Form and the Second Derivative

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Cratos

Horserace handicapping is about the measurement and prediction of objects moving through space over a surface within a closed circuit.

Well, this is a really bold statement!!!

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

Well, this is a really bold statement!!!

Maybe I am wrong, but I am stuck with my belief and satisfied enough to not want to extend this debate.

[Capper Al]

The premise here is that answering the question, " is the horse ripe for a strike as the independent variable"-- and a guesstimate at that. This is contrary to what Cratos believes and posted in this thread as that speed was the independent variable and the certainty of math as the solution.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

The premise here is that answering the question, " is the horse ripe for a strike as the independent variable"-- and a guesstimate at that. This is contrary to what Cratos believes and posted in this thread as that speed was the independent variable and the certainty of math as the solution.

Please if you are going to quote or paraphrase my posts at least do it correctly.

In post #4 I said speed was a DEPENDENT variable and I never said or referred to certainty about anything.

If you need to create fabrications to make your case, it is weaker than I thought.

Therefore this is my last post in this thread and you can twist it anyway you like.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Cratos

Therefore this is my last post in this thread and you can twist it anyway you like.

Promise?

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Cratos

Please if you are going to quote or paraphrase my posts at least do it correctly.

In post #4 I said speed was a DEPENDENT variable and I never said or referred to certainty about anything.

If you need to create fabrications to make your case, it is weaker than I thought.

Therefore this is my last post in this thread and you can twist it anyway you like.

I stand corrected. Yet, I don't understand all your noise.

[Capper Al]

Let's move on. Let's look at pace. Pace is a derivative of speed also. Pace tells how a horse needs to distribute their energy to win. If the match up works in favor of the horse, an opportunity might arise for a horse to be able to strike. The horse's connection most likely would want to take advantage and go for the win.

Now let's focus on the handicapper types. Earlier I mentioned that many handicappers start off learning about speed and keep revisiting speed over and over again throughout their handicapping life. Many handicappers search for a better way to look at speed and find pace. Pace handicappers unknowingly tape into the second derivative and find themselves winning with a little more sophistication and getting at times some better prices. Pace handicappers, many a time, can go back over a race and explain why a horse won or lost in a manner far superior to anything a speed handicapper can do. The awesomeness of knowledge sets in, pace handicappers become sophomoric with their newly found insights. They are clueless that they have stumbled upon the second derivative and, as speed handicappers did before them, believe the answer is in their math. It's not in their math. Pace may also show us that a horse is ripe to strike. What I call the second derivative.

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

With graded races, it is safer to assume that they will try. With claiming, it's a guess.

I think the opposite is true. With claimers, especially cheap claimer, they can not afford to take the gamble that today's race won't be the horse's last. In stakes races, they may be pointing for a bigger (purse) payday done the line since as general rule stakes horses are sounder than claimers. 40 years ago, your logic would have been correct when claimers were filled with sound , but slow runners and there were fewer big paying stakes, but not today.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I think the opposite is true. With claimers, especially cheap claimer, they can not afford to take the gamble that today's race won't be the horse's last. In stakes races, they may be pointing for a bigger (purse) payday done the line since as general rule stakes horses are sounder than claimers. 40 years ago, your logic would have been correct when claimers were filled with sound , but slow runners and there were fewer big paying stakes, but not today.

You might have a point about claimers, but the burden on this decision still rests with the handicapper. Look at horses that have been claimed. A lot of them still don't win. They had to be giving it their all since they lost the horse.

[GaryG]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

You might have a point about claimers, but the burden on this decision still rests with the handicapper. Look at horses that have been claimed. A lot of them still don't win. They had to be giving it their all since they lost the horse.

Many times horses taking a big class drop are damaged goods. The top trainers can spot them and avoid them. Often they are claimed by an incompetent trainer who thinks he is getting a bargain. That is almost never the case. If you follow a circuit closely you will soon know the trainers' habits. Many years ago a friend of mine named Steve Collison wrote a book (a pamphlet really) called The Claiming Game. Steve knows his business and is a very successful player.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by GaryG

Many times horses taking a big class drop are damaged goods. The top trainers can spot them and avoid them. Often they are claimed by an incompetent trainer who thinks he is getting a bargain. That is almost never the case. If you follow a circuit closely you will soon know the trainers' habits. Many years ago a friend of mine named Steve Collison wrote a book (a pamphlet really) called The Claiming Game. Steve knows his business and is a very successful player.

I have a copy. It provides a good intro to the claiming game.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Cratos

Maybe I am wrong, but I am stuck with my belief and satisfied enough to not want to extend this debate.

I disagree with your definition of handicapping..

In my book, handicapping is about discovering patterns that might cause the crowd to systematic erroneous conclusions that can present the profit opportunities.

Even the most precise estimate of “measurement and prediction of objects moving through space over a surface within a closed circuit” as you put it, are completely useless for betting purposes, if they happen to be embedded in the prices (and to make things ever worse, you need to also cover the takeout)..

Handicapping is NOT ABOUT PREDICTING THE WINNER OF THE RACE (a domain where your approach might excel) but about PREDICTING THE POSSIBLE ERRORS COMMITED BY THE BETTING CROWDS ( a domain that needs a combination of creative imagination and stochastic models as opposed to deterministic methods)

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

I disagree with your definition of handicapping..

In my book, handicapping is about discovering patterns that might cause the crowd to systematic erroneous conclusions that can present the profit opportunities.

Even the most precise estimate of “measurement and prediction of objects moving through space over a surface within a closed circuit” as you put it, are completely useless for betting purposes, if they happen to be embedded in the prices (and to make things ever worse, you need to also cover the takeout)..

Handicapping is NOT ABOUT PREDICTING THE WINNER OF THE RACE (a domain where your approach might excel) but about PREDICTING THE POSSIBLE ERRORS COMMITED BY THE BETTING CROWDS ( a domain that needs a combination of creative imagination and stochastic models as opposed to deterministic methods)

I am violating what I said I wouldn’t do and that was not to return to this thread, but you seem to want an answer from me and it is that you can disagree with what I stated and that is okay; and you might get others to agree with you and that is also acceptable, but I don't agree with you and that is the only thing that counts to me.

What you or I say is not the gospel; just what we believe.