Boxcar: Gee, I wonder...

[Dave Schwartz]

... why winning players don't want to post more.

[cj]

He posted a bunch of angles that all couldn't even approach making a dent in the take, and yet you assume he was a winning player. Have you read the thread? Try the first post. The guy is talking like he is on some throne and preaching to the commoners. In my world at least, no matter the field, you have to earn a thrown. You can't just proclaim it.

Further, I think most of the naysayers were leaving him alone the past week at least. Then he started making cameos in other threads spewing the same stuff.

[shanta]

He posted a bunch of angles that all couldn't even approach making a dent in the take, .

and yet on another board someone who doesn't give a shit either way said he used a couple of his angles and blended them with software readouts and had the biggest month win betting he has had in years.

go figure ha?

Richie :)

[the little guy]

And I saw Yeti on the C train in Brooklyn the other day.

Go figure THAT! ;)

[GaryG]

Most of the angles are grounded in logic and I enjoyed reading them. Just had to sort through the pomposity. The longshot being referred to as a "gimme" gave me cause for pause and then when he redboarded that longshot on the other thread I said screw it, this guy has lost it. Just another strange interlude in Twilight Zone territory. :lol:

[shanta]

And I saw Yeti on the C train in Brooklyn the other day.

Go figure THAT! ;)

my point was that different people are getting different results evidently and that's probably how it should be.

Richie

[the little guy]

my point was that different people are getting different results evidently and that's probably how it should be.

Richie

I know, I was just having fun, as people ( not you ) seem to be taking this whole thing WAY too seriously...at least IMO.

No offense intended.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Maybe it was me but I got tired of reading each Boxcar post after the first several paragraphs to get an angle. maybe he should just write a book. Or do like most authors and recap the angle.

[Murph]

He posted a bunch of angles that all couldn't even approach making a dent in the take, and yet you assume he was a winning player. Have you read the thread? Try the first post. The guy is talking like he is on some throne and preaching to the commoners. In my world at least, no matter the field, you have to earn a thrown. You can't just proclaim it.

Further, I think most of the naysayers were leaving him alone the past week at least. Then he started making cameos in other threads spewing the same stuff.

Yeah, the nerve of that guy. He even started his own thread to tell people his methods.

He might have taken his lead from your "cameo" appearance in his thread, CJ.

I sense a reflection of yourself in the above comments, sir. I wouldn't expect you to agree of course.

Murph

[shanta]

I know, I was just having fun, No offense intended.

None taken. My skin is a little "rubbery" anyway :eek:

[anglemaster]

Murph I figured I might be in the wrong place when posters were giving you flack. Heck you were in the World Series of Cappin were you not??

[cj]

I sense a reflection of yourself in the above comments, sir. I wouldn't expect you to agree of course.

Murph

You could be right, self assessment is always the toughest. Either way, I can tell you I won't go running off into the night proclaiming martyrdom and leaving just a long thread and an email address behind that I might answer if enough sheople follow me.

[Dave Schwartz]

CJ,

He posted a bunch of angles that all couldn't even approach making a dent in the take, and yet you assume he was a winning player.

I do not assume he is a winning player. I assume that any winning player who choses to post on PA will be asked to pay a price far beyond whatever value he might get in return.

Have you read the thread? Try the first post. The guy is talking like he is on some throne and preaching to the commoners. In my world at least, no matter the field, you have to earn a thrown. You can't just proclaim it.

I have not followed this thread... I just do not have the time to read hundreds and hundreds of posts. And you may well be correct that Boxcar over-stepped his... "place."

I can tell you what I did do: I captured the angles from the webpage that someone was kind enough to put up.

Why? Because I might learn something.


Frankly, I don't care if a guy is an absolute liar about his performance if he has an idea I can use.


Someone in this thread asked why he didn't just write a book. I think that he already did.

Handicappers are always asking for more and better printed materials. This one may have merit or be worthless. It is up to the read to decide but the price was certainly right.


While writing this response I got a couple of telephone calls from people who said what you did, CJ - that I should have followed the thread; that Boxcar declared himself the Oracle of PA.

That may well be true and perhaps Boxcar overdid it.


Speaking as one who knows he is capable of becoming a jerk when handed the microphone and given the spotlight, I can tell you that it is very easy to forget your own importance and exhibit... anti-social behaviors... that run people off. (Saratoga, year 1 was a good example for me.)


I just find it interesting that this is the usual end result for someone who tries to post what they deem to be good ideas. It just always seems to end badly and the result is that a potential well of good ideas dries up.


Regards to all,
Dave Schwartz

[Murph]

Hey anglemaster,

Yes, I was fortunate enough to qualify for the National Handicapping Championship in 2005. Not the HSW, but close in prize and prestige. I was able to make the leap after trying for the past five years.

I've made my own Quirin style pace-speed figures for the past 12 years or so. It wasn't until I addressed the weakness in my figure game and added lesser known methods, to bolster my returns and find the longer prices that the figures just cannot "give" you, that I was able to realize such success.

I'll always work up my own figures, but I'll never stop looking for ideas and methods to use that can only make them better. I KNOW that if my form analysis does not continue to improve, I won't be able to qualify for or win a major tournament ever again.

Thanks for the props, angle.

Murph

[anglemaster]

Murph congrats again. (sorry for getting the contest. LOL).
We must come from the same era as you were very modest in your accomplishments, which are to be applauded.

The newer generation might answer something to the effect that I am the best and am the best and got robbed on the final day of the tournment and should have won it all.


All the best to you my friend.

[Tom]

Dave, I agree with you.

It will be cold day in HELL before I ever share anything on this board again.
Why bother.......

[anglemaster]

Tom as a long time member , why do you feel that this board is like this.

TIA

[GameTheory]

Sadly, I agree as well. I just "shoot the shit" here but trying to really talk about handicapping in-depth or especially about "how to win" has become too much of an uphill battle. (Plus in my more immature moments I'm so annoyed by certain people that I know will be reading I can't stand the thought that I might post something that could help them in some way. As if they would listen.) This type of evolution seems to be an inevitable consequence of the growth of a forum. After a certain critical mass is reached, you've got to have some fairly draconian moderation to keep any good discussion from devolving to the lowest common denominator. If you have to FIGHT just to express something, who has the time?

I've never seen any forum be simultaneously big, intelligent, and civil without some strictly enforced rules. Of course, that makes it less "fun"...

[PaceAdvantage]

This type of evolution seems to be an inevitable consequence of the growth of a forum. After a certain critical mass is reached, you've got to have some fairly draconian moderation to keep any good discussion from devolving to the lowest common denominator. If you have to FIGHT just to express something, who has the time?

I've never seen any forum be simultaneously big, intelligent, and civil without some strictly enforced rules. Of course, that makes it less "fun"...

I think you're wrong. I don't think it's inevitable. Obviously, I am doing something wrong here, and I would like to know what it is...this forum really isn't that big....in fact it's tiny compared to some of the major forums that exist out there (not just horse racing).

I think one of my problems is that I don't enforce the limited rules I have set in place (from the BEGINNING) all the time. I am guilty of practicing selective enforcement, and that has to stop.

[PaceAdvantage]

It will be cold day in HELL before I ever share anything on this board again.
Why bother.......

Thanks. That really helps. I guess all that's left is to shut the door, right?

[the little guy]

What is wrong with heated debate????????

Geez, most of us are VERY passionate about this game, so why is it shocking or wrong that people get somewhat emotional about different ideas? This stuff is important to us. I think the manner in which things are taken, and I am not suggesting my behavior has always been perfect, is the biggest problem here.

There are plenty of threads, and plenty of posts in them, about a variety of different racing subjects. Most are a simple sharing of ideas...and most are very cordial. It seems to me the only ones that have drawn ire are the ones that feel like they are being delivered from some dais way up in the sky. If people want to preach they should hardly be surprised when all their minions aren't entirely cooperative.

