mardigras

I don't lose here. And again, they are generalisations. You can't quantify the impact to the horse's performance, so you pluck a number out of your arse. And then you call that form analysis which is hilarious.

Stupid strikes again. If I said I had many grains of rice in a bowl. You'd say that I didn't. Because you're stupid. You are the site clown.

It doesn't have to be in relation to the number run. Common sense says that there are a large number of races run in the UK, 3% is equally going to translate to many as a number. It's quite simple but your wasting everyone who reads this, time, due to your inadequacies. Yes it is basic English. And you still are not grasping it. Since many races are won by 0.05L or less, and 3% of the races run equates to many races. I'm not your damn teacher and clearly you haven't been capable when your teacher tried to help you.

Hey Thomass, how would those NH handicappers do at punting if they were allowed to punt. About as well as you. That's why they are handicappers.

No, but in all the handicap races, just 1lb between winning and losing 40% of the time. Hahahaha. According to you. In NZ, all those horses that race on the minimum but above their rated weight, they'd be winning everything if weighted properly. According to you.

More fool them if that is the case. They are going to be disappointed with the outcomes from the change.

3% of the races IS many races. Are you stupid. I can't believe you actually are repeating how stupid you are. I didn't say many compared to the total number. I said many. Go and look the word up. You're retarded.

Do they. Well what they think they know is wrong. Paragraph 2 - who knows. But they would have to make the 3yos carry more weight than the 5yos to do that.

What's not? 0.5kg? Yes it is. A further reason 0.5kg is not 0.5L is because 40% of the races run would be changed by a simple claimer being used claiming 1lb.

I love it when you confirm your stupidity. Try some more English remedial classes, the ones you've been taking are not working. There is no 'given' relationship between many and a percentage. You humiliate yourself better than anyone else can.

40% each year. So according to you, 40% of the races are lost by a horse that would have won with just 0.5kg less weight. And you actually believe that. Just half a kilo between winning and losing 40% of all the races run. Why the trainer of second didn't just throw on a claimer is beyond me. Simple. Or just one rating point less. That extra point must be so damn annoying.

None of which I use in punting. None. I use 'generally' to describe what happens 'generally'. It's worthless. You can't apply population stats and expect to profit. Which is what you try to do and is why you lose.

It's just another stupid statistic. You're becoming famous for them. Just read your own post. Things like 'they often'. Stupid is as stupid does and you do it better than any.

You've got me. I don't have a clue what that pile of crap is about Many races relates to races. Percentage relates to percentage. How can many relate to a percentage? You need an education. I'm pretty sure 100% of one is one, and I wouldn't call that many. You are demonstrably thick.

Still waiting for the link. Since what you wrote had zero to do with the impact of weight on margins in a race.

Try remedial maths as well. 0.5kg , 0.05L 1.5kg , 0.15L Only you would find that difficult.

In your opinion. Now c'mon, tell us what %of races are won by 0.5L or less?

I don't tell trainers how to do their job. And they don't tell me how to punt. That's one of the biggest differences between you and me.

More of your usual diatribe. What's funny is when I told you blinkers are to address behavioural issues, you tried to claim that wasn't true. Good to see you on board with that now. I don't use stats. I don't use opinions. I use facts. You're the stats man, 3yo after Christmas, Down in grade, 3kg claimers, blinkers on, 1kg = 1L. Maybe you've forgotten.

Good to see you finally admitting that blinkers are used to address behavioural issues. Well done, that's progress. Thankfully that should allow you to see that Redzel runs as fast without blinkers, but maybe Snowden felt he had a behavioural issue he wanted to address. Well done if that's the case.

Of course 0.05L makes a difference. 3% of races are able to change result by such an impact. 1.5kg. Generally would have an impact of 0.15L. Given your idea, I wonder why all the owners don't put a claimer on. What % of races 'generally' are won by a margin of 0.5L or less? Go on, have a crack. All 2nd place would need to do is put a claimer on in any of those races allowing claims and voilà, a winner instead of second.

You can, and obviously do. A pretty good reason why you lose. Unable to form an opinion by yourself.

Let's simply end this discussion now. You seem to hold the view that anyone who disagrees with the trainer about a horse is wrong. Odd view, but there you go. If I always believed trainers (even just the highest rated), I'd be broke. Reading this thread shows you up as having some serious anger issues. If I were you, I'd consider attending anger management sessions. It can't be healthy being the way you are. But on the topic, I know you struggle with simple stuff. But try this. The 3 starts prior to running without blinkers, the horse ran in races with margins away from the winner of 4.2L, 4.5L and 4.8L. Are you with me so far? Then ran with blinkers off, beaten 0.5L. In a time that was 3L off the actual track record. Now, when I went to school, 3L is less than 4.2L, 4.5L and 4.8L - which were the margins to the winner in those earlier races - not to the track record. In all prior starts, the only time he had finished closer to the winner was in winning its maiden race in a maiden event! All other starts beaten by more. Only 97% of all horses to race over 1000m at Warwick Farm on a Good 3 have run slower. Only 97% of them. 1000+ starters in the last 15 years. If you can't get this, then there is no way to help you. For someone that claims to not listen to trainers, you do a heck of a lot of posts claiming things from trainers. You thrive on hearsay. He's cagey quite likely as per what Snowden says. But he was also fast - without blinkers. That is indisputable. I rest my case.

Awesome. I like the fact that both times with blinkers on (first time/again) it ran down the track. Needs to get used to them. You've clearly worked that out.

You can't argue with blinkers. Which race Turny?