Congrats HP, but I'll take real money anytime

[TGJB]

1- I\'ve gone on record here maybe 10 times as saying we strongly suggest that players learn how to use the data, instead of the analysis. Also that the analysis doesn\'t figure to show a profit, but should do better than non-sheet players would do--that\'s what it\'s for. Soup (and others) intentionally misrepresent this point, and will continue to do so. It\'s their nature.

2- $1000 is plenty to play as many combinations you need in a contest.

3- If you liked Sarava on Rag, you would have loved him on TG--check it out in a couple of days. My problem was not my opinion of him--in my comments I said he had a \"nice pattern\", one of only 4 whose PATTERN I said was positive (4 neutral, 4 negative)--my problem was that I had a positive opinion on 2 horses who were much faster, and I was wrong.

4- If you really thought my ROI comment was lame you didn\'t understand it. Patent spreads out, and even assuming he did hit those races, the fact they were signers doesn\'t mean anything. I hit the Pick 6 at Belmont yesterday--and lost money. But I will be signing.

5- On the \"stumbled\" issue--my view is that a horse who is coming off a big effort or series of efforts is more likely to spit it out if given an excuse (short rest, slop, trouble). Anyone who \"knows\" the horse would have run poorly without the trouble is being just as silly as someone who \"knows\" it would have run well, especially since the Raggie analysis \"knew\" the horse would run badly in the last 2 starts, too.

6- I\'m not aware of anyone offering an opinion on the Raggie sheets on Belmont day, other than Mall\'s point by point. The comments were about Red Boarding.

[TGJB]

Just thinking that anyone would think that is true is going to keep me from sleeping tonight.

[superfreakicus]

...nunzio\'s, (and my), CONTEST entry, or his real life play of \'the GAME\'?


> \"It\'s like comparing what amateurs & professionals talk about after a round of golf. One group talks about how far they hit the ball & what clubs they used, & the other talks about the only thing which matters in golf & horseracing, final score. My point, which I\'m not surprised was lost on you, was that the overall approach Nunzio took in the contest is much more likely to result in a long term positive roi, which in the end is all that matters.\"


that\'s exactly the point ---- wait\'ll you sober up and think through the implications of what you and I have just said.
get back to me when you\'ve figured it out.
(I\'ll leave you a hint, it involves \'cherry picking\')

also, we amateurs will most likely be doing this again --- feel free to join in.
this ain\'t the pga.


ps --- nunzio

since this place is such a morass of bitterness and bile, I\'d just like to make it clear (again) that I\'m not bashing your entry, before all the negative spinsters and trouble makers start their work.
hey, if neither you nor HP want the prize, you might want to consider scott v. who generously volunteered to add up a gazillion entries.

[JRL]

1.  I really don\'t have a problem with you providing analysis.  It takes a long time to become a proficient sheet user and this is obviously a service to some of your customers.  I do have a problem with comparing your analsyis to Friedman\'s, as they are done for different purposes and are irrelevant in any event to the determining the quality of the sheets.

2.   I am not saying that $1,000 was not enough for the contest.  My point was that unless you spent half your money on the Belmont in the contest, you were unlikely to hit that trifecta.  On Belmont day, it was worth spending several hundred dollars to hit that trifecta.  (As one who got cheap and shaved a few horses off of the top of my tri, I wish I had bet a little more).

3.  I believe you on Sarava.  Some Ragozin people did not think he had a positive pattern. I liked it more than others, and thought he had a good shot to hit the board.  But many here keep missing the point.  The key to that race was not Sarava per se, but in confidently throwing out War Emblem completely and being very negative on Proud Citizen.  I will agree that Friedman did not make these comments, but that was my reading of the sheets. That only left about 6 horses who had any chance to finish in the tri, Sarava being one of them.  Also, as Sarava was the best value in the race (Perfect Drift ended up being no value), I bet him to win.

