Ray Taulbot is he best ever?

[BIG HIT]

Given his skill i think he can and know how for his time could match any hdcpr until now.Even though they have computer's and much more data then back then.His style has only been tinker with to one own thinking not always better but better suited to one style.He may not have as high roi but winner wise i think yes.If longivity in this game has truth he is up there.
If anyone would like to show me i'am wrong and like to tell me who is better and why.? Please sound off.It seem like he is foundation of 90% of all my opion

[LottaKash]

.


Many players were inspired to diverse degrees of success, by witnessing his particular "way of going"......

best,

[Sinner369]

The best ever?..........in the horse racing game, no such thing!

The man (Ray) is very knowledge and knows what he is talking about. I read many of his articles.

By the way is he Dead..........?

[TheGhostOfOscarB]

Deader than Chelsea's Nuts, and has been for longer than 95% of you have been alive.

They never reported his death WAYYYYYYYYY back there in the old days, so they could continue to publish 'new' stuff under his name .

[therussmeister]

It seems you are assuming the best become well known. I assume the best remain anonymous.

[thaskalos]

If we are talking about handicapping pioneers...then Tom Ainslie's name belongs at the top of the list.

Not only did Ainslie singlehandedly rescue the art of handicapping from the hands of the system peddlers of this game's "dark ages"...but he is also the one directly responsible for creating a "market" for the many worthwhile handicapping books which followed his.

They don't call him "the dean" of American handicappers for nothing...

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by BIG HIT

Given his skill i think he can and know how for his time could match any hdcpr until now

Was he a good handicapper?

In American Turf Digest probably long after he was gone his angles continually were presented.
Personally, each one of them, ....may have made sense, or alternatively may have been Red Boarded,...but to remember them all.."Good Luck."
I cannot buy the idea that he was a great handicapper at all.
Of course the 'net wasn't there.
But what evidence does anyone have that Ray Talbot was a great handicapper?

[Overlay]

To me, handicapping by definition means considering the winning chances of each horse in a field in relation to its odds. From that standpoint, Ray's single-horse spot plays (even including those that specify a minimum odds requirement for the selection), and his considerable contributions to pace handicapping (as long as the only goal of the process is to isolate the one horse most likely to win), will eventually be bet into unprofitability.

[BIG HIT]

Know you guy's can be tough and all response basicly good and tom a was for sure right up there.My thought was his stuff angle and what not have been around over 30 yr that fact made him pretty much #1.Have his pace software thought would have all his angle and stuff.It didn't thank you for response's

[raybo]

As far as I'm concerned, the "best ever" was Pittsburgh Phil.

Taulbot, Ainslie, Sartin/Brohammer, etc., all hold a high place in that classification, but I believe the latter ones' works provide(d) "tools" to be used "collectively". Phil's teachings and musings, IMO, are timeless and still provide a great groundwork for becoming profitable, because much of what he said (and did) revolved around form determination, trainer/jockey ability, and most important of all, wagering, rather than concentrated on traditional handicapping methods.

There are many good handicappers out there, but very, very, few good wagerers.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by raybo

As far as I'm concerned, the "best ever" was Pittsburgh Phil.

Taulbot, Ainslie, Sartin/Brohammer, etc., all hold a high place in that classification, but I believe the latter ones' works provide(d) "tools" to be used "collectively". Phil's teachings and musings, IMO, are timeless and still provide a great groundwork for becoming profitable, because much of what he said (and did) revolved around form determination, trainer/jockey ability, and most important of all, wagering, rather than concentrated on traditional handicapping methods.

There are many good handicappers out there, but very, very, few good wagerers.

Pittsburgh Phil operated during a vastly different era...when the betting aspect of this game was completely different than what we find right now.

Plus, Pittsburgh Phil never gave handicapping "lessons"...as far as I know.

I have read "The Racing Maxims and Methods Of Pittsburgh Phil"...but that book can hardly be considered substantial, from a handicapper's point of view.

I guess the fault lies with the word phrasing of the original poster of this thread...

Best ever WHAT?

Handicapper...or handicapping AUTHOR?

Pittsburgh Phil does not qualify to be called an author...IMO.

[Pell Mell]

I talked to Ray on several occasions back in the 60s and 70s. I consider him the father of pace handicapping...he was the first I knew of that used the 1/2 or 3/4 as what he called the highlight time...This was before track variants were even published in the Morning Telegraph..he was also very hip to trainer and performance angles...just like everything else, I think he was the most knowledgeable of HIS TIME..

[raybo]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Pittsburgh Phil operated during a vastly different era...when the betting aspect of this game was completely different than what we find right now.

Plus, Pittsburgh Phil never gave handicapping "lessons"...as far as I know.

I have read "The Racing Maxims and Methods Of Pittsburgh Phil"...but that book can hardly be considered substantial, from a handicapper's point of view.

I guess the fault lies with the word phrasing of the original poster of this thread...

Best ever WHAT?

Handicapper...or handicapping AUTHOR?

Pittsburgh Phil does not qualify to be called an author...IMO.

Not to argue your points, but, Phil's maxims "taught" many, me included. Regarding the difference in the game then and now, the things Phil did then can still be accomplished, albeit in different form, today.

Form determination and value are timeless necessities for profitability, IMO.

By the way, there was a book, either written by Phil or for him which took the reader through his day to day activities, regarding horse handicapping and wagering. I don't remember the name of the book as I read it in 1978 or so, and it was rare then and very hard to find.

The book you reference is only a mere shadow of the book I read.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by raybo

By the way, there was a book, either written by Phil or for him which took the reader through his day to day activities, regarding horse handicapping and wagering. I don't remember the name of the book as I read it in 1978 or so, and it was rare then and very hard to find.

The book you reference is only a mere shadow of the book I read.

Pittsburgh Phil confided his handicapping and betting methods to only one man, shortly before he (Phil) died...and that man was a New York turf writer by the name of Edward Cole.

The ONLY book Mr. Cole wrote about the legendary horseplayer was..."The Racing Maxims And Methods Of Pittsburgh Phil".

Any other books written about Pittsburgh Phil would have to be considered..."hearsay".

[Bruddah]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Pittsburgh Phil confided his handicapping and betting methods to only one man, shortly before he (Phil) died...and that man was a New York turf writer by the name of Edward Cole.

The ONLY book Mr. Cole wrote about the legendary horseplayer was..."The Racing Maxims And Methods Of Pittsburgh Phil".

Any other books written about Pittsburgh Phil would have to be considered..."hearsay".

The Chicago guy gets an Amen Bruddah!