and 12, frankly I didn\'t have the energy on Friday to even look much at them in any detail. I knew that it was going to cost a lot of $ to play the tris and my $1,000 was already spoken for, so shame on me I guess.
TG vs. the SHEETS
We have beaten the methodology horse to death. In terms of performance on Belmont day, again, I have no idea how the horses I bet or tossed based on sheet pattern (OTF, YG, Sarava, Quiet One, America\'s Guy, etc.) looked on TG and only HP and JB have come forward even partially with an answer (OTF, YG and Sarava). That would make a good discussion.
The profitability piece (the one we care most about) involves interpretation and betting strategy and execution.
Just look at how Friedman and I handicapped the Belmont using the same product. I thought War Emblem should have been 12:1. Friedman had him at 3:1 or 4:1. I thought MDO was good value, Friedman tossed him. And then there\'s the betting. You could easily have analyzed the race well and done lousy at the windows. I have blown my share of $20k tris and $80k supers because of stupid betting moves. Saturday was just one of those days when I happened to handicap well, bet well and get a bit lucky.
As for Saratoga, my schedule of betting is as follows:
June 10 to July 11 -- no betting
July 12 and 13 -- betting
July 19 and 20 -- no betting
July 26 and 27 -- betting
August-Oct 25 -- probably no betting; might sneak a day or two in there
Oct. 26 (BC day) -- BETTING!
So, super f., HP, and anybody else, I\'d be glad to jump back in and do another contest with you in July. And the BC is a no-brainer. If we do, though, and you guys lose the contest but hit some big winners at the track, please don\'t be shy about telling us.
Forgot to add this:
Tabitha -- 1) I think that next to the definition of \'sour grapes\' is the text of your posts in this string.
2) If you bet enough War Emblems and Beat Hollows at 6:5 and 8:5 you will be going to the ATM an awful lot
3) If if I post my W2s will you apologize for your comments?
1- I\'ve dealt with this so many times I\'m sick of it. The problem is that he doesn\'t take a definitive stand beforehand, but declares victory afterward (like in Ragozin\'s book), and is declared victorious by others. In any event, this is a straw man--we weren\'t talking about that comparison.
2- Who said he had to hit the tri? He couldn\'t have found a way to make money on the race with a small bet if he liked that horse? At 70-1, the play is cheap.
3- Congratulations.
4- My comment about ROI was neither lame nor about a $15,000 tri. It was about Patent\'s claim he hit 4 signers, and it involves betting strategy--it has nothing to do with handicapping. Like I said, I hit the Pick Six yesterday--and lost money.
5- We don\'t disagree.
6- See my lengthy response to your other post (Figure Making Methodology II) and we\'ll both look at both Belmont sheets when posted, especially at the numbers everyone ran that day. I have no idea who the results favor, other than Sarava, whom I saw in the Rag Preakness sheets, and we do look better there. But that\'s not the point I\'ve been trying to make, both after the B.C. and Preakness (I forgot to do it after the Derby). The point is to look at trends of figure making--circuit vs. circuit, short/long, changing days, etc., and discuss them.
David,
I don\'t think I have anything else to add to my other comments. I\'m only happy that everyone who wants to read this stuff can see it for themselves. No matter how much money you won, I don\'t think you could look any worse, but if it suits you to continue and try to \'take care of things\' with posts like this, go ahead and have whatever kind of fun guys like you can have.
In case anyone is keeping track, the score is now
HP - One
Patent - Zero
I would really rather have the next one of these over at your house, on the SHEETS board. That is, if it doesn\'t get in the way of all the priceless handicapping related discussions you guys are having at the time. Let me know when you\'re ready.
Please, tell us more about your views on handicapping contests, the card, your ROI, etc. Fascinating. Good luck to you.
HP
Author: TGJB
Date: 06-10-02 15:57
\"1- I\'ve dealt with this so many times I\'m sick of it. The problem is that he doesn\'t take a definitive stand beforehand, but declares victory afterward (like in Ragozin\'s book), and is declared victorious by others.\"
Are you talking about what you and your syndicate did after the Derby?
This stuff cracks me up.
Jerry, Jr.
Go back and read all the stuff about my overview for the Derby again. Then go sit in the corner.
Uhm Jerry,
I believe Jim put you in your place about Derby \"analysis\" and your past-posting. No need for me to get involved in your little circle jerk.
It\'s just another example of your hypocritical nature - slamming Mr. Patent for posting the same thing you did (though more props to Patent for not having to break his wager into 17 pieces to attract investors) in the same manner.
By the way, your condescending attitude and humorless quips don\'t add a thing to your diminishing credibility.
Jerry, Jr.
R3 $2 tri pd 1506
R10 $2 tri pd 25,209
R11 $2 tri pd 3733
R12 $2 tri pd 1843
The 4 tri\'s paid 32,291 total plus the win bet on the Belmont.
Why only a 14k profit?
I don\'t remember him saying that he hit the tris for $2.00. Cut that in half, and wow, it works out.
Ed,
I had $1 tris in those 4 races. I also cashed some win money on Sarava and on the winner in the 11th plus the exacta in the 11th.
I poured about $1,000 into losing P3s and the late P4 plus about $600 on the Belmont super, keying Perfect (Dread) Drift.
Total bet: $3309
Total winnings: $17637
Profit: $14,328
Saving my losers for the IRS.
Okay, one more time: In my pre-Derby comments I said the right play was to spread out in exotics against the favorites (one of them Friedman\'s key), and then listed the horses to use. That play resulted in the $18K tri. Thanks for allowing me to say that again. Say hello to Jim.
Tell us more, Dave. You\'re an amazing man. HP
Uhm ok Jerry,
I thought you made your money on a 7 or 8 horse box in the Derby, not by spreading and throwing out the favorites. I know you had to go 8 deep to get to War Emblem. By the way, when you played against the favorites, was that the 6-1 favorite and the 7-1 shot that ran third? How about the another 6-1 shot that ran fourth. Too funny.
Billy Spilane
P.S. Jim says hello and wishes the horses in your stable the best of luck.
You spelled Spillane\'s name wrong, and by the way, his box ran 1-3-4 in the Derby. I strongly recommend you keep posting--I\'ll rattle your cage every once in a while to make sure your okay.
Great Jerry, hope you are caught up with him now.
Glad to see you agreed with me about your Derby play and past-posting.
Why are you so afraid of Mr. Patent? Quit leaving everything to Alydar. :)
The way you dodge his posts isn\'t becoming of a man of your stature. LOL
Leo G.