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

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 10-20-2017, 02:46 PM   #4216
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,391
Rep Power: 14 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Okay...let me help you out a little, Mr. Philosopher of Logic, -- look up the definition of "timeless".
No. You answer my questions of #4212. We're far enough down your rabbit hole.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-20-2017, 04:06 PM   #4217
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 29,200
Rep Power: 47 boxcar has a spectacular aura aboutboxcar has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
No. You answer my questions of #4212. We're far enough down your rabbit hole.
The answers should be obvious. An entity cannot at once be eternal in its essence (nature in case you want a definition of "essence") and at the same time and in the same sense that entity's existence be changeable or diminished because it is thoroughly time-bound. There can be no succession of motion by an eternal entity. Succession of motion implies that the entity would have had potentiality to come into a state of existence due to Change and is, therefore, not eternal; and also implies that the entity has potentiality to change to a non-existent state and, therefore, be not eternal.

Also, an entity that is eternal in its existence would be by definition [b]pure, absolute, perfect existence), and such that entity would have no parts that would be able to go in and out of existence. But we witness these things (changes) every day, which violate two fundamentally important laws of logic: Identity and Non-Contradiction.

In short, Mr. Actor, we could boil down the whole issue with this one simple question: How can death logically proceed from eternal life?
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-21-2017, 03:15 AM   #4218
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,391
Rep Power: 14 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
The answers should be obvious. An entity cannot at once be eternal in its essence (nature in case you want a definition of "essence") and at the same time and in the same sense that entity's existence be changeable or diminished because it is thoroughly time-bound. There can be no succession of motion by an eternal entity. Succession of motion implies that the entity would have had potentiality to come into a state of existence due to Change and is, therefore, not eternal; and also implies that the entity has potentiality to change to a non-existent state and, therefore, be not eternal.

Also, an entity that is eternal in its existence would be by definition [b]pure, absolute, perfect existence), and such that entity would have no parts that would be able to go in and out of existence. But we witness these things (changes) every day, which violate two fundamentally important laws of logic: Identity and Non-Contradiction.

In short, Mr. Actor, we could boil down the whole issue with this one simple question: How can death logically proceed from eternal life?
Your entire post makes absolutely no sense. It sounds like the ravings of a madman.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-21-2017, 11:51 AM   #4219
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 29,200
Rep Power: 47 boxcar has a spectacular aura aboutboxcar has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Your entire post makes absolutely no sense. It sounds like the ravings of a madman.
You just don't want to understand. Death, Time and Change are antithetical to any entity that is pure existence. Yet, this universe that you conveniently claim is eternal (had no beginning and will have no end) is filled with these three phenomena.

As usual, the bible has this right. For example, God in whom is all Life can never die (which is why he had to send in his Son in human form to do just that for sinners.) God is the Great I AM having no beginning and no end, that is to say timeless. And God is immutable. He cannot change. There is no possibility that God underwent some change in the past to become God, or that God will ever undergo change in the future that would cause him to cease to exist.

Moreover, in the next age -- the eternal age, we find that the bible is logically consistent with itself; for in that age there is no Change. The New Heavens and New Earth will be perfect; therefore Change won't be possible. For if something could change, it would have to change for either the better or the worse which would mean that it wasn't perfect to begin with. There will be no sun or moon or stars (Motion); for time will have ceased to exist. There will be no night for the Sons of Day, since God's light will illuminate the environment of his saints. There will be no change of seasons in this perfect environment. There will be no suffering, sorrow, pain, misery or death, for sin will have ceased to exist. There will be perfect harmony and peace among all God's creation -- among the angels, the saints and the animals. Pure love will characterize the relationships among God's creation, and most especially between the creation and the Creator. All creation (certainly all moral beings) will be in perfect unity with God, since Love is the perfect bond of unity. Things like compassion or mercy will never be thought of again in this Restored Paradise; for these kinds of attributes are only necessary in a fallen, imperfect world. Even Faith and Hope will become extinct, for these attributes are only needed in an imperfect world.

Your lame eternal universe theory is in need of an infinite amount of work...for your info.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-21-2017, 01:48 PM   #4220
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,391
Rep Power: 14 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
You just don't want to understand. Death, Time and Change are antithetical to any entity that is pure existence. Yet, this universe that you conveniently claim is eternal (had no beginning and will have no end) is filled with these three phenomena.

