Freda Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Thomass said: Wtf..I can understand wee Cee and bogan Bazz supporting your nonsense of 'L''s but Freda? Perhaps she missed the whole point.... If I've identified a superior Black type performer racing back in inferior class...with recent excuses such as 'unlucky' in recent starts...(something you ignore due to you being too thick and/ or blind) ...which activates the 'value' component...where said trainer identifies their neddy as needing Blinkers...after trailing said gear in training... ...so I simply add 20% to the Stake invested... ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with population stats and 'investing' on L's Totally preposterous fake b/s idiocy its comparable... Where have I supported anything in this ridiculous discussion...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Thomass said: Wtf..I can understand wee Cee and bogan Bazz supporting your nonsense of 'L''s but Freda? Perhaps she missed the whole point.... If I've identified a superior Black type performer racing back in inferior class...with recent excuses such as 'unlucky' in recent starts...(something you ignore due to you being too thick and/ or blind) ...which activates the 'value' component...where said trainer identifies their neddy as needing Blinkers...after trailing said gear in training... ...so I simply add 20% to the Stake invested... ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with population stats and 'investing' on L's Totally preposterous fake b/s idiocy its comparable... Where have I supported anything in this ridiculous discussion...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 2 hours ago, Thomass said: Wtf..I can understand wee Cee and bogan Bazz supporting your nonsense of 'L''s but Freda? Perhaps she missed the whole point.... If I've identified a superior Black type performer racing back in inferior class...with recent excuses such as 'unlucky' in recent starts...(something you ignore due to you being too thick and/ or blind) ...which activates the 'value' component...where said trainer identifies their neddy as needing Blinkers...after trailing said gear in training... ...so I simply add 20% to the Stake invested... ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with population stats and 'investing' on L's Totally preposterous fake b/s idiocy its comparable... Where have I supported anything in this ridiculous discussion...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted October 28, 2019 Author Share Posted October 28, 2019 Ok got ya Freda, Freda, Freda... My bad! It was a LOL emoji you pressed and not a LIKE.. ...should have realised you'd be laughing at his preposterous suggestion that 'investing' in L's are the same as doing actual form analysis 101...separating the desperate last chance Blinker applications with serious trainers.... ...who have Form horses, and have trialled blinkers knowing said application will help rather than hinder... ...as evidenced by serious Stats such as Moore's... ...and Jockeys like Willow who said after CASTELVECCIO's great effort..."the trainer gave me great confidence that he loves the Blinkers"...after Willow trailed him without them yea...all that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 Sorry about the three - peat....technology.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Thomass said: ..should have realised you'd be laughing at his preposterous suggestion that 'investing' in L's are the same as doing actual form analysis 101...separating the desperate last chance Blinker applications with serious trainers.... ...who have Form horses, and have trialled blinkers knowing said application will help rather than hinder... Just because your understanding is poor, don't blame me. The two scenarios are identical. Doing serious form analysis and finding a horse starting with the letter 'L' and adding 20% is identical to doing serious form analysis and adding 20% because the trainer has put blinkers on. And yesterday the form continued with 3 more winners across Benalla and Cessnock. Just too damn easy. 20% extra on all of them if you followed the blue print. Give it a try. You don't back them all. You back the ones that meet the form requirement and add 20% if they start with the letter 'L'. All three of those winners did that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted October 28, 2019 Author Share Posted October 28, 2019 4 minutes ago, mardigras said: Just because your understanding is poor, don't blame me. The two scenarios are identical. Doing serious form analysis and finding a horse starting with the letter 'L' and adding 20% is identical to doing serious form analysis and adding 20% because the trainer has put blinkers on. And yesterday the form continued with 3 more winners across Benalla and Cessnock. Just too damn easy. 20% extra on all of them if you followed the blue print. Give it a try. You don't back them all. You back the ones that meet the form requirement and add 20% if they start with the letter 'L'. All three of those winners did that. Hilarious...that's about your level...country