TGJB,

"So you abandoned 3/4 of your earlier post. Good, it was really silly."

I abandoned nothing. I said from the beginning that a horse's record is often "reflective" of greater/lesser degrees of the intangibles that make one horse better than another even when they have similar speed figures. I haven't changed a thing.

"The original question was not whether other characteristics exist or are important (or even how important), but whether looking at accomplishment, as distinguished from ability, is a good idea."

Personally, I will continue to look at the quality of a horse's opposition and the consistency of his accomplisments against them etc.. as an indication of the intangibles because very often the intangibles aren't measureable (at least not yet) and because they aren't contained in the speed figures. When I can see them and measure them, that's even better.

It doesn't matter to me that the public tends to overbet these horses. People that don't pay attention to this stuff often overbet and overestimate the chances of horses that aren't as good as their higher quality more accomplished opponents just because they ran as fast. Personally I believe I have a firmer grip on the horses' abilities and the probabilities of them actually winning as a result.

That's what makes racing. We will have to agree on some things and agree to disagree on others.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/19/2005 08:08PM by classhandicapper.