[GameTheory]

I think you're wrong. I don't think it's inevitable. Obviously, I am doing something wrong here, and I would like to know what it is...this forum really isn't that big....in fact it's tiny compared to some of the major forums that exist out there (not just horse racing).

I think one of my problems is that I don't enforce the limited rules I have set in place (from the BEGINNING) all the time. I am guilty of practicing selective enforcement, and that has to stop.It is inevitable WITHOUT strictly enforced rules. Of course many just don't like strictly enforced rules. In fact, none of us like them when they affect us. The biggest forums have incredibly strict rules -- you don't need that, but you are at the point where you definitely need to moderate constantly. (There is no reason you need to do it all yourself -- sign up some moderators.) The main problem I see with your moderation is that you post your moderation, i.e. you enter a thread and say, "Don't do that". Much more effective at actually changing behavior is to be deleting posts or removing sections of posts and leaving behind something like, "[Section deleted -- don't do that]". Actually strike it from the record, you know?

Of course, what I actually wish is not to be deleting posts but to change the attitude expressed by the board in general, which would mean pushing out the vipers from being here at all and making it more welcome for those with something to contribute. But this isn't my private playground so I can't do that...

[anglemaster]

If people want to preach they should hardly be surprised when all their minions aren't entirely cooperative.


Little Guy, with all due respect , are you not preaching???

[Niko]

I've got a private message into somebody on this board that has wanted to share their ideas but is reluctant. I'm interested in learning more about it and asked if we could do a test to see how the board would react. I didn't think the reaction would be bad if they came in as discussing a handicapping approach. Would there be some debate, probably...does it have to be negative, no. Should questioning be expected, yes. We'll see.


Why don't I do it. Honestly I don't have anything revelutionary and due to work and a family change won't have any time in about a week.

[GameTheory]

What is wrong with heated debate????????

Geez, most of us are VERY passionate about this game, so why is it shocking or wrong that people get somewhat emotional about different ideas? This stuff is important to us. I think the manner in which things are taken, and I am not suggesting my behavior has always been perfect, is the biggest problem here.

There are plenty of threads, and plenty of posts in them, about a variety of different racing subjects. Most are a simple sharing of ideas...and most are very cordial. It seems to me the only ones that have drawn ire are the ones that feel like they are being delivered from some dais way up in the sky. If people want to preach they should hardly be surprised when all their minions aren't entirely cooperative.I love debate, even heated. But it is often over-heated, i.e. dominated by PERSONAL ridicule and not discussion of the ideas...

[the little guy]

If people want to preach they should hardly be surprised when all their minions aren't entirely cooperative.


Little Guy, with all due respect , are you not preaching???

I didn't think I was, but maybe I was, and I'm neither surprised nor upset that someone had a response that wasn't all positive to my post. And, you know what...I'm neither leaving nor announcing my impending departure.

I also didn't begin my post by announcing that I was giving a gift to this forum.

[surfdog89]

It could be that most serious players are studying the DRF, Digest or SHEETS plus watching hours of replays of past races....... I grew up in the Del Mar area and started playing the horses in the late 60's... and still play the Southern California tracks. I worked at various OTB's as a mutuel manager for fifteen years. After reading your website in how to pick winner's "all I have to say is where's the Beef... you lost me..... confusing way to understanding how a race sets up using PP's of races...

[michiken]

All,

Remember its February and cabin fever has obviously affected the forum.

Sit back, take a deep breath and dream about this summers Toga Party!

[the little guy]

I love debate, even heated. But it is often over-heated, i.e. dominated by PERSONAL ridicule and not discussion of the ideas...

I don't disagree with that...and Boxcar was as quick to get personal as any poster I have ever dealt with on any board.

[anglemaster]

Little Guy first let me state that I thought it was a nice thing that you were visiting your parents at the Spa.

But you and I are never going to see eye to eye because of our different approaches to posting.

You answer my post and then add what I thought was a cheap shot. It is very difficult to carry on a "conversation" with all the "low blows" in responses.

I give the last word to you.

John

[thebeacondeacon]

Boxie,

In five years of bidding, one of the two most valuable purchases I ever made on e-Bay was a set of Ray Taulbot's handicapping lessons, together with his angles book. When I began following your "Longshots" thread on the Pace Advantage forum, I knew I was seeing some of the most precious insights into racing since Taulbot's.

Because I had never seen anyone criticize Pythagoras for not proving his geometric theorems in real time, it never crossed my mind that your examples were in the least way deficient. As First Place has so aptly stated on several occasions, they were offered by you for the reader's application and benefit, and no amount of statistical backbiting or lack of cognitive ability can alter their value.

Although I was shocked and dismayed, this morning, to see the last three pages of cackling and derision that drove you off, I cannot fault your decision to leave that forum. I was especially saddened to see CJ leading the pack, because of the high esteem in which I hold him. I'll just have to chalk up his conduct to the ugly winter they are experiencing in Belgium, a case of S.A.D.

Your experience unfortunately proves the biblical parable, ""Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. ... ". Unfortunately, those of us who wear fine shoes don't know the depth of the mud and swill we have stepped into, until it is too late.

But it may also be a sign of the dark times in which we live, where the lost have no appreciation of those who know where they are and where they are going, and cannot see another world beyond the malaise and morass in which they wallow.

For those of us who dare to accept truth, happiness, and harmony, well I guess we will just keep punching our tickets on that old "Love Boat".

Best of luck to you and thanks, again, for a monumental contribution of your wonderful knowledge and spirit.


thebeacondeacon

[the little guy]

The last word comment is passive aggressive by the way. Some would consider that a low blow....luckily, however, I am not one of them.

I don't think I took cheap shots. I was very clear in my allusion, in that Boxcar left when people took exception to his posts, and he announced it as loudly as possible. If you are sensitive to that, I am sorry, but it is all true.

And, to be honest, he declared in his initial post he was " giving a gift to everyone "...and I am using quotes because it is exactly what he said...so I cannot fathom what was cheap about that reference.

Sorry if you disagree....but feel free to...and even respond if you like. I still won't leave :cool: .

[GameTheory]

I don't disagree with that...and Boxcar was as quick to get personal as any poster I have ever dealt with on any board.And Boxcar shouldn't be immune to moderation either.

Here's what I'm talking about. A guy expresses an idea. You have stated that you don't wish people to be able to "get away with" certain things. So you enter the thread and attack not the idea, but THE WAY THE IDEA WAS EXPRESSED. You seek to stop the guy from expressing his ideas because you don't like the way he presents them. This can only serve to drive discussion away from any ideas presented and towards whether or not the guy posting them is an ego-maniac. Which I can only assume is your goal, otherwise what is the point? Another thread derailed, congrats!

But some of us couldn't care less whether the guy is an ego-maniac or not and just want to hear the ideas without you getting in the way. If you don't like the way the guy talks, why not just ignore him and go participate in threads more to your liking instead of deliberatly trying to destroy those that aren't?

[anglemaster]

BeaconDeacon: (boy I wish I could write like you.LOL).

that was a great post. Well put.

Peace to you.

John

[the little guy]

I never once posted in " his " thread.

And call it what you like, but I find telling people after races have been run that $100 winners were " standouts " in the race, especially if you NEVER give pre-race opinions, is at best poor etiquette, and offensive. And I certainly believe it is my right to call someone out for that sort of behavior.

[the_fat_man]

Boxie,

Because I had never seen anyone criticize Pythagoras for not proving his geometric theorems in real time,


thebeacondeacon

Does this make sense to anyone?

Throwing names around to make an impression, deacon?