hick meetings... I couldn't give a flying fox what's happening over there and in your weird ' world' ...Your bizarre 'thoughts' are off the planet crazy shit "Constantinople wins without the trainer adding gear....Redzel ran a faster sectional in one Benchmark race without Blinkers so he doesn't need them...Whanganui rails runners on an H 11 gives value" TOTAL Bunkum Crazy Horse Shit.... Neil Young would love you beating your Bongos senseless though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 And I don't think anyone wants to read about your post race 'winners'. But they get to. Because you're a fraud. You have the intellect of a 5yo - you can't even understand that the two ideas presented are 100% the same in style. Go back to school. Quite happy to have different thoughts to you. You're a loser. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted October 28, 2019 Author Share Posted October 28, 2019 30 minutes ago, mardigras said: And I don't think anyone wants to read about your post race 'winners'. But they get to. Because you're a fraud. You have the intellect of a 5yo - you can't even understand that the two ideas presented are 100% the same in style. Go back to school. Quite happy to have different thoughts to you. You're a loser. The truley bizarre 'thought' process you employ... ...is to say "you trust a trainer to get said neddy to the races to perform to its peak" ...yet you won't alter a performance rating that coincides with trusting a trainer...especially a top one...that said trainer has trialled any new gear and they're well over 80% sure it'll work...or else they wouldn't have done the deed on an already performing neddy... ...anything else is desperation and last chance throw a dice I trust my assessments that a superior performer in a race is ready to perform... also trusting the Trainer has dispensed his professional services to anything else they think will help...you dont No f in surprises there then You're too shit scared to identify Course Specislists in case another similar rater hasn't raced on the course...holy f Like GO NICHOLAS and TIPTRONIC two Blue Print neddys who LOVE HQ... HQ is especially suited to Course Specialists... wake up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 Thomaas you still haven't given us the finer points of your "Blueprint" where you decide between multiple horses in multiple races that match the "Blueprint." You must eventually use some form of performance rating and value assessment to narrow down your choices. Otherwise as has been shown sticking to the parts of the Blueprint that you openly declare would make you broke very quickly. As for your "horses for courses" addition to the "blueprint" why doesn't the trainers of the said horses just stick to racing at those courses that their horses enjoy racing on? As for Tiptronic he has raced 7 times at Ellerslie for ONE win. I assume you lost backing it the other six times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 28, 2019 Share Posted October 28, 2019 24 minutes ago, Thomass said: ...yet you won't alter a performance rating that coincides with trusting a trainer...especially a top one...that said trainer has trialled any new gear and they're well over 80% sure it'll work...or else they wouldn't have done the deed on an already performing neddy... Who says they're well over 80% sure it will work. Another guess you've pulled out of your arse. Like Gerald Ryan did with the near fav who reportedly hated the blinkers and ran tailed off in a million dollar race. After trialling the horse with them? As for trusting the trainer. I don't trust the trainer has improved the horse. If he has improved the horse, why didn't he do that last time. Was he stupid then - and smart now? Aside from all this, you still haven't been able to name a single horse that will be improved with blinkers on - before the race. yet you say it is so common and you've managed to put up all sorts of selections post race. The reality of all this is that the trainer does it because they are taking a guess and hoping for the best. Just like you do with the way you adjust for unlucky. All guess work, some of it may even be an educated guess - but a guess all the same. It's why you lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted October 29, 2019 Author Share Posted October 29, 2019 41 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: Thomaas you still haven't given us the finer points of your "Blueprint" where you decide between multiple horses in multiple races that match the "Blueprint." You must eventually use some form of performance rating and value assessment to narrow down your choices. Otherwise as has been shown sticking to the parts of the Blueprint that you openly declare would make you broke very quickly. As for your "horses for courses" addition to the "blueprint" why doesn't the trainers of the said horses just stick to racing at those courses that their horses enjoy racing on? As for Tiptronic he has raced 7 times at Ellerslie for ONE win. I assume you lost backing it the other six times. Besides superior class back to inferior i'll run