To Janis Joplin

[SoCalMan2]

Your explanation to Classhandicapper was very good.  Thank you for the effort.  

Judging by his responses, it still did not sink in. It is comical that he thinks he operates in a more detailed level than we do when he operates in nothing more than bald generalities.

I think he is just completely blind to all the work guys like Ragozin or TGJB put into making the numbers.  These guys get FAR deeper into details everyday than Classhandicapper ever even remotely approaches ever.  I think it is frustrating to a person like TGJB because he goes and gets his hands dirty everyday doing all this work and then a guy like Classhandicapper (who appears to have never gotten his hands dirty in this arena) says the fruit of all your toil is flawed because you did not get into enough detail (i.e. did not get your hands dirty enough).

The initial first response is -- \"okay, get in the mud here and show me.\"  Instead, this chap keeps his hands clean and says, \"I just know you are wrong.  Can\'t show you but it is obvious to all.\"  After awhile, it is understandable why this is tiresome.  

Anyway, I think you said it better than me, Good post!

SoCal,

I understood JanisJoplins points perfectly well.

The post of mine that you are referring to was in response to the one where Indulto said I was brazen to ask for the details of what went into RAG and TG figures.

I said I requested information on broken out races and actual ground loss so I could rework the numbers for myself in a way that is consistent with my views. Those and other things are \"details\" that many other \"customers\" didn\'t seem to be as interested in, but I didn\'t view it as brazen to ask and Jerry didn\'t seem to mind.

However, that has nothing to do with the amount go work we all know goes into making the figures at both camps.



Post Edited (04-05-05 12:47)

[TGJB]

SoCal-- I agree, and if CH understood Janis\' post very well he wouldn\'t have written what he did to begin with (one hopes). I also would like to commend Janis on the even more significant accomplishment of getting Indulto to write some readable paragraphs-- I teased Len about misspellings yesterday, but at least when he and I screw up it\'s just that. Indulto writes that way ON PURPOSE. God help us.

Obviously, I did not ban CH. I deleted one post, after I told him in advance not to avoid the points in question if he posted, and he did. He has intentionally mischaracterized the situation (he\'s a pace martyr), both here and on the Ragozin board, but what else is new. Regardless, I am looking forward to that conversation continuing on the Ragozin board. It should be very entertaining.

[SoCalMan2]

Wow!  Somebody responded to one of your posts without reading what you said!  My apologies!  I should also say welcome to dealing with yourself!

It is not that we hate you over here.  It is just that you post a lot and repeatedly ignore what other people say.  I think people here are very tolerant of differing viewpoints.  The problem is not the different point of view, it is the repeated failure to listen to what the other guy is saying and just talking right over him.  

Quite frankly, it is not clear to me that you have been banished by TGJB.  If you have been, I think that is wrong.  I think you should be allowed to post here to your heart\'s content.  I just think it is incumbent on those of us you drive crazy to ignore you rather than join in on nonsense.  

I, for one, plead guilty to abandoning sanity when I decided to point out that Beyer was espousing a silly point -- that the fastest horse of the generation has NO chance in the Kentucky Derby due to his owner\'s stupidity.  You were implicated simply because you said that Beyer\'s arguments were striking similar to your own.  Once I made that first step it was a slippery slope.  Apologies to all.

[SoCalMan2]

I should point out that my message above starting with \"Wow!\" should be addressed to Classhandicapper.  TGJB apparently posted between when I started and when I finished so the order of postings looks funny.

SoCal,

Jerry hasn\'t banished me. Considering that I apparently annoy him and some others here a great deal, I suppose most people here would say he has been very tolerant.

It\'s rather simple.

I don\'t use TG figures the same way other people here do.

I don\'t think about the game the same way most people here do.

I doubt Jerry minds all that when I pay him for the figures. :-)

It seems the problem is that whenever I bring up ideas I think are important, I am often in areas that JB would rather not become the main event of discussion here. Yet they often become that because people respond, there are always communication issues related to the written word, people disagree etc...

So it is best that I not contribute very often, leave on decent terms, and find somewhere to discuss this stuff where people are more receptive.

