Turf Inquiry - Page 3 - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

karlskorner · 01-12-2003, 09:17 PM

I had a 2 page post written out to answer your above post, threw the whole thing out, what am I crazy wasting my time in your "sandbox"

There are 586 members on this Board, (plus untold lukers), I have 4 critics, not a bad average, smf his friend Wyatt ,you and now Keilan, there maybe others, but as of now that's all I know of. Keilan states he has viewed most of my posts and hasn't learned anything new, Keilan, why bother ?

I went to the trouble of skimming through the 93 posts you have made and the 176 made by Keilan and not once did I find a constructive suggestion by either of you that maybe of use to your fellow handicappers. Why ? You may disagree on my suggestions, this is your privilege, I have private mail and from recent post, those that appreciate some, if not all ,of what I have posted.

I posted to PA that the majority of members are "computer people" who can go through 3 zillion races in their data base and narrow it down to where a horse with one white stockiing on his left foreleg, runs a good mile and 1/16th especially on a Tuesday.
Not my bag of tea and maybe I really don't belomg here

GR1@HTR · 01-12-2003, 09:24 PM

In the history of the PA board, we have been blessed with 3 bright minds...And they have all left for one reason or another...

Scoopcone
ITM
Peopleplayer

We don't need another leave...Stay and play...

PaceAdvantage · 01-12-2003, 09:30 PM

Despite not wanting to prolong this line of discussion, I need to state the following:

GR1, maybe I'm missing something incredibly obvious, but I can't fathom how you can equate Karlscorner to the three ex-posters you just listed.

==PA

GR1@HTR · 01-12-2003, 09:35 PM

They were 3 of the most prolific and controversial posters...Fine entertainment...Thought I would bring up some old school and classic nostalgia...

smf · 01-12-2003, 10:25 PM

I have to disagree, PA. Look at the Chinese Double thread. On jan2 I asked a straightforeward question and got a rather pompous, arrogant reply.

Last night, the same thing. I asked, in a civil & curteous manner a question and he goes off on me (has happened to others as well). Look at his replies to those serious/ non flammable questions in that CD thread and there's an "attitude" that is exactly what you are describing. Not sure why it is dismissed or ignored, but it is.

We can live with it. No big deal.

Quote:

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage
Lindsay.....I don't get it. I don't see karlskorner at all like you do. Obnoxious?? Insulting??? Are you sure you don't have karl confused with some others on here who actually fit that description?????????????????????????

Is there a full moon out there tonight? All the personal attacks are starting to get boring.....

GameTheory · 01-12-2003, 10:38 PM

smf --

I consider both you & Karl to be some of the smarter ones around here, and enjoy reading both your posts, EXCEPT when you are addressing karl, wherein you seem quite snotty. That includes the Jan 2. post you just referenced, where you appeared to be asking a very much "loaded" question. You seem to be always attempting to "trap" Karl with his own words for some reason. I agree completely with PA about Karl -- I just don't see it -- no attitude. He has his opinions, and he states 'em. That's what I come here to read from everybody. But making personal attacks about people just makes the poster look foolish -- I will never understand why people do it...

smf · 01-12-2003, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GR1
They were 3 of the most prolific and controversial posters...Fine entertainment...Thought I would bring up some old school and classic nostalgia...

I disagree, GR1. I'd say that Ray Gordon and Fastracehorse are the most prolific and controversial. Let's look at the following:

-They have angles/ theories (not for sale) that only work for them, and their explanations of application(s) are vague when asked to describe their "secrets" to success in detail. Every race they bet is hit, and if you lose (or prove the methods lose) using the same method with the same raw #'s using the basic math, then YOU are to blame, not the method.

-Speaking of success, they make untold amounts from the windows. Just read their posts!

-They have never ventured into the Selections section to ply their craft/ show their stuff.

- No poster on this board has ever seen these guys at the windows making or cashing bets. ("internet personality")

--Redboard, redboard and more redboard.

-They get touchy and defensive when asked blunt questions of their method.

Does Karl fit the above profile? To me he does. That's why I'd put him, Gordo and Fast in that top 3 of "controversial" posters.

smf · 01-12-2003, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GameTheory
smf --

I consider both you & Karl to be some of the smarter ones around here, and enjoy reading both your posts, EXCEPT when you are addressing karl, wherein you seem quite snotty. That includes the Jan 2. post you just referenced, where you appeared to be asking a very much "loaded" question. You seem to be always attempting to "trap" Karl with his own words for some reason. I agree completely with PA about Karl -- I just don't see it -- no attitude. He has his opinions, and he states 'em. That's what I come here to read from everybody. But making personal attacks about people just makes the poster look foolish -- I will never understand why people do it...