As usual, the bible has this right. For example, God in whom is all Life can never die (which is why he had to send in his Son in human form to do just that for sinners.) God is the Great I AM having no beginning and no end, that is to say timeless. And God is immutable. He cannot change. There is no possibility that God underwent some change in the past to become God, or that God will ever undergo change in the future that would cause him to cease to exist.

Moreover, in the next age -- the eternal age, we find that the bible is logically consistent with itself; for in that age there is no Change. The New Heavens and New Earth will be perfect; therefore Change won't be possible. For if something could change, it would have to change for either the better or the worse which would mean that it wasn't perfect to begin with. There will be no sun or moon or stars (Motion); for time will have ceased to exist. There will be no night for the Sons of Day, since God's light will illuminate the environment of his saints. There will be no change of seasons in this perfect environment. There will be no suffering, sorrow, pain, misery or death, for sin will have ceased to exist. There will be perfect harmony and peace among all God's creation -- among the angels, the saints and the animals. Pure love will characterize the relationships among God's creation, and most especially between the creation and the Creator. All creation (certainly all moral beings) will be in perfect unity with God, since Love is the perfect bond of unity. Things like compassion or mercy will never be thought of again in this Restored Paradise; for these kinds of attributes are only necessary in a fallen, imperfect world. Even Faith and Hope will become extinct, for these attributes are only needed in an imperfect world.

Your lame eternal universe theory is in need of an infinite amount of work...for your info.
I believe in the standard model. You believe in woo. So much for cosmology. Let's move on.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-21-2017, 03:05 PM   #4221
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 29,200
Rep Power: 47 boxcar has a spectacular aura aboutboxcar has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
I believe in the standard model. You believe in woo. So much for cosmology. Let's move on.
At least with the "woo" model, there is very much to be said for its consistency. But not so much with your "standard" buffoonery.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-21-2017, 08:45 PM   #4222
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,391
Rep Power: 14 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
At least with the "woo" model, there is very much to be said for its consistency. But not so much with your "standard" buffoonery.
Really? Well why don't you publish, tell the world how the standard model is inconsistent, undergo peer review, and collect your Nobel Prize?
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-21-2017, 09:15 PM   #4223
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 29,200
Rep Power: 47 boxcar has a spectacular aura aboutboxcar has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Really? Well why don't you publish, tell the world how the standard model is inconsistent, undergo peer review, and collect your Nobel Prize?
I'll do that as soon as soon as you take your own advice and publish your standard buffoonery, undergo peer review and collect your Skunk Skin Dunce Cap for all your effort. Death, Time, Change and even Birth, for that matter, are all inconsistent, and indeed antithetical, with any entity that you claim is inherently pure existence, i.e. eternal.

As I said earlier, you have an infinite amount of work cut out for you. Better get busy.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-22-2017, 04:47 AM   #4224
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,391
Rep Power: 14 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
You still haven't produced an ancient source who disputed the existence of Christ.
Justin Martyr, Dialog With Typho. "But Christ -- if indeed he has been born, and exists anywhere -- is unknown, and does not even know himself, and has no power until Elijah comes to anoint him and make him known to all. Accepting a groundless report, you have invented a Christ for yourselves, and for his sake you are unknowingly perishing."
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-22-2017, 01:53 PM   #4225
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 29,200
Rep Power: 47 boxcar has a spectacular aura aboutboxcar has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Justin Martyr, Dialog With [sic]]Typho. "But Christ -- if indeed he has been born, and exists anywhere -- is unknown, and does not even know himself, and has no power until Elijah comes to anoint him and make him known to all. Accepting a groundless report, you have invented a Christ for yourselves, and for his sake you are unknowingly perishing."
Who the heck is "Typho"?

Identity of Trypho

The identity of Trypho, as rabbi Tarfon (the Hebrew name Tarfon likely derived from Greek Trypho) has been proposed, but virtually all scholars mentioned in Setzer's 'Jewish Responses to Early Christians' do not accept the notion that Trypho is Tarfon.[2] These scholars say that Trypho is a fictional character invented by Justin for his literary goals.[2][3] Setzer's book further claims that, whether a character on which Trypho was based existed or not, one can generally assume that Trypho's words are "largely put in his mouth by Justin".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue_with_Trypho

At best the dialogue was nothing more than a fictional literary device depicting an intellectual conversation or debate between a believer and a skeptic as a Christian apologetic.

