Husband and wife finish one-two in NHC Tour!

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

What's totally untrue?

It's untrue that there are very few women that know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels. What are you basing this foolishness on?

[Grits]

Reading about Judy Wagner's skill and her triumphs for many years, Dan, its nice to see the thread, and the posts by her, at HTR. She's mighty sharp.

I'm not really sure the odds for a couple who share the love of horseracing, handicapping and horseplaying, staying together, are any less than the odds for success of a couple who enjoys their weekend golf trips together, or their boating trips--cruising the sounds, the harbors, etc, etc, off and on during the year.

One can be assured, though, if one is in Kentucky watching horses run, and the other is aboard the boat, the two will drift apart.

And far more than just a bit off course; given the Grand Banks is equipped with auto pilot. And the cell phones reach from Kentucky to all along the Inland Waterway.

Its great the Wagners share this game. They're wise. We should all be so blessed!!

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

It's untrue that there are very few women that know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels. What are you basing this foolishness on?

I didn't mean it to come across that women aren't smart enough to win at the highest levels, what i meant was that there are very few women who actually DO win at the highest levels.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

I didn't mean it to come across that women aren't smart enough to win at the highest levels, what i meant was that there are very few women who actually DO win at the highest levels.

Oh no, you're not going to weasel your way out of this one...

What you stated was:

There are very few women who know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels.

This is very different from your new, revised version:

there are very few women who actually DO win at the highest levels.

[Zman179]

Honestly, who here can galavant across the country all year playing horses HOPING to qualify and win some money? That's what this contest requires. It's a contest that requires that you either be retired, semi-retired, or not have a life.

I'm sure that they lost a chunk of change on expenses and taxes, and I'm happy for them that they won and caught an additional 15 minutes of fame, but I don't envy them.

[Bobzilla]

Another nice article from the DRF on the Wagners and their success in this year's NTRA tour.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/110000.html

[The Hawk]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

It's untrue that there are very few women that know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels. What are you basing this foolishness on?

I know I'm in the minority here but what he said is mostly true, since you can count the women who play regularly in these tournaments on two hands, maybe one. Then, when you consider how many win, and how many of these aren't "beards", he's right, if politically incorrect.

The gist of the argument is the "know enough about handicapping" part. I can see where someone would take issue with that, since there are lots of women who are good handicappers. But when you combine that with the ability to do well in these tournaments -- and there's a difference between the two skills, as many men also find out -- there ARE very few women that know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels.

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by The Hawk

I know I'm in the minority here but what he said is mostly true, since you can count the women who play regularly in these tournaments on two hands, maybe one. Then, when you consider how many win, and how many of these aren't "beards", he's right, if politically incorrect.

The gist of the argument is the "know enough about handicapping" part. I can see where someone would take issue with that, since there are lots of women who are good handicappers. But when you combine that with the ability to do well in these tournaments -- and there's a difference between the two skills, as many men also find out -- there ARE very few women that know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels.

We're talking about two different things. I'm not real familiar with tournament play, so I'll take your word for your first paragraph.

I disagreed with the "know enough" part. I personally know a lot of very good handicappers that also happen to be women. Better than many men I know.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by The Hawk

The gist of the argument is the "know enough about handicapping" part. I can see where someone would take issue with that, since there are lots of women who are good handicappers. But when you combine that with the ability to do well in these tournaments -- and there's a difference between the two skills, as many men also find out -- there ARE very few women that know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels.

Hawk, you are making this statement, which is quite a broad one. What you are not stating is WHY you believe this to be. You are not stating the mechanics of your conclusion that, though, possessing good handicapping skills, women still are not a factor at high level tournament play.

WHY and WHAT makes this so, and what do you see as the vital difference in managing "two skills" that are necessary to win--but, one of which, you are not explaining.

Aside from the fact, of course, less women enter handicapping contests than men as basically we know more men handicap horseraces than women do, but exactly what causes them to fall short?

These contest do require a great amount of skill, along with a bit of luck too. As we know, they often are determined by unearthing the longest shot of the day. Women, myself included, can do pretty good in this regard. Still, why would I perform poorly?

