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? (1166 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? (2304 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/28/2002 10:51PM |
Didn't we already talk science? (1308 Views)
|
Treadhead |
05/29/2002 12:10AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1206 Views)
|
JimP |
05/29/2002 12:33AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1118 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 12:43AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1151 Views)
|
Treadhead |
05/29/2002 01:11AM |
Re: Didn't we already talk science? (1097 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 03:27PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1205 Views)
|
Mall |
05/29/2002 02:12AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1208 Views)
|
tegger |
05/29/2002 03:39AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1162 Views)
|
Mark O'Keeffe |
05/29/2002 04:58AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1202 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/29/2002 08:23AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1221 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 04:28PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1175 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/29/2002 05:02PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1076 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 05:35PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1132 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 06:11PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1135 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/29/2002 07:18PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1171 Views)
|
JimP |
05/29/2002 07:37PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1101 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 08:16PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1096 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/30/2002 12:48AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1161 Views)
|
teekay |
06/03/2002 08:17PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1218 Views)
|
mandown |
05/29/2002 09:58PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1127 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/30/2002 12:25AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1077 Views)
|
mandown |
05/30/2002 02:46AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1206 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/30/2002 03:48AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1194 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/30/2002 09:29AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1188 Views)
|
Patrick Morgan |
05/29/2002 05:03PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1160 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/29/2002 05:15PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1142 Views)
|
Patrick Morgan |
05/29/2002 05:38PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1214 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/30/2002 10:25PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1234 Views)
|
Mall |
05/30/2002 10:48PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1103 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 12:02AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1188 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 03:37AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1267 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 07:25AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1110 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 07:30AM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1157 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 12:42PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1208 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 12:45PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1130 Views)
|
David G. Patent |
05/31/2002 12:50PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1269 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 01:16PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1119 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 04:41PM |
Re: jerry (1258 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 05:34PM |
Re: jerry (1129 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 05:56PM |
Re: jerry (1124 Views)
|
David Patent |
05/31/2002 06:02PM |
Re: jerry (1175 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 06:20PM |
Re: jerry (1193 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 06:32PM |
Re: jerry (1083 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 06:55PM |
Re: jerry (1166 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
05/31/2002 07:35PM |
Re: jerry (1084 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 08:33PM |
Re: jerry (1058 Views)
|
Jason L. |
05/31/2002 09:44PM |
Re: jerry (1154 Views)
|
Michael D. |
05/31/2002 10:05PM |
Re: jerry (1213 Views)
|
Jason L. |
05/31/2002 10:34PM |
Re: jerry (1152 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 11:06PM |
Re: endless bitchy catfights (1165 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
06/01/2002 07:21AM |
Re: jerry (1179 Views)
|
Jason L. |
06/01/2002 08:32PM |
Re: jerry (1239 Views)
|
TGJB |
06/02/2002 04:13PM |
Re: jerry (1327 Views)
|
Jason L. |
06/03/2002 07:40PM |
Bill Clinton Medallion of Merit (1269 Views)
|
Anonymous User |
06/01/2002 03:15AM |
Re: jerry (1153 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 08:27PM |
David: Two More Things To Think About (1132 Views)
|
Mall |
05/31/2002 08:42PM |
Re: David: Two More Things To Think About (1046 Views)
|
BrettFavre |
05/31/2002 09:34PM |
Re: David: Two More Things To Think About (1158 Views)
|
tgab |
05/31/2002 10:20PM |
Re: David: Two More Things To Think About (1116 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 11:04PM |
Re: jerry (1204 Views)
|
HP |
05/31/2002 06:12PM |
Re: Mild Dissent. (1153 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/31/2002 04:07PM |
Re: alydar (1202 Views)
|
superfreakicus |
05/31/2002 04:37PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1133 Views)
|
Patrick Morgan |
06/03/2002 11:53PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1155 Views)
|
Alydar in California |
06/04/2002 07:37AM |
Re: David, David, David. (1078 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 03:15PM |
Re: David, David, David. (1080 Views)
|
TGJB |
05/29/2002 03:10PM |
track speed (1168 Views)
|
nunzio |
05/29/2002 11:37AM |
Re: Last Words? (962 Views)
|
HP |
05/29/2002 01:20PM |
Re: Last Words? (1166 Views) |
TGJB |
05/29/2002 05:50PM |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|