Apparently, there are no murky, miry depths to which you will not sink before you quit embarrassing yourself.
__________________
There is no such thing as an isolated handicapping factor, for all factors are related to one another to one degree or another, and all especially to the form factor. -- Ray Taulbot
boxcar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-22-2017, 06:22 PM   #4226
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,391
Rep Power: 14 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Who the heck is "Typho"?

Identity of Trypho

The identity of Trypho, as rabbi Tarfon (the Hebrew name Tarfon likely derived from Greek Trypho) has been proposed, but virtually all scholars mentioned in Setzer's 'Jewish Responses to Early Christians' do not accept the notion that Trypho is Tarfon.[2] These scholars say that Trypho is a fictional character invented by Justin for his literary goals.[2][3] Setzer's book further claims that, whether a character on which Trypho was based existed or not, one can generally assume that Trypho's words are "largely put in his mouth by Justin".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue_with_Trypho

At best the dialogue was nothing more than a fictional literary device depicting an intellectual conversation or debate between a believer and a skeptic as a Christian apologetic.

Apparently, there are no murky, miry depths to which you will not sink before you quit embarrassing yourself.
Your question should be "who was Justin?" Obviously it was Justin Martyr, a person I assume we can both agree actually existed. I agree that the dialog is possibly "a fictional literary device" but then I must ask you "why did Justin put those words in his fictional character's mouth?" The dialog is hard evidence that the question of Jesus historicity was extant circa 160 C.E.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-22-2017, 07:20 PM   #4227
dnlgfnk
Registered User
 
dnlgfnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: St. Louis suburb
Posts: 864
Rep Power: 8 dnlgfnk is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Your question should be "who was Justin?" Obviously it was Justin Martyr, a person I assume we can both agree actually existed. I agree that the dialog is possibly "a fictional literary device" but then I must ask you "why did Justin put those words in his fictional character's mouth?" The dialog is hard evidence that the question of Jesus historicity was extant circa 160 C.E.
"No pagans and Jews who opposed Christianity denied Jesus’ historicity or even questioned it...at the end of chapter 8, Trypho, Justin’s Jewish interlocutor, states, 'But [the] Christ—if indeed he has been born and exists anywhere—is unknown, and does not even know himself, and has no power until Elijah comes to anoint him and make him known to all. Accepting a groundless report, you have invented a Christ for yourselves, and for his sake you are unknowingly perishing.' This may be a faint statement of a nonexistence hypothesis, but it is not developed or even mentioned again in the rest of the Dialogue, in which Trypho assumes the existence of Jesus...if anyone in the ancient world had a reason to dislike the Christian faith, it was the rabbis. To argue successfully that Jesus never existed but was a creation of early Christians would have been the most effective polemic against Christianity … Yet all Jewish sources treated Jesus as a fully historical person … The rabbis … used the real events of Jesus’ life against him" --Robert Van Voorst, Jesus Outside

At the risk of doing your homework for you, I'm aware that Richard Carrier criticizes Van Voorst. For a criticism of Carrier, I've got atheist historian Tim O'Neill warming up in the bullpen.

"The non-Christian testimonies to Jesus … show that contemporaries in the first and second century saw no reason to doubt Jesus’ existence...as far as we know, no ancient person ever seriously argued that Jesus did not exist."--Theissen and Merz, Historical Jesus
__________________
"One way to stop a runaway horse is to bet on him." Jeffrey Bernard
dnlgfnk is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-22-2017, 07:23 PM   #4228
dnlgfnk
Registered User
 
dnlgfnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: St. Louis suburb
Posts: 864
Rep Power: 8 dnlgfnk is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Who the heck is "Typho"?

Identity of Trypho

The identity of Trypho, as rabbi Tarfon (the Hebrew name Tarfon likely derived from Greek Trypho) has been proposed, but virtually all scholars mentioned in Setzer's 'Jewish Responses to Early Christians' do not accept the notion that Trypho is Tarfon.[2] These scholars say that Trypho is a fictional character invented by Justin for his literary goals.[2][3] Setzer's book further claims that, whether a character on which Trypho was based existed or not, one can generally assume that Trypho's words are "largely put in his mouth by Justin".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue_with_Trypho

At best the dialogue was nothing more than a fictional literary device depicting an intellectual conversation or debate between a believer and a skeptic as a Christian apologetic.