[PaceAdvantage]

Wasn't there already a show called "Fat Man and Little Guy?"

or am I mixing that up with WWII and the A-Bomb?

[the little guy]

Wasn't that a movie, with Paul Newman, about the making of the Atomic Bomb?

Seems appropriate.

[GameTheory]

I never once posted in " his " thread.

And call it what you like, but I find telling people after races have been run that $100 winners were " standouts " in the race, especially if you NEVER give pre-race opinions, is at best poor etiquette, and offensive. And I certainly believe it is my right to call someone out for that sort of behavior.To what end?

I hate football. I think being a football fan is a character flaw. So EVERYTIME someone posts about football, should I "call him out"? That would be ego-mania on my part, wouldn't it?

[anglemaster]

I bet half of the poster will understand what it means, and half will not.

Guess it is like either you are a democrat or a republican.

I can understand that you do not understand

[the little guy]

My criticisms were within topic, and not unfair, and shared by many on the board. And it was a thread I had already posted in as well.

I'll continue arguing with you if you like, but I think it is the poster you have a problem with...not his posts. Perhaps one could say that would make you guilty of what you may be accusing me of.

[GameTheory]

My criticisms were within topic, and not unfair, and shared by many on the board. And it was a thread I had already posted in as well.

I'll continue arguing with you if you like, but I think it is the poster you have a problem with...not his posts. Perhaps one could say that would make you guilty of what you may be accusing me of.Not in a thread explicitly about poster behavior. And your posts (the ones I'm talking about) are "only" behavior, if you will. They don't have content -- they all just say "look at me, not at him".

So I'll ask again -- to what end? What are you trying to accomplish with your "criticisms" of Boxcar and others? The only thing I can think of is that you wish to shut them up -- is there another reason? While I wish to shut you up, it is because you don't express ideas, only try to prevent others from doing so...

[cj]

To what end?

So, if you disagree with someone, you should just let it go? I say bull, if I think someone's method is full of it, I will say so, just as I'd expect if someone disagreed with something I've posted. As I've said before, a lot of good can come from disagreement. I'm not talking personal stuff, which I don't think I stooped to with boxcar, as he did many times.

I still think his method is bad, and don't regret for one second that I stated as much. I'm stubborn that way, which is probably part of the reason I love betting horses. I opine at the window.

[GaryG]

I knew I was seeing some of the most precious insights into racing since Taulbot's. Because I had never seen anyone criticize Pythagoras for not proving his geometric theorems in real time, Ray Taulbot and Pythagoras are a tough combination to beat....I am in awe, this is like one of Toetoe's weird analogies.

[the_fat_man]

I bet half of the poster will understand what it means, and half will not.

Guess it is like either you are a democrat or a republican.

I can understand that you do not understand


You think so?

I have an interest in Ancient Greek mathematics and philosophy. Have worked through 'The Elements' many times and am reasonably familiar with Phythagorean advances in arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy.

Makes absolutely no sense to me.

[the little guy]

Shut him up? On the absolute contrary, I begged him to post pre-race opinions, so my posts were asking for him to post MORE.

The rest or your " behavior " argument could easily be considered semantics, as I disagreed with his posts. I believe that the content of a post telling someone after a race, one where you never even had a pre-race opinion, that a $100 winner was a standout was misleading, unfair, and inaccurate.

[thebeacondeacon]

Does this make sense to anyone?

Throwing names around to make an impression, deacon?


I'll give you a hint. Pythagoras was not a character in either "The Godfather" or "Zorba, The Greek".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoras

[GameTheory]

So, if you disagree with someone, you should just let it go? I say bull, if I think someone's method is full of it, I will say so, just as I'd expect if someone disagreed with something I've posted. As I've said before, a lot of good can come from disagreement. I'm not talking personal stuff, which I don't think I stooped to with boxcar, as he did many times.

I still think his method bad, and don't regret for one second that I stated as much. I'm stubborn that way, which is probably part of the reason I love betting horses. I opine at the window.If you only disagreeing, yes sure let it go. If you just pipe up with, "This is bull" what am I as a reader supposed to do? Write it down? "Ok, got CJ's vote on that one, good." Give me a reason to care about your disagreement -- tell me why the method won't work / can't work -- give me a better method, something. (Maybe you have, speaking in generalities here.)

And if all you are going to do is complain about "pomposity" -- yes, definitely, let it go. If you wouldn't complain if the exact same thing were presented more humbly -- yes, definitely, let it go...

[schweitz]

Ok--I have it figured out. If you want to share some handicapping knowledge on the web this is what you have to do:

1. Don't call it a gift.

2. Always be modest so as not to sound like you are preaching or actually know what you are talking about.

3. Don't let it be known that you are retired from wagering.

4. Don't be a board member for 5 years and all of a sudden decide to share your knowledge.

5. Be willing to show your work in any fashion that any poster deems necessary or otherwise you will be wasting this posters time.

6. When baited by the non-believing do not respond in kind.

7. Even though some will see no value in your methods (just as you said would happen) you must accede to their demands even though you know they have no interest using anything you post.

8. Realize that your methods will be run through a database (as if any method is a stand alone factor :rolleyes: ) and criticized.

9. When you finally cave in and give up posting don't say you are leaving and make it possible for those who actually found value in your posts to keep in touch with you.

I think this about covers it but you critics out there feel free to add to my list.

[the_fat_man]

I'll give you a hint. Pythagoras was not a character in either "The Godfather" or "Zorba, The Greek".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoras

I'll give you a bit of education:

geometry, since the time of THALES, roughly a contemporary of Pythagoras

was a deductive endeavor

in other words, there were proofs of all theorems


duh??????????????????????????????

so if BOXCAR had a theorem to offer at the time

he'd have to prove it (sort of like preRACE posting)

get it, deacon?

you might want to do a search on the preSocratics, greek science, greek math, etc.

would save future embarrassment

[thebeacondeacon]

Well, I am just roughly overwhelmed by the facts and the vitriole you toss around.

Lighten up! Oh, and you can have the last word, if you want.

[GameTheory]

Shut him up? On the absolute contrary, I begged him to post pre-race opinions, so my posts were asking for him to post MORE.

The rest or your " behavior " argument could easily be considered semantics, as I disagreed with his posts. I believe that the content of a post telling someone after a race, one where you never even had a pre-race opinion, that a $100 winner was a standout was misleading, unfair, and inaccurate.I'm not just talking about Boxcar's posts, you know. It is a general theme around here. But really, why anyone care if you think it is misleading or whatever? That isn't disagreement, that's just you saying you don't like Boxcar's personality. You could argue that you are disagreeing that it was actually a standout, but you can't disagree whether or not Boxcar thought it was. You can't know his mind. You can all him a liar, but calling him a liar is just the sort of pointless, thread-derailing stuff I'm talking about.

Since you steadfastly refuse to even take a look at your own behavior, there isn't much point in talking about it anymore, but the bottom-line is you and people like you keep a lot of smart people from contributing, and I think that's regrettable. If you filled up the space with something worthwhile in return, maybe it would be a good trade. Do you think people are printing out your posts for future reference?

[the_fat_man]

Ok--I have it figured out. If you want to share some handicapping knowledge on the web this is what you have to do:

1. Don't call it a gift.

2. Always be modest so as not to sound like you are preaching or actually know what you are talking about.

3. Don't let it be known that you are retired from wagering.

4. Don't be a board member for 5 years and all of a sudden decide to share your knowledge.

5. Be willing to show your work in any fashion that any poster deems necessary or otherwise you will be wasting this posters time.

6. When baited by the non-believing do not respond in kind.

7. Even though some will see no value in your methods (just as you said would happen) you must accede to their demands even though you know they have no interest using anything you post.

8. Realize that your methods will be run through a database (as if any method is a stand alone factor :rolleyes: ) and criticized.

9. When you finally cave in and give up posting don't say you are leaving and make it possible for those who actually found value in your posts to keep in touch with you.

I think this about covers it but you critics out there feel free to add to my list.

Or

you can just cut to the chase (being honest with, and respectful to, people)

and

do a preRACE analysis

something very simple to some

yet very very difficult for others

wonder why that is?

all the detractors wanted was preRACE analysis

simple stuff for someone who gets the form daily
and has the time to compose lengthly POST race analyses

go figure

[anglemaster]

I still think his method is bad////

CJ you are allowed to think what you might, but if I said to you that your numbers do not work (now hang on PA I remember how good you said he is), what would you think???

Assuming you will answer me that I am not qualified to post that (and you would be correct in doing so), how are you qualifed to say his methods do not work.

[the_fat_man]

Well, I am just roughly overwhelmed by the facts and the vitriole you toss around.

Lighten up! Oh, and you can have the last word, if you want.

aren't we pompous:

we attempt to 'show off' with our (lack of) knowledge in a given area

get called on it

and

take offense

tell the truth, BOXCAR, oopps, I meant, deacon

don't you feel a little bit embarrassed? a bit of a IDIOT?

I'm thinking that you probably voice (wrong ) opinions in any number of areas
and
you're rarely called on it

given your reaction

OUCH

post some more links, I want to learn from you

[cj]

If you only disagreeing, yes sure let it go. If you just pipe up with, "This is bull" what am I as a reader supposed to do? Write it down? "Ok, got CJ's vote on that one, good." Give me a reason to care about your disagreement -- tell me why the method won't work / can't work -- give me a better method, something. (Maybe you have, speaking in generalities here.)

And if all you are going to do is complain about "pomposity" -- yes, definitely, let it go. If you wouldn't complain if the exact same thing were presented more humbly -- yes, definitely, let it go...

I'm not going back into that thread, but I am nearly certain I did say why I thought the method wouldn't work. My complaint was never originally about his pomposity, that came later, it was about the content. Then I got the whole "how dare you question me" attitude. I actually did let it go after a few non answers from him, until he started coming into the other threads. I was by then more than sick or reading about obvious $100 winners. I guess it is a character flaw of mine.

[schweitz]

Or

you can just cut to the chase (being honest with, and respectful to, people)

and

do a preRACE analysis

something very simple to some

yet very very difficult for others

wonder why that is?

all the detractors wanted was preRACE analysis

simple stuff for someone who gets the form daily
and has the time to compose lengthly POST race analyses

go figure


That falls under number 5 and wasn't necessary for me to see if there was any value to his methods.

[GameTheory]

People also should accept that no one is REQUIRED to respond to your challenges. Especially the "post before the race" types, which I find tedious. Is every poster with an idea really supposed to provide a statisically valid sample of winners before he can say anything?

[PaceAdvantage]

Hey fat man (were you also Santa Claus a while back? You know, that user name is still active....), if this is the way you are going to carry on, please stop now....it's not helping.

[the little guy]

I'm not just talking about Boxcar's posts, you know. It is a general theme around here. But really, why anyone care if you think it is misleading or whatever? That isn't disagreement, that's just you saying you don't like Boxcar's personality. You could argue that you are disagreeing that it was actually a standout, but you can't disagree whether or not Boxcar thought it was. You can't know his mind. You can all him a liar, but calling him a liar is just the sort of pointless, thread-derailing stuff I'm talking about.

Since you steadfastly refuse to even take a look at your own behavior, there isn't much point in talking about it anymore, but the bottom-line is you and people like you keep a lot of smart people from contributing, and I think that's regrettable. If you filled up the space with something worthwhile in return, maybe it would be a good trade. Do you think people are printing out your posts for future reference?

You do yourself a disservice by zeroing in on me, while ignoring all the others ( including the cheap shots in this very thread by the Deacon ) and making insulting and, frankly, unfair assertions. You say I " steadfastly refuse to even take a look at " my behavior. First of all, that is untrue, and who are you to even pretend to know what my introspective thoughts are. Yeah, I know what response you will have to that, and it isn't all that clever to say it is obvious from my posts I don't, because all that will really demonstrate is your selective reading and selective comprehension of posts. And we know you're much too smart for that.

And, furthermore, blaming me ( even if it is along with others ) for keeping people from posting here is flat out BS....and you know it. This is an open forum, and no other person can be blamed ( other than PA I guess ) for someone's personal decision not to post. Who are you to throw around accusations like that? The idea that you accuse people of acting inappropriately while setting what you think are the official rules for disagreeing is as laughable as it is ludicrous.

At least you didn't let us down. many have been wondering how long it would be before you somehow zeroed in on me in this discussion.

[cj]

I still think his method is bad////

CJ you are allowed to think what you might, but if I said to you that your numbers do not work (now hang on PA I remember how good you said he is), what would you think???

Assuming you will answer me that I am not qualified to post that (and you would be correct in doing so), how are you qualifed to say his methods do not work.

People can say what they like about my numbers. I gave my program to the one guy that people said I was crazy to give them to, Formula. I'll stand by them, I post stats on them, and I post them BEFORE the races EVERY day.

I think I am qualified to say his methods won't work because I've been playing the game for over 22 years now. I know many have probably done it longer, but I can guarentee only a very select few have spent the insane amount of time I have studying PPs, making figures, writing trip notes, clipping charts, writing programs, etc, etc. I did actually read his methods, or angles. He was cherry picking winners after the fact. For every 20-1 winner he posted, I could find 21 that ran the same week showing the same angle that lost. I am nearly as certain that any combination of the angles are losers as well.

It is possible that he was a winner. I never said for one second he wasn't. But, it would take a lot more than the stuff he posted. But, with the tools he was presenting, you needed to see what makes the difference between deciding when to bet a horse and when not to. And this is something you will never see by merely posting the PPs of one horse after the race that fit some angles. That is my opinion, I stand by it, but I certainly don't get my feathers ruffled if someone disagrees.

[PaceAdvantage]

Or

you can just cut to the chase (being honest with, and respectful to, people)

and

do a preRACE analysis

something very simple to some

yet very very difficult for others


I still don't completely understand this mentality. Why is a pre-race analysis so important, to the point of completely disrupting the thread that obviously others are getting some use out of?

And how many races are going to be enough to satisfy you? If this is a longshot method, he could easily run a streak of 20-25 straight losers.....and then what? It STILL could be a winning method, yet by loss #15 or 20, I would run out of the bandwidth necessary to carry all the hate mail he'd be getting both publicly and privately.

[the_fat_man]

Hey fat man (were you also Santa Claus a while back? You know, that user name is still active....), if this is the way you are going to carry on, please stop now....it's not helping.

I apologize, Pace

just have a thing for frauds/disseminators of falsehoods

especially in areas of interest to me

I am not Santa Claus

[cj]

People also should accept that no one is REQUIRED to respond to your challenges. Especially the "post before the race" types, which I find tedious. Is every poster with an idea really supposed to provide a statisically valid sample of winners before he can say anything?

No kidding, and I let it go...until he started showing up in other threads with the same crap. It was that simple.

[anglemaster]

CJ I can appreciate your dedication to your research. But no matter what you post , you said his system is wrong..

I could understand if you posted it would not work for you or something akin to that.

As I mentioned previously it would be unprofessional for me to say that your system is wrong, especially because I know so little about it.

Not to take a cheap shot , but you like many here have blinkers on . It is this way or the highway.

[Richie]

Yeah, cj and the TLG, both come across to me as pompous bores. I don't care who likes them, that just the way it reads. Off to lurker land.

[GameTheory]

You do yourself a disservice by zeroing in on me, while ignoring all the others ( including the cheap shots in this very thread by the Deacon ) and making insulting and, frankly, unfair assertions. You say I " steadfastly refuse to even take a look at " my behavior. First of all, that is untrue, and who are you to even pretend to know what my introspective thoughts are. Yeah, I know what response you will have to that, and it isn't all that clever to say it is obvious from my posts I don't, because all that will really demonstrate is your selective reading and selective comprehension of posts. And we know you're much too smart for that.

And, furthermore, blaming me ( even if it is along with others ) for keeping people from posting here is flat out BS....and you know it. This is an open forum, and no other person can be blamed ( other than PA I guess ) for someone's personal decision not to post. Who are you to throw around accusations like that? The idea that you accuse people of acting inappropriately while setting what you think are the official rules for disagreeing is as laughable as it is ludicrous.

At least you didn't let us down. many have been wondering how long it would be before you somehow zeroed in on me in this discussion.
I am not zeroing in on you, nor am I only talking about the Boxcar thing. I keep saying that I'm talking about the general attitude around here. You are just a handy example because you're right here talking about it. And I've expressed similar thoughts before you even started posting on this forum at all.

You think I have some sort of vendetta against you or something? Not so. Why would I?

As far as "looking at your behavior", I mean posting about it in this discussion, like what you are trying to accomplish with your posts? Do you think you are providing something of value when you post? Do you care about that? Stuff like that. I am challenging you to examine it, and you are ignoring the challenge. As is your right, which is why I said there is no point in talking about it anymore if you are not going to respond.

People who choose not to participate obviously do so voluntarily, but people who choose not to jump into snake pits also do so voluntarily. It is still the snakes that provided the reason...

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah, cj and the TLG, both come across to me as pompous bores. I don't care who likes them, that just the way it reads. Off to lurker land.

Again, very helpful. Thanks so much.

[the_fat_man]

I still don't completely understand this mentality. Why is a pre-race analysis so important, to the point of completely disrupting the thread that obviously others are getting some use out of?

And how many races are going to be enough to satisfy you? If this is a longshot method, he could easily run a streak of 20-25 straight losers.....and then what? It STILL could be a winning method, yet by loss #15 or 20, I would run out of the bandwidth necessary to carry all the hate mail he'd be getting both publicly and privately.

Here's my take on all this, with all due respect to everyone.

I've been playing the horses off and on since the mid '70's.

I have read through most of BOXCAR'S angles.

My intuition, as a long time handicapper, tells me that his method cannot work. Primarily because you can't get enough information from the PPs alone to win at the game. Where's your race shape come from, for example? BOXCAR speaks of horses gaining lengths in the stretch;what was the shape of the race? Wire job (then a gain might mean something); COLLAPSED (then it doesn't, cause everyone was running) etc.

Might the methods prove fruitful in combination with other handicapping methods (trips, etc.)? Maybe.

However, the author presents them as standalones and as a path to winning at the races.

Let's face it, we all get out of the game (or any endeavor) exactly what we put into it. If we persist we eventually achieve competence. The path is difficult enough without being misled by others.


You're probably thinking, who am I. Why would my opinion matter?

You're correct.

However, a number of others, members I respect quite a bit in terms of their knowledge of the game, have also voiced similar concerns, namely, Keilan, CJ, Drugs, and the little guy (among others).

Perhaps there's some substance in the criticism.

We didn't ask for the world: a preRace analysis here and there would've sufficed for most.

[PaceAdvantage]

This is getting beyond tedious. I say we put it behind us.....you either take what Boxcar has written, or you leave it....

Let the dust settle where it may, and let's move on. Things will either improve, or they won't. I think both camps have made valid points....why don't we just leave it at that?

[Tom]

Thanks. That really helps. I guess all that's left is to shut the door, right?

Sorry, PA...didn't mean it to sound like that. But just looking at the posts since I posted this one - basically my lunch hour - why would anyone want to offer up anything with this bunch of vultures circling overhead?
There was a nice thread going that a few people were enjoying. Hurrikane did a statistical study and found some of them suprisingly strong. Some went ot a lot of work to organize them to make them easier to read/save.
Some of us actually tried them out on real races and somemade oney, some lost money. I found a few I like, that fit into my way of hndicapping, and kept them. Others, I don't really think I'll use too much. I am not an angle player - I use the angles to look for reasons to forgive races and go back for pacelines.
I never saw any need for boxcar to post picks before the race - I was not and am not interested in how he bets, just the ideas he threw out.
But I don't recall anyone coming out and saying "this angle showed a win percentage of only 8% with an roi of .25! I saw "if you don't post befroe the race is run, you have no credibility!" and "Do it for me! Do it for me!"

Hey, I did it before the races - the races I was playing, the way I interpreted the angle. I kept track of the results myself. Everyone else's glasses broken?
I never asked Ken Massa to show me how his ratings worked before I used them. Never refused to use a Beyer number because Andy "red-boarded:" every race in his books, and some guys at CJ's site post examples every day before the races are run - you when I look at them....a few days later, the next week, when I have time. Never saw any correlations to when I saw the examples, before or after.
Do I think HTR is a good program-hell yes.
Do I think CJ's are great figs.....HELL yes.
Do I use Beyer numbers...of course.
Never once having had anyone demonstrate them for me before the races.

The other day, I handicapped a race using the fulcrum to add to a discussion - it was refered to as "flawless analysis, but done afte the race was run."
So what. I didn't know who won when I did it.
I did two more races from the same day, after I saw the results. Got two losers. So what - I was only making an example of the procedure not my picks ( although I did make pick in one of them - and they both ran out).
Does that matter?


Don't close the doors - I'll keep posting, after I revise my Ignore List again.
No one ever told me I had to read every post here.;)

[the little guy]

Yeah, cj and the TLG, both come across to me as pompous bores. I don't care who likes them, that just the way it reads. Off to lurker land.

Oh come on...CJ's a good guy.

[PaceAdvantage]

Sorry, PA...didn't mean it to sound like that. But just looking at the posts since I posted this one - basically my lunch hour - why would anyone want to offer up anything with this bunch of vultures circling overhead?

Thanks for the follow-up. You make a lot of sense.

[cj]

Not to take a cheap shot , but you like many here have blinkers on . It is this way or the highway.

Whenever someone starts a sentence with "not to take a cheap shot" guess what is coming? If you are going to take one, just do it. That is fine, maybe I do have blinkers on.

I will do my best to refrain from posting in threads I don't agree with the content in the future.

[Tom]

CJ has shared a TON of stuff here - some of it really innovative. As has Game Theory, Dave Schwartz, Jeff P.....I think this counts for something. It's not a good idea to complain about the meal if you didn't bring a dish to pass.

These guys are putting the pounds on me! :)

[Grifter]

CJ,

I do not assume he is a winning player. I assume that any winning player who choses to post on PA will be asked to pay a price far beyond whatever value he might get in return...............

I can tell you what I did do: I captured the angles from the webpage that someone was kind enough to put up.

Why? Because I might learn something.

Frankly, I don't care if a guy is an absolute liar about his performance if he has an idea I can use...........

I just find it interesting that this is the usual end result for someone who tries to post what they deem to be good ideas. It just always seems to end badly and the result is that a potential well of good ideas dries up.


I think I agree with Dave here. There is a price to posting good information, i.e., information that may actually help someone to make better handicapping decisions.

Let's start here: The price to posting good info is the "price". The more good info you share, the more the odds drop. The "public" (the great unwashed out there, present company excepted) now knows what you know. Do we need to be reminded that the betting system is PARIMUTUEL? How does it make any economic sense to share information?

Boxcar says he's retired from betting. He thus no longer has an economic incentive to clam up about his methods. He is free to tell all, and perhaps derive some ego or psychic gratification from being the teacher... maybe like authors of handicapping books.

But he still paid a price. At the end of the 600+ plus posts, he decided the thread was no longer worthwhile. I have no idea whether what he was talking about made any sense. (I couldn't keep up with all the acronyms... still have no idea what the BUFI angle is, and I've read the whole thing). But like Dave, I say thanks for sharing. Like Jeff, I intend to quantify the angles that are quantifiable and run them through my database. But I can't imagine that it'll shift my game much.

If I hear someone at the track call a 57-1 shot a "gimme", I'll just figure the guy's a knucklehead. Horse racing attracts more than its fair share. But I'll excuse Boxcar because he put a lot of work into that thread. Does not mean he's not a red-boarding knucklehead.... but if he has something that may even remotely help me, I don't care.

Bottom line is that economic self-interest means most of us will keep the good stuff to ourselves. And if one is looking for ego gratification, I suggest getting a dog.

I know this may sound negative. What's the point of the PA forum if nothing good comes out? But good stuff does come out ... people share some things that help us all, without giving away their secrets. That's good enough.

-- Grifter

[thebeacondeacon]

aren't we pompous:

we attempt to 'show off' with our (lack of) knowledge in a given area

get called on it

and

take offense

tell the truth, BOXCAR, oopps, I meant, deacon

don't you feel a little bit embarrassed? a bit of a IDIOT?

I'm thinking that you probably voice (wrong ) opinions in any number of areas
and
you're rarely called on it

given your reaction

OUCH

post some more links, I want to learn from you

By the way, with your background in pre-Socratic whatever, how did the name Pythagoras get past you, to begin this snide sidebar?

[betchatoo]

I feel very strongly...both ways. In fact make that 3 ways

1. If someone wants to share their knowledge, I appreciate that. I will accept it at face value as generosity and look at it objectively and pragmatically. No one who is being generous is under obligation to meet or even acknowledge a challenge from another poster to do things differently.


2. This is an open forum. If you post ideas you need to accept the fact that they will be challenged. Sometimes by knowledgeable people who just seek more and/or better information and sometimes by ignorant people who are jealous of the attention someone else is getting. Regardless, if you can't stand being challenged this, or any other open racing forum, is not the place to post.

3. I did not get much out of Boxcar's angles because I never understood his thinking or methodology. I don't care if he did a race pre or past post, I would have liked him to go over a race horse-by-horse, explain why he threw out some and what, if any angles each horse possessed. Finally, how he reached his final decision. He explained several times that no one angle was a sufficient reason to bet a horse. So how did he choose, how did he make money? Again, he was never under obligation to tell me, but if he was truly interested in imparting a "gift," this would have been appreciated

[thebeacondeacon]

Here's my take on all this, with all due respect to everyone.

I've been playing the horses off and on since the mid '70's.

I have read through most of BOXCAR'S angles.

My intuition, as a long time handicapper, tells me that his method cannot work. Primarily because you can't get enough information from the PPs alone to win at the game. Where's your race shape come from, for example? BOXCAR speaks of horses gaining lengths in the stretch;what was the shape of the race? Wire job (then a gain might mean something); COLLAPSED (then it doesn't, cause everyone was running) etc.

Might the methods prove fruitful in combination with other handicapping methods (trips, etc.)? Maybe.

However, the author presents them as standalones and as a path to winning at the races.

Let's face it, we all get out of the game (or any endeavor) exactly what we put into it. If we persist we eventually achieve competence. The path is difficult enough without being misled by others.


You're probably thinking, who am I. Why would my opinion matter?

You're correct.

However, a number of others, members I respect quite a bit in terms of their knowledge of the game, have also voiced similar concerns, namely, Keilan, CJ, Drugs, and the little guy (among others).

Perhaps there's some substance in the criticism.

We didn't ask for the world: a preRace analysis here and there would've sufficed for most.

I think you are missing something that Boxcar stated early in his postings, that the angles were not the essence of his method, but something he had found helpful in selecting value plays.

[PaceAdvantage]

I feel very strongly that all of this borders on the ridiculous.

Time to go back to running the board the way I think it should be run, and time to stop trying to make everyone else happy. You can't make everyone happy, so why bother trying?

The past is what it is. The future is the only thing we can change.

[Pace Cap'n]

And, you know what...I'm neither leaving nor announcing my impending departure.



Darn the bad luck.

[twindouble]

I feel very strongly that all of this borders on the ridiculous.

Time to go back to running the board the way I think it should be run, and time to stop trying to make everyone else happy. You can't make everyone happy, so why bother trying?

The past is what it is. The future is the only thing we can change.

PA, Get used to it, future threads of this nature will bring the same results as experienced with the boxcar's. In my opinion it was very, yes very predictable it would end this way. Also, as a handicapper I would have wagered TLG would play a major part in pointing out any weaknesses in any posters claims then end up taking the brunt of the criticisms for doing so.

I will say this, the manor that TLG handled those critics should be appalluded.

Myself, I still think Boxcars thread was a good exercise in handicapping.


Good luck next time around.

T.D.

[sgv]

If you had nothing positive to contribute to boxcars thread then why post? Did it make you feel better showing everyone how smart you both are?

[PaceAdvantage]

If you had nothing positive to contribute to boxcars thread then why post? Did it make you feel better showing everyone how smart you both are?

Why did you feel it necessary to add that last line? The first line in your post was all that was needed.

Did they show people how smart they were? I don't think so, and I don't think that was their intention. Don't take this as a defense of them (as if they need it)....take it as my opinion that your post just now is the kind of post I look to avoid in the future. It adds nothing, and only sets up more ridiculous banter (especially the last line in your post.....the "smart" one)

And for the record, I believe the stated reason they made their post is because this is an open forum, and everyone is allowed to have an opinion.

[sgv]

Sorry chief, you are correct. I went over the line.

[PaceAdvantage]

Just trying to point out how easy it is to fan the flames, without even realizing it at times.....

What we need is a night at the bar....we should all get drunk and forget about this bs in the morning....

[NoDayJob]

Dave, I agree with you.

It will be cold day in HELL before I ever share anything on this board again.
Why bother.......

:lol: I thought this board was a cynic free zone--- must be wrong? :lol:

[sgv]

The first round is on me.

[Tom]

I'll have a case of Blue! :eek:

[the little guy]

If you had nothing positive to contribute to boxcars thread then why post? Did it make you feel better showing everyone how smart you both are?

I'm not fanning the flames and even if you hadn't made your following posts I wouldn't have been upset, and perhaps that's because I just got back from the bar, but to be fair, I NEVER posted in Boxcar's thread, I only responded to him when he went into another thread I was involved in. I'm not saying everything I said was perfect, though I don't particularly regret anything I posted, but I did NOT interfere in " his " thread. And, shockingly, still haven't.

Anyway, I agree with PA that this has run its course. I am genuinely sorry if I offended any of the fine contributors to this board.

[mainardi]

Whew... just scrolled through the ENTIRE SIX PAGES -- what kind of masochist must I be? -- and I can say the following (with varying levels of confidence):

First, saying that you picked a BIG winner after it happened IS NOT a wise thing to do. One year I did a seminar at Del Mar, and had a decent day going. The nightcap came down to two horses -- a 20-1 and a 6-5 -- and I didn't try to separate them. The longshot beat the favorite (they ran 1-2), and I was pretty happy that some attendees actually played it as well. The problem started when I posted the seminar results on my web site; I can't even begin to describe the "liar, liar, pants on fire" emails that I got. Needless to say (but I will), I don't post-race brag any more. :eek:

Second, posting selections is a rough business, mainly because people want instant and consistent success. So if you have a run of bad selections, no matter how well you recover, people are going to rip you. For example, if you make selections that average 6-1, winning one-in-five would be a profit... but if you start 0-for-5, then you're going to hear it from the naysayers. :faint:

Third, the "lurkers" (taken from someone's else's post) are always going to be there. Not sure if they mean any harm, but it certainly seems to be the case more often than not. :(

Fourth, "if you can't do the time (getting ripped) then don't do the crime (bragging about yourself)!" :D

[sgv]

I'll have a case of Blue! :eek:

One case of Pabst blue ribbon coming up.;)

[sgv]

We have to remember that this board is not just for seasoned handicappers. Boxcars angles did not appeal to me per se but alot of people here really enjoyed them. If someone learned just one thing from one of his angles than he did a noble service and more power to him.

