TG = Voodoo?

[jimbo66]

I have heard Andy Beyer and a few other professional \"handicappers\" refer to the Thorograph sheets and Ragozin numbers as \"voodoo\" and baseless.  I have been betting horses for about 20 years and rely on speed figures, trips and some breeding knowledge to make my bets.  Every year for the past 3, I have bought the Thorograph seminar for the Derby, just to get another opinion and because I am a little intrigued.  I actually bought two handicapper sheets from Thorograph the past week as well.  So granted, I have a very small sample of what to go by.  But, to be honest, the handicapper went \"0 for the card\" on both Belmont cards and I think the analysis missed the mark in the Derby.  I have been watching this board for a few weeks and I found it very strange and a little too \"self-serving\" when a posting \"congratulated Jerry on the Derby analysis\".  I listened to that seminar twice and distinctly heard \"50% chance that either Lion Heart or The Cliff\'s Edge\" wins the race.  I also heard that Smarty Jones was the \"key\" to the race in that he was much faster than the other horses but was likely to regress and possibly a catastrophic regression, so Jerry was hesistantly throwing out the horse.  He won, so I don\'t understand the congratulations.  

Like I said, I have only seen a small sample, but would love to hear from a few Thorograph veterans as to why the sheets are not voodoo and instead a solid handicapping tool.
Thanks,

Jim

[TGJB]

Who congratulated me? I must have missed that one.

I\'ll let the veterans speak for themselves, but I\'ll point out that the archives section contains several seminars, some that worked out better than others, if you want to check them out-- if you really want to understand the underlying theories they can help, as can the back Race Of The Weeks.

[jimbo66]

Fort Knox on May2nd.  Below is the excerpt.

Great work TGJB.

I\'ve got yo believe you got the Arkansas races right--otherwise Lion Heart should have won. Count me as a true believer now.

I can\'t believe Beyers lowered SJs fig because of the cringe factor! I bet his accountant is doing the cringing now.

I didn\'t bet SJ because--I must confess--my faith in Thorograph against the both Beyers and Rag was just not quite strong enough, and I also rationalized about green connections.

O ye of little faith . . . .

[TGJB]

Looks to me like he\'s talking about the figures, not the seminar, and probably didn\'t get the seminar, or didn\'t care about my opinion.

About an hour ago I was talking to Dave Johnson, who bet SJ off our figures. I told him I didn\'t, and he said \"amazing how we can bet different horses using the same data\". I\'m guessing that all the people who use Beyer don\'t bet the same horse every time either.

[jimbo66]

Fair enough.  As a complete \"beginner\", I didn\'t feel comfortable doing my own analysis on your numbers, but rather went with your seminar.  I liked Lionheart on my own, so your seminar just led me further down the path I was already on.  But I will review some of the archives and see what I can ascertain.  Maybe I just caught two really lousy days at Belmont.

[bccassidy]

I think what is the most interesting about your comment is: regardless of anyone\'s analysis of the numbers, (even Jerry\'s), the sheets had the the winners identified. If you just played the horses with the lowest numbers, you hit the win and the exacta very easily.  clearly Smarty Jones, Lion Heart and The Cliff\'s Edge were the lowest numbers, and oh by the way, Smarty Jones had the fastest back number to boot. Sometimes we all over analyze a race when all you have to do is play the lowest number or the lowest back numbers in the race. It happens to me every day I play. The sheets are the best handicapping tool I have ever used and the thorograph numbers are more accurate and contain more data than its competitors and I would be lost without them.

[jimbo66]

But I thought the whole concept of the \"sheets\" is that horses run in patterns, sometimes making new tops, sometimes pairing up and sometimes are very due for regressions.  Playing the fastest horse in the race would seem to go against that entire line of thinking.  Or am I wrong about the \"patterns\" that Thorograph uses?

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

I don\'t think the posters were congratulating Jerry and his guys on picking the winner.  They were congratulating them upon the fact that the T-Graph determination that Smarty was indeed the fastest past performance horse was upheld by the race results. Lion heart was also right there on T-Graph speed.

The problem is always application of the data and it takes more than numbers to determine a winner.

Patterns are not absolute, like everything in this game.  Pace, path, post position...they all can factor into the result.  additionally some patterns are more reliable than others....a horse always bouncing off a top for instance. If you see he\'s always done it..you can project with greater probability he will again.