a few other 'niches' over a race including an ultimate fitness requirement that relates to its ability to take Racing... ...on average there maybe 3/4 per race that fit the total bill... btw why would you rate EVERY runner per race when some have NO CHANCE...the idea that the Sultuns of Sophistry have of pricing every horse is balmy The basis is fewer convictions with up and coming horses...in short... fresh legs...although some mature later so I'll take that into account obviously... I'll dish out unit values taking into account excuses, quality of field previously, weight, gear etc...normal analysis 101... Of course the value component then comes into it post analysis...but I won't hesitate investing on 3/4 horses at times if there's a a good ROI to be had...definitely NO SAVERS.... As for Tip being a CS...almost every start bar one he'd raced very well there but unlucky...either caught wide or just pipped...3 placings in G2/3...beating Jon Snow in one, drew the outside in another G 2 just pipped...now back in an ordinary Hdcp ..was wayyy over the odds...I had him value at 8's...even though winless for 2 years...unlucky as I say..and racing in Black Type...G1 2nd at WFA The other 6 times may have been either poor value or unsuited.. Certainly don't invest EVERY start if no value... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted October 29, 2019 Author Share Posted October 29, 2019 53 minutes ago, mardigras said: Who says they're well over 80% sure it will work. Another guess you've pulled out of your arse. Like Gerald Ryan did with the near fav who reportedly hated the blinkers and ran tailed off in a million dollar race. After trialling the horse with them? As for trusting the trainer. I don't trust the trainer has improved the horse. If he has improved the horse, why didn't he do that last time. Was he stupid then - and smart now? Aside from all this, you still haven't been able to name a single horse that will be improved with blinkers on - before the race. yet you say it is so common and you've managed to put up all sorts of selections post race. The reality of all this is that the trainer does it because they are taking a guess and hoping for the best. Just like you do with the way you adjust for unlucky. All guess work, some of it may even be an educated guess - but a guess all the same. It's why you lose. That's why I increase the investment by 20%..not 80%...who said it works EVERY TIME...or 80%... ...Trainers will be expecting at least that though....after trialling gear on in form horses and not last resorters... ...basic shit this...last time the horse may have not had a problem...yet developed one including breathing...any number pop up... ..you obviously think they're machines...yet even machines need oiling so you're clueless...but we knew that from your previous dickhead dissertations I trust the Trainer that in their professional opinion some gear will improve them this start... ...you don't and assess performance with new gear post race...and you've lost...if it wins...me 20%...you nothing... ...oh and Magoo can't see if they're unlucky or caught wide without cover either... ...to which I add @0.3 secs to their performance measurement on average... you...NOTHING...NIL...NADA... You NILLER...OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 7 minutes ago, Thomass said: That's why I increase the investment by 20%..not 80%...who said it works EVERY TIME...or 80%... ...Trainers will be expecting at least that though....after trialling gear on in form horses and not last resorters... ...basic shit this...last time the horse may have not had a problem...yet developed one including breathing...any number pop up... It certainly doesn't work every time. It wouldn't work any more than doing the same for horses starting with the letter 'L'. the process is identical as you've been informed but can't grasp. It certainly is basic shit. Shit being the operative word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Thomass said: I trust the Trainer that in their professional opinion some gear will improve them this start... ...you don't and assess performance with new gear post race...and you've lost...if it wins...me 20%...you nothing... I haven't seen horses demonstrate this improvement you're going on about. If it wins and is at value - I already have it. I don't know why you even persist with trying to pretend you are something you aren't. Crazy stuff. Edited October 29, 2019 by mardigras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Thomass said: ...Trainers will be expecting at least that though....after trialling gear on in form horses and not last resorters... All horses will be considered to be 'in form' to some punters. Therefore, trainers will be expecting the improvement across all horses with the gear change - every horse will fit your analysis for punters out in the real world. I even put up the stats for blinkers on for horses to have finished within 1 length of the winner last start. The stats were poor to which you said, that doesn't mean they are in form. Yet it does when you say they are. Hmmm - fraud. Edited October 