We could all talk about the above items all day, but can we ever hold a long term discussion about something that really matters..... hadicapping, patterns etc?.....I don\'t know ...our handicapping attention span has become shorter over the past few months.
NC Tony
how can so many speak so litle about the one thread we all recieve from this board? ROTW
Is this what rockect scientists do when they extrapolate(l.pincay 3rd)information?
all who have brought this question to the fore(myself included) have quietly removed their intellectual inquisitive juices from participating in what this link was originally intended.(right congaree?)
welcome back again michael d. always a pleasure.
Have t agree with you.
hi david, tony ....
i enjoy some of the editorial stuff, and enjoy getting involved in a discussion now and then. it\'s too bad, however, that just about all of the recent posts have little to do with handicapping horse races using TG. a bit more balance would probably suit this board well.
Hello Michael,
I\'ve tried on this board several times to get the posters to discuss handicapping and horses, but it never happens. It\'s pretty much a gossip board where evrybody is wondering what the ROTW is. How about the race of the day or the horse of the week.
congaree1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hello Michael,
>
> I\'ve tried on this board several times to get the
> posters to discuss handicapping and horses, but it
> never happens. It\'s pretty much a gossip board
> where evrybody is wondering what the ROTW is. How
> about the race of the day or the horse of the
> week.
Sincerely, I\'m not sure what there is to discuss.
Thorograph includes a vast statistical data base regarding what a horse has done after a particular effort. The key concepts are Top, Pair, Off and X. The probability is mathimatical and then you assign a projected figure for the race. You do it for all the entered animals, factoring weight change, post position and Figures already earned. The contenders become self evident. Certain patterns are encompassed in this analysis. The 0-2-X among them. A key element to my mind that is not reduced to statistics is distance. Varying distances will many times result in differnt efforts because horses are not machines and have differing distance aptitude. In other words who really expects Lost in the Fog to win at the Derby distance in top class? Or more accurately stated, who expects Lost in the Fog to Pair his 6 furlong figures at 10 furlongs?
Clearly the forging pattern is one of the very best. Still, the forge has to be factored with the ability level of the animals in the race under review. In that regard you have to factor the \"Figure Spread\". Is a 1 or even a 2 point Past Performance figure advantage significant enough to win? Often its not. Odds will always play a role.
What precisely do those wanting to discuss patterns want to hear? Ask it, Alan will answer.
David, Conga, Bobphilo, Nc \"the Jesuit\" Tony, Michael D:
I am as guilty as anyone of posting \"gossipy\", verbose and sometimes tedious pieces concerning the sport/business I love, and am guilty of starting some threads which have gotten way out of hand. Music, politics and travel have all become intertwined in racing threads at various times, and I have said at various times the board can be both educational and entertaining.
But instead of bemoaning the lack of threads concerning TG methodology and philosophy, why not start one yourself?
I have quite a few questions regarding using the TGs to handicap races, and welcome a response from any rational poster and/or Jerry or Alan.
On the Ragboard, questions are usually directed to Len, and his answers tend not to be the subject of debate. Almost like the old when EF Hutton talks, everybody listens ad campaign. On the TG board, statements by TGA or TGJ tend to be the starting point of the debate, not the final word. (Len actually recently made a fascinating post where he stated his belief that his confidence level in numbers/ patterns was higher in classier races, simply because better horses tend to be sounder and more formful. It got me to thinking about when are races so cheap (and runners so inconsistent) that any handicapping tool (TGs, Rags, Form) is rendered ineffective).
IMO a big problem now is that everyone wants to talk Derby, and each year the crop of Derby prospects tends to be more lightly raced meaning that many runners have not raced enough to establish patterns as we know them. Discreet Cat (3 lifetime races) is ranked 5th on Ed Fountaine\'s Derby Dozen; Strong Contender (2 lifetime races) is ranked 9th. How much of a pattern have these lightly raced animals established?
As I have previously stated, a lot of common sense handicapping knowledge/ theory becomes diluted when it comes to the Derby. (A) We are not accustomed to handicapping 20 horse fields where (B) most of the 20 horses are not on the day of the Derby prepared to race 10 \"marks\". Makes it more of a crapshoot than your average race, no?
Comments?
Richiebee,
Your points are well taken. With regard to the Derby, for the reasons you mentioned, including the huge field (many of which don't even belong), the race is often a horror show of bad trips making it one of the most unpredictable races possible. In their frustration many handicappers throw away all the proven handicapping methods and try to "reinvent the handicapping wheel" based on too small samples. These can range anywhere from the discredited Dosage theory to the 3 prep minimum rule. The fact is that the way the race is run frequently makes it an unpredictable poor betting proposition, period. Just enjoy it, or not, as the spectacle it is and bet it as a lark. As for serious betting opportunities, look at more fairly, and sanely, run races.
