Come on, Len. Knock it off. (1312 Views)
Posted by:
TGJB (IP Logged)
Date: August 31, 2005 06:24PM
Just got back from playing St. Andrews (43 on the front, as good as I can play, blew up on the back, although the heat and 30 mph wind didn't help any).
More annoying stuff to deal with, mostly from Friedman.
1-- The study Len quotes is very old, from way back when we had hand written sheets. It was done by a guy with a Vegas newsletter. It featured several mechanically done studies (best last number, etc.), and Ragozin did better than we did, although as I remember, worse than others did (specifically, the old DRF figures based on track records, I believe). The guy who did the study, Jim Bayle, said himself that he was not satisfied with it and did not think it was meaningful. So he later gathered data from Ragozin, us, and several other figure makers, for six months, at something like 10 circuits. After doing all that he did not run the studies, because it was interfering with his betting (!!!).
2-- Let me get this straight, Len. You don't want to do Jimbo's study because it is purely mechanical and doesn't take into account patterns, but you quote the results of a decade-plus old study that was done purely mechanically and doesn't take into account patterns. Do I have that right?
I'll let the rest of Len's nonsense go. But I'll say that while we both use patterns, those will wash out over a long run-- meaning, in one race it will hurt one of us that we are not using patterns, in another it will hurt the other-- and, the patterns are always a matter of opinion and percentages (see the Thoro-Patterns). Numbers are numbers, and in the long run, faster horses will beat slower horses. There are lots of ways to do a study, but Jimbo's works for me, although I would do the scoring a little differently. I'm willing to do it, there is really no reason that Len would not if he has confidence in his figures, except for marketing reasons.
But also-- Indulto, you are such a putz. In case you haven't noticed, the sheer number of posts about me and TG on the Rag board is staggering-- like, maybe half the posts there, more than that recently. Maybe 5% of the ones on this board are about Friedman or Ragozin, or even JJ. In that recent exchange, there were at least 5 times as many posts attacking me and calling me names as those going in the opposite direction. Did you even notice?
Jimbo can take care of himself (and you, without breaking a sweat), but one more thing you might want to think through: he is proposing an objective, purely mechanical test. While it may or may not be indicative, there is no way, especially since he wants to recruit a Ragozin guy to do it with him, that it can be biased in my favor. So how in that weak brain of yours do you come up with the idea that it is some nefarious plot? Objective tests of data are bad, and insidious TG doings? Do you read the stuff you write?
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/2005 06:37PM by TGJB.
Come on, Len. Knock it off. (1312 Views) |
TGJB |
08/31/2005 06:24PM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (714 Views)
|
kev |
08/31/2005 08:13PM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (731 Views)
|
jimbo66 |
08/31/2005 09:54PM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (650 Views)
|
kev |
08/31/2005 10:20PM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (681 Views)
|
jimbo66 |
08/31/2005 10:50PM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (588 Views)
|
|
09/01/2005 09:42AM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (637 Views)
|
miff |
09/01/2005 10:39AM |
Study, What Study? (667 Views)
|
Chuckles_the_Clown2 |
09/01/2005 12:31AM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (650 Views)
|
sighthound |
09/01/2005 02:59AM |
Here We Go Again (681 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 03:36PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (611 Views)
|
jimbo66 |
09/01/2005 04:01PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (611 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 04:06PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (664 Views)
|
jimbo66 |
09/01/2005 04:32PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (697 Views)
|
richiebee |
09/02/2005 03:46AM |
Re: Here We Go Again (642 Views)
|
richiebee |
09/01/2005 04:16PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (634 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 04:21PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (607 Views)
|
miff |
09/01/2005 04:22PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (625 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 04:30PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (586 Views)
|
miff |
09/01/2005 04:39PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (699 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 04:42PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (673 Views)
|
|
09/01/2005 05:01PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (682 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 05:06PM |
Re: Here We Go Again (637 Views)
|
miff |
09/01/2005 05:07PM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (636 Views)
|
richiebee |
08/31/2005 10:18PM |
Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (659 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 11:57AM |
please JB (685 Views)
|
horsegoer |
09/01/2005 11:00AM |
Re: please JB (691 Views)
|
TGJB |
09/01/2005 11:39AM |
Re: please JB (651 Views)
|
Chuckles_the_Clown2 |
09/01/2005 11:45AM |
Re: please JB (676 Views)
|
|
09/01/2005 11:48AM |
Re: please JB (594 Views)
|
Chuckles_the_Clown2 |
09/01/2005 11:58AM |
Re: please JB (622 Views)
|
horsegoer |
09/01/2005 12:19PM |
Re: please JB (635 Views)
|
|
09/01/2005 01:10PM |
Re: please JB (696 Views)
|
jimbo66 |
09/01/2005 01:27PM |
Re: please JB (640 Views)
|
|
09/01/2005 01:30PM |
Re: please JB (669 Views)
|
kev |
09/01/2005 06:29PM |