Apparently, there are no murky, miry depths to which you will not sink before you quit embarrassing yourself.
Be careful with Justin. He was not a fan of sola scriptura, nor were any Early Fathers, it has been argued (successfully, IMHO).
__________________
"One way to stop a runaway horse is to bet on him." Jeffrey Bernard
dnlgfnk is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-22-2017, 10:14 PM   #4229
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,391
Rep Power: 14 Actor will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnlgfnk View Post
At the risk of doing your homework for you, I'm aware that Richard Carrier criticizes Van Voorst. For a criticism of Carrier, I've got atheist historian Tim O'Neill warming up in the bullpen.
Carrier, Van Voorst, O'Neill. Names. If we are going to discuss this writer v. that writer then it's all ad hominem and appeal to authority without addressing the issue under discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnlgfnk View Post
"The non-Christian testimonies to Jesus … show that contemporaries in the first and second century saw no reason to doubt Jesus’ existence...as far as we know, no ancient person ever seriously argued that Jesus did not exist."--Theissen and Merz, Historical Jesus
Nor did they argue that Hercules or Dionysus did not exist although few today would argue that they did. Prior to Copernicus, Galileo and Newton there was no alternative to superstition. To argue that someone else's god does not exist was to invite a counter argument that your's does not exist. Boxcar wanted an example of an ancient who disputed the existence of Jesus. I gave him one who at least indirectly acknowledged the possibility.

How many different religions were there in the ancient world? Thousands. How many different religions are there today? Thousands. Can they all be true? No.

How many different sciences are there today? One. Did North Korea build its nukes using a different science than our guys in Alamogordo used? No. There are two things that are absolutely true about science:
  • There is only one.
  • It works.

If you get sick or are injured you go to the hospital. You do not go there for religion. You go there for the science. Because the science works. Even if the doctors tell you that you have an incurable disease the science still works because the science tells them they can't save you.

The question of the historicity of Jesus only came about as a serious discussion in the nineteenth century. It needed science to bring it about. It needs science to seriously investigate it. If no ancient writer steeped in superstition ever questioned it then that is not surprising. It's also irrelevant.

Question: Why is Jesus called Jesus? His name was Joshua. Jesus is a Greek name.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-23-2017, 01:58 AM   #4230
dnlgfnk
Registered User
 
dnlgfnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: St. Louis suburb
Posts: 864
Rep Power: 8 dnlgfnk is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Carrier, Van Voorst, O'Neill. Names. If we are going to discuss this writer v. that writer then it's all ad hominem and appeal to authority without addressing the issue under discussion.
Nor did they argue that Hercules or Dionysus did not exist although few today would argue that they did. Prior to Copernicus, Galileo and Newton there was no alternative to superstition. To argue that someone else's god does not exist was to invite a counter argument that your's does not exist. Boxcar wanted an example of an ancient who disputed the existence of Jesus. I gave him one who at least indirectly acknowledged the possibility.

How many different religions were there in the ancient world? Thousands. How many different religions are there today? Thousands. Can they all be true? No.

How many different sciences are there today? One. Did North Korea build its nukes using a different science than our guys in Alamogordo used? No. There are two things that are absolutely true about science:
  • There is only one.
  • It works.

If you get sick or are injured you go to the hospital. You do not go there for religion. You go there for the science. Because the science works. Even if the doctors tell you that you have an incurable disease the science still works because the science tells them they can't save you.

The question of the historicity of Jesus only came about as a serious discussion in the nineteenth century. It needed science to bring it about. It needs science to seriously investigate it. If no ancient writer steeped in superstition ever questioned it then that is not surprising. It's also irrelevant.

Question: Why is Jesus called Jesus? His name was Joshua. Jesus is a Greek name.
So you arrived at your position via your own research, and have rarely cited other sources who have unearthed supportive arguments? Nonsense. You utilize whatever supports your position, from a half-remembered something about cats to juvenile cartoons. And were I to continue, I would need an indication of when it's OK to appeal to authority. Global warming? Yes. The overwhelming majority of scholars that accept an historical Jesus? No.

When scholars are done laughing at the attempted analogy of a historical Jesus who has impacted the Western and near Eastern world vis-a-vis Greek mythology, they may suggest to you that the "Paul" mentioned in the Christian scriptures did challenge Greek mythology at Areopagus in his longest recorded dialogue.

