Changing Track Speeds

[Josephus]

Just finished reading \"A BREED APART\" by Mike Helm.  If anyone needes further validation of Jerry\'s methods, read the chapter (6) BEHIND THE HARROWS - THE TRACKMEN.  It backs up TGJB 1000%.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Its NOT a question of tracks changing speeds. Of course they change speeds. The problem is the hypothesis of Changing Speed based upon the notion that a certain percentage of the horses will Pair cannot exist in a vacuum and it certainly CANNOT run contrary to observable evidence indicating those horses didn\'t Pair.

No One is questioning track speed can change day to day or even race to race. However, when you say \"The track was fast, got slow, then got fast again.\" Thats clearly a debateable premise.

Josephus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just finished reading \"A BREED APART\" by Mike
> Helm.  If anyone needes further validation of
> Jerry\'s methods, read the chapter (6) BEHIND THE
> HARROWS - THE TRACKMEN.  It backs up TGJB 1000%.

[TGJB]

CTC-- generally I just let you drone on, but I took the red eye last night, didn\'t get much sleep, and am not in a good mood. Go to \"Changing Track Speeds\" in the archives section, and listen to it about 4 times. Once you understand that there is a ton of scientific evidence that tracks change \"speed\" significantly (and measurably, by scientific measurement of energy return) with only slight changes in moisture content throughout the day, think about how a serious figure maker can tell when it does, and how much it does. Answer-- only by seeing how fast the horses run over the track, compared to how fast they have run in the fast. \"Pairing\" is a gross oversimplification used by those that either have no idea what they are talking about, or are intentionally attempting to mislead.

The internet is a very democratic thing, and anyone with an opinion usually gets to voice it, whether they know what they are talking about or not. You don\'t have anywhere near the expertise, experience, or data to offer a serious opinion on this subject. I let some others who don\'t have a real basis voice their opinions because they are good customers and have a very serious and valid interest in the figures being right. You are not and do not-- knock it off.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CTC-- generally I just let you drone on, but I
> took the red eye last night, didn\'t get much
> sleep, and am not in a good mood. Go to \"Changing
> Track Speeds\" in the archives section, and listen
> to it about 4 times.

I\'ve read it. I read things once and generally understand them.

> Once you understand that
> there is a ton of scientific evidence that tracks
> change \"speed\" significantly (and measurably, by
> scientific measurement of energy return) with only
> slight changes in moisture content throughout the
> day, think about how a serious figure maker can
> tell when it does, and how much it does.

As a matter of practice, I don\'t get into detail about how or how much time I\'ve spent analyzing race cards. I spent years at it and put more time into producing accurate Pars than Andy Beyer ever dreamed about. His Par\'s were amateurish. I also bought your figures every single day for two years. The point being that enough time has been invested by myself in card analysis that I most certainly am not an amateur. The truth of it is much stronger than what I\'ve just stated.

I learned a great deal while charting races that closely and reached a point where I don\'t even have to chart them any longer to understand why a result occurred. I don\'t mean to say in any way that I can figure every major race in the country more accurately than your intensive statisical method of figuring them. But, I resent the notion that close observation cannot compete with the T-Graph method nor point out mis-assigned figures and I\'ll tell you why, I know it can.

How fast is Bob and John?

I dont\' have any issue with changing track speeds. You know where I take issue.


  Answer--
> only by seeing how fast the horses run over the
> track, compared to how fast they have run in the
> fast. \"Pairing\" is a gross oversimplification used
> by those that either have no idea what they are
> talking about, or are intentionally attempting to
> mislead.
>
> The internet is a very democratic thing, and
> anyone with an opinion usually gets to voice it,
> whether they know what they are talking about or
> not. You don\'t have anywhere near the expertise,
> experience, or data to offer a serious opinion on
> this subject. I let some others who don\'t have a
> real basis voice their opinions because they are
> good customers and have a very serious and valid
> interest in the figures being right. You are not
> and do not-- knock it off.