4.  The ROI comment was lame because, the tri was a $15,000 one.  Further, it is a generalization that minimizes the value of the sheets.  In some races, you have a strong horse that you bet to win and key in exotics.  Those races obviously have the best chance of hitting and certaily a more predictable ROI.  Some races, are races like the Belmont where you throw out an even money favorite in an 11 horse field.  There, you may bet dozens of races before you hit one.  If your only point was that stating that you hit a tax ticket does not mean you made money, then we are agreed.

5.   I don\'t disagree, but it is often also true that the series of efforts is the reason for the excuse.  As an owner of a few horses over the years, if a horse is sore, it not unusual to stumble at the start.  

6.  Well, this debate keeps shifting.  I will reiterate that I don\'t see any point in determining who are better handicapers.  We are trying to determine who makes better sheets.  By constantly criticizing Ragozin\'s methodology, you are arguing that his sheets are not a good handicapping tool and yours are better.  That is how this contest started.  My point is that the Ragozin Sheets did very well that day.  I am open to comparing TG\'s when they are posted.  Also, I would be interested in hearing other TG\'s users big scores on the day and their reasons for playing them, as I really do not know whether Ragozin patterns work the same with Thorograph.

[HP]

Supe, this reply is incoherent, even for you. Apparently it eludes you that Nunzio\'s GAME play would have worked out nicely at the track as well.

As for the prize, since you didn\'t win, you don\'t have to concern yourself with who gets it. It\'s up to Nunzio, and Jerry can take it from there.  

I thought you were leaving? HP

[HP]

Supe, this reply is incoherent, even for you. Apparently it eludes you that Nunzio\'s GAME play would have worked out nicely at the track as well.

As for the prize, since you didn\'t win, you don\'t have to concern yourself with who gets it. It\'s up to Nunzio, and Jerry can take it from there.  

I thought you were leaving? HP

[superfreakicus]

\"Supe, I don\'t know what \'embodied\' the contest means. Nunzio employed his betting strategy and won. That\'s part of the deal. I can\'t make the argument that the way you chose to play was inherently in the spirit of the contest, and Nunzio\'s focused win bet approach wasn\'t. Maybe you should reconsider your attitude a little bit, as this sounds a little like sour grapes, and given your results you should have had nothing but a positive experience, both here and at the track. It would be great if your posts could reflect that. \"


now, I\'m afraid to say, but you apparently aren\'t being very honest.
considering that the format of my entry mirrored your own, w/o having seen yours beforehand, I think you have a pretty good idea what this contest was all about.

loooooong ago, I stated that, since this was for fun and an exchange of opinion (no prize), I\'d just worry about betting my opinions, and only put a very slight sprinkle of contest strategy in.
hey, if nunzio had no opinion about the rest of the card, fine w/me.

I\'d think this would sound a LOT like sour grapes if I was the one who was spinning this as a comparison of me and nunzio --- it never was.
since this is just for bragging rights, you see fit to compare your entry w/DP, and I certainly have the same options.
I might\'ve been beaten by a couple, but I beat a WHOLE LOT more, using The Sheets.
I racked up $1400 betting TEN RACES, which you and mall have both reminded me is NOT THE WAY TO MAXIMIZE RETURN.

considering the circumstances, I have the right to brag.


I\'m sure we\'ll be doing this again, and when we do, we\'ll see if nunzio\'s one pick will run, and if sarava fan can catch another 70-1.........

[superfreakicus]

based on your contest entry, you don\'t seem like much of a prognosticator.

and to think the weathermen always get a bad rap....

[HP]

Supe, the contest was bet $1,000 however you want. For your benefit, since you apparently can\'t read or understand English, any ANY WAY YOU WANT would include two $500 win bets. If it didn\'t, the rules would have been \'no $500 win bets.\' Your style of play is no more \'honest\' or \'dishonest\' than any other, including Nunzio\'s, given the rules. If we were talking face to face, I\'d be saying this VERY slowly, so you could understand it, but even then, I don\'t think you would. I\'m sorry you can\'t face the fact that solid win bets at fair odds may carry the day over betting ten races worth of exotics. Take a math class.

