Jump to content
NOTICE TO BOAY'ers: Major Update Coming ×
Bit Of A Yarn

Punting 1.01


mardigras

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Thomass said:

This is hilarious...

Yet you don't recognise the fact some horses present faster stats on certain courses

COURSE SPECIALISTS

Recognise it? Of course I do. Dirt, synthetic, turf. Sure. In NZ, nope, nothing. 

As for faster stats, can you show me some of those. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mardigras said:

At this stage, because I'm yet to find a horse that their course stats/performance correlates to a change in chance. 

This whole idea around chance of a horse is beyond you.

Let's use the bogan Bazz analagy...

If Bazz gets a better quality chip at HQ...

It makes him happier and he performs better

That directly correlates to neddys as well

Insert that in your bot...sideways 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thomass said:

Certainly faster than you...

Your uptake is so dromedary that you want proof Blinkers make some neddys go faster

ffs

Have you no shame?

Something that even anecdotally, isn't supported. What a joke. To even suggest such thing is indicative of you listening to too many wives tales, which you've converted to fairytales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Thomass said:

Let's use the bogan Bazz analagy...

If Bazz gets a better quality chip at HQ...

It makes him happier and he performs better

That directly correlates to neddys as well

Insert that in your bot...sideways 

Except as usual, you just write fairytales and nothing that supports them. You've been hoodwinked again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mardigras said:

Something that even anecdotally, isn't supported. What a joke. To even suggest such thing is indicative of you listening to too many wives tales, which you've converted to fairytales.

Well done on highlighting the extreme world of sophistry that you live by

REDZELS trainer said 

"REDZEL NEEDS BLINKERS"

You said "yea na"

Its a long list of sad supporating sophistry 

And incredibly you don't understand what 'anecdotally' means

Even allowing for the FACTS that Redzel needs Blinkers to perform

You think Redzels trainer tells fairy tails

Astonishing how you even got accepted into Uni let alone Kindy

Were you Curious's fag at Massey?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thomass said:

Well done on highlighting the extreme world of sophistry that you live by

REDZELS trainer said 

"REDZEL NEEDS BLINKERS"

You said "yea na"

Its a long list of sad supporating sophistry 

And incredibly you don't understand what 'anecdotally' means

I'm extremely confident I do. What Redzel's trainer says is anecdotal yet you just tried to call it fact. Idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, mardigras said:

What it is, is that I don't just accept opinion. And when it comes to opinion on punting, they're mostly wrong. 

Like all yours. That's why the majority of punters lose, like you. Listen to too much opinion, and think it is fact.

Every trainer I've quoted...who amazingly know their horses..Weird I know...

Yet you poo pooed them...every single one

Idiot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/01/2019 at 11:50 AM, mardigras said:

What it is, is that I don't just accept opinion. And when it comes to opinion on punting, they're mostly wrong. 

Like all yours. That's why the majority of punters lose, like you. Listen to too much opinion, and think it is fact.

It's called HORSEMANSHIP....not punting you know it all...

a trainer knows his charge backwards...

To say REDZEL's trainer is wrong...is again pure sophistry on your behalf 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/01/2019 at 8:47 PM, mardigras said:

According to you, the chance of the horse that has performed on the course has increased. Increased from what? When you assessed it's chance (which we all know you don't do), you would have already known its performance on the track.

And I like it that the chances of the other horses have decreased - including those that have never raced on the track.

 I'm not against course stats (or prizemoney) - they relate to the horse itself which is a plus, but I only use them to reinforce, not change betting strategy. Reason being, I don't want to change chance for a runner with course stats, as that has to have a counter change - potentially against a runner that doesn't have the course stats - even though the other runner may have simply never raced there. If the horse becomes a horse I potentially want to back, it gains credence if it has associated course stats. That's all I use it for. Nothing wrong though in using them as far as I can see.

So there's "nothing wrong in using them"

Good...

Saturday proved once again how some simply love a certain course

'Course Specialist' indeed

THOUGHT THAT

12 starts on his home course..3 wins, 6 placings...

Youve assessed 2 horses as being fairly equal...the other has a record of 6 starts...perhaps one placing on the course

WTF would you do I wonder?

Yep

GORBACHEV

6 starts...1 win 4 placings

Loves the Open spaces that Trentham provides

It's simply Counterintuitive not to increase the unit invested of a course performer v one who has a poor record

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, curious said:

I don't think you can get a betting slip the day after the races Chief.

I don't think they need to have won on the track before either. Placings are fine. Even a horse with many starts and only placings is a target for extra investment.

I was wondering about all this counter intuitive stuff, so thought Trentham was the place to find out.

So got to Race 1. Thought Cavallo Veloce was the bet. Never raced there before so looked at others I had rated at the same level and find good form on the track in What A Smasher. It is supposedly counter intuitive to not add extra when the horse has form on the track especially against a horse that has never raced there. Down the tubes it went. I guess Cavallo Veloce is now a course specialist at Trentham given 1 start, 1 win.

