Re: Arrogance and poor judgment ..... (332 Views)
Posted by:
jimbo66 (IP Logged)
Date: March 29, 2005 01:19PM
SoCalMan,
One horse since 1948 doesn't "CLEARLY dispose of that argument". I thought from your previous post, you had some concept of statistics. Saying one winner in 57 years, clearly disposes of the argument that the method is either "neutral" or "negative" is way out of whack. I don't know how many horses have run with less than three preps since 1948, but I do know that 17 have done it in the last 5 years. About 3 per year, which if that is the case going back to 1948 (I agree this is a very big "if"), than we are looking 171 horses with one winner.
CH said "neutral" or "negative", which is very conservative. I think that means negative.
As for sample size, how big of a sample would you like? 1000's of races would be nice, but if that becomes the case, this will be a good theory for our great, great, great, great, great great grandchildren to bet with.
We have to settle for 57 years of data.