Re: Track Selection (988 Views)
Posted by:
David Patent (IP Logged)
Date: July 08, 2002 03:41PM
Alydar,
I knew that you were the most likely person to figure out the reference in my original post.
HP,
Belmont it is. My ROI there is great this year! But then, you previously defeated me in a handicapping contest there. Hmmm.
Regarding your comments on the rules, which, since you have accepted (and got to pick the track), you really have no business bashing:
You wrote: "This contest has NOTHING to do with anything anyone does when they handicap".
Sorry, HP, but that is just not right. What we are doing for the 13th is really no different than what the beleaguered public handicappers do every day, which is to place, in rank order, the horses in the race by their probability of winning. It is also what you and I do every time we handicap a race. At least I hope you do it.
What I think we are not including in the contest are the next three steps, which are to 1) make some attempt to quantify the difference in probabilities then 2) look for a mismatch of great enough magnitude between your assessment and the public's assessment of the odds for each horse and then 3) wager accordingly.
I have never claimed that this contest is the ultimate test of skill or anything like that. It isolates one of the key skills necessary to be a successful bettor. Next time we can do it your way or Mall's way or Rasputin's way. I'm game for anything. Give me some credit.
HP, even you have to chuckle at the suggestion that somehow I had cooked the rules to favor me because Ragozin sheets allegedly result in more throwouts of high-priced winners than TG (a hypothesis that I would dispute) and that I would be more likely to win because I would be picking off a bunch of low priced chalk that TG would somehow miss. Paranoia, by the way is not a character flaw.
I'll post my picks by 11:59 p.m. EDT on the 12th. No, that's not an excuse if I lose. And since you have pre-accused me of a legion of offenses (past-posting, coming up with some reason that Belmont was not truly indicative of something or other, etc.) I assume that you will step up and offer the appropriate mea culpas if those do not come to pass.