Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 06-22-2016, 02:44 PM   #16
delayjf
Registered User
 
delayjf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk VA
Posts: 6,149
Quote:
I was a huge Strike the Gold fan and he was my Derby horse.
The same reason I got off of Charismatic.
delayjf is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 02:54 PM   #17
Cratos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 4,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
If you go to a roulette wheel, black or odd will at some point be "deadly" for a period of time....

It is a clear post hoc fallacy to assume that the reason Dosage no longer "works" is because of changes in breeding. The most obvious explanation is that Dosage was working with a very small sample so that there was no reason to think it was making statistically valid conclusions in the first place.
Your assumption that the change in breeding by the breedersí didnít affect the Roman Dosage methodology is a fallacious postulation and the Law of Large Numbers proves that assertion.

Yes, Romanís sample size was small, but it was within the parametrics of the breeding scenarios at the time. Statistical extrapolation to large sample sizes doesnít always give a better curve fit.
__________________
Independent thinking, emotional stability, and a keen understanding of both human and institutional behavior are vital to long-term investment success Ė My hero, Warren Edward Buffett

"Science is correct; even if you don't believe it" - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Cratos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 03:08 PM   #18
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 103,980
I jade a ton of money back int he day with Dosage.
There were only a few horses who met the 4.0 guideline and you could pretty much safely throw out the rest. That generally included everything Lukas showed up with early on. Nowadays, most everything qualifies...why is that?
Maybe breeders caught on?

Strike the Gold - yes, I threw him out.
But so what, you lose one bet. And that his numbers changed, so what - more data came in and it was updated. Beyer updates figures all the time.

Two of the most potent thing I ever used in racing were dosage and Tomlinson grass numbers.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 03:14 PM   #19
RXB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,787
Even in its earliest days he pointed out that the DI of stakes horses was rising and that stamina breeding was giving way to speed breeding. 35 years later, people are still taking that 4.00 thing to heart? That's their own fault, not Steve Roman's.
RXB is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 03:33 PM   #20
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 7,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
If you read the entire document, he addressed handicappers using Dosage as an eliminating factor for the Derby. It sounds like it annoyed him because that was not the intended purpose and he felt the misuse by others diminished the value of the work.

Imagine I created a class rating to help estimate the quality of a field relative to PAR and people started using it to arbitrarily bet on horses coming out of strong fields and against horses coming out of weak fields. It would fail. The fact that it failed what it was not designed to do does not mean it wasn't doing what it was intended to do really well.
Class, I think he's partly responsible for what he calls the "misuse" of his work for a couple of reasons.

First of all, he never poured cold water on it. I was around when everyone was talking Dosage in the 1980's, and Roman was a minor celebrity in horse racing. He enjoyed it. As long as the system was winning, he wasn't out there saying "hey, don't use this for handicapping".

Second, it isn't really the truth that the only problem was his system was "misused". In fact, it wasn't a statistically valid study to begin with. There simply are not enough Kentucky Derbies to make ANY statistically valid conclusions about sire influence. And the Derbies that have been run are not remotely a uniform, controlled sample-- for example, the 1973 Derby, with a short field and a superstar winner, is completely different from the 1974 Derby, with a gigantic field and a mediocre longshot winner.

So he was purporting to make "scientific" and "statistical" conclusions about things that he had insufficient warrant to make conclusions about. Maybe he didn't explicitly say "go use this to bet", but he did say "this is meaningful" and it wasn't.
dilanesp is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 03:35 PM   #21
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 7,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cratos
Your assumption that the change in breeding by the breedersí didnít affect the Roman Dosage methodology is a fallacious postulation and the Law of Large Numbers proves that assertion.
I didn't assume anything. When you are dealing with too small a sample size, the default conclusion is that any changes in the trend line are due to variance, and the people claiming that it is something else have the burden of proof.
dilanesp is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 03:40 PM   #22
Grits
Registered User
 
Grits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage
I like how he took his parting shot at Beyer...called him Andrew instead of Andy as well, like he's his dad....jealousy runs deep and long....
In all of its negativity, this too, is the feeling I got. But, I felt this about the entire piece. His boredom, his bitterness, outweighed any plus, even any gratitude that could have been realized through (and by) his contribution to the sport. Maybe he'll feel better after reading some of the posts that you gentlemen have written. He won't, at mine. But its OK. Obviously, this man had a good run. I hope he'll remember this.. JMO
Grits is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 03:40 PM   #23
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 103,980
Burden of proof?
I think not.

We have the risk of our bets using it and the pleasure of the profits we realized in doing so.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 03:44 PM   #24
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 7,251
Here are some other examples of things that are wrong with Dosage:

1. He assumed there was something special about the Kentucky Derby. But that's silly. Snow Chief did have terrible Dosage, and did run up the track on Derby Day. But he came back 2 weeks later and beat most of the same horses at 1 3/16 miles, just 110 yards shorter, at Pimlico, and then 2 weeks after that won the Jersey Derby at 1 1/4 miles. The next year, he beat the 2 other best horses of his generation, Ferdinand and Broad Brush, and the best other Cal Bred of his generation, Variety Road, going 1 1/4 miles in the Strub. In other words, on no planet did Snow Chief lack the stamina to go 1 1/4 miles. He was beaten in the Derby because he was too close to a fast pace. Had nothing to do with his Dosage. But I remember Roman crowing at the time about it (Snow Chief was a Derby favorite and he said he was a toss-out).

