HOL trims stakes purses; Rosario's book to Ebanks

[The Indomitable DrugS]

PID is my 'home track' only in so much as it's 2 miles away and all my selections go in the newspaper.

For two straight years my top selection has yielded a flat bet profit at the end of each meet.

But hey, that's just 1,600 races... Joel Rosario, who you knock bigtime as a jockey, has yielded a flat bet profit for a riding career of over 4k races.

Don't get me wrong .. I'll downgrade the chances of a horse if I think the new rider is hopelessly incompetent... or if the rider switch is one I deem negative.

Just because I quote a lot of riders stats doesn't mean it's much of a factor in my handicapping. A lot of times - the reputation of the rider gets baked into the odds. Yeah, Dominguez is great ... but if you get him you're going to see a bit of a hit in price. Yeah, Jackie Davis stinks ... but hey, you're going to get the best of it price wise with someone like that. If the horse runs well enough .. it won't matter.

Sometimes everything unfolds right and bad riders land perfect trips. Sometimes things go wrong and good riders find bad trips.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

PID is my 'home track' only in so much as it's 2 miles away and all my selections go in the newspaper.

For two straight years my top selection has yielded a flat bet profit at the end of each meet.

But hey, that's just 1,600 races... Joel Rosario, who you knock bigtime as a jockey, has yielded a flat bet profit for a riding career of over 4k races.

Your top picks are typically CHALK, from what I've seen you write on the topic. Moreover, I just completed a year's worth of plays, close to 2,000 plays, with a POSITIVE ROI. (And my only 'tool' is that simpleton Fat Chart-- imagine if the charts were actually accurate?)
It's NOT statistics or any other of the common tools. So, let's get that out of the way and not feel the need to mention it again.

I could care less what Rosario's flat bet results are. I have an idea what he can and can't do from watching him. He's NOT a top jock. If I depended on results, then I'd be keying on Jacquie Davis, who certainly has a HIGHER return over the past 200 races than Rosario. These stats are USELESS to me.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Your top picks are typically CHALK, from what I've seen you write on the topic. Moreover, I just completed a year's worth of plays, close to 2,000 plays, with a POSITIVE ROI. (And my only 'tool' is that simpleton Fat Chart-- imagine if the charts were actually accurate?)
It's NOT statistics or any other of the common tools. So, let's get that out of the way and not feel the need to mention it again.

I could care less what Rosario's flat bet results are. I have an idea what he can and can't do from watching him. He's NOT a top jock. If I depended on results, then I'd be keying on Jacquie Davis, who certainly has a HIGHER return over the past 200 races than Rosario. These stats are USELESS to me.

This is not true.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by philcski

This is not true.

It is true Phil. I've had top pick winners pay as high as 35/1 and more than a few pay higher than 15/1 .. which is a big reason for the profitable stats.

But the vast majority of the time - I'm picking short prices on top.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

It is true Phil. I've had top pick winners pay as high as 35/1 and more than a few pay higher than 15/1 .. which is a big reason for the profitable stats.

But the vast majority of the time - I'm picking short prices on top.

That's the bane of being a public handicapper. I'm just trying to give credit where credit is due. The NY Post guys pick a lot of chalk of course and they don't even match the takeout. The fields at Pid necessitate picking short prices often anyways...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

That's the bane of being a public handicapper. I'm just trying to give credit where credit is due. The NY Post guys pick a lot of chalk of course and they don't even match the takeout. The fields at Pid necessitate picking short prices often anyways...

Clocking their selections are ya?

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Clocking their selections are ya?

I read the Post every day for years, and they publish their winning percentage and ROI daily. Their selections are laughably bad.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Your top picks are typically CHALK, from what I've seen you write on the topic. Moreover, I just completed a year's worth of plays, close to 2,000 plays, with a POSITIVE ROI. (And my only 'tool' is that simpleton Fat Chart-- imagine if the charts were actually accurate?)
It's NOT statistics or any other of the common tools. So, let's get that out of the way and not feel the need to mention it again.

I could care less what Rosario's flat bet results are. I have an idea what he can and can't do from watching him. He's NOT a top jock. If I depended on results, then I'd be keying on Jacquie Davis, who certainly has a HIGHER return over the past 200 races than Rosario. These stats are USELESS to me.

Yeah. You win at the track. Your picks on your little twitter page are hilarious. That is when you post them. And you are one to talk about chalk. When your dartboard is correct and you do hit something it's some ridiculously chalky exacta that you brag about. Leaving your charming personality out of the equation you are truly one of the worst cappers to grace the internet.

But you sure act like a guy who wins at the track

Like when you make fun of farmers with..

"Look at me daddy I'm a farmer!"

You're being mean.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52mZs9ngNug