Hey David Patent...

[HP]

It looks like you now have the distinction of having your posts removed from BOTH bulletin boards.

Personally I think this is good stuff. Saving ground is not that important. Santos wins by going around the other horses, which allows his mount to maintain its full momentum. I only wish you had posted this before Santos won five yesterday, but you probably saw it coming and didn\'t want to kill your prices. I thought it looked like a win-by-losing-ground-and-going-around-the-other-horses (LGGAOH bias) kind of track yesterday, but I didn\'t catch on until it was too late. Next time I\'ll go with my gut instead of these lousy figures. Congrats and thanks. HP

[dpatent]

Jerry,

As Mall alluded, I have not even looked at the Sheets (except for one race at BM last week where a friend of mine had a horse) since July, but based on his reading of the JCGC, EA looked like a great bet.  I would not have gone near Repent based on the \'1\' he supposedly ran in his last (see all of my previous comments about 3 y.o. running 1s), but I don\'t know enough.  

My current schedule calls for a busy schedule of racing in October (5, 12, and 26) followed by 2-3 months of inactivity -- a winter \'freshening\' if you will.  Since I have received special dispensation to attend the races this coming weekend for the trio of BC preview schedules at Bel, Kee, and SA, maybe we can have some dialogue about those races when the sheets come out.

I have printed the Sheets for Preakness day and set up a schematic for recording the numbers and calculating the various averages and St.Dev..  This is going to be a lot of work -- probably about 15 to 20 hours -- and since I have a day job I won\'t be able to do much work on it until Oct. 11-13, when my wife is visiting family out of town.  I hope to have the results posted here by the 15th of October.

[TGJB]

Are you going to split by region and 1/2 turns?

[Michael D.]

HP,

   Just answer one question for me: What was the purpose of this post?   oh... by the way, the post deleted over there was a rather friendly one. I had just stated that two of the popular nominees for whatever the hell award they were talking about (something bad) were Santos and Bridgmohan. I only wanted to make the point that those two jockeys have been brilliant lately, winning quite a few races over the past few days. I also pointed out that most of those wins were with wide moves. Furthermore, I pointed out that you could have made a ton of money betting on those horses because of the money pissed away by players who were posting on that thread (and other like them), players who think saving ground is the key to winning every horse race. I thought it was one of my better posts, and I advise the other guys to leave up such heedful posts......

ps...   nice to hear from you HP

[Michael D.]

HP,
My rather thoughtful post is back up over there (I think they have a rookie doing the deletion duties today). I still do hold the distinction, however, of being deleted on both boards (partially thanks to you).

[HP]

You\'re making my point right here MD. You are making an assumption (\"players who think saving ground is the key to winning every horse race\") about the people who were posing on that thread to make your point. Your assumption is incorrect and you seemed pissed off in the bargain, which is an odd position for someone who I presume was sharp enough to make \"a ton of money betting on those horses because of the money pissed away by players who were posting on that thread.\"

Although I know players who use TG and the Sheets, I don\'t know of ANY who believe \"saving ground is the key to winning every horse race.\" I know people who consider it as one factor among many others. Some think it\'s more important, some think it\'s less important. Kind of like the jockey issue. Just because someone doesn\'t emphasize jockeys is no reason to assume they don\'t consider them at all.

You insisted on assuming and exaggerating their position to make your point. You could make your points by saying that many sheets players (I think you called them something else in your post - \"numbers somethings\" - I can\'t remember what, but it was insulting) fail to consider jockeys and then give your examples. I welcome insight that doesn\'t exactly correspond with mine, so I\'m interested in what you have to say. You go the extra mile (often) and that\'s probably why they booted you. They also are probably more interested in posts that have to do with sheets-related handicapping, but that\'s another story.

The success of the wide trip at Belmont, has been described (at least for the 20 years I have gone there) as the \'balcony move.\' The story I\'ve heard is that since the turns are so much longer than on the conventional mile ovals that a horse can actually pick up some speed with that sweeping wide move off the turn and into the stretch. Other posters may be able to identify the source of this term. It\'s nothing new. It stands out as a marked contrast to Saratoga and Aqueduct. Your success in identifying jockeys who may have picked up on this is somewhat offset by the way you went about it. Judging by the prices paid on Santos\' winners on Sunday, I would guess that quite a few of the people that you insulted over there cashed tickets, even though they might have picked those horses for different reasons. Maybe you can speak your mind without dropping the proverbial anvil on their foot. Live and let live. That\'s the point. HP

[HP]

\"Number monkeys.\" That was it. Even though I disagree with you, I managed to write a whole post without calling you names (even though I would say \"number monkeys\" ain\'t so bad). HP

[Michael D.]

HP,
Why did you waste so much of your time with this ridiculous post? Once again, you prove to be nothing but a blabbering fool. (I think the Bridgmohan/Santos winners over the past few days paid well, indicating that the fools on that string cashed nothing; why make such stupid comments?)

[HP]

Santos winners Sunday 11.80, 10.60, 10.40, 7.90 and 8.40. Not bad, but SOMEBODY was playing them (besides you, of course). You probably retired off of these.

I didn\'t waste much time on my post, but since any time spent trying to talk to you is a waste it was quite enough. TG and Sheets users have one thing in common, they\'re all fools but you. Good luck. HP

[TGJB]

Okay, look-- both you guys need to grow up. You both sometimes post garbage-- if I remember correctly, Michael, you once E-mailed that you assume I change the numbers I sell to the public so that I can buy horses for my clients at a bargain, and HP knows my opinion of a couple of his posts. Knock it off, guys.

[dpatent]

Jerry,

I am going to split (arggh, there\'s that awful word) by type of race (sprint, route, and turf) not region.  The key stat I\'m looking for is Standard Deviation and that should not vary by region, just the scale.  If you think that assumption is wrong, let me know.

[Michael D.]

TGJB,
I don\'t address this character. I really don\'t know why he has interest in my posts, which are usually about racing topics until he gets involved. These strings will never start if he just discusses topics with others..... I do not address public posts to you personally, I think you can handle the personal e-mails.

[TGJB]

I don\'t know if it will split by region or not, but it definitly could-- different figure makers, different circumstances.