Saw an ad in DRF for a new book (James Quinn)

[so.cal.fan]

Has anyone read James Quinn new book?

[Greyfox]

Has anyone read James Quinn new book?

No.

James Quinn is a bright man and has written well.

Unless a bright man is a novelist, he is lucky if there are more than two books that he can write.

Just sayin'.

[thaskalos]

http://store.drf.com/acb/stores/1/THE_COMPLETE_HANDICAPPER_P20564.cfm?UserID=7886723 3&ACBSessionID=0FDF9785DA853D62F3C1

I placed an order for it...and will provide a review as soon as I read it. :)

[so.cal.fan]

Thanks, thask..... we'll be interested in reading your review.
I know Jim Quinn, he is a very, very bright guy. I have to think he's come up with some new ideas.

[DeltaLover]

Judging from the summary as written on the drf site, I am getting the impression that is it another introductory text : 'a must read for the novice'

I am expecting a book following the standard template: throw in some generalities and aphorisms backing them with stories and one or two sample races where the proposed axiom proved to be successful.. Of course these authors seem to ignore that following such a method we can prove anything. We can prove that gray horses are a good bet during the next weekend after a full moon if the race is of turf, the horse is switching to an apprentice and NASDAQ lost more than 1% yesterday...

Do we really need another book focusing to the novice? The related bibliography is full of similar titles, none of them is good enough to cover the basics of handicapping?

What we need is vertical coverage of the topic, where a writer will select some specific aspect of the game and cover it using data mining and statistical methods trying to spread light to common misconceptions and fallacies that are very common among handicappers and horse players.

Of course book publishing is business and as such they try to reach the wider audience possible without much respect to quality and density.

I am waiting for Daskalos review before I buy the book (besides my comments I buy every new handicapping book that comes out except these $1.99 ebooks that appeared recently on amazon)....

[Dave Schwartz]

Do we really need another book focusing to the novice? The related bibliography is full of similar titles, none of them is good enough to cover the basics of handicapping?

I doubt that YOU need such a book.

I, too, purchase just about everything that comes along.

[Greyfox]

Of course these authors seem to ignore that following such a method we can prove anything. We can prove that gray horses are a good bet during the next weekend after a full moon if the race is of turf, the horse is switching to an apprentice and NASDAQ lost more than 1% yesterday...

...

Hey. I thought that I was the only one who plays that angle. Drat. :D

[DeltaLover]

Dave, I am the last one who would try to flatter you or anyone else, but in my opinion what we need are books like Percentages & Probabilities (http://store.thehorsehandicappingauthority.com/percentages-probabilities-2012/) rather than a mere repeat of well known introductory theories.

As I have said before the related bibliography is antiquated and there is huge room for new texts that will treat the topic to depth using more scientific approach.

[DeltaLover]

Hey. I thought that I was the only one who plays that angle. Drat. :D

I am about done with the research, so I will begin next week with it ;)

[Dave Schwartz]

I used to say the same thing. I would buy a book and say, "Where are the statistical tables?"

Now I realize that I don't need the tables. Heck, I would build my own anyway.

What I need is the IDEA!

[Tom]

Daskalos?

[DeltaLover]

You need the idea, the methodology, the analysis, the data collection and the implementation.

There is no clear distinction between these phases when we are doing research. Usually we have a target that we can define with clarity but the whole process translates to trial and error experiments where ideas are conceived, formed, approved and rejected in a recursive fashion.

In contrary to what many seem to believe (even in this board!) the only way to confirm a conjunction is the empirical which assumes statistical and quantitative verification. Stories, memories and opinions simply do not cut it!

[Greyfox]

Daskalos?

Daskalos?

Ya datsa close.

[DeltaLover]

Sorry, I mispronounced it :rolleyes:

[thaskalos]

How can I pass up a handicapping book with more than 400 pages...written by one of the most scholarly authors writing on the subject?

I would pay double the price...

With 400+ pages...is it conceivable to think that I won't learn something new? :)

[Robert Goren]

I always wonder what the true cost of the book will be. In other words if there something new in it, how much money will I waste trying to see if it works? Some books are pretty costly.
The thing about Quinn's books is that they are usually little behind the current thought in handicapping. I be shock if that wasn't case here.

[Greyfox]

I always wonder what the true cost of the book will be. In other words if there something new in it, how much money will I waste trying to see if it works? Some books are pretty costly.

One new idea in any horse racing book can pay for that book many many times over.

[Robert Goren]

One new idea in any horse racing book can pay for that book many many times over.Those kind of books are really rare. The Beyers speed rating book was one of the few exceptions. Some of the pace handicapping books would be too if we could ever get good info.

[Tom]

I would pay double the price...



I'll buy two, and sell you one......

[HUSKER55]

why tom,...your really are a gentlemen! :D

[upthecreek]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1480252646/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=

Sounds quite interesting(at least to me)

[Capper Al]

How can I pass up a handicapping book with more than 400 pages...written by one of the most scholarly authors writing on the subject?

I would pay double the price...

With 400+ pages...is it conceivable to think that I won't learn something new? :)

So how is the book?

[Capper Al]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1480252646/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=

Sounds quite interesting(at least to me)

Just ordered it. I am a handingcapping book addict. Waiting to hear about Quinn's book.

[Red Knave]

How can I pass up a handicapping book with more than 400 pages...written by one of the most scholarly authors writing on the subject?So how is the book?
Al, he just ordered it yesterday. :rolleyes: :)

[thaskalos]

Al, he just ordered it yesterday. :rolleyes: :)
Al must be one of those speed readers... :)

[RaceBookJoe]

Just ordered it. I am a handingcapping book addict. Waiting to hear about Quinn's book.

Please give a review once you go through it...even though there is a good chance i will order today as I am a handicapping book addict too. Usually this time of year i go back and read the older handicapping books ( pre 1970 ), not sure why, but i do.

