Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chrome Prince
Massive generalization in that statement.
The second part is a throw away line to justify your personal view.
The variables you have outlined apply just as much to handicapping as they do to mechanical systems.
Did it occur to you that some purely mechanical systems (the good one's) actually contain within them, one of the most powerful handicap techniques available?
|
Chrome Prince,
Ah, it was a reply to your 'statement' of what constitutes a winning system by 'Crash' [he called one of your points 'a load of crock'] that had him banned from the forum, that was the only reason I visited this thread really in the first place, to have a look at what the fuss was about.
Crash also said Darkydog was 'gullible' in answer to his post here about having [tongue in cheek] bought over 300 systems [now there is a way to make money from systems!]. Crash then went on to try and sell Darky the Sydney Harbor Bridge for whatever money he had left. He wants to buy it and expects delivery on Xmas day:-)
After reading this thread and the posts concerned, I really can't understand the fuss. There was obviously no malice in either comment from Crash. Blatantly obvious regarding the post to Darky, but his 'load of crock' comment was perceived by you as 'harsh' according to your reply post. The one member who complained to management perhaps? I'm not saying you did though of course.
I would have used different language than a 'load of crock'. Crash is just a bit old fashioned. 'Massive generalization' would have been my choice of words.
Interestingly, I was looking at another thread of yours: 'Chrome tipped arrows'.
One of your rules that Crash didn't criticize, mentioned 'must not rely on occasional long shots'. I notice your 'Chrome tipped Arrows' does exactly that. Decide a few rules and chance is doing the rest. Nothing scientific there. If it's making a profit at the moment, it's chance at work not probability.
Beyond explaining some probability in my post with some simple maths., yes I indeed summarized my final point with a bit of reason. 40% facts collected into a database and 60% 'events', collected over thousands of races is going to provide long term, predictable future profitable outcome? You really have to be joking right? Are you involved in selling systems or something?.
'Generalized' is your claim about my final point in my post. OK if you like, I'm not trying to prove anything here. If I was I would have decided not to summarize, but used another language completely, advanced maths. which was not needed for the simple explanation about probability.This is a punting forum, not a science forum right?
If you would like to change the language of your disagreement with my point of view here Chrome Prince, I'm willing to oblige if you also can speak the language. Crash would not be able to, but with a Bachelor of Science degree, I certainly would have no trouble.
I tried to keep my post's point simple. Do I get banned now too:-)?
No offense meant Chrome Prince and all the best,
Zoe.