New Product Survey

[Big Bill]

Dave,

Interesting that seven of the 'products' got fewer votes in the poll than #1 (Paceline selection), yet none of the posts to the thread mentioned #1!

I'd love to see what you might write about paceline selection.

Big Bill

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Overlay

Not to pull this thread off-topic, but check this earlier thread:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...t=21334&page=1

The obvious answer to the question in the thread is that Monty could manipulate the odds by knowing which door contained the car, and could use that information as a means for not giving away the car if the contestant stuck with his/her original choice (door #1). The original odds were approximately 33% of picking the right door with 3 doors available, one of which, contains a car. This is only because Monty has not had the chance to manipulate the odds yet. He only has that chance after the contestant picks a door.

If Monty had no knowledge of which door contained the car then the correct answer is 50%, for changing doors from door #1 to door #3, after door #2 was opened, otherwise the answer could be 66% or 0% chance if the contestant decided to not change doors, and Monty knows that most of the time contestants given this scenario will not switch doors.

This, of course, is dependent on whether or not Monty or his boss wanted to try to give away a car on that particular show (they don't know for sure because some contestants actually switch doors from their original pick). Both Monty and his boss know that in order to increase ratings it is important to occasionally give away a car, even after the first "non-car" door is opened. If the car was never behind the door that the contestant decided to switch to, then the viewing public would eventually pick up on it and scream "FIX".

Now are you even more confused?

[Overlay]

It goes to show that if Pascal had taken the promotional/business aspects of the situation into consideration, probability theory would have headed in a completely different direction.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Each one is a complete book.

OK, book of the month then?

[headhawg]

8,6,5.

[Sinner369]

Dave:

How about a chapter or two on each one............in summary form?

It would be a best seller!!!


sinner

[Greyfox]

Hmm? Maybe that's what Dave is "phishing for" and ultimately doing?

If so, .

[plainolebill]

1, 6, 9 please.

[Dave Schwartz]

Greyfox,

These are all titles that take 60-100 pages or more to discourse about. I am not writing a 900-page book.

I simply want to know what to produce first.

I expected Fred Davis to be #1 but did not expect some of the other high-scorers.

As close as it is, we may need a run-off. <G>

Dave

[Speed Figure]

Dave, what and who is Fred Davis? and Monty Hall?

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Greyfox,

These are all titles that take 60-100 pages or more to discourse about. I am not writing a 900-page book.

I simply want to know what to produce first.

I expected Fred Davis to be #1 but did not expect some of the other high-scorers.

As close as it is, we may need a run-off. <G>

Dave

I assume you have considered what demographic group will purchase the majority of this kind of work; amateur players, average handicappers, advanced handicappers, etc..

If it were me, I'd start with the one that is the most basic, relating to that demographic group. Many of the titles you listed are much more advanced than the others, so, unless you're expecting the advanced crowd to purchase most of the books, I'd start with titles that are not so advanced.

That way, they are presented in a logical series and would be followed by the least knowledgeable group because they gain knowledge with each step in the progression.

If you start at the other end of the spectrum you will lose much of the least knowledgeable group, "right off the bat", because you started "over their head".

[Hank]

Originally Posted by Speed Figure

Dave, what and who is Fred Davis? and Monty

Hall?

Fred Davis is the father of impact values "Percentages and probabilities" circa early 70s I think? a statistical technique that allows one to tell at a glance if a certain aspect of a horses pp is meaningful or not. If Dave produces a modern version of this work it would be awesome.

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by Speed Figure

Dave, what and who is Fred Davis? and Monty Hall?

Monty Hall was the host of the daytime TV game show Let's Make A Deal, in which he would select members of the audience and offer them either a totally blind choice of a prize, or a partially-blind choice (in which they would be given the opportunity to trade something that they knew they had already won for an unknown item of potentially greater value). The prizes could be a valuable prize, a sum of money, or a "zonk" (a valueless item). At the end of each show, he would offer the high-value winners on the day a chance to trade the prizes that they had already won for a chance to win the biggest prize of the day, which was located behind one of three doors. Sometimes, after the contestant had chosen one of the doors, he would reveal what was behind one of the doors that they had not chosen (which would not be the biggest-value prize), and then offer them an option to change their original choice, if they wished. The "Monty Hall problem" centers around the optimum strategy as to whether the contestant should change their original door choice, after knowing that one of the doors that they had not chosen was not the grand prize.

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by Hank

Fred Davis is the father of impact values "Percentages and probabilities" circa early 70s I think? a statistical technique that allows one to tell at a glance if a certain aspect of a horses pp is meaningful or not. If Dave produces a modern version of this work it would be awesome.

Fred Davis also pioneered the concept of "impact value", which was later expanded on by authors such as William Quirin in Winning at the Races, and Mike Nunamaker in any of his various statistical studies. (If I recall, however, the technique that Davis outlined in Percentages and Probabilities employed weighted numerical values for the various factors, rather than the impact values themselves (which I think would have been more useful).

[Dave Schwartz]

If I recall, however, the technique that Davis outlined in Percentages and Probabilities employed weighted numerical values for the various factors, rather than the impact values themselves (which I think would have been more useful).

Overlay,

Actually, they were pre-computed IVs, built into several tables.


Dave