Thomass Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 Yea...not bad if you know about the on speed bias there...some continually complain about the shock they feel when they can't cop the f on about it though... ...and then there were the 5 apprentices winning who took advantage of a lighter weight...and some STILL can't work out the advantage and when to apply it! Itd be great if the ignorami at NZTR recognise that pen. readings provided across the width are the minimum standard required for Punters to know about a rails bias as well though...dickheads Oh and that Trackside angle of the finish is ATROCIOUS...along with their pathetic winning post...which is a bit of red paint..onya boys... ...keep up the quaint yocal local country racing theme..it'll attract Punters galore 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weasel Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 Anjameme won from well back. I See Red won from 3 wide without cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All The Aces Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 2 hours ago, Thomass said: Yea...not bad if you know about the on speed bias there...some continually complain about the shock they feel when they can't cop the f on about it though... ...and then there were the 5 apprentices winning who took advantage of a lighter weight...and some STILL can't work out the advantage and when to apply it! Itd be great if the ignorami at NZTR recognise that pen. readings provided across the width are the minimum standard required for Punters to know about a rails bias as well though...dickheads Oh and that Trackside angle of the finish is ATROCIOUS...along with their pathetic winning post...which is a bit of red paint..onya boys... ...keep up the quaint yocal local country racing theme..it'll attract Punters galore Not to mention Saturday at Counties where apprentices won four and Riccarton where they won four. Woodville they won three of the seven. First day Riccarton they won three and of course Te Rapa where they won six of the eight races. Apprentices in the past week have won 25 of the 45 flat races. I hope these experts listened to what Asvin Goindasamy had to say post race after Scaglioni's win over Paisley Park. And I thought I would mention the report that have come out of France recently re the women rider's winning statistics since they were given a claim. Claims making a difference in a race...….who knew? The experts on the other channel...…..yeah....na!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 18 minutes ago, All The Aces said: Not to mention Saturday at Counties where apprentices won four and Riccarton where they won four. Woodville they won three of the seven. First day Riccarton they won three and of course Te Rapa where they won six of the eight races. Apprentices in the past week have won 25 of the 45 flat races. I hope these experts listened to what Asvin Goindasamy had to say post race after Scaglioni's win over Paisley Park. And I thought I would mention the report that have come out of France recently re the women rider's winning statistics since they were given a claim. Claims making a difference in a race...….who knew? The experts on the other channel...…..yeah....na!! So how did you select which apprentice and which race at Riccarton to back? Given that 7 out of 10 were won by non-apprentices? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 Interesting. I doubt anyone on the other channel would say claims don't make a difference ATA. Just that the evidence suggests that those carrying claims win at a lower than expected rate compared to those with non-claimers, particularly on heavy tracks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 Just now, curious said: Interesting. I doubt anyone on the other channel would say claims don't make a difference ATA. Just that the evidence suggests that those carrying claims win at a lower than expected rate compared to those with non-claimers, particularly on heavy tracks. That's what I've read from that particular quarter when they were regular posters here. At the end of the day you still need to evaluate "value" and "individual chance relative to the field" to determine who to back. Otherwise you end up backing EVERY apprentice in EVERY race and given the averages you lose shit loads! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All The Aces Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 27 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: That's what I've read from that particular quarter when they were regular posters here. At the end of the day you still need to evaluate "value" and "individual chance relative to the field" to determine who to back. Otherwise you end up backing EVERY apprentice in EVERY race and given the averages you lose shit loads! Stating the obvious Chief. Of course you have to try and figure out which horse wins the race but you also have to do the same with the fully fledged riders who don't claim. There are better apprentices just as there are better senior riders and that is all part of the equation. But one has to look very closely at a good apprentice taking weight off a horse's back particularly when one rates the horse a winning chance without the allowance. The idiots are quick to jump on Thomas when he makes mention of an apprentice claim. As to value, have a look at their price ratings over the past few weeks and you will see a big variance in pricing of runners amongst the posters. Value is subjective to each person and what is value to one is not to another ie it can swing wildly. Surely the object is to back the actual winner rather than back a "so called value runner" that runs down the track. You only have to look at Barry's value runner scenario selection which he gave up on after closing in on a four fiqure loss to work that one out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 8 minutes ago, All The Aces said: Stating the obvious Chief. Of course you have to try and figure out which horse wins the race but you also have to do the same with the fully fledged riders who don't claim. There are better apprentices just as there are better senior riders and that is all part of the equation. But one has to look very closely at a good apprentice taking weight off a horse's back particularly when one rates the horse a winning chance without the allowance. The idiots are quick to jump on Thomas when he makes mention of an apprentice claim. As to value, have a look at their price ratings over the past few weeks and you will see a big variance in pricing of runners amongst the posters. Value is subjective to each person and what is value to one is not to another ie it can swing wildly. Surely the object is to back the actual winner rather than back a "so called value runner" that runs down the track. You only have to look at Barry's value runner scenario selection which he gave up on after closing in on a four fiqure loss to work that one out. I disagree. I don't think anyone has criticised the positive evaluation of a "good apprentice". It's working out value and which apprentices are "good". However what the stats guys have pointed out is that relative to their weight advantage apprentices bat below average. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 (edited) Exactly Chief. No-one is suggesting that a "good" apprentice with a 3kg claim won't make a positive difference to a horse's chance. What I think those posters are saying is that depending which statistics you believe, you can't apply apprentice claims to your assessment across the board whether you think it's positive or negative. It has to be applied to the individual horse. Most would also say that and carried weight in general is a relatively small contributor to chance in NZ racing. Plenty of evidence backs that up. On the other hand, similar evidence suggests that the effect of a .5kg increase in the female allowance may have impacted female win rates on average across the population. As ATA notes, there is considerable variation in assessments of chance in a single race such as have been used in that exercise. You have to remember though that some of those posters are just learning to frame markets and others are not familiar with doing so on NZ racing. That said, I don't agree that it's about backing winners per se. Of course you have to back some winners but whatever rate you do that won't bring success unless you are doing that on runners at value (that is having a better chance and winning at a higher rate than the available pricing indicates). That requires reasonably accurate assessment on average. Some will rely more heavily on one factor than the other. So, some rate significantly based on speed maps, others primarily on time based ability assessments. If you look at the summary of those assessments to date from 370 bets only 11 of those have been on a winner but the ROI is still over 100%, not that I'd expect for a moment that to be achieved in the longer term but the point is it's not the win strike rate that matters to in order to gain a POT. Edited August 12, 2019 by curious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted August 12, 2019 Author Share Posted August 12, 2019 23 hours ago, Weasel said: Anjameme won from well back. I See Red won from 3 wide without cover. Where did I say every single race Weas? You know it..every punter knows it...it's a front bias almost every day.... Thats why the Feds need to give us the WIDTH pen. Reading every 3M... Just as my spies give me at Te Rapa...which usually show the drains working far better by the rail... Who knew the part of the track where the drain is...drains better?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted August 12, 2019 Author Share Posted August 12, 2019 22 hours ago, All The Aces said: Not to mention Saturday at Counties where apprentices won four and Riccarton where they won four. Woodville they won three of the seven. First day Riccarton they won three and of course Te Rapa where they won six of the eight races. Apprentices in the past week have won 25 of the 45 flat races. I hope these experts listened to what Asvin Goindasamy had to say post race after Scaglioni's win over Paisley Park. And I thought I would mention the report that have come out of France recently re the women rider's winning statistics since they were given a claim. Claims making a difference in a race...