Bob
Bobphilo -
I have the opposite view. The fact that many people tend to take leave of their handicapping senses when betting the Derby creates value and makes it a good betting opportunity. You just have to be willing to accept that the risks and rewards will be higher than in a smaller field.
To your list of things that lead people astray, I would add ego. Bettors want so badly to be able to say that they had the winner of the Derby that they don\'t emphasize value as much as they would ordinarily.
Bitplayer,
You are correct in saying that there is a lot of stupid money in the Derby and that in itself adds some value to intelligent picks. The problem is that the frequency of bad trips of even the best choices, often makes the race so unpredicatable as to cancel out this advantage. I think that the high prices one see\'s for Derby winners are more a relection of unpredictability than they are of value. I find many Derby-specific strategies just one step above strategies for winning the lottery. Though my overall Derby R.O.I. is about as good as most other races I play (probably for the reasons you state), I\'m still leary of making it a prime bet. The one thing I hate the most is when I lose with a good selection due to a bad trip. This happens more often in the Derby than any other race. If I lose because of a handicapping error, I can at least learn something from the experience.
Of course, people should base their betting stratigies on what they\'re comfortable with and the last thing I want to do is tell people how heavily to bet the Derby. I just personally find it useful to realize that this race is often a minefield and bet accordingly.
Bob
Recent Derby Winners
Giacomo
Smarty Jones
Funny Cide
War Emblem
Monarchos
Fusaichi Pegasus
Charismatic
Real Quiet
Silver Charm
Grindstone
Thunder Gulch
Go For Gin
Sea Hero
Lil E. Tee
Strike the Gold
Unbridled
In reviewing that list its hard to point to a Derby winner and say \"He doesnt belong.\" Giacomo would make that \"He doesn\'t belong list\" in my opinion. Second might be Go For Gin, but he certainly was a fast hard knocking horse that year. Charismatic was a bit of an enigma, he certainly jumped up Derby time and maybe he was hard to come up with. I still believe Lemon Drop Kid was a far better horse. Beaten five lengths, he proved it with a clearer run.
However with a couple exceptions, I don\'t think you can look at those Derby winners and not realize in retrospect, \"Sure, he made sense.\" Granted some were erratic after their Derby wins, but they certainly fit and were not complete surprises with the exception of Giacomo. Which brings me to the value question. Theres always value in the Derby. The key is picking your winner, you can almost always eliminate over half the field. Except for last year...lol
Afleet Alex -3rd
Smarty Jones -1st
Funny Cide -1st
War Emblem -1st
Point Given/Monarchos Box
Anees -Also Ran
Menifee -2nd
Indian Charlie -3rd
Captain Bodgit -2nd
Cavonnier -2nd
Southern Rhythm-Also Ran
Jumron -4th
Sea Hero -1st
Lil E. Tee -1st
Strike the Gold-1st
Summer Squall -2nd
Easy Goer -2nd
Forty Niner -2nd
Thirty years or so ago, a tabloid called \"nat\'l enquirer\" was taboo to anyone w/a brain. today that \"rag\"(w/apololgies to len) is considered rather tame.
I mention it because a strain in our daily life seems to have an insataible appetite for \"gossip\".
Horse players tend to isolate themselves from being inadvertanly swayed by anothers\' opinion which might change their original instincts.
But since brown lays it out for all to see...why not chime in on our individual readings,patterns,track biases,etc.
You should try it,and once we all realize that we can pick up stuff that we missed originally...well hell we might even improve our game.
thanx for listening.
David,
That was my point exactly. We need ti get back to basics. One concern that TGJB can answer is can we talk openly about non ROTW info we puchase prior to thae races? I know you have porduct to sell, but in many cases (such as this past one) the ROTW would not be my choice of races to talk about, although the results were very discussable for a good post mortem disection of the sheets for that race.
Anyway, my intention was to bring to our attention we should be discussing handicapping. We all have digressed, me included. Time to get pback on point.
NC Tony
Tony,and David,
So am I to take it that discussing the influence of the dam in looking at firsters or determining if a horse can stretch out in distance is considered gossip and not handicapping? Maybe we should tell Jerry to exclude breeding info from the PP\'s then.
Bob
bob,
what you wrote previous to my entry was so unique and intriging,that it really should have had its\' own topic.
I\'m not attacking anyone here,only stating that we lack communication skills when gathering information from sources other than our OWN tried and true.
What someone likes or dislikes in an ROTW can often be eye opening.
David,
I agree, which is why I introduced it as a new thread. It just seemed odd that people are continuing to complain that nobody is posting about handicapping rigth after a new thread on handicapping has been posted and is right in front of their eyes.
I do appreciate you\'re noticing it and an looking forward to your comments.