[cato]

This is crazy. Its like watching a car wreck and yet here I am.

A couple of things. My primary problem with Boxcar was that in my opinion, his methods were misleadng. He would take a winner and then analyze its angles and proclaim it a standout. While I would prefer at least some of that to come pre-race its fine to do post mortems--but on the whole field. And it appeared to me that this type of analysis--whole field, rather than THE WINNER was the exception rather than the rule. And that's just bogus. It is not helpful (to me) and I think its misleading and disingenuous.

Secondly I don't think the board runs good people off. I think it does run off the crazies and ego-centric folk who burn brightly and then flame out. It is easy to control the insanity of this board by blocking people and not engaging them. If I had the time and wanted to write 476,000 words on handicapping and someone was attacking me--boom--throw the block on them and move on. But the folks like Boxcar seem trannsition from from pompous pronouncements and "gifts" to the board to difficult, defensive, petty, irate, etc, and then flame out.

When Boxcar started going from thread to thread attacking people seemed like a good example that he was losing it (or never had it) and was flaming out.

But that's just me and my approach or view of things. I could be wrong.

And the last thing I want to do is encourage people to share ideas. I was surprised by some statements by "old timers" that they throught the price was too high. Maybe so, but then you can block out the ass***** and have a civil discussion .... just do it (use the blocking option--its very satisfying).

Finally, finally,some folks appeared to suggest that its fine to be a jerk as long as you are here with ideas that will help. Just give me the damn ideas man! now! That's not my experience as a human (but that's just me). Or said another way, I can only do that so long before I snap and simply say, its too high a price to have to deal with this jerk. So I do think there is some value to coming across as a reasonable person who is here to discuss and help rather than coming across as a pompous combative ass (even though that concept was mocked somehwat in an earlier thread). That's true in life and I don't know why people think it shoudl be different in a "board" community.

All the best, Cato

[hurrikane]

This is pretty entertaining. A ranting thread about ranting.

I never finished the Box thread. I gave up on it..just too boring.

IMO, there is no way you could have tested Box's methods exactly. I know Jeff posted things on his board showing tests but I would be willing to bet that if you looked at the algorithm he created it doenst' really match Boxes thinking.

It's hard to program 'horses last race was a conditioning race)'.
<=60 days (approximately)

And many other conditions of his plays.

I got something out of it and I use it today. One little piece of 1% of all his ideas. So, though overall I did not find use for his methods I did find something.

JMHO

[Suff]

Winning player (s)?:lol:


yea ok. Gotcha.

[DJofSD]

Tom said:

I never saw any need for boxcar to post picks before the race - I was not and am not interested in how he bets, just the ideas he threw out.

For some, it's the destination. For others, it's the journey.

Therein is the difference.

[Light]

The reason there is conflict on this board is because people are on different experential levels. When you get guys like Stevie boy or Boxcar spewing their ideologies,people who havent heard those ideologies find them interesting and people who have been there,done that find them trite. More advanced handicappers ask more challenging questions. Those questions can be looked upon as a personal attack but from what I have seen they are turned into a personal attack because the questions remains unanswered. I do enjoy the challenges because I challenge myself everytime I think I've hit paydirt,and it usually does not pan out.

We need to be honest with ourselves and the methods we preach. If you have tested your methods with yourself,then you will have no problems from challenges to your theory. If you have not tested them yourself,then you deserve to be put to the test and you should be.

[Suff]

Boxcar spewing their ideologies,.

Boxcar is Private messaging and e-mail Members of Paceadvantage redirecting them to another site.

:lol:

I mean.......come on. This guy was surrounded by anyone who spent 30 minutes on a corner.

[twindouble]

The reason there is conflict on this board is because people are on different experential levels. When you get guys like Stevie boy or Boxcar spewing their ideologies,people who havent heard those ideologies find them interesting and people who have been there,done that find them trite. More advanced handicappers ask more challenging questions. Those questions can be looked upon as a personal attack but from what I have seen they are turned into a personal attack because the questions remains unanswered. I do enjoy the challenges because I challenge myself everytime I think I've hit paydirt,and it usually does not pan out.

We need to be honest with ourselves and the methods we preach. If you have tested your methods with yourself,then you will have no problems from challenges to your theory. If you have not tested them yourself,then you deserve to be put to the test and you should be.

Light; Shed some light on this. When no challenges you, what then? Does that mean your on the ignore or just a lost cause and should take the gas pipe.:bang:

[hurrikane]

The reason there is conflict on this board is because people are on different experential levels. When you get guys like Stevie boy or Boxcar spewing their ideologies,people who havent heard those ideologies find them interesting and people who have been there,done that find them trite. More advanced handicappers ask more challenging questions.

This is a bunch of bs. The reason for the differences is that this is a sport that is based on your opinion. If we all bet the same horse there would be no reason to bet.

There are many advanced handicappers that don't ask sh*t.
And there are many other that do.

My experience has been the ones that talk the loudest usually know the least.

[Suff]

My experience has been the ones that talk the loudest usually know the least.
Amen Brother. And I include myself as an occasional bloviator with limiited know how.


I'll be back to this thread as I have put my hound dogs to the hunt.

Three letters..........PIZ.


More to come.

[twindouble]

This is a bunch of bs. The reason for the differences is that this is a sport that is based on your opinion. If we all bet the same horse there would be no reason to bet.

There are many advanced handicappers that don't ask sh*t.
And there are many other that do.

My experience has been the ones that talk the loudest usually know the least.



The problem as I see it is, we don't know who the hell we are talking to 99% of the time. You can get a lot more out of what someone has to say, how they say it looking him or her in the eyes along with other obvious behavior. We are all handicapped when it comes to making judgements as you put it.

I was at OTB one day, this guy was a regular that was quiet well dressed, polite to others, then when I went to the rest room I saw him banging his fist and kicking the stall like he was killing someone. :eek: How sad it was when everyone thought he had his head together and was a cool gambler. Freaking guy was a psycho.

T.D.

[Light]

This is a bunch of bs. The reason for the differences is that this is a sport that is based on your opinion. If we all bet the same horse there would be no reason to bet.


What's bs is your notion that differing opinions is an automatic source of problems. Everyday handicappers play the races with eachother in a harmonious funloving way that builds frienships based on different opinions.In fact their disgreement is their bond.

What I was talking about was instances such as when Stevie boy talks about how to bet a pk3 in a way to get multiple returns. People who praised him for it were either novices or sheep. When CJ told him this stuff is as old as the moon as has been spoken of a gazillion times before that was taken as offensive. Bottom line is that was a more experienced capper pointing out a fact that should have been included and acknowledged in the dissertation so the speaker does not plagerize a method as original and recieve unworthy praise.

[Sean Rua]

Fascinating stuff: like going to the zoo.

How can so many clever people act so badly? You turned the place into a lunatic asylum.
PA ( seems like a decent guy) allows you into his house and you abuse his hospitality and trash the place.

For what?

Sure, there are some clever dudes here, but on this thread they're not helping the cause. Shrewd ,experienced guys are acting like adolescent fkn idiots!