[mandown]

Class,

No one has a problem with the points you are making it is just that you make the same ones over and over again. I\'m from the UK so I have a natural scepticism (the proper spelling BTW) that a 5 from Penn National is the same as 5 from Belmont.

In Europe you do relate figures to the class and the competitiveness of the race. One of the easiest pitfalls in UK racing is to fall for a horse that puts up a good performance figure in a weakly-contested maiden race and then steps up to tougher compnay. They just can\'t repeat the effort in the more competitive race.

I think you\'re making the same point - that how a figure is earned is as important as what the figure is.

But you won\'t get JB or either of the two Lens to agree with you - as Robespierre made clear in one of his replies to you for them the figure is the only thing that matters.

I disagree - horses aren\'t machines and we have no way of knowing what makes them run fast or not on a particular day.

The problem is how you quantify the factors which might affect a figure. One of the things we are aware of at TG is putting in too much information which can overwhelm people.

Effectively you were arguing that we should not give a single figure but one which also showed components so that people like you could evaluate it better.

That may have helped you but it would have confused an awful lot of other people who are looking for a relatively straightforward measure of a horse\'s merit.

The other thing to remember is that because Jerry breaks out races he is more likely to be correcting for situations where the race is run in abnormal fashion. Those who profess to rely on the physical resiliency of the track are much more likely to be caught out by a horse which gets a soft lead.

And don\'t worry about being taken to task by Janis and Indulto. They get lonely on the Ragozin site and will do anything to try and ingratiate themselves with Jerry so they\'ll be welcome over here. (Just kidding, lads!)

George

[TGJB]

George, I can\'t believe you went and did that. Just what I need. Oi vey.

You might end up being the first TG employee to get banned.

[thatfigures]

, and find somewhere to discuss this stuff where people
> are more receptive.

Very few places of substance are receptive to being talked \"at\" .



Post Edited (04-05-05 18:14)

[mandown]

Hey, Boss, What about the First Amendment? Or doesn\'t that apply to resident aliens?

It\'s bad enough being taxed without being able to vote - what was that Tea Party and Revolution about again? - without being gagged as well.

As an interloper said elsewhere it is the difference of opinion that makes horse-racing.

IMHO accurate performance figures are the greatest part of the game but horses ain\'t machines and sussing out the nuances can be the difference between profit and loss.

Your humble servant

hey mandown,

I appreciate that you at least understand me and are willing to say so. I probably would have been less repetitive and less of a pain in the butt if someone else would have granted me as much in conversation, but you are even crazier than me to have this conversation. :-)

[mikemd]

the mandown response was just what was needed to finally put this to bed.  i think classhandicapper\'s intention was never to question jb\'s methodology.  his point, i think, was that not all 2s are equal.  it wasn\'t that a 2 should have been a 4 or a 0.  

it should be noted that those last two statements were not contradictions.  if you think they were, think about it some more.

[NoCarolinaTony]

I am glad we got this out of the way finally. Someone else understands the prodigal son.

A 2 is a 2 is 2, how they got the 2 is the art of handicapping. (Class handicapping or otherwise). Now the question is what does the said horse do next time out?

It\'s up to you the handicapper to decide.(No FOX NEWS PUNS INTENDED)

Mandown your the Figs Form Guy....(Your product was ahead of its time) Was a great product in its day.As I recall it did have a pace graph/fig and race graph/fig of all horses superimposed on one summary graph plus a graph for each horse individually. Maybe you can discuss how that product differs from TG in philosophy and why TG\'s Figs are different and better and less confusing the the average handicapper. What I believe I have found that the TG Figs have shown a horses overall ability/potential and class potential quite well numerically especially in Higher class Dirt and ALL Turf races for starters. Maiden races with the Trainer/sire info has helped me find some high priced gems from time to time.

NC Tony

[RICH]

Hey JB

I been here for 9yrs, I thought a 5 was a 5?

Oh well.

Rich

[davidrex]

im calling the toll free # they show on hiway overpasses for any threat to homeland security....this class handicapper has himself confused w/class clown.[JUST KIDDING].with this poor guys reception and the volumes written about absolutely nothing...well it seems obvious to me this string would make for a mavelous SEINFELD episode.



             PARTYpokerON