Just For The Hell Of It

[miff]

JB,

Not sure I completely understand. Do you mean that the difference between TG and Rags should be fairly consistent at 3-4 point spread now?

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

With all due respect, I can\'t seriously understand why anyone would want to compare TGraph figures to \"Rags\". Why would you want to do that? Its like putting a German made BMW (They make them in the Carolinas now) next to a Hyundai and lauding how the Hyundai is almost as fine an automobile because it has four tires, a steering wheel and a seat for the driver. (Michael\'s gonna hate this...lol) Sure it can drive the same route from New York to Miami along Interstate 95, but is that the measure of its quality?

If someone was watching the \"Rags boys\" on a race by race basis they\'d have serious problems in my estimation. Its obvious to me from the \"big race day\" samples that they can\'t really get ground right. Additionally, they don\'t have a clue how racetracks can metamorphosis on certain days.

The Rags have horses running faster also, though even a Hyundai will get you to Miami.

CtC



Post Edited (12-10-04 15:49)

[TGJB]

Mike-- All other things being equal, which covers a lot of ground-- 1/2 turn splits, circuits being done by different guys for Ragozin, etc.-- that\'s about what it seems to come out.

CTC

>With all due respect, I can\'t seriously understand why anyone would want to compare TGraph figures to \"Rags\". Why would you want to do that? <

With regards to whether horses are getting faster, it\'s not a matter of comparison. It\'s a matter of having data that precedes the lauch of TG.

>if the breed as a whole improved you wouldn\'t be able to tell. He said he saw my point. Whether that caused the change I can\'t tell you, but even though horses have continued to get faster on our figures they no longer have gotten FASTER relative to Ragozin, and Friedman said at the DRF Expo that they no longer use pars.<

Well if you have a bias in your figures related to non path related trip issues, pace, position, and/or the effect of stiffer/easier competion on final time etc... now you both have it. :-)



Post Edited (12-10-04 16:44)

[Michael D.]

HP,
how do you measure lengths vs points at 10f?
from \"5\" or \"6\" to smarty\'s figure (forget exactly, but negative i think), you get 8 lengths? why do you and TGJB have different scales? he says \"5\" to \"6\" equals 10-12 lengths.

[kev]

\"My point being, theres different ways to have success, but does that success hold up in the long run?\" You don\'t think theres players that use the sheets, that have been hitting hard for years?? hell they only been in biz for over 40 years, and where JB got his idea for his great biz.

[jimbo66]

Kev,

I think that very very very few people have been \"hitting it hard for years\".  There was a window in the 70\'s and maybe early 80\'s where information like speed figures was limited to a few people and there were great opportunities.  But in the \"information age\" we are in now, it is very tough.  I am sure some do it.  But very few.  And those that do \"hit it hard\" have the discipline to limit their plays to very strong opinions.  They may bet 1 or 2 races a card.  No more.

[kev]

I did\'nt say anything about alot of players winning, I just say, don\'t you think their out there?? Don\'t you think that there is at year end, rag\'s and TG users showing a profit?? There better be for $25.00 or 30.00 a pop.

[jimbo66]

Kev,

I would take a wild stab and say that 3% of the people who bet horses regularly, show a profit.  Obviously it is a wild guess, but I would be shocked if it was much higher.

My question to you is what percentage of T-Graph/Rags users that bet horses regularly show a profit.  Do you think it is the same?  Double?  Triple?  50%?

I obviously don\'t know the answer, but I am curious as to what your perception would be of \"effective\" the 25 to 30 bucks a pop sheets add to the bottom line.

[kev]

Well if either product is not working for you, you still going to but it at that cost?? It all goes back to what I said early about both products holding their own. I understand JB to a certain point, why he is going after his comp. most company\'s do it. Where do you stop?? it\'s like bud and miller lite, you really think that all that sh*t they see on TV about the other beer is going to make someone else switch??? You might have some come over to your side, but what about the people that don\'t care to hear for all of it?? I don\'t know what % is, I was asking the question. Don\'t you think there out there on both sides?? or how about above avg. players then??? Where will it all end..........

[jimbo66]

Kev,

No reason to continue the thread.  I agree with you.  There is a small percentage of people out there winning with Rags, a similar small percentage winning with T-Graph, and another small percentage out there winning with beyers and traditiional handicapping.

I thought you were trying to make the point that a lot of the sheets players win regularly, which I think is not true.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

No I don\'t. I don\'t think theres much of an edge anymore in figures. They\'re absolutely necessary, but they don\'t put you heads and shoulders above the majority of the crowd. Its not like the seventies. Theres even less edge with BAD figures.

[Michael D.]

ctc,
my earlier post went too far, sorry about that.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Its o.k. Michael

Your opinionated and you love horseracing and that counts in your favor. I think its o.k. to agree to disagree as long as the debate doesnt get personal. Along those lines, I don\'t think TGJB \"attacks\" the other product. I think he points out legitimate issues that serious handicappers would want to be apprised of. (Recently, it was SoCalMan2 that pointed them out.) Thats \"substance\" oriented. The other guys, tend to go after TGraph on \"form\" and they have played some dirty tricks. In my opinion the debate from the other side needs to be elevated to the issues, not the personalities. Its not a personal issue. Its about method and practice and we post here without restriction because the host wants that debate.

Regarding method, I can\'t understand making figures without up to date \"pars\". I may be entrenched in the \"par\" era. But, to my mind pars enable some hard data reflection for what kind of effort a horse just ran. I would rotate the base pars and keep only times from the last year, (Perhaps longer in rarely run condition races), because pars become a stale reference when tracks change. Gulfstream resurfaced this summer, so what good are pars this coming meet? I just think some statistical base data source is good to have in applying the expertise. Its not a critism of either Rags or TGraph, neither use them. To my mind, its about staying on top of changing track conditions. I\'m not sure about intergenerational comparison with recalibrating pars, but thats not especially important to me, because I believe what Jerry does. That tracks change and horses have gotten to be better athletes for a host of reasons. Which is not to say I believe Ghostzapper is Dr. Fager. At least not yet.

CtC



Post Edited (12-10-04 22:39)