[Mike A]

I'll honestly say it's been kind of funny for me when I've heard people talk about how Quinn is lacking, when they talk about him needing to utilize a level of statistical rigor or more to the point conclusiveness, especially large sample conclusiveness, as if the most effective way to learn to handicap really well involves statistical analysis outside the context of the deductive and inductive feedback loop available to us based upon the fundamental factors most peculiar to horse racing. (ie., form cycle, partly based upon what is for all intents and purposes a constant: basic thoroughbred exertion and recovery physiology, which can be gleaned from observation of small samples)

The only point they could have there is one along the lines of understanding how better to actually use the kind of pattern recognition traynor was talking about and/or more cost-effective and precise ways to find useful meaning within the data we have..and that would be the case only if it were true that the edges in the game able to be gleaned from fundamental understanding (fundamental here NOT mainly meaning "simple") were getting thin to the point where that was necessary...but they are not....and furthermore that is not what most players who are not winning need. If (one of) their main problem(s) is handicapping, they need a better fundamental understanding of the game. It's along the lines of Dick Schmidt's saying; "Nothing works when you use a database.".

[Capper Al]

I can't see how one could like handicapping and not like Quinn's books. He writes his text at the college level. This could be what the problem is.

[Jay Trotter]

I can't see how one could like handicapping and not like Quinn's books. He writes his text at the college level. This could be what the problem is.Well, there goes that holiday gift idea! Thanks a lot Al!!!

[Capper Al]

Al must be one of those speed readers... :)

What you need the book to read it? I got too excited. New racing books do that to me. Please let us know how you like it. I'll do the same with the Matrix handicapping book.

Thanks

[Capper Al]

Well, there goes that holiday gift idea! Thanks a lot Al!!!

You could always use it as a paper weight.

[Robert Goren]

I can't see how one could like handicapping and not like Quinn's books. He writes his text at the college level. This could be what the problem is. I can't say that I agree with that. If you think he writes at the college level, you need go down to your local college book store and take a gander at a couple college text books. I would say more like the junior in high school level. Needless to say, I am not a fan of his.

[Capper Al]

I can't say that I agree with that. If you think he writes at the college level, you need go down to your local college book store and take a gander at a couple college text books. I would say more like the junior in high school level. Needless to say, I am not a fan of his.

I always feel that I should be writing notes as I read him.

[proximity]

will be interesting to see if mr quinn is still scribbling quirin #s and turn times on the pps or if the focus will be on moss/beyer #s and formulator info? and it may be even more interesting to see if he's come up with any new changes to his turf ratings.

[Profiler8]

Why is the book not available at amazon ? It seems, that it has not released yet.

[thaskalos]

Why is the book not available at amazon ? It seems, that it has not released yet.

It will probably be a month before DRF ships it to us.

They said the delivery date would be Dec. 10...but now, who knows?

[Tom]

I'll be calling - if I pay extra for 2 day shipping, I want to be sure the morons at DRF have someone there that can count for them. I am already pissed of at them.

[Beachbabe]

I'll probably wait for the movie.

[andicap]

While I'm always happy to see new handicapping books on the market, I have to agree that Quinn is a terrible writer. I have no idea if he is a good handicapper and there are always decent nuggets in his works but parsing them is generally exhausting. He writes extensively in the passive voice and in the third person in a dry, impersonal style that generally serves to obfuscate rather than clarify his points.

So yes, in a lot of ways Quinn does write like a college professor. Not that he uses $5 words when a 10 cent one will do, but that he cares much more about putting his thoughts down on paper as quickly as possible than keeping the reader engaged. Professors get away with it because they are writing for other academics. But for the consumer market, it's lazy and eventually kind of insulting to the reader.

Beyer is a example of an excellent writer. Engaging. Active voice, full of personality. That's the main reason why his books sold well among horseplayers.

The other problem with Quinn's material is the lack of quantifiable proof that any of his ideas actually work. The evidence is all anecdotal. Yes, you might get a good idea or two from reading them and if that's all you expect from your $25, then fine.

But with communicators like Dave Schwartz, I get evidence. Charts. Data. Reasons to have confidence in his theories. The knowledge that Dave has spent hours running his hypotheses through the mill and getting an objective analysis of their validity. William Quirin was the same way.

Beyer did this in his own fashion in "My $50,000 Year at the Races." You got to see how his futures worked in the real world in semi real-time.

[dlgreg]

I received the Quinn book yesterday.
I ordered it on 12-10.

[Greyfox]

While I'm always happy to see new handicapping books on the market, I have to agree that Quinn is a terrible writer. I have no idea if he is a good handicapper and there are always decent nuggets in his works but parsing them is generally exhausting. He writes extensively in the passive voice and in the third person in a dry, impersonal style that generally serves to obfuscate rather than clarify his points.
.

Yes, he does have a dry impersonal style.
I've met him in person twice and his writing style pretty well matches his personality. Certainly, he lacks the color of an Andy Beyer.

I understand from those who know him better that he is a good handicapper.
Whether or not that translates into betting, or making money from his wagers, I'm not sure.

However, while Quinn's writing style lacks flair, I would never ever say that he is a terrible writer.
His writing has depth and there is lots of food for thought for interested readers to chew on.

[thaskalos]

Yes, he does have a dry impersonal style.
I've met him in person twice and his writing style pretty well matches his personality. Certainly, he lacks the color of an Andy Beyer.

I understand from those who know him better that he is a good handicapper.
Whether or not that translates into betting, or making money from his wagers, I'm not sure.

However, while Quinn's writing style lacks flair, I would never ever say that he is a terrible writer.
His writing has depth and there is lots of food for thought for interested readers to chew on.

I agree. :ThmbUp:

I have for a long time been recommending Quinn's book RECREATIONAL HANDICAPPING as the best book of its kind in the handicapping marketplace...and I think he is a very good writer. Sure his writing is a little dry and more "technical" than Beyer's is...but that's not necessarily a bad thing; this is, after all, a complicated subject when you get beneath the surface of it.

Beyer, Quinn, Davidowitz, Brohamer, Sterling, Ragozin, Schmidt...they have all paid their dues as far as I am concerned...and I would run to pick up their book, were they to decide to commit more of their thoughts to paper.

[CincyHorseplayer]

The way Quinn writes is deliberate because he wants it to be accessible to players of all kinds.His treatment of class in relation to ages and times of year,providing archetypes of winners,he is the Jung of horserace handicapping.But that doesn't mean IMO he should write a book like Jung's Aion or Norman Brown's Life Against Death or an Immanuel Kantian treatise that is so obscure in it's terminology that it's useless for all but about 10% of readers.Quinn puts himself deliberately in the middle of the road and his understanding of the game,while seemingly simple,is as thorough as any author I've read.Tough crowd.He doesn't have the war stories of Beyer so he lacks personality.And doesn't have painstaking language along with polished diamonds for you at 29.95 so he lacks intelligence!What a cranky,greedy bunch:cool:

[thaskalos]

The way Quinn writes is deliberate because he wants it to be accessible to players of all kinds.His treatment of class in relation to ages and times of year,providing archetypes of winners,he is the Jung of horserace handicapping.But that doesn't mean IMO he should write a book like Jung's Aion or Norman Brown's Life Against Death or an Immanuel Kantian treatise that is so obscure in it's terminology that it's useless for all but about 10% of readers.Quinn puts himself deliberately in the middle of the road and his understanding of the game,while seemingly simple,is as thorough as any author I've read.Tough crowd.He doesn't have the war stories of Beyer so he lacks personality.And doesn't have painstaking language along with polished diamonds for you at 29.95 so he lacks intelligence!What a cranky,greedy bunch:cool:

There you go! :ThmbUp:

That's the problem with society today; we value style over substance.

[bob77713]

Does anyone know the Table of Contents for Quinn's new book?

Thanks.

[Capper Al]

The way Quinn writes is deliberate because he wants it to be accessible to players of all kinds.His treatment of class in relation to ages and times of year,providing archetypes of winners,he is the Jung of horserace handicapping.But that doesn't mean IMO he should write a book like Jung's Aion or Norman Brown's Life Against Death or an Immanuel Kantian treatise that is so obscure in it's terminology that it's useless for all but about 10% of readers.Quinn puts himself deliberately in the middle of the road and his understanding of the game,while seemingly simple,is as thorough as any author I've read.Tough crowd.He doesn't have the war stories of Beyer so he lacks personality.And doesn't have painstaking language along with polished diamonds for you at 29.95 so he lacks intelligence!What a cranky,greedy bunch:cool:

A good post about Quinn.

[so.cal.fan]

I'm anxious to hear what you guys think after reading Jim's new book?
I can't buy it....we had to order a new credit card...won't be here for another week, so I'm stuck, unless they have one in the Santa Anita Gift Shop Wednesday.

I will be going to Jim Quinn's seminars on Sundays. He gives some very good advice there. It's helped save me and make me money, personally.
He told his free seminar class, about 3 years ago a very helpful tip.
Races at Santa Anita 6 1/2 furlongs on the hillside turf course:
Only bet on horses who have won or run very close to winning on this course. I thought that sounded simplistic, but it really works more often than not. I've collected some decent prices as well.

[Dan Montilion]

I'm anxious to hear what you guys think after reading Jim's new book?
I can't buy it....we had to order a new credit card...won't be here for another week, so I'm stuck, unless they have one in the Santa Anita Gift Shop Wednesday.

I will be going to Jim Quinn's seminars on Sundays. He gives some very good advice there. It's helped save me and make me money, personally.
He told his free seminar class, about 3 years ago a very helpful tip.
Races at Santa Anita 6 1/2 furlongs on the hillside turf course:
Only bet on horses who have won or run very close to winning on this course. I thought that sounded simplistic, but it really works more often than not. I've collected some decent prices as well.

Just as anxious to read reviews... Anybody?

[Greyfox]

Races at Santa Anita 6 1/2 furlongs on the hillside turf course:
Only bet on horses who have won or run very close to winning on this course. I thought that sounded simplistic, but it really works more often than not. I've collected some decent prices as well.

I hope that he mentioned that European shippers who have raced on hilly turf courses (and right hand turns) before can also be a threat first time down the slope.

[andicap]

I'm anxious to hear what you guys think after reading Jim's new book?
I can't buy it....we had to order a new credit card...won't be here for another week, so I'm stuck, unless they have one in the Santa Anita Gift Shop Wednesday.

I will be going to Jim Quinn's seminars on Sundays. He gives some very good advice there. It's helped save me and make me money, personally.
He told his free seminar class, about 3 years ago a very helpful tip.
Races at Santa Anita 6 1/2 furlongs on the hillside turf course:
Only bet on horses who have won or run very close to winning on this course. I thought that sounded simplistic, but it really works more often than not. I've collected some decent prices as well.

I admit I was skeptical of that advice BUT I checked it through my HTR database for the past year (tho I'm missing three weeks in Oct.)
Quinn was pretty accurate, at least for non-maiden races 3 and up. Horses which finished out of the money in their last start won only 8% of their following races at a loss of 47 cents per dollar.

BTW, in non-maiden races, favorites have a flat bet profit at 6.5f, (again, three weeks are missing) with a 44% win rate out of 86 races charted. Horses 20-1 and up were 1-162.

Interestingly among older maidens (3 and up) horses who finished out of the money did just as well as horses that finished 2nd and 3rd measured by impact value. Favorites were only 4-27. So I would take Quinn's advice only for non-maiden races.

[so.cal.fan]

Grey Fox....you are right about foreign horses....they almost always outclass in these lower bracket alw.
Certain courses in England, have courses with downhill slopes much like the 6 1/2 course. Epson and Brighton...my husband knew of these because he rode horses at those tracks many years ago.
I'm not sure if Quinn ever mentioned it, he may have.
He does stress that most of these horses from France and England almost always outclass our horses on these turf races, no matter what distance they usually run in Europe.

andicap....where did you find these stats? I have heard them, but it's good to be reminded. Interesting stats that can save us many careless selections.

[marksinger]

Hey. I thought that I was the only one who plays that angle. Drat. :D
One of my top angles. :)

[andicap]

So. Cal Fan,

They are from HTR, the computer software that I use.

[Capper Al]

Al must be one of those speed readers... :)

How's the speed reading going on this book now?

[Capper Al]

Please give a review once you go through it...even though there is a good chance i will order today as I am a handicapping book addict too. Usually this time of year i go back and read the older handicapping books ( pre 1970 ), not sure why, but i do.

No time for a real book review except I'll make a few quick comments. It's an ok book for beginners. Any capper beyond the beginner level would not care for it. His race sample study size is only about 84 races???

[cj]

I've read a few chapters, skimmed some of the rest, but nothing exciting yet. For example, I don't want to read that high figure horses in races where no horse has run to par are terrible bets. Maybe they are, but in 2012 "because James Quinn says so" doesn't cut it for me. How about some data?

[cj]

Read a few more chapters. I hope it will get better. There is just a lot of the same stuff I've read from him before, with a few "the game has changed" items thrown in. Still, no real data or even much in the way of examples. I have liked Quinn's work in the past, but so far so bad on this one.

[so.cal.fan]

:ThmbUp: I just finished reading this book.
The book was worth my effort. Yes, I know most of this information, but not all of it.
I know I've been making a few careless errors, that I will correct.
His advice to steer clear of these non-winners of two claimers or the lousy non winners of two starter alw. races and his advice on 3 year old races during the winter and early spring is good to review.
His advice on maiden claiming races is also accurate, in my opinion.
His tips on playing the 6 1/2 furlongs down the hill turf at SA are very good.
I think any handicapper that reads this book carefully, can pick up more than a few good pieces of information that you can incorporate into your own
preferred method of play.

[andicap]

The key word in that summary is "review." If you've read Quinn's previous books on class, etc., what reason could there be to buy this one? For a newcomer, the book sounds like it is worthwhile.

[Dave Schwartz]

DRF said that the review copies should ship this week.

[plainolebill]

:ThmbUp: I just finished reading this book. His advice to steer clear of these non-winners of two claimers..........

Uh - oh, I actually like betting these races. The messier the better. :)

[so.cal.fan]

Plainolebill.....
I have a good friend, who also happens to be one of the best winning handicappers (with his own money) at the So. Cal. tracks....he does well in these cheap races, including the cheap maiden claimers.
He has a very unusual gift for coming up with the right horses in these races.
His main strength is his expert ability to watch replays on his large home screens and judge the ability/class of horses. No one I know is better at this.
It works for him. I've known this man for nearly 30 years.

I, myself, have trouble with these races....I used to do okay in them, but in the past few years, they have been a loser for me.
Perhaps, Jim Quinn has concluded the same thing.

Anyway, Bill, if you're doing well....you go for it.
One thing Quinn stresses in this book is to keep records of your plays and identify your strengths and weaknesses. It makes sense.
I personally prefer turf races and a few main track races that fit certain angles I like to follow.
I do well at Santa Anita and Hollywood Park.....problem with Del Mar past few years and don't care for Fairplex racing.

Everyone is different....follow your own comfort level, try to improve and you should do okay.

[cj]

The key word in that summary is "review." If you've read Quinn's previous books on class, etc., what reason could there be to buy this one? For a newcomer, the book sounds like it is worthwhile.

I still haven't finished, but I'm working on it. The problem I'm having is I've read it all before from him so I get bored. Maybe I'll come across a few nuggets over time, I don't know. I also would like to see at least some proof of his conclusions, but he offers none, at least yet.

[cj]

I'll be nice and keep this simple. I would not recommend this book at all, especially for $26 or whatever it was from DRF. It is a typical 1985 handicapping book, but we are in 2013.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I'll be nice and keep this simple. I would not recommend this book at all, especially for $26 or whatever it was from DRF. It is a typical 1985 handicapping book, but we are in 2013.
I have The Best of Thoroughbred Handicapping and found it a useful read, but as soon as I read the comment on this forum that he says avoid cheap non winners of two races, he lost me. I seem to have my best "luck" in those races.

[Maximillion]

I have The Best of Thoroughbred Handicapping and found it a useful read, but as soon as I read the comment on this forum that he says avoid cheap non winners of two races, he lost me. I seem to have my best "luck" in those races.


I feel the same way... I also welcome "cheap" non winners of 3 or 4 races lifetime..to each his own I guess.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I feel the same way... I also welcome "cheap" non winners of 3 or 4 races lifetime..to each his own I guess.

I also feel the same way but I thought it might just be a geographical reality.Ohio horses can't beat open claimers but there are enough small stables to produce runners that rifle through these.I have always viewed these as the poor man's non winner's allowance series.Using Quinn's lightly raced,younger horses theory.In fact,the older and more experienced I get,I think betting maidens and this 2-3-4 lifetime series are the most profit capable races there are.The eliminations are pretty clear cut and they run to form usually.Without being underlayed overall.

Regarding Quinn.I think any writer only has so many magnum opus's in him.I still read his other stuff,sometimes just for a headcheck,and get something out of it.It sounds like I don't have to get this book.He's elucidated a pretty comprehensive approach thus far and that still will steer you towards wins.Plus does anybody think some of these writers reach a point where they experience x amount of success at a high level and they become dispassionate?Beyer reminds me of this more than a lot of them.The work ethic seems intact,but what they are working on doesn't change.Working in unprofitable directions tirelessly.Seemingly unable to change the approach.I don't know,just thinking out loud.

[classhandicapper]

I feel the same way... I also welcome "cheap" non winners of 3 or 4 races lifetime..to each his own I guess.

I'm really shocked he feels that way about the limited winner claiming races. He's known as a class handicapper, yet IMO some of the best class plays come from understanding the conditions of those races and where those horses fit relative to open horses and recent maiden graduates.

Sometimes, races that are listed identically in the DRF or at Bris had very different conditions and weren't even close to alike. At other times, the public underestimates how much a well beaten horse that's dropping into one of those races from open company might improve its figures in a much softer spot.

[so.cal.fan]

I don't care for real cheap claiming races and I hate the phony starter allowances for maiden claiming winners and these winners of 2 lifetime claimers.
That said, I only handicap at Santa Anita, Hollywood Park and Del Mar.
I think Quinn is mistaken if he thinks his idea applies everywhere in the U.S.
It doesn't.

Still.....if you can classify these horses CORRECTLY, you can win these races for sure, even here in California.

Every winning player I know classifies horses well. I don't care if they use speed/pace figures and any number of angles, they are still classifying.
Speed and pace figures are likely the superior way to classify correctly, coupled with a very extensive knowledge of trainers and owners and how they operate.

Quinn's book is just a guide, and for beginning players it is a very good book to read. Advanced players may just get reminded of one angle they are not using properly and correct it themselves to make their game better.
Every good handicapper has their own way of doing things, and they develop this skill themselves over very long periods of trial and error.

[mrroyboy]

Agreed. DRF wanted $9.00 for ground shipping. $22 for 2 day shipping. I canceled my order immediately.

[Dave Schwartz]

I know this sounds crazy, but $22 for 2-day shipping is far less than it would cost me to ship a book 2nd day. Last time we sent a book 2nd day I believe it cost us $47. That is just crazy.

This is why we try to do everything electronically that we can.

[Dave Schwartz]

I just completed my read of Jim Quinn's The Complete Handicapper.

First, let me preface this by saying that I have been both a friend and an admirer of Jim Quinn for years. My review is not slanted, but I do admit that if I didn't like his book I would not post any review at all.

I have read all of JQ's previous books and, simply put, they have not been "my style." For years I was a guy who liked to look at statistical tables that showed me something I could immediately add to my handicapping. If there were no statistics, then I lost interest quickly.

Now, as I have matured (and have a giant database to research things :eek: ), instead of looking for statistics, I hunger for ideas; things I can use to research myself and (perhaps) add to my handicapping.

When I began reading The Complete Handicapper I was admittedly surprised. It appears to me that Jim's writing has become... more intense. What I mean is that he makes very direct and strong statements, sometimes many to a page.

This makes the book a very intense read (which is a good thing). Permit me an example from the first chapter in the book:

From the bottom of page 7
The three kinds of maidens that warrant support:

Maidens that equaled par last time
Second starters that projected to par with normal improvement
First starters that satisfy the trainer, sire and workout criteria



This is JQ's opinion of what is important. What it represents to me is a researchable idea that might turn out to be a worthwhile angle. I am not doubting Dr. Quinn here; simply saying that everything must be verified.

How often do we judge a book by whether or not we get a single idea that might pan out?

So, by page 7 I was saying, "Hmm... This is interesting. A real idea that I can test."

On page 15 I found another set of (6) bullets with direct statements about maiden races. Again, on page 24. More bullets, more ideas.

In fact, I found this to be true all the way through the book.

I am not suggesting that you just skim the book for the bullets. But if you did,--- if you did nothing more than look for the bullets --- you would have the equivalent output of many of those "hope-I-just-get-one-good-idea" book.

The truth is, Quinn has ruined my life with this book. You see, after reading it the first time, I find that I am going to have to go back and read it slowly, one paragraph at a time, AND TAKE NOTES! I may have to read this book as often as I did Dr. William Quirin's book back in 1979 (and 1980, and 1981, etc.).

In my opinion, this is the best book Dr. James Quinn has ever written.


Stars: ? of 5
http://www.practicalhandicapping.com/desktop/Images/stars5.jpgFor a beginner-to-intermediate handicapper I would give this FIVE STARS!

http://www.practicalhandicapping.com/desktop/Images/stars4.jpg For the very advanced handicapper, I would give it FOUR stars. (Sorry, but I still like statistical tables.)

I offer serious congratulations to Jim for a wonderful read.


Regards to All,
Dave Schwartz

[CincyHorseplayer]

I just completed my read of Jim Quinn's The Complete Handicapper.

First, let me preface this by saying that I have been both a friend and an admirer of Jim Quinn for years. My review is not slanted, but I do admit that if I didn't like his book I would not post any review at all.

I have read all of JQ's previous books and, simply put, they have not been "my style." For years I was a guy who liked to look at statistical tables that showed me something I could immediately add to my handicapping. If there were no statistics, then I lost interest quickly.

Now, as I have matured (and have a giant database to research things :eek: ), instead of looking for statistics, I hunger for ideas; things I can use to research myself and (perhaps) add to my handicapping.

When I began reading The Complete Handicapper I was admittedly surprised. It appears to me that Jim's writing has become... more intense. What I mean is that he makes very direct and strong statements, sometimes many to a page.

This makes the book a very intense read (which is a good thing). Permit me an example from the first chapter in the book:



From the bottom of page 7


The three kinds of maidens that warrant support:

Maidens that equaled par last time
Second starters that projected to par with normal improvement
First starters that satisfy the trainer, sire and workout criteria



This is JQ's opinion of what is important. What it represents to me is a researchable idea that might turn out to be a worthwhile angle. I am not doubting Dr. Quinn here; simply saying that everything must be verified.

How often do we judge a book by whether or not we get a single idea that might pan out?

So, by page 7 I was saying, "Hmm... This is interesting. A real idea that I can test."

On page 15 I found another set of (6) bullets with direct statements about maiden races. Again, on page 24. More bullets, more ideas.

In fact, I found this to be true all the way through the book.

I am not suggesting that you just skim the book for the bullets. But if you did,--- if you did nothing more than look for the bullets --- you would have the equivalent output of many of those "hope-I-just-get-one-good-idea" book.

The truth is, Quinn has ruined my life with this book. You see, after reading it the first time, I find that I am going to have to go back and read it slowly, one paragraph at a time, AND TAKE NOTES! I may have to read this book as often as I did Dr. William Quirin's book back in 1979 (and 1980, and 1981, etc.).

In my opinion, this is the best book Dr. James Quinn has ever written.


Stars: ? of 5
http://www.practicalhandicapping.com/desktop/Images/stars5.jpgFor a beginner-to-intermediate handicapper I would give this FIVE STARS!

http://www.practicalhandicapping.com/desktop/Images/stars4.jpg For the very advanced handicapper, I would give it FOUR stars. (Sorry, but I still like statistical tables.)

I offer serious congratulations to Jim for a wonderful read.


Regards to All,
Dave Schwartz

Dave,I haven't read the book yet but I had to respond to your comment.I am happily surprised!It's been getting dismal reviews.I thought it was simply reader familiarity with his work.You and I have talked briefly about reading between the lines of many books and taking an idea from an author's conclusion to another perceived more meaningful direction.I find when I read between Jim's lines it is just saturated with meaning and boiled down thinking,in the alchemical sense.His understanding of the relationships of horse nature as it applies to age,year to year,and within the year,and how it relates to handlers and all means of objective data,IMO is first class.I can read his books repeatedly(and do at times)and get something new out of it everytime.The meaning is always getting broader,deeper,more expansive,and dynamic,for all of us I think.But in my opinion nobody embodies that more than Quinn.That intensity level you speak of is something that has always turned me on about really good writers of any genre.The feeling of esoteric elevation.I love it!Good stuff Dave.

[Will Power]

I agree. :ThmbUp:

I have for a long time been recommending Quinn's book RECREATIONAL HANDICAPPING as the best book of its kind in the handicapping marketplace...and I think he is a very good writer. Sure his writing is a little dry and more "technical" than Beyer's is...but that's not necessarily a bad thing; this is, after all, a complicated subject when you get beneath the surface of it.

Beyer, Quinn, Davidowitz, Brohamer, Sterling, Ragozin, Schmidt...they have all paid their dues as far as I am concerned...and I would run to pick up their book, were they to decide to commit more of their thoughts to paper.

YES! I agree.

Quinn can say more in one paragraph than some complete books I have purchased.

[Krudler]

Just purchased the the new Quinn book, The Complete Handicapper, via the Google Play store as an eBook. It was just under $16 with no S&H, of course.

I'm in Australia at the moment and I'm not sure if it's available on Google Play in North America, mind you.

Can't wait to dive in and check it out.

[Capper Al]

Thanks CJ about redirecting me to this thread. I just picked up Quinn's book and started re-reading it. It's work.

[thaskalos]

I preface this by saying that I have always been a fan of Quinn's writing...and that I have recommended his book "Recreational Handicapping" to every struggling player that I have ever met.

Sadly...I do not feel the same about his latest work.

It isn't that the book is "boring"...or that the player will not be able to find a few "nuggets" in it which he might be able to use in his own play. The problem is that the serious player has read it all before...while the "not so serious player" is unlikely to be able to distinguish the enclosed "nuggets" from the tons of other unsubstantiated opinions of the author...which he presents as fact.

I have many examples of these unsubstantiated opinions gathered here, and I would have preferred to comment on all of them...but I don't think this is necessary...so I will keep this review relatively short. I will list only one opinion...which I think will illustrate my point very nicely.

Quinn writes:

"If too many front-runners and pressers have lined up, handicappers can afford greater attention to the off-pace contenders."

But then, in the very next paragraph, we find this:

"When front-runners and pressers prove difficult to separate at the first call, turn-time will often complete the task. During the second fraction, the truly superior horses in the front flight will take control. In the cheaper claiming races and maiden-claiming races where all the horses look below-par on final-time speed, turn-time can spell the difference between victory and defeat."

This is the type of advice that we might have swallowed whole 20 years ago...but in this, the age of the database, we must demand that it come accompanied by some sort of PROOF. Where is the proof that the turn-time is the deciding factor in these cheaper races...where the front-runners and pressers are difficult to separate?

And what about the "stalkers" and the "closers"...with their superior third-quarter fractions? When do THEY figure in our calculations?

If the stalkers and the closers -- and their superior closing fractions -- are not a primary consideration in these races where the pace of the race figures to be contested...then where can we apply the wisdom of Quinn's first sentence in this thread -- where he instructs us to..."afford greater attention to the off pace contenders", when "too many front runners and pressers line up"?

There are many examples like these, where the player is instructed to "prefer the pace figure over the speed figure of a horse in a given race...or to "ignore a horse's speed and form if it figures to be helped by a prevailing track bias"...but again, no real proof of the legitimacy of these opinions...and explanations which the experienced player will find highly debatable.

As I said...we no longer live in the primitive 80s and 90s...and we cannot be expected to believe highly debatable opinions without being offered any proof which substantiates them.

A handicapping author must write his book with his audience in mind, IMO...and he must know which type of audience this book has as its target.

I don't think Mr. Quinn kept this in mind when he wrote this book.

IMO...this book will confuse the beginning players...while frustrating those who have read his other books, and were expecting something more from him with this one.

Pity...because I really looked forward to reading it.

[Capper Al]

Nice review.

[Capper Al]

As I change planes, I'd like to add the following. I find Quinn compelling because he's correct in stating that it is all about the race type. The old timers sage was before one even starts handicapping read the race conditions. I believe with all our information today we easily pass over this bit of wisdom. Why Quinn is worth the trouble is that he painstakingly reviews how to interpret the race conditions for handicapping. I believe the DRF folks in Bet with the Best made Quinn present his ideas in a more concise way and therefore better to study.

[cj]

I preface this by saying that I have always been a fan of Quinn's writing...and that I have recommended his book "Recreational Handicapping" to every struggling player that I have ever met.

Sadly...I do not feel the same about his latest work...



Nice review, pretty much exactly what I was saying about it, just done better and with more detail.

I'll be nice and keep this simple. I would not recommend this book at all, especially for $26 or whatever it was from DRF. It is a typical 1985 handicapping book, but we are in 2013.

[DeltaLover]

Although from the reviews it was clear that this book is not important for the education of the handicapper, I still went ahead and purchased its kindle edition.

I speed read most of it and I find it not only outdated but also full of wrong information.

The author seems to live in the seventies, using stories to make his case and even worse seems to ignore that the purpose of horse betting is not to find the winner but make a profit.

As an example of (the many) completely wrong advice he is providing I refer you to the section about weight, the spirit of which can be summarized in him quoting Quirin's suggestion, that people who know nothing about handicapping would do best by betting the high weighted horses every time! This represents a completely wrong conclusion, underlying a poor understanding of the betting game!

We can prove it be the following data:



chi2 = 118.44

Factor Observed Expected ROI WIN% IV Matches
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Single Top Weighted horse 907 648 0.74 19% 1.50 4737.0
All other horses in same race 3839 4089 0.76 12% 0.14 32312.0



This means that although the single top weighted horse wins way more than his rivals, the actual performance of the strategy is worst than betting all the other horses in the race. In other words what he is suggesting although is producing a lot of winners is still so well known to everyone so it ends up as a terrible betting angle!

My advice to the aspiring horse bettor who want to learn more about the game, is to stay clear of this book..

[Greyfox]

In other words what he is suggesting although is producing a lot of winners is still so well known to everyone so it ends up as a terrible betting angle!



The exception to the above conclusion would be horizontal exotics, especially if you can get a longshot in one of the other races.

[coachv30]

After just finishing Quinn's new book, I have to agree that it is not his best work. Way too many references to elite horses from decades ago as well as some contradictions from chapter to chapter. At times I felt as if I was re-reading Steven Davidowitz's book , "Betting Thoroughbreds" and that book was written decades ago.

For the modern day handicapper, the three books that I've read and have gotten some good angles from are, Pandy's pace, Calibration Handicapping and the Matrix System.

All three of these books deliver clear-cut angles that can be used in conjunction to identify contenders. Most importantly, you do not have to devote your life to thoroughbred racing to understand and apply the content.

[Cratos]

Although from the reviews it was clear that this book is not important for the education of the handicapper, I still went ahead and purchased its kindle edition.

I speed read most of it and I find it not only outdated but also full of wrong information.

The author seems to live in the seventies, using stories to make his case and even worse seems to ignore that the purpose of horse betting is not to find the winner but make a profit.

As an example of (the many) completely wrong advice he is providing I refer you to the section about weight, the spirit of which can be summarized in him quoting Quirin's suggestion, that people who know nothing about handicapping would do best by betting the high weighted horses every time! This represents a completely wrong conclusion, underlying a poor understanding of the betting game!

We can prove it be the following data:



chi2 = 118.44

Factor Observed Expected ROI WIN% IV Matches
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Single Top Weighted horse 907 648 0.74 19% 1.50 4737.0
All other horses in same race 3839 4089 0.76 12% 0.14 32312.0



This means that although the single top weighted horse wins way more than his rivals, the actual performance of the strategy is worst than betting all the other horses in the race. In other words what he is suggesting although is producing a lot of winners is still so well known to everyone so it ends up as a terrible betting angle!

My advice to the aspiring horse bettor who want to learn more about the game, is to stay clear of this book..

Do I understand correctly when I state Quinn’s Hypothesis: Single high weighted horses are good bets because they win a disproportion of the races?

Therefore you used the Chi Square test to find out a "goodness to fit" between the observed and expected; and concluded that Quinn’s hypothesis was incorrect or at least faulty.

I would say before that conclusion can be reached a Chi Square test should be conducted for random versus conditional occurrences and by race class.
My reasoning is that if you evaluate the universal set of races for high weighted horses winning as an random occurrence there is merit to your conclusion, but I don’t believe the same conclusion can be drawn if you evaluate a sub-set of the universal set conditionally by class.

What I am suggesting is that Quinn is probably right if you look at high weighed horses in just graded stake races.

Incidentally your comment, “The author seems to live in the seventies” is disingenuous and has nothing to do with the author’s assertion; this is just a plain statistical problem that occurs in the data independent of era.

[DeltaLover]

I would say before that conclusion can be reached a Chi Square test should be conducted for random versus conditional occurrences and by race class.


This is what you say, but not what Quinn is talking about. He is making a blanket statement that is completely wrong. He is neven mentioning class or any other conditions and this is exactly how I tested his sayings. Later today I will run the simulation only for stake races, although, again, this is NOT what he is saying.

He lives in the seventies, in the sense that his understanding of the game has not progressed much since then. He seems to be confused about high frequency winners and making profit betting horses. which are completly different topics. His approach reminds me of Ainsley's factors that are picturing a 1-10 cinch that is obvious to anybody....

[thaskalos]

I still read almost every new handicapping book that I deem worthwhile...and it occurs to me that the well-known handicapping authors have not yet realized that there is a great deal of difference between "theory" and "practice" in this game.

They seem to be stuck endlessly explaining the "fundamentals" of the game...even though they've all done this repeatedly in the past. Enough already!

IMO...what the players need is an updated version of Andy Beyer's My $50,000 Year at the Races...where the author explains his handicapping and betting philosophies, and then puts them to the test on REAL races...so that the player can see how the "expert" performs in "real life", over a considerable period of time. Enough of this bullshit where the author uses a few carefully pre-selected race samples, designed to show how brilliant he is. Take your handicapping skills on the road for a year...and report to us how you make out.

Now...I can understand that the authors might claim that they are not prepared to let us look over their shoulder for the mere price of a book.

Fair enough...but they should then stop pretending that they have something new to share with us...when they really don't.

[DeltaLover]

They seem to be stuck endlessly explaining the "fundamentals" of the game...even though they've all done this repeatedly in the past. Enough already!



I could not agree more..

It occurs to me, that the fundamental, all authors seem to completely ignore, is that fundamentals are very well known to the average player and very well reflected in the pools and a bet should NEVER BE PLACED BASED IN THEM .

Betting ABC handicapping factors represent the most secure path to financial ruin.

[Cratos]

This is what you say, but not what Quinn is talking about. He is making a blanket statement that is completely wrong. He is neven mentioning class or any other conditions and this is exactly how I tested his sayings. Later today I will run the simulation only for stake races, although, again, this is NOT what he is saying.

He lives in the seventies, in the sense that his understanding of the game has not progressed much since then. He seems to be confused about high frequency winners and making profit betting horses. which are completly different topics. His approach reminds me of Ainsley's factors that are picturing a 1-10 cinch that is obvious to anybody....


I don’t think I am disagreeing with you as much as I am saying that extrapolation of this premise or hypothesis should be extended to include class because that could be meritorious and beneficial to the reader.

Using the Chi Square test to test whether there is a significant difference between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies is not that difficult, but understanding that difference in the context of horseracing class is more complex and not easily understood.

[DeltaLover]

I don’t think I am disagreeing with you as much as I am saying that extrapolation of this premise or hypothesis should be extended to include class because that could be meritorious and beneficial to the reader.

Using the Chi Square test to test whether there is a significant difference between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies is not that difficult, but understanding that difference in the context of horseracing class is more complex and not easily understood.

The thing is the chi2 (as mere IV does as well) proves without a doubt that he is correct as far as winning frequency of the top weighted horse. What is missing from this statement is that this assesment does not provide any betting value since it is reflected in the pools.

Actually is very difficult or not impossible to find a generic enough angle that affects the wining frequency so dramatically and still remains unkown to the public. In contrary I believe that the very best bets can be found going against to these angles since they tend to be overbet.

Stating that a claiming horse who tries stakes company for first time has very low winning chances, although correct, is also irrelative for betting purposes. The few exceptions to this rule, that will manage to win at hefty odds, are a good example of what this game is about. This exactly is the assignment of the advanced handicapper, to detect situations where the 'fundamentals' do not apply and try to convert this opinion to dollar signs. Any other approach, focusing to increase hit rate, cashing a lot of tickets, is good only for the recreational gambler (whatever this mean!).......

I am concluding that the very best thing about horse betting, is that people still try to pick winners!

I hope it stays like this for ever!

[Tom]

I don't think he was suggesting anyone just bet the high weighted horse. I think he was just making a point that the top weight win more races, so if you have no clue what you are doing, that would get you more winners than not.

[Cratos]

I still read almost every new handicapping book that I deem worthwhile...and it occurs to me that the well-known handicapping authors have not yet realized that there is a great deal of difference between "theory" and "practice" in this game.

They seem to be stuck endlessly explaining the "fundamentals" of the game...even though they've all done this repeatedly in the past. Enough already!

IMO...what the players need is an updated version of Andy Beyer's My $50,000 Year at the Races...where the author explains his handicapping and betting philosophies, and then puts them to the test on REAL races...so that the player can see how the "expert" performs in "real life", over a considerable period of time. Enough of this bullshit where the author uses a few carefully pre-selected race samples, designed to show how brilliant he is. Take your handicapping skills on the road for a year...and report to us how you make out.

Now...I can understand that the authors might claim that they are not prepared to let us look over their shoulder for the mere price of a book.

Fair enough...but they should then stop pretending that they have something new to share with us...when they really don't.

I can go back to the sixties when I first got into this game and horseracing was one of the premier sports in America; and given that status it seemed as though at that time there was a “book-a-month” on horserace handicapping.

However in the late seventies and on the heels of Andy Beyer’s ground breaking book, “Picking Winners” came the advent of the personal computer and everything changed because horseracing along with baseball is all about statistics; and now we had an approach then and now that pushes handicapping through a statistical window like never before.

As much as I agree you about the merits of Andy Beyer's “My $50,000 Year at the Races” I believe the demand for that sort of literary input is gone forever because the new racing fan want his/her info faster, more condense, and in a quantitative format that fits into some sort of computer program that will give them an answer and they will take that answer to the betting window and bet. No more pawing through the pages of the DRF and making markings with different color markers; and from that effort the true understanding of handicapping fundamentals was learned.

[so.cal.fan]

I've been betting on horse races for decades.
So has Jim Quinn. I know this man, he is a winning player.
I like his new book and refer to it often.

[Clocker]

I recently returned to horse racing after many years, and this was one of the books I read in my self-reeducation program. I found it to be a very good and comprehensive review of handicapping principles and practices, and helped me get my head around a number of concepts that I didn't understand back in the day. And it is about handicapping, not about systems.

I'd say it is about at or a little above the level of "Betting Thoroughbreds" by Steve Davidowitz. Both are a step up from "Handicapping 101" by Brad Free, which is probably the best book for a beginner.

[Capper Al]

Finally finished the book. I put it down for months. It's tough to stay awake while going through stories about 'who cares about what happened in California', but I found several nuggets buried along the way that makes the effort worthwhile.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I re-read one of Quinn's books every winter.I always get something out of it.The way he thinks is the big win.I might be going through a phase though.I get more out of how an author thinks than the examples given.

[traynor]

Has anyone ever used the speed figures Quinn was (is?) producing? Seemed like an incredible amount of work (at least the programming part) went into them.

[thaskalos]

Has anyone ever used the speed figures Quinn was (is?) producing? Seemed like an incredible amount of work (at least the programming part) went into them.

Which ones?

His PDQ ratings?

[MikeH]

Has anyone ever used the speed figures Quinn was (is?) producing?

At one time (late 90's) Tom Brohamer was doing them. I haven't been to the track in years, so I don't have any contact with either of them. I think there are/were others on this Board that used them at one time. They were very good when I saw them.

[Capper Al]

I re-read one of Quinn's books every winter.I always get something out of it.The way he thinks is the big win.I might be going through a phase though.I get more out of how an author thinks than the examples given.

Best use of Quinn's books.

[Capper Al]

Has anyone ever used the speed figures Quinn was (is?) producing? Seemed like an incredible amount of work (at least the programming part) went into them.

They seemed interesting and might work, but what complicated to use even with a computer.

[traynor]

They seemed interesting and might work, but what complicated to use even with a computer.
I just looked and they are apparently still free. It seems the notion that if you give someone something for free, they will become addicted to its use and then give you money to continue getting it does not work unless there is more to gain than pages and pages of (whatever they are supposed to be).

[Tom]

Free where?

[sevenall]

I'm going to assume that the poster is talking about this site.

http://www.speedfigures.com/index.html

[Tom]

OK, they have been free for years now.
The only problem is too many races at other tracks have no figs for them.

[traynor]

Has anyone used them (successfully or otherwise) for the tracks they cover?