29, 2019 by mardigras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted October 29, 2019 Author Share Posted October 29, 2019 Many top trainers will tell media... "I've been saving Blinkers up" If a top trainer says that then I should be adding 80% obviously! Not 20%...stupid me as stupid does... Its counterintuitive to think anything else... So you do? NIL... NILLER But you can't assess Course Specialists...so no f in surprises there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 2 minutes ago, Thomass said: Many top trainers will tell media... "I've been saving Blinkers up" If a top trainer says that then I should be adding 80% obviously! Not 20%...stupid me as stupid does... Its counterintuitive to think anything else... So you do? NIL... NILLER But you can't assess Course Specialists...so no f in surprises there Why would you listen to what a top trainer says. No wonder you lose. If I heard a top trainer say that, I'd be highly likely to lay the horse. The price will be massively affected and still no more likely to win that without the gear. I don't know of any course specialists. I wouldn't even have called Chief De Beers a course specialist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 I have looked up my last 6 runners who had blinkers applied -1st time -4 won, 1 was second, the other 4th. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 1 minute ago, Fred said: I have looked up my last 6 runners who had blinkers applied -1st time -4 won, 1 was second, the other 4th. Good for you Fred. I could look up the last 1000 runners to have blinkers applied first time. Get around 80 winners. I'm not sure how that helps a punter know whether the application of blinkers first time to a runner is going to help or not. But I do like to hear about some success stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 As repetitive and boring this thread is, it's important from the point that the racing industry needs as many punters as possible to keep on betting with them. Not be drawn in to punting, read some supposedly informed comment on here and quickly realise they are losing all their money rapidly - and walk away. Idiots suggesting the ways for others to make money which is all based on being a fraud and a loser - is something the industry can ill afford to condone. If he just said, this is what I do but others shouldn't necessarily do similar. Then I'd leave him alone. But he keeps on and on with the usual post race crap as if people should listen to what he says. It's one of the issues with giving idiots free reign on the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 33 minutes ago, mardigras said: As repetitive and boring this thread is, it's important from the point that the racing industry needs as many punters as possible to keep on betting with them. Not be drawn in to punting, read some supposedly informed comment on here and quickly realise they are losing all their money rapidly - and walk away. Exactly. We want them losing slowly and staying interested. This type of misinformation is fraudulent as you say when offered as gospel. Should be in the RITA strategic plan to develop a way of burying it. I accidentally heard a couple of dog races yesterday. The presenter was not only listing his value bets for the day but giving out the prices he made them. Might be a genetic thing which is possibly Thommo's problem and covers the lack of intellect required to think you can price a field by pricing 4 horses. How do you do that Thommo? Set all the rest to 1000/1? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 1 hour ago, Fred said: I have looked up my last 6 runners who had blinkers applied -1st time -4 won, 1 was second, the other 4th. Is that because of the blinkers or because the trainer applies them when the horse is ready and placed in the right race to win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 4 minutes ago, curious said: I accidentally heard a couple of dog races yesterday. The presenter was not only listing his value bets for the day but giving out the prices he made them. Might be a genetic thing which is possibly Thommo's problem and covers the lack of intellect required to think you can price a field by pricing 4 horses. How do you do that Thommo? Set all the rest to 1000/1? Like two or three years back when the Karaka Million was being priced. He didn't price the winner because he said why price horses that have no chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooncoin Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 Everyone has an idea of how a race may or may not pan out and that's the gamble.You guys are pros, and spend your valuable time doing your homework. Most pros see a race totally differently. Nobody needs to put up ones punts or selections on any site ,although one or two would be handy throughout the year!?.There is no right or wrong way in accessing races so good luck guys and stop the bitching, its getting f..king boring now! By the way, my left arm has been in fine form of late! I'm thinking of joining the PDC!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts