View Full Version : I made ONE bet today. To place.
PriceAnProbability
12-08-2006, 06:58 PM
Off the board.
I quit.
I single out ONE horse to run SECOND and can't even get him home. He was 9-5. Had great figs, top trainer, and figured to get a great trip. Did. Died anyway.
Isn't that SPECIAL!
rrbauer
12-08-2006, 07:48 PM
WHAT! He didn't get a good trip?
The other day I was getting the feeling that things were not going well and looking at my recent results showed that I had lost 52 races in a row.
I have lost something like 40,000 races over the past 10 years.
Hard to understand why someone would care if they lost a race if they had confidence in their process.
PriceAnProbability
12-08-2006, 08:29 PM
The other day I was getting the feeling that things were not going well and looking at my recent results showed that I had lost 52 races in a row.
I have lost something like 40,000 races over the past 10 years.
Hard to understand why someone would care if they lost a race if they had confidence in their process.
I do have confidence. Just don't have as much of it after something like that.
I take losing as a personal insult to my intelligence.
I do have confidence. Just don't have as much of it after something like that.
I take losing as a personal insult to my intelligence.
Your posts show a lot of insight into how things work. I would think you would be better off to let the losses roll off your back.
Handiman
12-08-2006, 08:43 PM
Aren't you the one that said he had things wired? And that you had all the answers to my questions earlier? But giving them to me would depress your mutuals.
One race in a day? You are a wizard!
Handiman
traynor
12-08-2006, 08:46 PM
The other day I was getting the feeling that things were not going well and looking at my recent results showed that I had lost 52 races in a row.
I have lost something like 40,000 races over the past 10 years.
Hard to understand why someone would care if they lost a race if they had confidence in their process.
Easy, sjk. They don't have the database that validates the benefit of a consistent approach. You do. Your experience (and your data) gives you a confidence level that most can only envy.
Good Luck
traynor
12-08-2006, 08:52 PM
I do have confidence. Just don't have as much of it after something like that.
I take losing as a personal insult to my intelligence.
A suggestion, called "re-framing." If losing is a personal insult to your intelligence, then ignore profit for awhile, and go for a high number of wins. It may sound foolish, but you are reversing the "calibration" process of decision-making; the whole idea is to replicate your successes, rather than beat yourself up over losses. That isn't "positive thinking" or "denial"; it is a simple strategy of separating process from individual outcomes.
Good Luck
njcurveball
12-08-2006, 09:06 PM
Off the board.
I quit!
I think you guys misunderstood, he said he quit. Leave the man alone! ;)
Handiman
12-08-2006, 09:28 PM
Hard to do when he insults other's intelligence. And he also starts about a gazillion threads if you haven't noticed. He isn't quiting...he's just lonely.
Handiman :)
PriceAnProbability
12-08-2006, 11:56 PM
Easy, sjk. They don't have the database that validates the benefit of a consistent approach. You do. Your experience (and your data) gives you a confidence level that most can only envy.
Good Luck
The trouble with paradigms is that shift happens.
Ever notice those little envelopes that come to your house (they're called BILLS) while you're waiting for forward confirmation of your regression analysis? It is far more profitable to attempt to pounce on a perceived advantage than it is to sit on your hands to see if what worked from 2002-2006 will continue to work through 2008, and even if it does, it then has to keep working until 2010. In the meantime, the track you just studied slammed Polytrack up your butt and you have to start over.
I respect the number-crunchers, really I do, but the overhead involved in setting up and using a database to construct stuff that used to be profitable and which may still be profitable is so prohibitive that it is no more expensive or risky to just begin shoving money through the windows to test an angle. I've done both, and I've profited from both, but I prefer the neural approach to the number-crunching approach. It's just how I bet.
Today, I was a dumb recreational handicapper determined to make one solid bet, found a solid horse, bet it, and watched it lose. The day this doesn't piss me off is the day you throw out anything I pick.
traynor
12-09-2006, 01:22 AM
The trouble with paradigms is that shift happens.
Ever notice those little envelopes that come to your house (they're called BILLS) while you're waiting for forward confirmation of your regression analysis? It is far more profitable to attempt to pounce on a perceived advantage than it is to sit on your hands to see if what worked from 2002-2006 will continue to work through 2008, and even if it does, it then has to keep working until 2010. In the meantime, the track you just studied slammed Polytrack up your butt and you have to start over.
I respect the number-crunchers, really I do, but the overhead involved in setting up and using a database to construct stuff that used to be profitable and which may still be profitable is so prohibitive that it is no more expensive or risky to just begin shoving money through the windows to test an angle. I've done both, and I've profited from both, but I prefer the neural approach to the number-crunching approach. It's just how I bet.
Today, I was a dumb recreational handicapper determined to make one solid bet, found a solid horse, bet it, and watched it lose. The day this doesn't piss me off is the day you throw out anything I pick.
Not my personal opinion, but that of some very intelligent people who specialize in decision-making, is that you can gain more with consistency than with occasional brilliant insights. Handicapping is not rocket science. Although individual races are dynamic and unique, overall processes involved in the analysis are (or should be) relatively consistent.
Good Luck
44PACE
12-09-2006, 01:59 AM
Lossing a race means nothing just like winning a single race also means nothing.
Group 40 race cycles together see how you do. I write down all my bets in a 40 race cycle this is enough to compansate for bad luck races .
The problem with speed figs, trainers etc is that the horse can't read its own past performances, when a race goes off all the horse knows is that the others are running away from the gate for some reason and that they better join or risk what the others are afraid of.
Handicappers Doc Sartin once said can not stand the idea that they are wagering on an animal, they feel the need to know that humans are running the show. If you really watch a race you will see how close Horse racing is to Greyhound racing.Jockeys have very little control of what is happening, other than a trainer drugging a horse, the results of a race is for the most part upto the horse.
NY BRED
12-09-2006, 07:04 AM
hopefully the horse didn't die, he'll live for another day, and the trainer
will find the right spot for the horse to finish in the money.
by the same token,. hopefully you'll cash your bet
PriceAnProbability
12-09-2006, 09:56 AM
Lossing a race means nothing just like winning a single race also means nothing.
Which is more expensive:
a) posting here while on "tilt"; or
b) continuing to bet while on "tilt"
Off the board.
I quit.
I single out ONE horse to run SECOND and can't even get him home. He was 9-5. Had great figs, top trainer, and figured to get a great trip. Did. Died anyway.
Isn't that SPECIAL!
Did you ride home with Karl? :lol:
(Karl, just funning - you know I agree with you on sessions;))
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.