Get a grip, and stop disgracing America and Horseracing: two things that we all love.
If you're gonna nuke each other over some fairly long-winded, complicated, longshot approaches to playing the ponies, wtf would you do if you saw yourselves on the Simpsons?

You're letting the side down badly, imo. And who tf am I? Nobody special - just a citizen who's probably not as smart as you.

God bless America! Keep up the good work, and cut the bullshit and pointless abuse, please. We can all learn a bit, but why make it harder?

Sean Rua.

[JackS]

A logical angle in an illogical race can be a good bet and we all use them weather it's an angle that we have learned from someone else or an angle of our own design.
It would be pretty boring for me to have to search out these illogical races in advance and then bet with fingers crossed and eyes half shut.
I would expect longterm runouts are the norm but, for Boxcar maybe the're profitable.
I'll stay with my current methods and possibly try one of his angles now and then or until I'm satisfied that my own angle doesn't work just as well.

[DrugSalvastore]

If you're gonna nuke each other over some fairly long-winded, complicated, longshot approaches to playing the ponies, wtf would you do if you saw yourselves on the Simpsons?

Actually, my dream in life is to be in an episode of the Simpsons.

[JustRalph]

Everyday handicappers play the races with eachother in a harmonious funloving way that builds frienships based on different opinions

Now that is funny.............harmony and Ivory......live together in perfect ..............


I can almost hear the music................


give me a break..............

[GaryG]

Now that is funny.............harmony and Ivory......live together in perfect ..............


I can almost hear the music................


give me a break..............Where do you find that place, at the end of the yellow brick road?

[Light]

Sorry Ralph,I forgot that Harmony is a foreign concept to you.

[Indulto]

Originally posted by Sean Rua:
An Outsider's View
Fascinating stuff: like going to the zoo.

How can so many clever people act so badly? You turned the place into a lunatic asylum.
PA ( seems like a decent guy) allows you into his house and you abuse his hospitality and trash the place.

For what?

Sure, there are some clever dudes here, but on this thread they're not helping the cause. Shrewd ,experienced guys are acting like adolescent fkn idiots!


Get a grip, and stop disgracing America and Horseracing: two things that we all love.If you're gonna nuke each other over some fairly long-winded, complicated, longshot approaches to playing the ponies, wtf would you do if you saw yourselves on the Simpsons?

You're letting the side down badly, imo. And who tf am I? Nobody special - just a citizen who's probably not as smart as you.

God bless America! Keep up the good work, and cut the bullshit and pointless abuse, please. We can all learn a bit, but why make it harder?

Sean Rua.SR,
Although you’ve captured my sentiments here, you’ve also employed some of the very tactics you decry. I’ve bolded the portions where I thought you expressed my own reaction far more directly and succinctly than I ever could, and italicized those I find questionable.

I agree that lack of civility is a big problem here, but it doesn’t reflect negatively on anyone’s patriotism, our country, or the pastime/business in which we have a common interest; it just gets in the way of meaningful information exchange. And where should we draw the line between humorous needling and abuse?

[rokitman]

This crap again, huh?

Let's see, when Steve R posted his bold opinions he was torn down as full of shit and a probable future shill. And when some said, Just ignore him, to those that just could not bear to not read his threads and bash him, they resolved that they could not, as Defenders of the Board, ignore his posts because he had posted his particular brand of bullshit before his Official Probationary Period for the Posting of Bullshit was complete.


Now, when Boxcar posts his bold opinions, his Probationary Period being long complete, he has been found to have breached the Acceptable Statistical Standards for Posting Opinions and, therefore, fair game to be belittled.

Isn't that convenient.

PA, you really need to appoint some carefully chosen moderators. There's just too many hours in the day and too many posts & personalities for one man to manage. And you're too nice. You already have some self-appointed "moderators" who consistently masturbate all over your board as they act as if they are doing us a favor (It's really face cream! It's good for your skin!) But all I see is people putting their delusion of superiority onto others and enforcing some pecking order at this site that exists only in their mind.

It's time to start whacking some posts, buddy.

And where is that gaddamn poll I told you to put on the home page? What the hell is wrong with you? You retarded or something? :D

[JustRalph]

Sorry Ralph,I forgot that Harmony is a foreign concept to you.

Are you kidding? I have been married almost 20 years! :D

[Sean Rua]

"And where should we draw the line between humorous needling and abuse?"

I really don't know, Indulto.

I just used the rough tactics that worked whenever my teenage grandchildren played up!

Perhaps the " end justifies the means" sometimes.
Anyway, we won't be drawn into any squabbles; all I'm looking for is profitable winners, which I'm sure you guys want too.

All the best to you and all!

Sean Rua.

[osophy_junkie]

PA, you really need to appoint some carefully chosen moderators. There's just too many hours in the day and too many posts & personalities for one man to manage. And you're too nice. You already have some self-appointed "moderators" who consistently masturbate all over your board as they act as if they are doing us a favor....


I've seen almost no moderation. So I don't agree with pretty much anything after
"self-appointed "moderators"".

But I am +1 to having much more moderation in the horse racing related threads.

[PaceAdvantage]

I think we can all agree it's time for this thread to be placed into off-topic....It has nothing to do with handicapping.....


As for moderators, good idea....anyone volunteering?

And Rokitman, your prayers will be answered very shortly....

[kingfin66]

Yeah, and somebody else has decided to pop into the Boxcar thread and stick up for his buddy.

Rokitman, you pretty much summed it up beautifully and even graphically. Of course, I do have to admit, I was one of the many who thought SteveR was full of it.

[DJofSD]

PA, when you select some help, make sure you get two -- a shite and a suni. They'll fit right in on the board.

[boxcar]

Perhaps PA should have taken my advice a few weeks ago when I seriously suggested that he start a thread for the purpose of taking a a "black and white" (yes or no) poll about whether or not the Handicapping Forum should have a hard 'n' fast rule in place that states that if anyone wants to post about their handicapping methods or methodology, they should be required to make pre-race selections publicly for "x" number of races and show a "y" ROI in order to qualify as a bona fide handicapper. If he doesn't qualify, then he's prohibited from posting. Very simple proposition.

My bet would have been on the "no" crowd. PA seemed to agree with me. Perhaps if he had gone that route a lot of the stupidity that ensued afterwards wouldn't have occurred But then again, maybe it would have. We''ll never know.

Meanwhile, I have at least 30 emails from people who want to learn more about my approach. And I'm pretty sure that out of another dozen or so that I plan on inviting to my little party, at least half of them will accept. Now...here's the megabytes of irony in all this: I have already found one forum that would most definitely serve as a "temporary home" for "Robin Hood and his Little Band of Merry Men" :) until more permanent arrangements can be made on a future site that is currently a work in progress. The irony in all this that neither site is a horse racing forum! And this fact virtually guarantees my group's success for attaining to rationale, intelligent, objective and civil discussions on my handicapping approach.

What happened on the DL several years ago and what was happening on the Handicapping Forum over here doesn't speak well to racing fans generally. To me it just stirs up memories of a bunch of boorish, socially-challenged fans at the track cussin' and swearin' and yellin' and moanin' and groanin' whenever the heavy fave got beat by a false or vulnerable long shot. These kinds of unpleasant scenes accounted largely for why I was so elated to quit attending live races in the mid '90s to play the ponies, instead, from the quiet, comfort and sanity of my office at home.

Boxcar

[DJofSD]

An ominous hush has fallen over this thread.

What does it mean?

[DJofSD]

OK, PA, you can close this thread.

[cj]

OK, PA, you can close this thread.

What is there to say? He returned, posted more crap, who cares?

[ljb]

You guys should leave Boxcar alone. He is a pompous ass and can be rather chatty at times but, he meant well and some enjoyed learing about his insight into horse racing.