46zilzal
10-23-2007, 03:52 PM
While I don't agree overall with the objectivist philosophy cultivated by Ayn Rand's novels, there is much at the heart of this belief which is adaptable to horse racing. Reality just is reality, not the view we superimpose on it.
We all have biases if we are aware of them or not. Keeping good honest records can sort out the ones we need to work on, but even the most honest of individuals have some inherent ones that sneak back into our modus operandi from time to time should we let down our guard.
I see this in bettors at the course all the time thinking that every horse from barn A (where several champion arose) are going to continue to produce horses of that same quality, or Barn B (which has done well with fillies) will continue to well with the fair sex. The worst, and I have found myself at the mercy of this one, is to strongly dislike the horse's connections to the extent as to then not be objective about the horse itself.
I have often gone to the extent of covering up horse's names and just looking at the past performances to find the contenders. This takes away any inherent biases associated with my perceptions of that horse: 1) may have lost a close one via a DQ or bad ride 2) missed it the last time, etc. the reasons are many.
A second aspect is wishful thinking in a horse that has peaked in it's form cycle and/or level of ability and the old perceptions of what you WANT the reality to be, and what it is are two different things. Take the case of War Emblem. Recognizing this one's game plan required a specific pace scenario that he was not going to get again, and the reality of this one later in this three year old season OBJECTIVELY diminished his chances.
I have found these psychological obstacles to be insidious and recurrent if one does not take the time to have, what the Buddhists call a "quiet mind," at the time one evaluates their relative merits.
We all have biases if we are aware of them or not. Keeping good honest records can sort out the ones we need to work on, but even the most honest of individuals have some inherent ones that sneak back into our modus operandi from time to time should we let down our guard.
I see this in bettors at the course all the time thinking that every horse from barn A (where several champion arose) are going to continue to produce horses of that same quality, or Barn B (which has done well with fillies) will continue to well with the fair sex. The worst, and I have found myself at the mercy of this one, is to strongly dislike the horse's connections to the extent as to then not be objective about the horse itself.
I have often gone to the extent of covering up horse's names and just looking at the past performances to find the contenders. This takes away any inherent biases associated with my perceptions of that horse: 1) may have lost a close one via a DQ or bad ride 2) missed it the last time, etc. the reasons are many.
A second aspect is wishful thinking in a horse that has peaked in it's form cycle and/or level of ability and the old perceptions of what you WANT the reality to be, and what it is are two different things. Take the case of War Emblem. Recognizing this one's game plan required a specific pace scenario that he was not going to get again, and the reality of this one later in this three year old season OBJECTIVELY diminished his chances.
I have found these psychological obstacles to be insidious and recurrent if one does not take the time to have, what the Buddhists call a "quiet mind," at the time one evaluates their relative merits.