Quote:
Originally Posted by MPRanger
...
Another thing to watch for is just relying on the ratings as the program presents them. You can do it that way. That's the way it's presented. However I find I get a better feel for it by going over the PP's myself. I have my own checklist I like to go thru to get an understanding of a race.
Dave Schwartz has a thread going on his Facebook page about story handicapping. I prefer to do that. Still use the ratings and the portfolios because they save so much time. But get an understanding of the race with your own intuition as well as the numbers.
...
|
That's a well-thought post.
Glad you are enjoying the Talking Handicapping group.
I think that at one time I was a pretty pure "numbers guy," but that changed when I realized that there was no way I could possibly have the sharpest numbers against the whales.
However, I am still a purely "systematic guy," and that makes it difficult for me to connect with the majority of horse players because they are some form of "story handicapper."
When I came up with the term
Story Handicapper my definition was a guy who looked at the PPs for each horse and developed that horse's story. That was how I was taught to handicap back in 1978 by "Jimmy and Ken."
Jimmy was an intense trainer handicapper who tracked the
winners of perhaps 100 trainers in about 50 categories at each of the tracks he played. His "Trainer Books" were legendary. He carried a number of 3" binders into the racebook every day.
Jimmy's approach was to start at the 10th paceline back...
"So, he ran in a 25k claimer and lost, then came back in a sprint for $32k, then a route at $25k, and then won in a sprint at $20k..."
Now, especially from the conversations in our group, the definition has morphed more towards
The Story of the Race. This is more like, "The Early Speed horses will likely be 1,2,3 but the 3 does not have what it takes to win. The class edge horses are 2 & 4..."
What we are really trying to do is to meld the numbers concepts together with the story in such a way that the we can come to a logical, value-based conclusion without killing the player with a lot of labor-intensive calculations.
This conversation is helping me understand what other players do, as opposed to saying, "Here, just do it my way."
Best to everyone,
Dave Schwartz