Projected Power Fraction Pars & Handicapping Magic

[Light]

Originally Posted by bigmack

"Without their corresponding creator" - Wha?

Everything is created including ppf's and pace numbers. Their corresponding creator may be a form cycle,a track bias, a pace bias,a new trainer,etc. Take that away and your numbers are now backfiring. You go back and try to tweak the numbers like this: The system goes in the toilet if you can't see what's behind the numbers.

[Tom]

That is for the handicapper to evaluate when he uses the numbers, just like a speed or pace figure. The numbers just help to clarify things (sometimes).

[Light]

Tom

What you and I said is handicapping 101. But I'm getting the impression that maddog42 is basically just using the numbers and not associating them with form.

[maddog42]

It is true that I excuse the last race much more easily than most. That is how I get longshots that most don't. I demand a race on the same surface and distance sprint or route. The horse must be within 8.5 lengths of winner. The contender must be within 15 points of the best Beyer in the race and not achieved his ppf # with an absurdly slow route time. Of course I violate any of these rules with almost any excuse. I often go back 4 races at a similar distance and surface.

[Capper Al]

How's GBC doing nowadays? Last time I looked they almost dropped all there horse racing stuff. It's too bad. I enjoyed them in their heyday. They stirred me toward a couple of good books.

[Light]

maddog42

That's cool. I had got the impression of you ignoring form because of a couple of things you said,like:

Originally Posted by maddog42

I am breaking even with routes and losing my ass with sprints) My gathering of these Pars was in response to my frustration with Handicapping Magic.

and this:

Originally Posted by maddog42

But about one weekend in 10 I will go on a longshot run. Picking 70 to 1 shots and having them place or show is not that unusual .

That's what usually happens when you ignore form and just play numbers. You can go on wild swings both ways but usually the wrong way and for extended periods of time.Good to know you are above that.

I have yet to be impressed with Pizzolla's works. Seems like a likable guy but I think the stuff he has is nothing that's going to make you beat this game. His Fulcrum theory is just another way of saying,"who's the speed of the race". His PPF's that he thinks is his best angle in HM is basically a rehash of ability times. I don't like the penalization of closers in it. That's fine on a speed biased track but pity someone stuck in that dogmatic approach on a surface where closers are ruling. He now has a feature he likes to use in Black Magic that will immediately bring up all pressured pace races at any track in the country. He picks these races in a video or newsletter I get from him and its funny. In a lot of cases,the duels in these "highly pressurized races" does not materialize or the two speed go wire to wire because of a bias, or they are just gutsy types of horses who do not give up on the front end. There is some disconnect to the total picture on his part too. We all suffer from this as handicappers but his type is supposed to be a pro who has overcome this and charges money for his extraordinary ability. I don't buy it. And I have never seen his ROI either. I consider him like I do Andy Beyer (whose bets I have seen and ughh!). Interesting to read or listen to both these gentlemen but they will add very little to your wallet.

[maddog42]

I do go on wild swings. No doubt about it. If you want steady income go work at McDonalds. When Andy Beyer published Picking Winners, it started a speed handicapping revolution. It was so much better than any Handicapping book ever written THAT IT WAS NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!!! In the years after its publication and before the Racing Times started publishing Beyers, speed handicapping ruled. Go to the Desert Sea website and read what even another rival numbers guy had to say about him. Speed horses prices have plummeted.What used to pay $25 now pays $7.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Light

Tom

What you and I said is handicapping 101. But I'm getting the impression that maddog42 is basically just using the numbers and not associating them with form.

I am not convinced that you and Tom are talking about the same thing.

Tom is stating, correctly, that the figures - whether pace or speed - need proper interpretation, whereas YOU keep on referring to the "creators" of these figures...and the role that "form" plays in their effectiveness.

Could you please explain to me what FORM means to you...and can this "form" be properly analyzed and determined without using accurate speed and pace figures?

[dansan]

sounds like you guys are all playing the same horses

[Light]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I am not convinced that you and Tom are talking about the same thing.

Tom is stating, correctly, that the figures - whether pace or speed - need proper interpretation, whereas YOU keep on referring to the "creators" of these figures...and the role that "form" plays in their effectiveness.

Could you please explain to me what FORM means to you...and can this "form" be properly analyzed and determined without using accurate speed and pace figures?

I think we are saying the same thing using different words.

By form,I mean where is the horse at in his form cycle. Is he ready for a peak performance or has he peaked? My strongest angle in horse racing after playing almost 30 years is a simple form angle that tells me when a horse has run a prep race,whether that prep was successful,and whether today is the day the barn is out for a score. And it is all literally in the form.

[Xman2]

Pizzolla's Black Magic has added a lot of weight to my wallet.

Xman2