Bob
Bob,
That wasn\'t my point at all. Our posts just crossed. Its an aspect of handicapping that merits its own thread.Your post speaks to a specific point of handicapping that has nothing to do with reading figs. The data on the sheets is very informative and gives insight into the breeding of the firster. So to answer your specific question, I don\'t want Jerry to stop including the info in the sheets as its supplements the figures or proxies when no figures exist at all.
Breeding science will never become an exact science. Breeding alone will not create a winner of a horse. Bad training,injuries can all compromise the breeding to some extent.
Each major breeding farm has a geneologiest studing crossing patterns/nicking patterns etc. Adena Springs/ Lanes End/ Phipps/ Coolmore/ Judmonte/ Claiborne all have a guy like the one you wrote about. They\'ve had decades to play/perfect dna information. How far away are we from someone cloning horses?
NC Tony
Bob,
I made my original point for what it was worth. The point you brought up is quite deep and not for everyone. Lets face it, many players pass on MDN Races and first time starters.
Quite frankly, if you meant me as some people, our points crossed.
NC Tony
Tony,
Sorry about the sarcastic tone. I didn\'t realize our posts had crossed.
Ironically I don\'t use breeding much in my own handicapping because breeding is not an excat science, but apparently these new findings seem to have some predictive value. Handicapping and traning are far from exact sciences as well. Of course, poor training can undo the best genes in the world but, by the same token, the best training in the world can\'t change bad genes if the potential just isn\'t there. It\'s always a combination of both.
Of course, performance is the ultimate test and the figures are always my main source if a horse has raced, but with an unraced or untried horse at the distance, knowing the mare makes an additional contribution is useful to know. From a buyer\'s or breeder\'s point of view, locating the exact genes would be invaluable.
Bob
I\'ve found the Breeding info helpfull in all handicapping situations . I\'d like to see the Breeding info data expanded on though I don\'t know exactly how , there is real potential for finding an edge and value ...
David,
What you say about the value of comparing views on the ROTW is very true. That\'s why I always urge all the members in my group to make picks and even add an analysis if they wish, both pre and post race. You\'d be surprised at what a large percentage of the people contribute to this and how useful it is getting varying points of view. Actually, I don\'t think you would be surprised, as you know the value of open intelligent discussion. Given the increase in international racing and foreign shippers, I\'ve had a number of requests for ways to evaluate foreign figures and I am currently working on a table for converting Timeform figures to accurate equivalent TG, Beyer and Brisnet figures.
Bob
Bob
Dr. Roman has a chart similar to the one you mentioned, thought you might have an interest.
http://www.chef-de-race.com/pfs/comparative_speed_figs.htm
thank you for this. I have been looking for similar for some time.
Thanks Wrongly. I actually already have that and have been using it in my conversions, with some slight modifications. It\'s pretty useful. I appreciate you passing it along, all the same.
Bob
I\'m currently working on a table that converts TG figures as well as the others listed. I\'ll let you know when it\'s done if you\'d like to see it.
Bob
Bob
Thanks, would love to see it when your done.
Wrongly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bob
>
> Thanks, would love to see it when your done.
I , too, am most interested in this Bob.
Wrongly and Shanahan,
Will gladly pass along my findings when I\'m done.
TGAB,
Thanks for the Dubai data. This additional info is just what I need to for my conversions study.
Bob
Bob,
Since you are already comitted, would like to see the data too. My email is attached here or in your yahoo groups.
NC Tony
NoCarolinaTony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bob,
>
> Since you are already comitted, would like to see
> the data too. My email is attached here or in your
> yahoo groups.
>
> NC Tony
A lot of people have said that that I should be commited. LOL.
I\'m working on it now and you\'l be one of the first to know.
I\'ll also list a lot of related data in my Yahoo group files section as well, including a standardized rating system that any type figure can be converted to. Remember the t scores and Z scores from your stat days?
bobphilo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NoCarolinaTony Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Bob,
> >
> > Since you are already comitted, would like to
> see
> > the data too. My email is attached here or in
> your
> > yahoo groups.
> >
> > NC Tony
>
> A lot of people have said that that I should be
> commited. LOL.
>
> I\'m working on it now and you\'l be one of the
> first to know.
> I\'ll also list a lot of related data in my Yahoo
> group files section as well, including a
> standardized rating system that any type figure
> can be converted to. Remember the t scores and Z
> scores from your stat days?
>
>
>
Bob,
Yes I do remember my t and z scores. But unfortunately the F scores prevail!!!
NC Tony
Bob, how can I get into your group?
shanahan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bob, how can I get into your group?
Just go to:
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/Horses_and_Racing_Forum/
The dues require that I get 10% of all your winnigs for life. LOL
Just kidding. It\'s free. Just click the join link when you get to the home page and I\'ll approve your membership. It would be a pleasure to have you as a member, as well as you other TG posters.
In addition to figure conversion there is a thread going on where I am taking the minority view that defends Godolphin\' methods of preparing horses for the Derby. Sounds interesting? Or you can just come for the figures analysis.
Bob