[The Hawk]

Originally Posted by Grits

Hawk, you are making this statement, which is quite a broad one. What you are not stating is WHY you believe this to be. You are not stating the mechanics of your conclusion that, though, possessing good handicapping skills, women still are not a factor at high level tournament play.

WHY and WHAT makes this so, and what do you see as the vital difference in managing "two skills" that are necessary to win--but, one of which, you are not explaining.

Aside from the fact, of course, less women enter handicapping contests than men as basically we know more men handicap horseraces than women do, but exactly what causes them to fall short?

These contest do require a great amount of skill, along with a bit of luck too. As we know, they often are determined by unearthing the longest shot of the day. Women, myself included, can do pretty good in this regard. Still, why would I perform poorly?

Hey Grits:

Believe me, I'm not saying women lack something to compete with men. Very good tournament players are rare, when viewed as a percentage of overall players. Not just women, men AND women. Strong female players are also rare, in terms of percentage of overall players. So when you combine the two elements-- very good tournament players, and excellent female handicappers -- you come up with a small percentage of players. It's not a knock on women handicappers, it's just that there are so few of them in the contests.

The only analogy I can think of is daycare. I know there are men that are EXCELLENT parents, but most of the people working at my kids' daycare are women. When I think of the best workers there, they are all women. Does that mean men can't do as good a job? No. But it just so happens that mostly women work there, and while most of the workers are decent there are very few who are excellent. They happen to be women. Maybe not the best analogy, but it's all I can think of.

[Grits]

Hawk, you explained yourself well, as we both know, you're correct, the numbers show--just how few women enter handicapping contest across the country.

I'll add to your thoughts--when we were students in school, we saw that, more often, boys excelled in math. Girls were stronger in language, spelling, etc. (And from the looks of some of the "spellers" here, they still do. LOL)

I would imagine this continues to hold true to a great degree, though, there are always exceptions.

I was hoping you wouldn't tell me that women could not handle the pressure of the contest circuit as well as men can, and on that one I would have disagreed quite a bit.

I understand, perfectly, your example. Men make fine dads, but men aren't as readily received as preschool childcare employees. Parents are far more comfortable with female teachers. Males are few and far between, at least in this area, in all grades lower than junior high.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

There are very few women who know enough about handicapping to win tournaments at the highest levels. Kudos to her for being one of the very few who can.

I know it sounds prejudiced but I agree. Not that they don't have the intellignce to do it; I don't think most have the patience for it. Takes several years for most to develop the skills to be a winning player. I know several women have done well in these contests, but IMO, contests are completely different than beating the game in a day in-day out fashion.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Wow.You can tell the age group of this can of worms.

[DanG]

I know I’m repeating myself, but it seems appropriate in this thread.

I spent a few years at the Palm’s playing horses and struck up a friendship with a woman who did the same. She attended 5 days a week; by herself and bet on what I consider a serious level.

After getting to know her it was fascinating about the double standard she felt concerning her gambling. She went out of her way NOT to discuss her involvement because she was tired of the condescending remarks (or worse) directed at her. She just went about her business and played a very sharp game from what I gathered.

As far as women gambling on racing; if anything they may be more suited to the endeavor then men imo. Its clear in “most” relationships the fiscally responsible partner is the women and after having coached men’s baseball and women’s softball I can tell you females have most men covered in the area of concentration and discipline.

I unfortunately lost touch with her after she moved, but I’m guessing she isn’t unique in terms of operating from the shadows because of a naïve public perception.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Wow.You can tell the age group of this can of worms.

I've known and met a number of full time handicappers over the years and not one of them was a woman. I don't doubt that some have done well in these tournaments, but winning a 2 or 3 day event is nothing like producing money to live on for a year. It has nothing to do with their intelligence at all. I just don't see them as having the same passion about handicapping.

BTW, I don't know how old you are or how many years you've been following the game. I'm in my mid 40s and have been handicapping for well ove 25 years.