Order Online |
Complete Menu of
TG Data products |
Customize a Value
Package of Select
TG Data |
Order The Last Figure for Any Horse |
Free Products |
Download and Review previous days' data. |
With detailed comments |
Email notification when your horse races |
Information |
For newcomers.
Samples and Tutorials |
Consulting services and Graph Racing |
Where to buy TG around the country |
Historical
races and handicapping articles |
Handicapping |
Major handicapping contest winners |
|
|
Re: Last Words? (1162 Views)
Posted by: TGJB (IP Logged)
Date: May 29, 2002 05:50PM
Alydar did a good job with this, which saves me some work. And of course, again, it’s not really you I’m speaking to, since you have no real interest in getting to the truth—if you did you would have joined the chorus asking Friedman to post the 13th (which they now have, and which I will be addressing shortly).
Numbered points are mine, not yours, except where indicated.
1- I make no assumptions, other than that prior figures of horses can be used to determine future figures horses run, and outcomes of races. I do this because it’s the premise, and that it works out in practice. Because you don’t make figures, this point eludes you, but Alydar did a pretty good job of explaining it. You can’t assign artificial (incorrect) figures for horses running in different races, at different distances, and different tracks, to have them run in a tight range, and ALSO have them running in a tight range when they come out of those different races and run against each other. It’s physically impossible unless you screw around with the relationships WITHIN the race, and the “tightness” confirms both the numbers you are assigning today and they numbers they are based upon. Spend one week making figures and you’ll get it.
2- Ragozin was first, and has tons of dogmatic rules concerning sprints/routes, changing tracks, etc. I came along, disavowed that stuff, and only make the one assumption, above. Good luck convincing anybody I’m the creationist.
3- (your 1)- Yeah, Bayakoa probably won a FM graded stake with a 19. Do you ever actually listen to yourself?
4- (your 2)- Pure nonsense, and you know it. The point is not the percentage of variability, but of net effect on final time, and re-casting the argument is disingenuous. The actual difference between variants was 3.6 points (not 5 or 6) for the grass races—a difference of right around 1% of the final time. That’s not a lot, and in this case we’re talking about a course that had been soaked by rain, and was now drying. Regardless of all underlying logic, however, everyone should look at the 5th and 7th races on Preakness day on Ragozin and TG, and draw their own conclusions.
5- (your 3)- Again, disingenuous, especially your granting “graded horses run better”. Not just better—more consistently near their tops. If you actually don’t know this, you’re a very bad handicapper.
What I said (and BOTH statements are in the 5/24 post) was, “every horse, in a graded stake race, ran at least 6 points off their top”, and “every horse in the field but one ran at least 6 points worse than his previous race.” i.e., bounced. BOTH ARE TRUE ON RAGOZIN—everyone can look at Ragozin’s Schaefer sheets and see for themselves. Again, even if you think any one older stake horse is 50/50 to run 6 points off his top (or bounce 6 points, either way)—and 50% is an astronomically high number considering how close to their tops stake horses run—the chance of all 6 doing it is 2%. Rather than taking a position that can’t be proved (like saying each one had an 80% chance) why not try one that can—take me up on the bet I offered.
6- (your 5)- As has been documented here (my lawyers letter to Ragozin after we taped Ragozin employees lying about us) the “dissing” that takes place is almost all by them, in the field, in private, where we are almost never in a position to respond. The only reason they don’t do it here is because we can respond. And calling my raising questions of figure methodology “dissing” is diss-ingenuous. You know better.
TGJB
Last Words? (2298 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/28/2002 10:51PM |
Didn't we already talk science? (1306 Views)
|
Treadhead |
05/29/2002 12:10AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1204 Views)
|
JimP |
05/29/2002 12:33AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1115 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 12:43AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1149 Views)
|
Treadhead |
05/29/2002 01:11AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1095 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 03:27PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1203 Views)
|
Mall |
05/29/2002 02:12AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1205 Views)
|
tegger |
05/29/2002 03:39AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1160 Views)
|
Mark O'Keeffe |
05/29/2002 04:58AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1199 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/29/2002 08:23AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1218 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 04:28PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1172 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/29/2002 05:02PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1073 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 05:35PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1129 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 06:11PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1132 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 07:18PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1168 Views)
|
JimP |
05/29/2002 07:37PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1097 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 08:16PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1091 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/30/2002 12:48AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1157 Views)
|
teekay |
06/03/2002 08:17PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1215 Views)
|
mandown |
05/29/2002 09:58PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1123 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/30/2002 12:25AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1073 Views)
|
mandown |
05/30/2002 02:46AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1204 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/30/2002 03:48AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1190 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/30/2002 09:29AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1184 Views)
|
Patrick Morgan |
05/29/2002 05:03PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1156 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/29/2002 05:15PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1139 Views)
|
Patrick Morgan |
05/29/2002 05:38PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1211 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/30/2002 10:25PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1227 Views)
|
Mall |
05/30/2002 10:48PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1101 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 12:02AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1185 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 03:37AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1265 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 07:25AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1105 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 07:30AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1153 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 12:42PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1207 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 12:45PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1126 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 12:50PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1266 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 01:16PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1115 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 04:41PM |
Re: jerry (1255 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 05:34PM |
Re: jerry (1127 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 05:56PM |
Re: jerry (1121 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/31/2002 06:02PM |
Re: jerry (1172 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 06:20PM |
Re: jerry (1191 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 06:32PM |
Re: jerry (1079 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 06:55PM |
Re: jerry (1163 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 07:35PM |
Re: jerry (1081 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 08:33PM |
Re: jerry (1056 Views)
|
Jason L. |
05/31/2002 09:44PM |
Re: jerry (1152 Views)
|
Michael D. |
05/31/2002 10:05PM |
Re: jerry (1208 Views)
|
Jason L. |
05/31/2002 10:34PM |
Re: jerry (1150 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 11:06PM |
Re: endless bitchy catfights (1163 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
06/01/2002 07:21AM |
Re: jerry (1176 Views)
|
Jason L. |
06/01/2002 08:32PM |
Re: jerry (1225 Views)
|
TGJB |
06/02/2002 04:13PM |
Re: jerry (1325 Views)
|
Jason L. |
06/03/2002 07:40PM |
Bill Clinton Medallion of Merit (1266 Views)
|
Anonymous User |
06/01/2002 03:15AM |
Re: jerry (1150 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 08:27PM |
David: Two More Things To Think About (1129 Views)
|
Mall |
05/31/2002 08:42PM |
Re: David: Two More Things To Think About (1043 Views)
|
BrettFavre |
05/31/2002 09:34PM |
Re: David: Two More Things To Think About (1145 Views)
|
tgab |
05/31/2002 10:20PM |
Re: David: Two More Things To Think About (1113 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 11:04PM |
Re: jerry (1201 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 06:12PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1151 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 04:07PM |
Re: alydar (1199 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 04:37PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1131 Views)
|
Patrick Morgan |
06/03/2002 11:53PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1152 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
06/04/2002 07:37AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1075 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 03:15PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1077 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 03:10PM |
track speed (1163 Views)
|
nunzio |
05/29/2002 11:37AM |
Re: Last Words? (957 Views)
|
HP |
05/29/2002 01:20PM |
Re: Last Words? (1162 Views) |
TGJB |
05/29/2002 05:50PM |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|