To miss the point that "Jesus" would be the fulfillment of "Yahweh is Salvation" is to submit one's point of reference-composed by all the factors that form it--to bear on the matter. And so your "scientism" establishes an hermeunetic of suspicion--"Jesus is another Hellenized myth". For millions of other individuals, countless individuals with letters behind their names, Jesus is the New Joshua, the New Moses, the New David, i.e., the fulfillment of the promises made to Israel. Tomorrow is Tuesday. Do you use the term? If so, you are undoubtedly a worshipper of Tiw, the god of single combat, victory and heroic glory in Norse mythology. What other reason could there be for your acceptance of the name?

The rest is the appeal to the thesis that science alone gives us knowledge of reality. When I asked if the truth of that thesis can be measured by the scientific method itself, you resorted to the incoherent response that (after thousands of posts in the Religion thread), we can't really know if anything outside the mind is real.
__________________
"One way to stop a runaway horse is to bet on him." Jeffrey Bernard
dnlgfnk is offline   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
Which book(s) would you recommend to a Newbie" Up to 3
Picking Winners: A Horseplayer's Guide by Andrew Beyer 1994 - 20.69%
12 Votes
Betting on Horse Racing For Dummies by Richard Eng - 5.17%
3 Votes
The Winning Horseplayer by Andrew Beyer 2007 - 8.62%
5 Votes
Betting Thoroughbreds by Steven Davidovitz and Andrew Beyer 1997 - 17.24%
10 Votes
Exotic Betting by Steven Crist 2006 - 13.79%
8 Votes
Bet With the Best by Andrew Beyer and Steve Davidowitz 2001 - 1.72%
1 Vote
Getting the Best of It by David Sklansky 1997 - 3.45%
2 Votes
How to WIN the PICK 6 by Steven Kolb 2009 - 0%
0 Votes
Betting Thoroughbreds for the 21st Century by Steve Davidowitz and Steven Crist 2009 - 5.17%
3 Votes
Finding The Hidden Horse: Tips, tricks, angles and secrets by William Davidson 2017 - 0%
0 Votes
The Blood-Horse Authoritative Guide to Betting Thorougbreds by the Blood-Horse staff 2005 - 1.72%
1 Vote
Profitable Horse Race Betting Using Stock Market Techniques by Aaron Ainslie and Woodbine Mike 2015 - 0%
0 Votes
Secrets of Professional Turf Betting by Robert L Bacon 1952 - 1.72%
1 Vote
Commonsense Betting by Dick Mitchell 1995 - 5.17%
3 Votes
Overlay, Overlay by Bill Heller 2004 - 0%
0 Votes
Thoroughbred Cycles by Mark Cramer 1990 - 17.24%
10 Votes
Handicapping 101 by Brad Free 2004 - 12.07%
7 Votes
Complete Idiot's Guide to Betting on Horses by Sharon B. Smith 1998 - 0%
0 Votes
Beyer on Speed by Andrew Beyer 2012 - 13.79%
8 Votes
Trifecta: The Business of Betting Thoroughbreds by Bobby Zen 2012 - 0%
0 Votes
Finding an Edge: A 21st century book by Ron Loftus 2014 - 1.72%
1 Vote
Winning without Thinking by Nick Mordin 2002 - 3.45%
2 Votes
Six Secrets of Successful Bettors by Frank R. Scatoni and Peter Thomas Fornatale 2005 - 8.62%
5 Votes
Money Secrets At The Racetrack Paperback by Barry Meadow 2000 - 17.24%
10 Votes
Smarter Bets - The Exacta Way by Keith Hoffman 2013 - 0%
0 Votes
Betting Maidens and 2-Year-Olds by Dan Illman 2005 - 0%
0 Votes
Winning Horseracing Handicapping by Chuck Badone 1999 - 0%
0 Votes
The Power of Early Speed by Steve Klein 2005 - 3.45%
2 Votes
Modern Pace Handicapping by Tom Brohamer 2000 - 20.69%
12 Votes
None, just go to the track. - 5.17%
3 Votes
None, all are outdated - 8.62%
5 Votes
Other (please specify) - 25.86%
15 Votes
Total Votes: 58
Non-members may not vote on this poll.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2017 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved -- Best Viewed in a modern browser @ 1280x720 Resolution Or Higher
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.