Odds have to be a factor also...but tossing the favorite in the derby on regression from top was probably not an illogical play. Its held up over the years



Post Edited (05-10-04 18:12)

[bccassidy]

Ahhh, and there lies the dilemna, I absolutely agree with you that the true value of the sheets is the visibility to predict the effort a horse should be capable of running in his next start, but it is certainly not the tools fault if and when we guess wrong. Smarty was capable of running another huge effort in the Derby, Are you going to bet against him in his next? I won\'t, but others may, it is only an answer you can derive for yourself. I still seriously doubt there is any other tool that identifies the true contenders and throw outs as consistantly as this product. We still have to interpret the data on our own and each of our \"frames of referrence\" will influence our decisions, but the numbers and facts are there, sometimes we interpret them wrong and sometimes we speculate that something may or may not happen to get the best value in a race; which is a whole other discussion, but the fact remains, the numbers are there for us to interpret. Sometimes we are correct and sometimes we are wrong, when we are wrong, I don\'t think it is the tools fault.

[TGJB]

B. Cassidy-- I have to say that seeing the movie they made about you and The Sundance Kid about 10 times or so was a major life altering event of my youth. I was flat out in love with Katherine Ross...

[ronwar]

jimbo66,

I think I know where you\'re coming from.  Let me first say, I wouldn\'t consider myself a veteran.  I\'ve used TG off and on for a year or so, but recently, the last four months or so, I\'m a dedicated user.  They are the best.

Formerly I would only use DRF.  I still use them for my trip handicaping, but for pure #\'s, TG is the best!  
Not because the Analysis hits 5 out 9 every race day.  No one does that.  I wouldn\'t recommend you purchase anyones analysis on a regular basis anyway.

Back to your point, because I had some of the same questions when I started.  About how to read patterns, bounces and the like.  I don\'t think they are any hard rules about it, but as you use it you\'ll discover patterns such 0-2-x, horses pairing-off race-big improvement, etc.

I considered myself a pretty good handicapper, I believe TG numbers made me better.  Especially with the ability to identify longer shots.  Very rarely now, do I scratch my head after a race saying \"how did that horse win.\"  Not that I had him mind you, but I can see where I missed him.

As handicappers, we all have our strengths, I believe TG #\'s add super value to our game.
I\'ve seen the fastest horses on TG in a 7 horse field go off at 19-1 and win, while in the DRF they look like crap.  I\'ve seen 3-5 shots that are the 4th and 5th fastest, that run up the track.  Do I hit every race?Nope!  Do I run into losing streaks? Sure!  

The better the numbers, the better the handicaping.  Its the numbers man, its the numbers.

[miff]

I\'ve used the TG sheets for 15 years in conjunction with the form, some breeding knowledge, and tapes of the NY races.I\'ve hit the pick six about 20 times over the years. I bet from 500to1500 depending on the pool and generally, I\'m an exotic player. I do not subscribe to some of the TG SHEET players commandments, especially about the automatic bounce.I\'ve had many, many pair up\'s when the bounce was equally likely.I also make my own adjustments regarding the value of ground loss,track bias, juice trainers, etc.

Having said all of the above, I cannot imagine any serious player not using the sheets in conjunction with other tools, especially for a new horse player.What I read from the postings of some of the newer players is too dogmatic.After you\'re around this game for a long time, you learn that only one thing is certain, NOTHING!!!

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Have you seen Paul Newman and Robert Redford lately...all those wrinkles and sags???  

They\'ve held up better than Katherine Ross.

Thought that might get you over your pining.

[shanahan]

I would like to throw my 2 cents in on the subject...as the previous poster indicated, he is a beginner.  TG is a tough place to begin because  you really have had to understand the game first to understand the data supplied.  I would suggest the poster use TG either as confirmation of his own handicapping, or if he simply must play a race he can\'t figure out (or a leg in a pik 3 he likes), then he go with the lowest #, or in the instance of the analysis, just that pik.  I have used TG on and off  for 3-4 years, and let me tell you...you get what you pay for.  Personally, I find using a combination of TM+ with TG sheets to be a most reliable tools, but again...use them to confirm what you like.

[magicnight]

You said it, JB!