2. He attributed way too much influence to breeding with respect to stamina. It is of course true that over a large number of horses and many generations, some bloodlines transmit stamina ON AVERAGE. But that is only one factor, and not really a controlling one, with respect to specific horses. History is littered with horses who shouldn't have been able to get a distance and did. Snow Chief, by the California sprint sire Reflected Glory, who I already mentioned, was one of them. Here are a couple of others:

a. Native Diver, one of the best horses in the history of California racing, had sprint breeding. He was by Imbros from Fleet Diver, two speedy California stakes winners. Native Diver won the Hollywood Gold Cup at 1 1/4 miles three years in a row, one of only two horses to ever do that. He was not supposed to get 10 furlongs.

b. Creme Fraiche had sprint breeding-- and, by the way, lousy Dosage. He was by Rich Cream, a sprinter who once set a world record in a sprint race at Hollywood Park. Creme Fraiche won the Belmont Stakes and later the Jockey Club Gold Cup when it was 1 1/2 miles. In the latter race, he beat Java Gold, who was by far the best horse in New York at the time. During the same period Roman was crowing about Derby favorites, Creme Fraiche was a continuing embarrassment to him.

The reality is that there really just isn't a lot that breeding can say about whether a horse will get a particular distance in a particular race. It depends a lot on trip, pace, training, and a lot of other things other than breeding. And Roman, obsessed with the Derby (as so many racing fans are), got way outside the realm of statistical validity and got a lot of publicity for himself peddling a bogus theory.
dilanesp is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 04:13 PM   #25
whodoyoulike
Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
I jade a ton of money back int he day with Dosage.
There were only a few horses who met the 4.0 guideline and you could pretty much safely throw out the rest. ...

I know very little about D.I. So, what were the D.I.'s of the other 1,000's of other horses which raced in the TC series. That, I would think would have increased the size of the sample population.

Were the winners the only ones with 4.0 or less?

I didn't understand that part.

And, why is it only effective up thru the TC series instead of all the other races being run e.g., Beyer, Sheets, Thorograph etc.?

I remember he was posting on here last year maybe he or someone familiar with the process can provide me with a better (but a little late) insight. And, this changing the numbers after other facts come up I just don't know about that part.

Last edited by whodoyoulike; 06-22-2016 at 04:19 PM.
whodoyoulike is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 04:39 PM   #26
Cratos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 4,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
I didn't assume anything. When you are dealing with too small a sample size, the default conclusion is that any changes in the trend line are due to variance, and the people claiming that it is something else have the burden of proof.
Dr. Romanís Dosage methodology appear to have worked on frequency statistics which works on the number of occurrences of an attributes and there is not case of dependency, but are you suggesting that he should have used. Bayesian statistics which are applicable in the data sets where every attribute is dependent on every other attributes and every attributes existence is purely conditional?
__________________
Independent thinking, emotional stability, and a keen understanding of both human and institutional behavior are vital to long-term investment success Ė My hero, Warren Edward Buffett

"Science is correct; even if you don't believe it" - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Cratos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 04:49 PM   #27
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 7,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cratos
Dr. Romanís Dosage methodology appear to have worked on frequency statistics which works on the number of occurrences of an attributes and there is not case of dependency, but are you suggesting that he should have used. Bayesian statistics which are applicable in the data sets where every attribute is dependent on every other attributes and every attributes existence is purely conditional?
I'm really suggesting that given both the small sample size and the lack of uniformity in the sample, there's really nothing that can be said about the influence of sire lines in the Derby specifically that's going to be very useful.

What COULD be useful is a Dosage-like system that looks at ALL 1 1/4 mile races, or all races of longer than a particular distance, if it could be statistically established that there was a significant correlation between influential sires in the pedigree and performance in such races. But such a system would only have limited utility with respect to the Derby.
dilanesp is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 04:53 PM   #28
Cratos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 4,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grits
In all of its negativity, this too, is the feeling I got. But, I felt this about the entire piece. His boredom, his bitterness, outweighed any plus, even any gratitude that could have been realized through (and by) his contribution to the sport. Maybe he'll feel better after reading some of the posts that you gentlemen have written. He won't, at mine. But its OK. Obviously, this man had a good run. I hope he'll remember this.. JMO
So with you it is Dr. Romanís personality and demeanor; and not his work that turns you off.

Therefore you probably wouldnít have like Newton or Einstein because both of them fit the pompousness you are alleging about Roman.
__________________
Independent thinking, emotional stability, and a keen understanding of both human and institutional behavior are vital to long-term investment success Ė My hero, Warren Edward Buffett

"Science is correct; even if you don't believe it" - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Cratos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 05:00 PM   #29
tucker6
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cratos
So with you it is Dr. Romanís personality and demeanor; and not his work that turns you off.

Therefore you probably wouldnít have like Newton or Einstein because both of them fit the pompousness you are alleging about Roman.
Except Roman was never and is not in the same universe as Newton or Einstein.
tucker6 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 06-22-2016, 05:07 PM   #30
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 7,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by tucker6
Except Roman was never and is not in the same universe as Newton or Einstein.
Well, I believe Einstein's theories allow for a parallel universe under certain conditions.
dilanesp is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
How would 12 mins between races effect your play?
Like to see it, Would probably bet more - 25.30%
21 Votes
Like it, Would bet the same - 36.14%
30 Votes
Like it, Would bet less - 2.41%
2 Votes
Wouldn't like it. - 36.14%
30 Votes
Total Votes: 83
This poll is closed.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2021 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.