Quote:
Originally Posted by big frank
I don't know how to say it----but i actually like it when they talk up a horse i am totally against or when they don't like a horse i am on....today was a great example--in the 4th at Gulf i totally threw out the fave - Lieutenant Sam , mainly because everything seemed like he didn't want any part of a route race--late pace figs-pedigree -- running style- it all seemed like a bet against , yet the fanduel reporter said how the horse was built for the distance.. body was lanky and should be able to run all day.... and the horse didn't run past 6f and tired badly , on top of that the firster i bet was never mentioned....i bet him because Tyler G was up and pedigree was pretty good , he got up late at 10-1 . this happens every day . i know we all make mistakes , and believe me i make many , but i see no value in having someone tell the public that a 4/5 shot '' is walking around like he is ready to explode or she is walking around like she owns the place "" Do people actually bet their money on horses because of what they heard from a paddock reporter ??? just curious
|
You may be told that even whale teams give a number to physical appearance, but that doesn't remove the subjective nature of the observations. Crunching data from subjective inputs produces subjective output. Two people don't perceive subjective, qualitative experiences (appearance, degree of nervousness, color, smell, pain, etc.) exactly the same.
This has led "qualia" (subjective experiences) to be controversial in the scientific world because it cannot be measured, with many scientists denying its existence in the objective external world- merely a projection of the subjective mind.