I did not remind you that playing ten races is not the way to maximize return, and I don\'t know what you\'re talking about. As I pointed out, you did well. If you want to brag, be my guest. It\'s not like I can stop you.

You said you were leaving. I know exactly how good I am at prognosticating. About 5% better than David Patent. You\'ll have to continue this without me. Continued good luck to you. HP

[dpatent]

A bunch of things here:

HP -- I saluted you and Nunzio and anyone else who bested me in the contest and I make no excuses.  I lost.  And I\'m sorry you don\'t like my character but if that\'s the price I have to pay for celebrating a little on the message boards, then so be it.  BTW, I have previously taken stands on horses (usually against) and publicly eaten crow when I was wrong (e.g., Fusaichi Pegasus in the Derby), so I am not at all ashamed to post when I have some big winners.  Besides, do you really think that we\'d have half as much fun on these boards if it weren\'t for some good needling here and there?  

Finally, for the record, my post on this board Sat. night was not just the \'Icky Shuffle\' writ Internet. I asked several TG/Rag. related questions and peppered the post with handicapping observations -- almost all of which have gone ignored in the wake of a lot of whining and crying by several others on this board.

Alydar -- Sticks and stones. You did you not have the guts to take a stand on any horse in any of the races.  That says enough about you.

Jerry -- My ROI for the Belmont Stakes was 976%.  For the day it was 486%.  I bet 7 races and cashed 4 of them.

Let\'s get a few other things taken care of:

Handicapping contests:  

1) I agree completely that we should not hold the public handicappers to the same ROI standards as we hold ourselves.  But I don\'t recall bashing any handicappers for their ROI, just for their reasoning.

2) The way you bet in a handicapping contest is fundamentally different than you bet in real life, and depending on what kind of contest you are in, your strategy will be different.  For example, in a 500 handicapper field, one has to take a Nunzio-like approach and try to make a big score.  If you spread and hit a few races, it\'s almost impossible to come out on top.  I took a middle ground in this contest, given that there were about 10-15 entrants, playing about 1/2 the races and skewing my bets toward the exotics and hoping that the \'go-for-brokers\' like Nunzio were wrong.

3) Odds make the play and you don\'t know the odds until the race is run.  Race 3: True I did not have Sherpa Guide in my contest tri.  True he was not a magnificent looking horse on the sheets.  But my approach to the race was to make sure I hit the tri if Personable Pete was in the top three, given that I had tossed the two overbet 2nd and 3rd choices.  At 34:1 I had to use SG \'defensively\'.  If you play the races too fine with exotics you will lose a lot of sleep.  In the Belmont I ended up betting 3 horses to win at the track: Sunday Break, MDO, and Sarava.  Since I had Sarava at 30:1, I needed at least 60:1 to bet him.  Given that only 1 or 2 horses out of the 31 that ran in the Derby and Preakness went off at 50:1 or more, he was not a cinch as of Friday night to be enough value for me.  PD got bet down too much on Sat. to be a bet.

4) Bankroll matters -- With $1,000 dollars and a desire to spread, I limited my Belmont plays somewhat (27% of my bankroll).  In reality, I had a significantly larger bankroll (about $3,000) so was free to make more plays.  I keyed PD in supers and took the opportunity to toss WE and the hopeless Artax Too and Like a Hero, leaving me with 8 horses.  Given what happened to me in the Derby, where I left WE off the top of my ticket I was not going to make that mistake again, especially when you have a 6:5 shot that you think is a clear toss.

As for races 11 and 12, frankly I didn\'t have the energy on Friday to even look much at them in any detail.  I knew that it was going to cost a lot of $ to play the tris and my $1,000 was already spoken for, so shame on me I guess.

TG vs. the SHEETS

We have beaten the methodology horse to death.  In terms of performance on Belmont day, again, I have no idea how the horses I bet or tossed based on sheet pattern (OTF, YG, Sarava, Quiet One, America\'s Guy, etc.) looked on TG and only HP and JB have come forward even partially with an answer (OTF, YG and Sarava).  That would make a good discussion.

The profitability piece (the one we care most about) involves interpretation and betting strategy and execution.

Just look at how Friedman and I handicapped the Belmont using the same product.  I thought War Emblem should have been 12:1.  Friedman had him at 3:1 or 4:1.  I thought MDO was good value, Friedman tossed him.  And then there\'s the betting.  You could easily have analyzed the race well and done lousy at the windows.  I have blown my share of $20k tris and $80k supers because of stupid betting moves.  Saturday was just one of those days when I happened to handicap well, bet well and get a bit lucky.

As for Saratoga, my schedule of betting is as follows:

June 10 to July 11 -- no betting
July 12 and 13 -- betting
July 19 and 20 -- no betting
July 26 and 27 -- betting
August-Oct 25 -- probably no betting; might sneak a day or two in there
Oct. 26 (BC day) -- BETTING!

So, super f., HP, and anybody else, I\'d be glad to jump back in and do another contest with you in July.  And the BC is a no-brainer.  If we do, though, and you guys lose the contest but hit some big winners at the track, please don\'t be shy about telling us.

[dpatent]

Forgot to add this:

Tabitha -- 1) I think that next to the definition of \'sour grapes\' is the text of your posts in this string.
 
2) If you bet enough War Emblems and Beat Hollows at 6:5 and 8:5 you will be going to the ATM an awful lot

3) If if I post my W2s will you apologize for your comments?

[TGJB]

1- I\'ve dealt with this so many times I\'m sick of it. The problem is that he doesn\'t take a definitive stand beforehand, but declares victory afterward (like in Ragozin\'s book), and is declared victorious by others. In any event, this is a straw man--we weren\'t talking about that comparison.

2- Who said he had to hit the tri? He couldn\'t have found a way to make money on the race with a small bet if he liked that horse? At 70-1, the play is cheap.

3- Congratulations.

4- My comment about ROI was neither lame nor about a $15,000 tri. It was about Patent\'s claim he hit 4 signers, and it involves betting strategy--it has nothing to do with handicapping. Like I said, I hit the Pick Six yesterday--and lost money.

5- We don\'t disagree.
 
6- See my lengthy response to your other post (Figure Making Methodology II) and we\'ll both look at both Belmont sheets when posted, especially at the numbers everyone ran that day. I have no idea who the results favor, other than Sarava, whom I saw in the Rag Preakness sheets, and we do look better there. But that\'s not the point I\'ve been trying to make, both after the B.C. and Preakness (I forgot to do it after the Derby). The point is to look at trends of figure making--circuit vs. circuit, short/long, changing days, etc., and discuss them.

[HP]

David,

I don\'t think I have anything else to add to my other comments. I\'m only happy that everyone who wants to read this stuff can see it for themselves. No matter how much money you won, I don\'t think you could look any worse, but if it suits you to continue and try to \'take care of things\' with posts like this, go ahead and have whatever kind of fun guys like you can have.

In case anyone is keeping track, the score is now

HP - One

Patent - Zero

I would really rather have the next one of these over at your house, on the SHEETS board. That is, if it doesn\'t get in the way of all the priceless handicapping related discussions you guys are having at the time. Let me know when you\'re ready.

Please, tell us more about your views on handicapping contests, the card, your ROI, etc. Fascinating. Good luck to you.

HP

[Friendly]

Author: TGJB
Date:   06-10-02 15:57

\"1- I\'ve dealt with this so many times I\'m sick of it. The problem is that he doesn\'t take a definitive stand beforehand, but declares victory afterward (like in Ragozin\'s book), and is declared victorious by others.\"

Are you talking about what you and your syndicate did after the Derby?

This stuff cracks me up.

Jerry, Jr.

[TGJB]

Go back and read all the stuff about my overview for the Derby again. Then go sit in the corner.