Re: Come on, Len. Knock it off. (680 Views)
Posted by:
jimbo66 (IP Logged)
Date: August 31, 2005 10:50PM
Kev,
I gave my honest motive on the other board. I am a gambler and am open to any theories or products that increase my ROI. I think that comparing the products would prove interesting. I did some less formal comparisons this summer with a few Rags users and it peaked my interest. The two companies disagree alot. It would be worth it to me to spend some time and money to compare them.
Patterns are of course important, but you must realize how different the patterns for the same horse can look on each of the products? Since you have used both products before at the same time, you would know that on one product, a horse could be sitting on 0-2 and be ready to "x", while on the other he may have paired up his top and be ready to move forward. That is why to me, the simple mathematical formula I proposed would provide a way to see whose figures are more accurate, despite the lack of pattern reading in the study. Reading and interpreting patterns is more style than substance, knowing which horses are the fastest before the race is more important to me. If I know that, I can start from there and figure it they can run back to it. But like I said in my post, that was just my opinion, I am open to alternative ways to measure the data.
RichieBee,
Respectfully disagree with your post. Sheets and Thorographs are not used in different ways. They are used in very similar ways. For this reason, the quality of the data is key. How we as handicappers interpret that, is our own issue. But the figures have to be as accurate as possible.
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. (680 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 (680 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 (610 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 (585 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 |