curious

Not sure what this has to do with the discussion but could you explain the above in a bit more detail please? I tried 111 but they didn't seem to know much about it.

Do some homework. I'm not going to feed you anymore.

Yep after 5 or 6 years, we are definitely very excited and waiting for you to report your next win. Don't worry about trying to do it before the race. After will be fine.

How long ago was that remind me? The post has expired from my archives. Is that the last decent win you had?

Like the entire BP?

Great post ATA

Hilarious. I gave you that didn't I? Where's the critical thought or analysis? I've been marking crap like that for years. That's a 'D' .... just.

So for example, if I were you, I'd cite something like this. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4013968/

But please provide solid evidence such as peer reviewed studies. I'm not interested in hearsay.

Run me through what you like.

You think wrong. Where's the current prospective example?

Any progress on this example?

I looked up simulate and that I am afraid is you to a 'T' Synonyms for simulated affected, artificial, assumed, bogus, contrived, factitious, fake, false, feigned,

I doubt you could insert sense into anything.

OK. Please educate me. Give us an example of how you adjust chance or price in accord with an unlucky run. A prospective example would be good.

How do you quantify it and what adjustment do you make to the chance of the horse in the current race? I tend to assume that its ability is assessable from its more "lucky" runs. I certainly know that wide can be essential for best performances. I can give you first hand examples.

How do you quantify it and what adjustment do you make to the chance of the horse in the current race? I tend to assume that its ability is assessable from its more "lucky" runs. I certainly know that wide can be essential for best performances. I can give you first hand examples.

How do you quantify it and what adjustment do you make to the chance of the horse in the current race? I tend to assume that its ability is assessable from its more "lucky" runs. I certainly know that wide can be essential for best performances. I can give you first hand examples.

True. The evidence suggests that most horses do not improve on their best 2yo performance. Thommo is probably the same. A promising or maybe unpromising 2yo and hasn't improved. Hopefully he'll be better once he graduates from his remedial reading classes.

Where did I say that? I agree some do but I'm unclear what that has to do with the discussion. And it is rare. Most horses' best performances don't exceed that demonstrated in their first few runs. Not that we were talking about that.

It's a bloody shame for this site that this thread for example which had evolved into a reasonably intelligent discussion has been wrecked as soon as they let you out on Monday morning.

OK. Thanks for the help. From a blind standpoint it appears to me that I'm not the one that is blind.

Can you try that again in English that I can understand. Thanks.

I'm reluctant to enter into what appears to be becoming a rational discussion, however, I'll risk it. I doubt that mardi has not done as you suggest re weight and barrier draws at least. The impact of wide and moreso unlucky is harder to quantify. On the latter, I tend to assess ability based on other runs, not just the unlucky or wide one, so if it is a factor, then that run based on time is likely to be not up to best ability which is what I am after. I don't think wide generally affects chance negatively on average. For some horses at least, it is preferable. As to barrier (and weight), my comparative analyses here, Oz and in the US suggest their effect is over estimated by most markets making horses with wider barriers likely to be at better value, thus a disproportionate number of my bets are horses with wide barriers and higher weights. Please note, I am not saying that weight (or barrier for that matter) don't make a difference, just that they do not have a significant assessable impact on chance, again across those three jurisdictions.

Awesome stuff here btw. Just post a screenshot of your Iskander bet to verify please that you came to that conclusion pre-race. Get it from someone else's account if need be. Anything to help you avoid the ongoing fraud label.