Went to R3.  Redcayenne looked an absolute cert. Looked up the runs on the track. None! Decided better go with the one I liked next with the track form, as it's counter intuitive to not take the one with the track performances on the board. So looked at Soleseifei. Great efforts on the track. Down the tubes it went. What would you do I wonder?

Went on to R4. Found Tinkalicious. Looked up the track starts. Not flash. 3 starts and 1 single lowly placing. Not a fav then considering in the other 13 starts, has been in the money 8 times. So went with Awesome Al. A horse that clearly loves the open spaces and with a couple of wins on the track to boot, from a horse that had only ever won three races. This was a course specialist. Down the tubes again. 

It's always easier after the races. We've seen that.

Edited by mardigras
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone with basic racing knowledge knows that SOME horses favour SOME tracks. It may be hard to fathom why but in respect of Wanganui and Rotorua [and others] it may be to do with ground composition .I can recall one horse that was unbeatable when humidity was close to 100%, other than that it was not much cop.They all have their little quirks or foibles, especially track conditions -when you hear someone say that the track will suit all runners they are talking through a hole in their hat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Fred said:

Anyone with basic racing knowledge knows that SOME horses favour SOME tracks. It may be hard to fathom why but in respect of Wanganui and Rotorua [and others] it may be to do with ground composition .I can recall one horse that was unbeatable when humidity was close to 100%, other than that it was not much cop.They all have their little quirks or foibles, especially track conditions -when you hear someone say that the track will suit all runners they are talking through a hole in their hat.

I'm not totally disagreeing - but please tell me how course stats can help you with that? And when you've done that, tell all how to alter the chance of the runner that has raced well at say Wanganui and what you should do to the chances of the horse that has not raced at Wanganui. Cheers.

And on this 'SOME horses favour SOME tracks' - which you call basic racing knowledge. How do you determine which are those 'SOME horses'. Do you guess?

Edited by mardigras
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, mardigras said:

I'm not totally disagreeing - but please tell me how course stats can help you with that? And when you've done that, tell all how to alter the chance of the runner that has raced well at say Wanganui and what you should do to the chances of the horse that has not raced at Wanganui. Cheers.

And on this 'SOME horses favour SOME tracks' - which you call basic racing knowledge. How do you determine which are those 'SOME horses'. Do you guess?

I'm guessing that Fred does a lot of guessing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jasper said:

But was he actually better at Doomben than elsewhere? He is the classic example. I'm not saying his results weren't better there. But I'm also not saying he actually was any better there in his own performances. Have you got something that verifies that he actually raced superior at Doomben? If you do, please present it. Something more than anecdotal or simple results would be a start.

After all, I did introduce him to the discussion, and he is a case of very strong form at one track - not a horse with 4 placings from 5 starts like Gorbachev who apparently is worthy of extra investment as a result of those placings. 

On that basis, you'd be adding 8000% to every bet on Chief De Beers at Doomben - and maybe a little irate when he lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, mardigras said:

I don't think they need to have won on the track before either. Placings are fine. Even a horse with many starts and only placings is a target for extra investment.

I was wondering about all this counter intuitive stuff, so thought Trentham was the place to find out.

So got to Race 1. Thought Cavallo Veloce was the bet. Never raced there before so looked at others I had rated at the same level and find good form on the track in What A Smasher. It is supposedly counter intuitive to not add extra when the horse has form on the track especially against a horse that has never raced there. Down the tubes it went. I guess Cavallo Veloce is now a course specialist at Trentham given 1 start, 1 win.

Went to R3.  Redcayenne looked an absolute cert. Looked up the runs on the track. None! Decided better go with the one I liked next with the track form, as it's counter intuitive to not take the one with the track performances on the board. So looked at Soleseifei. Great efforts on the track. Down the tubes it went. What would you do I wonder?

Went on to R4. Found Tinkalicious. Looked up the track starts. Not flash. 3 starts and 1 single lowly placing. Not a fav then considering in the other 13 starts, has been in the money 8 times. So went with Awesome Al. A horse that clearly loves the open spaces and with a couple of wins on the track to boot, from a horse that had only ever won three races. This was a course specialist. Down the tubes again. 

It's always easier after the races. We've seen that.

You went to all that trouble statsman?

Nothing about form in superior races..back in class...

Nothing about those other Course spec neddys being OUT OF FORM??

The easiest BP of the day was FLAMINGO though...

The classic Black Type form...BACK IN CLASS...

1 1/2L behind MONTOYA STAR at LEVEL WEIGHTS!  On the course!

MS would have licked that field...

Doesnt surprise me one bit you didn't get Tink...

Beaten a neck by the class horse here in EAGLE BAY..on the course

Then started from the extreme outside 18 barrier...3 wide all of the way...3L from the winner...should have won..ON THE COURSE

But your stats don't include unlucky..Do they McFly?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...