|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
12-22-2009, 07:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
huh?
TG numbers tend to be tighter than Ragozin numbers. They are FAR more prone to splitting variants and cutting races loose. 
|
|
#3
12-22-2009, 08:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Like Steve just said - they both use the same adjustments for weight, the same adjustments for ground loss, I would assume the same data for wind corrections .. the difference between the two is in the days race track variant. Ragozin is far less likely to split variants or cut races loose. I don't prefer either method. On a very tough day to make numbers - I might write down in my trip notes something like "Tough day for figure making. this figure might be as high as a 79 .. could be as low as 71." On an easy day I'll put "Easy day for making figs. cut and dry figure of 62 for winner" The commerical figure makers have to come up with one number - because they're selling ... and you don't see any indicators of how easy or tough a day it was to make numbers. Speed figures are an amazing tool for comparing horses from circuit-to-circuit and comparing horses from different time periods. However, they're a sometimes very overrated betting tool - unless you have great strength in all other areas of handicapping and good analytical skills... they won't help you win by themselves.
|
|
#4
12-22-2009, 08:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
I am analytical and like using numbers, but it seems to me that Thoro-Graph and Ragozin are better for telling what a horse's capability is on a given day.
I'm more comfortable just using Beyers numbers and recent workouts to determine what a horse is likely to run on that day. I guess I just need more experience using these other handicapping tools. Thanks again.....
|
Hybrid Mode
