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

[so.cal.fan]

Has anyone read James Quinn new book?

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by so.cal.fan

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/TH...85DA853D62F3C1

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]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

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.

[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 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]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

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

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]

Originally Posted by Tom

Daskalos?

Daskalos?

Ya datsa close.

[DeltaLover]

Sorry, I mispronounced it

[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?