"Proprietary Knowledge"

[mountainman]

In my opinion, there is an ethical imperative for anyone who sells books on handicapping or is paid to talk about handicapping, to hold back nothing (time or space permitting) relevant to their immediate topic. Tout sevices are one thing, but any author, columnist, or even analyst taking money to dispense handicapping wisdom forfeits the right to "proprietary" theories or methods. I'm not saying that writing one book makes every iota of the author's knowledge part of the public domain, but I do think any book predicated on some methodology should deconstruct that method to the nuts and bolts. I've been frustrated by literature that played coy when it came to stripping their systems bare. And I pity readers attempting to piece together something they've already paid for. Any feedback?

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Those that can't...... teach, tout or write books.

Those that can...... bet.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by InsideThePylons-MW

Those that can't...... teach, tout or write books.

Those that can...... bet.

I'm on the floor here. Not because I agree (or disagree)-but simply because your response is soooo you. Keep it real man.

[Robert Fischer]

how was the book advertised?

[GameTheory]

I'm "piecing together" that you're talking about Cary Fotias, although not necessarily exclusively. So putting Cary aside because we've just discussed him and his book, are there any other examples you're thinking of here?

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by mountainman

In my opinion, there is an ethical imperative for anyone who sells books on handicapping or is paid to talk about handicapping, to hold back nothing (time or space permitting) relevant to their immediate topic. Tout sevices are one thing, but any author, columnist, or even analyst taking money to dispense handicapping wisdom forfeits the right to "proprietary" theories or methods. I'm not saying that writing one book makes every iota of the author's knowledge part of the public domain, but I do think any book predicated on some methodology should deconstruct that method to the nuts and bolts. I've been frustrated by literature that played coy when it came to stripping their systems bare. And I pity readers attempting to piece together something they've already paid for. Any feedback?

I have no particular argument with your above post but am curious about the following post that was posted in this thread http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...680#post982680 a while ago

Originally Posted by mountainman

That's exactly what I'm saying. I'm already unpopular with plenty of horsemen because of my blunt commentary. That's cool. My job isn't to be their best buddy and booster, but to deliver candid analysis. But if I started to spill things about their stock that i'm only aware of because of my morning job, they would lynch me. Literally. There is a confidence between horsemen and officials that I won't violate. And I doubt the superiors I respect and answer to at Mnr would approve of me crossing that line. The boundaries don't solely exclude me giving info about mnr's vet's or steward's list. I also can't divulge anything concerning claims I might be aware of, or dish that a horse, for instance, was entered at the office's behest to fill a race. I could list other no no's, but you get the idea.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by InsideThePylons-MW

Those that can't...... teach, tout or write books.

Those that can...... bet.

Those who can't teach, tout or write books, post here in off topics.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by GameTheory

I'm "piecing together" that you're talking about Cary Fotias, although not necessarily exclusively. So putting Cary aside because we've just discussed him and his book, are there any other examples you're thinking of here?

My purpose wasn't to call out any specific author-just to spark conversation about how much disclosure those paid to talk or write about handicapping owe the public.

[highnote]

Ragozin didn't disclose his method of making speed figures in his book.

In Fotias' case, I know that he is a serious bettor and sells his figures to a select clientele. If everyone knew his methods then his prices and his clienteles prices would go down. I can see the logic in his not wanting to disclose all his methods.

It's no different than a Dr. Edward O. Thorp writing "Beat The Market" and explaining some of his trading methodologies, but not all of them. The idea for Thorp's book was to try to raise money for his hedge fund. It apparantly worked.

Back to Fotias ... he did tell how to use his figures. Others are free to use his ideas with other figures or to make their own. He told people his figures are velocity based and that they are a hybrid of Sartin, Beyer and Ragozin.

If you have any programming ability at all or knowledge of horseracing then it would be a snap to make your own. So to me, explaining his methodolgy for making the figures would be boring.

Just read Brohammer if you want to learn how to do pace numbers.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by the little guy

I have no particular argument with your above post but am curious about the following post that was posted in this thread http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...680#post982680 a while ago

Apples and oranges. Respecting personal confidences or certain boundaries to which a racing official is subjected has nothing to do with the holding back of handicapping theory one is specifically paid to purvey. Thanks for remembering my earlier post, though. I'm flattered.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by mountainman

Apples and oranges. Respecting personal confidences or certain boundaries to which a racing official is subjected has nothing to do with the holding back of handicapping theory one is specifically paid to purvey. Thanks for remembering my earlier post, though. I'm flattered.

You need to reread your post that began this thread.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by swetyejohn

In Fotias' case, I know that he is a serious bettor and sells his figures to a select clientele. If everyone knew his methods then his prices and his clienteles prices would go down.

Then don't sell books predicated on what you aren't willing to deliver.

[Robert Fischer]

mentors > books

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by the little guy

You need to reread your post that began this thread.

No, you need to reread it. The type of info that a racing official (by custom and common sense) is forbidden to divulge hardly constitutes any "theory or method." Now I'm the one who is curious. What jobs have you held in the industry aside from tv analyst? If that's too personal, please excuse me.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by mountainman

No, you need to reread it. The type of info that a racing official (by custom and common sense) is forbidden to divulge hardly constitutes any "system or methodology." Now I'm the one who is curious. What jobs have you held in the industry aside from tv analyst?

Don't deflect this with your sudden curiousity. You claimed, and let me quote, " In my opinion, there is an ethical imperative for anyone who sells books on handicapping or is paid to talk about handicapping, to hold back nothing (time or space permitting) relevant to their immediate topic. " But, suddenly, this is not relevent to your previous admission of withholding information that may well be relevent to the topics being discussed in your job.