….who knew? The experts on the other channel...…..yeah....na!! Exactly ATA...not to mention 13 CD races IN A ROW last month! But they can't read.. Some tossers think we invest on EVERY single APP...like downloading every single APP available to tossers playing on their wee devices...yea na But the SCAGLIONI case is a very good one and it perfectly demonstrates my raisin day tear...something I learnt in 1st Year French... Tell moi if I'm boring you..but I know I'm not... This horse had been racing very well...out of its grade...one of the better recent performances at Ruakaka WITHOUT A CLAIM...ran the very good horse Dragon Storm to a length... ..and a NK off VALANTE..who won the BOP Cup the very next start... ask yaself To this race and the well spruiked PAISLEY PARK was conceding 7 1/2kgs to the Scag...that's GOLD... You know it...I know it ... ...the other tossers though...can't quite get their heads around the bleedin' obvious...yet... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Cool - so Thomaas you'll show us your TAB account activity receipt for your bet on Scagolini? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 19 hours ago, curious said: Exactly Chief. No-one is suggesting that a "good" apprentice with a 3kg claim won't make a positive difference to a horse's chance. What I think those posters are saying is that depending which statistics you believe, you can't apply apprentice claims to your assessment across the board whether you think it's positive or negative. It has to be applied to the individual horse. Most would also say that and carried weight in general is a relatively small contributor to chance in NZ racing. Plenty of evidence backs that up. On the other hand, similar evidence suggests that the effect of a .5kg increase in the female allowance may have impacted female win rates on average across the population. As ATA notes, there is considerable variation in assessments of chance in a single race such as have been used in that exercise. You have to remember though that some of those posters are just learning to frame markets and others are not familiar with doing so on NZ racing. That said, I don't agree that it's about backing winners per se. Of course you have to back some winners but whatever rate you do that won't bring success unless you are doing that on runners at value (that is having a better chance and winning at a higher rate than the available pricing indicates). That requires reasonably accurate assessment on average. Some will rely more heavily on one factor than the other. So, some rate significantly based on speed maps, others primarily on time based ability assessments. If you look at the summary of those assessments to date from 370 bets only 11 of those have been on a winner but the ROI is still over 100%, not that I'd expect for a moment that to be achieved in the longer term but the point is it's not the win strike rate that matters to in order to gain a POT. Ohhhh my...where did you even get the energy to write such crap? At least you finally admitted you're the CONTRADICTORY GURU WHERE you want the Female allowance back a 1/2kg....even though 2kgs= 0.2L... ...but it'd have a big effect..but really weight..."it's a really small contributor..most say" WTF?? No most don't say that! Only ignorami with their heads up without the sun shining do... Let me tell you now though... ITS ABOUT BACKING WINNERS.. ok? Terribly simple...back 10/10 and you're ahead on the day! Wtf knew? Only the dumbest dullards don't get that... however...if one also gets value on those winners...good shit...like moi's well published BP Niches..I.e. the Stake increases as the price lengthens... ..SUBJECTIVELY selected...(this is so obvious) which most just can't do.... Like pricing a market to 180% as one of your crowd did...and had 3/4 of the field at value...f me Or you pricing VERY FLASH at 35's when winning at 7's...and the hotty HELENA BABY at 12's... How on earth do you get pricing like that?? Then you fluked one...and now you're claiming you were ON throughout the tiresome experiment...and where others are claiming amazing ROI's even though the ACTUAL tips they posted in a much publicised spruik ...were incredibly BAD ...BAZZA's BAD BOTCHUPS... ...at least I posted moi's TIPPING MASTERCLASS BEFORE the event... But were talking about ignorami who can't even sprekin the Queens Englaise here "Another words"..it's amazing how some people go through life thinking that certain words go together.. Or your ignorant alma mater mate..."could of" where 'of' is not even a verb...it's a preposition and not part of the verb phrase 'could have' could've sounds could of perhaps?....but only if your ignorant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weasel Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 yaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said: Cool - so Thomaas you'll show us your TAB account activity receipt for your bet on Scagolini? I've already done that chef so what's the point?...cooked up a storm of controversy it did... When under extreme provocation to prove the BP was legit...I posted a lazy Friday 200 Hundy turned into 10k..or was it 11? Some claimed it was a fluke and there's no possible way I could do what I did... ...and last year after more extreme bullying...and include yourself in that... I posted a TIPPING MASTERCLASS of the Tri, q and winner of the last 3 races in ONE SELECTION.... ... I'm assuming that's a World f in record...So moi can't be an ass Ask yaself...how could I talk so much shit while holding down a full time job let alone a Princess if i wasn't all over this like a rash? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Well since you are online so much I would have thought it was a simple case of posting a screen shot of the Scagolini bet to prove your prowess but I guess we just have to assume you historical revisionist and full of hot air. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 Simply post a screen shot of your investments while you're there I think I'm the only poster in the history of NZ racing websites to post such a comprehensive list of the days bets... ...just as the criticism reached a crescendo of antagonism and bullying... ...with one fowl swoop I sent them directly to the hen house...stuttering and spluttering into their sad sorry smack talk... Sure, the great investment day before the Masterclass tipping lesson..but I enjoy ass about face Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 So you didn't back Scagolini. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 2 hours ago, Thomass said: But were talking about ignorami who can't even sprekin the Queens Englaise here "Another words"..it's amazing how some people go through life thinking that certain words go together.. Or your ignorant alma mater mate..."could of" where 'of' is not even a verb...it's a preposition and not part of the verb phrase 'could have' could've sounds could of perhaps?....but only if your ignorant People Who Constantly Point Out Grammar Mistakes Are Pretty Much Jerks, Scientists Find https://www.sciencealert.com/people-who-pick-up-grammar-mistakes-jerks-scientists-find Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 While you're in the dictionary...look up 'CONSTANT' I think you'll find I've alerted you to two samples... Its an example of how ignorami can congregate and produce... ...even more ignoramous 'stats'...such as 1 kg =0.1L... Or your 'contradiction' chaos theory theory... Of changing the Female allowance by 0.5kg to stop the massive 0.05L advantage No wonder you didn't want to comment on your 'Math' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 How much of a length shift in the impact of the female allowance is necessary to shift the win rate by 1% in favour of females in NZ handicaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 (edited) 19 hours ago, Thomass said: WHERE you want the Female allowance back a 1/2kg....even though 2kgs= 0.2L... ...but it'd have a big effect..but really weight..."it's a really small contributor..most say" The problem you have Thommo is that neither you, the media nor the likes of the BHA handicappers who promote these silly ideas about the effects of weight can produce any evidence other than anecdotal or citing each other. Aside from the hard raceday evidence that I've shared, I've ridden heaps of gallops with horses of well established comparable ability where I was giving 20kgs to the other rider. I can make two solid empirical observations from those. 1. 20kgs makes a difference to performance. 2. That difference is much closer to 2 lengths than 20 lengths. You haven't produced an iota of evidence in support of your claims about the effect of weight other than "so and so said so it must be right." Edited August 13, 2019 by curious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 The problem you have is the totes lack of understanding of the word 'CONTRADICTORY' You can't on one hand tell NZTR their female allowance is out by...Weight for it... 0.5kg...which in your world is 0.05L...bizarre in itself ..and they "need to get back to 1 1/2kgs to even the stats up" And tell us "weight don't matter"... then dishing us up shit Yankee stats racing on soup from as far back as 26 years ago!! The hard evidence moi showed...you may have missed it....and which took away ALL variables... ...of course was on a treadmill....which CLEARLY showed the affect weight does have... The only advice I can give for your fatty deposit problem...is to take a sit behind your fellow partner...I.e. get cover...hook out and outfinish the sucker ...because that's a 'thing' even though your alma mater mate says... " but they race wide without cover in Harness so I don't see the problem" Next you'll be agreeing 100% on that b/s...as indeed you do on everything else he shit talks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.