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

~.....the informed analysis approach vs random luck in finding winners on the track..


Recommended Posts

As an exercise this Saturday I will select 3 races-1 in Sydney,1 in Melbourne and 1 in NZ.

Using a very transparent' luck'formula I will select 4 horses in each race.Any cumulative dividends -F4,Tri,Q,10/10 EW will be totalled.

If anyone is up for the challenge they can do the same using their own form analysis.

If there is no one inclined to do that,I will substitute the selections of a known media racing scribe.

I find the proposition of 'measurable variables' quite fascinating tbh.

I think people can agree that 'luck' is a component in every race.

How is a barrier draw decided for instance?

Roll on...Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

But you haven't defined what YOU determine is a variable you call 'luck'.  What is it?  How do you measure it?  How does it influence your selections?

And you steadfastly offer no explanation of your 'measurable variables'!

Don't you think barrier draws are down to ...'luck'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

And you steadfastly offer no explanation of your 'measurable variables'!

I'm still waiting to read your definition of luck.

6 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

Don't you think barrier draws are down to ...'luck'?

No.  That is measurable probability just like Lotto.  The chance of getting Barrier 1 as the first marble drawn was 1 in 13 in the Derby.  Just like it is 1 in 40 in Lotto.

If a horse gets caught 3 wide without cover is that bad riding or bad luck?  Or was it the likely outcome of a particular draw relative to the speed map for the race?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

I'm still waiting to read your definition of luck.

No.  That is measurable probability just like Lotto.  The chance of getting Barrier 1 as the first marble drawn was 1 in 13 in the Derby.  Just like it is 1 in 40 in Lotto.

If a horse gets caught 3 wide without cover is that bad riding or bad luck?  Or was it the likely outcome of a particular draw relative to the speed map for the race?  

I have already posted a definition of luck that people recognise by a reputable source.

You are spinning like a top...'measurable variables' was your term,now you have decided 'measurable probabilities' is more credible.

You highlight your lack of understanding with your barrier/lotto analogy.

Think about it!

If there are 13 runners in a field and random barrier draws have been made for 11 of the runners and the only barriers left are say 2 and 12....the odds are now 1/2 or 50/50 not 1 in 13.

Barrier draws are luck...period. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

You highlight your lack of understanding with your barrier/lotto analogy.

Think about it!

If there are 13 runners in a field and random barrier draws have been made for 11 of the runners and the only barriers left are say 2 and 12....the odds are now 1/2 or 50/50 not 1 in 13.

Barrier draws are luck...period. 

You may consider yourself "lucky" if you win but the probabilities of drawing a particular number is measurable.

You obviously have a literacy and comprehension problem.  I posted the probabilities of the FIRST marble drawn out.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the off chance that someone may try their....um....hand at selecting 4,the nominated races are the Derby @Ellerslie,R4@Flemington and R10 @Randwick.

This should enable plenty of time for form analysis.

Any late scratching, the next starter below becomes the selection-if the last horse is scr,then no.1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

Haha....the ex Capt of the Lincoln College debating team?..show's the depth of his skills...!

Another example of your ability to make things up and or poor level of literacy. 

When are you going to explain your luck punting stratagem?  I guess you will be taking Easy Bets?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chief Stipe said:

Another example of your ability to make things up and or poor level of literacy. 

When are you going to explain your luck punting stratagem?  I guess you will be taking Easy Bets?

Are you interested in putting up 4 picks for those races Chief?...or are you afraid luck may not favour...you?😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, holy ravioli said:

Are you interested in putting up 4 picks for those races Chief?...or are you afraid luck may not favour...you?😉

Quite frankly I find you an absolute bore Holey Pasta.  90% of your posts are having a crack at the Chief Stipe or BOAY.  

We'll wait and see who plays your little game.

Still waiting for the detail on your luck theorem/stratagem.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I may interupt just briefly to offer a different perspective. And I admit I stopped reading the above after the first four messages.

Sure the initial barrier draw is purely luck, but once it is known it becomes a measurable variable. Barrier draws are very important on many tracks. In a sprint race at Doomben for instance if I don't like anything in particular and if there is some value in those drawn inside I will just box the four inside draws in a quinella. I am not including heavy tracks here. Caulfield is another track where barrier draws become important once the track bias is known.

To suggest it is irrelevant considering the numerous variables in determining the outcome of any race is quite farcial to be honest. The Chosen One looked as close as you could get to a weight certainty in that mile at Trentham recently. Some horses will not handle certain track conditions based on breeding and previous performance, others won't cope with some distances for the same reason.

Even the odds can be a relevant variable. There are an awful lot of false favourites out there and people who only back favourites get sucked in badly quite regularly.

As a punter of course I should be grateful that there are others out there who don't consider any of these variables in making their bets; long may they continue punting.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Quite frankly I find you an absolute bore Holey Pasta.  90% of your posts are having a crack at the Chief Stipe or BOAY.  

We'll wait and see who plays your little game.

Still waiting for the detail on your luck theorem/stratagem.  

At least you are predictable Chief.

Having a crack at posters whose position on  matters is different to mine is not confined to you at all.

You happen to be the most prolific poster and the one whose take' on alot of things often differs from mine.

Imagine if everyone sang off the same songsheet everyday!

I always try to play the 'ball',not the...'man'.Try it.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Doomed said:

Even the odds can be a relevant variable. There are an awful lot of false favourites out there and people who only back favourites get sucked in badly quite regularly.

That's where the concept of looking for value comes into play.

The debate around luck is that if a horse is blocked for a run in its previous start that could be described as "bad luck" but the point is it has no relevance in either determining who you backed in that race nor in its next race.

Now its potential for "bad luck" to occur could be assesses prior to the race when looking at the barrier draw.  For example barrier 10 over 2200m is a shocker at leaving a horse posted 3 wide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a thread on neo liberalism where you state...(amongst other things😉)

' did make the debating team three years in a row as third speaker.  I had a reputation for quick wit, rapier style rebuttal and immolating my opponents.'

So you were not Captain,but you will notice I put ?-as I couldn't recall your exact quote.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, holy ravioli said:

There is a thread on neo liberalism where you state...(amongst other things😉)

' did make the debating team three years in a row as third speaker.  I had a reputation for quick wit, rapier style rebuttal and immolating my opponents.'

So you were not Captain,but you will notice I put ?-as I couldn't recall your exact quote.

Idiot.  Once again you are making things up.

  • Bad Post 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, holy ravioli said:

As an exercise this Saturday I will select 3 races-1 in Sydney,1 in Melbourne and 1 in NZ.

Using a very transparent' luck'formula I will select 4 horses in each race.Any cumulative dividends -F4,Tri,Q,10/10 EW will be totalled.

If anyone is up for the challenge they can do the same using their own form analysis.

If there is no one inclined to do that,I will substitute the selections of a known media racing scribe.

I find the proposition of 'measurable variables' quite fascinating tbh.

I think people can agree that 'luck' is a component in every race.

How is a barrier draw decided for instance?

Roll on...Saturday.

I'm in , the luck variable will be very high if I get a divvy .

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...