GT,

This is "snotty"? I asked the question in earnest. It is pasted below and had merit. He didn't **yet** specify that the late double was not played. Curious as to what parts of that question was out of order.

---------------------------
Karl,

Straightforeward question;

You stated that you leave the track early when you've done well in the early races. Get up, go to the car, drive home.

That being the case, why would you do that when you have a "70% play" waiting for you at the end of the card? That late Double has to be worth hanging around for, assuming it's a "70% play" as you state it to be.

----------------------------

smf · 01-12-2003, 10:54 PM

GT,

I should have included this piece of info in my post above...

You stated...."You seem to be always attempting to "trap" Karl with his own words for some reason. "

GT,

To my memory, I haven't posted anything to karl since mid July other than the CD thread. Can you be more specific of when it was I tried to "trap" him into anything?

Thanks.

Amazin · 01-12-2003, 11:16 PM

This fued interests me because when discussing an issue,some people can't stick to the subject and address the issues as I was victim to by several in the Iraq debate..If you don't like what someone says ,show some inteligence in responding to why you disagree with what he said.BUT STOP THERE..Personal attacks are not only unnecessary but irrelevant to the subject.You don't know me.I don't even know all of me. I'll say flat out that they make the attacker look like an idiot and shows defeat in the subject because he now has to resort to emotional stupidity to make himself look smart.Hindu religion has a wise saying:When you point your finger at me ,you also have 3 pointing back at yourself.

smf · 01-12-2003, 11:28 PM

Amazin,

Not sure who you are 'pointing your finger at' <G>.

Seriously, my questions to Karl in the Chinese Double thread were genuine & in earnest, but I received responses that were offensive to say the least. Usually I just let folks slide their comments in and I let em go at that. Perhaps it's the redboarding that gets under my skin. In any event, it's over, to me.

Only time from here on I'll remark of the guy is when he insists of it happening.

ranchwest · 01-13-2003, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GR1
Re Quirin: What if he wasn't a better? No prob w/ me. He was the first to publish statistics to go with his statements. ie...The first to make a statement and back it up with data. No other horse writer had done so to date. Besides, some folks just enjoy the research.

Statisticians scientist, engineers all do research...I assume because they enjoy it, not because they are looking to place wagers...

You make very good points.

If I might take this in a slightly different direction (and my comments are to the general audience, not pointed at you, GR1)....

EVERYONE, PLEASE TAKE NOTE. ANYBODY CAN PICK WINNERS. ANYBODY. A GOAT IN A FIELD CAN PICK WINNERS.

The trick is to not only pick winners, but more importantly to get off of losers. Quirin taught me a lot about what does and does not work and how to take a scientific approach to horse racing.

Yes, there's a whole lot more to good handicapping than using the numbers in the past performances, but analyzing races is a strong tool and Quirin taught me a lot.

Why, if nothing else, Quirin enabled me to learn a lot about the pro's and con's of scientific handicapping.

Amazin · 01-13-2003, 01:34 AM

SMF

Was that supposed to be a joke?I'm not pointing fingers ,just saying I was fingered,classified,pidgeonholed and put down for my views in the Iraq debate.I didn't find it amusing.I never pointed the finger back cause to me I would have been as pathetic as my accusers.However,I hold no grudges against them. Love should be your absolute ruler ,not hate.

smf · 01-13-2003, 01:44 AM

Amazin,

Duly noted.

Lindsay · 01-13-2003, 06:36 AM

Karlskorner wrote:

"Lindsay
I had a 2 page post written out to answer your above post, threw the whole thing out, what am I crazy wasting my time in your "sandbox""

Karlskorner,

Those who CAN make an intelligent reply, do. Those who CAN'T make an intelligent reply, reply as you just did. You had your shot. You have no reply. Fighting with someone who can fight back is not your game. You would rather do this:

Karlskorner wrote:

"Words such as Variant, Pars and Bias, all invented by book writers to add mystery to racing and they sure are keeping a lot of people busy"

If someone stands up for the "book writers," anonymous Karlskorner cries personal attack. PATHETIC.