Author Topic: Dark Cove  (Read 1483 times)

bellsbendboy

  • Posts: 403
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove
« Reply #60 on: April 29, 2013, 07:30:58 PM »
Thats funny.

 I have at least a reasonably education and passion  on handicapping horses and have not a f...ing clue on what a \"conditioning move\" is?

Anybody?

bbb

plasticman

  • Posts: 402
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove
« Reply #61 on: April 29, 2013, 07:32:49 PM »
Mako, couldnt agree more. I saw this Rosario/Maker/Ramsey nonsense and i just pulled the plug on Keeneland halfway thru and didnt make too many bets down the stretch.

Same with Tampa, i havent made a wager at Tampa in god knows how long, its been years, Ness has kept me away from that place.

TreadHead

  • Posts: 633
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove - Historical Question
« Reply #62 on: April 29, 2013, 08:56:56 PM »
Thx for clarifying that, I see what you are saying since the number of starts on the win% side is far more than the number of starts evaluated for the top-pair-off-x side for the same stat (like last 90 days)

Interestingly, I just located Ness\'s profile on some Saturday sheets as well.  His Last 90 days stats show new top of 13% and pair of 21% in 108 starts, similar sample size.  And remember, Maker\'s was 40% and 25% for almost the same sample size.

For the laughably ridiculous argument made that Maker is just \"dropping his horses into places they will do well\", it is interesting that Ness\'s stats (like you said, if accurate) suggest that he ACTUALLY IS playing the claiming game well, spotting horses in places they will win despite not having a huge % of new tops/pairs.

BH

  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove
« Reply #63 on: April 29, 2013, 09:08:04 PM »
HR:

By your logic veterinarians should make the best trainers.

Check John Kimmel\'s stats for the year and get back with us.

razzle

  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove
« Reply #64 on: April 29, 2013, 09:10:22 PM »
Thank you.

razzle

  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove
« Reply #65 on: April 29, 2013, 09:11:42 PM »
Thank you for thinking of me.

bellsbendboy

  • Posts: 403
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove - Historical Question
« Reply #66 on: April 29, 2013, 09:12:58 PM »
Why is it \"laughingly ridiculous\" that Maker is \"dropping horse into spots where they will do well\".

Get a DRF, add the TG, download a condition book, take two, make it five aspirins and call me in the morning.

bbb

TGJB

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10868
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove
« Reply #67 on: April 29, 2013, 09:13:48 PM »
No Chuckles or Class no matter how much you beg.
TGJB

TreadHead

  • Posts: 633
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove - Historical Question
« Reply #68 on: April 29, 2013, 09:40:24 PM »
Because when 2 out of every 3 horses you run is running a new top or pairing, you can win any game you want to.  Not to mention that they were running a higher % of non-claimers than Ness normally does.

TGJB

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10868
    • View Profile
Re: Dark Cove - Historical Question
« Reply #69 on: April 29, 2013, 09:49:46 PM »
Because it will not make his horses run faster, which is the test for what we\'re talking about-- not just whether they win. And that\'s been said enough times to you now that I have to believe you understand that.
TGJB