Accepting randomness in wager creation

[Tim Y]

Just finished TWO very good books
http://www.amazon.com/Drunkards-Walk.../dp/0375424040
The Drunkards Walk How Randomness Rules Our Lives

and Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets by Nasim Taleb and these have profound implications on the predictive nature of a wager in that there will ALWAYS BE a bit of unpredictability in any attempt at judging the future and we must confront that truism or be exiled to constant frustration.

Realize how a slight bump at the gate, a rough trip, jockey dropping the stikck etc, can change the outcome by things one has NO ability to predict, or a horse suddenly "woke up" or was jolted (phenomenologically).

In exotics this mean the oft use of the "all" or near "all" at a point in the wager. I often get the SPLITZACTA (first and third with many a long long price in between) and since accepting the randomness these previously frustrating situations have graduated to profits.

Biggest shots are in the baby races where you ride the coat tails of a single good horse to the completely random field of many first timers and the payouts, particularly when that horse runs third, are big time

[Tim Y]

A review of the first book: This smart book will make you think. Academic yet easy to read, it explores how random events shape the world and how human intuition fights that fact. I found this point fascinating. It never occurred to me that our brains naturally want to see patterns and order, and life doesn't necessarily work like that.

It's comforting to think of an orderly world, with everything in its place, running according to plan. It dovetails into our yearning for meaning and control, and the need to feel that we are important. The idea of randomness is frightening. If the world is shaped without conscious decision, it's a pretty chilly prospect.

Author Leonard Mlodinow examines the importance of randomness in diverse situations, including Las Vegas roulette tables, "Let's Make a Deal," the career of Bruce Willis, and the Warsaw ghetto after Hitler invaded Poland. The author does a good job explaining how chance and luck are vital factors in how things turn out.

[Tim Y]

A great example occurred in the nightcap at Belmont on Wednesday July 15th as the choices with 3 and 8 with the choices and the FOUR the random factor.

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthr...7161#post57161 post 24

9th race - Belmont Park - July 15, 2009

Pgm Horse Win Place Show
8 Joaquin Memphis 9.80 4.30 3.70
3 Api Mohkat 3.50 2.50
4 One Starry Nite 8.40

$2 Daily Double 1-8 263.50
$2 Exacta 8-3 35.00
$2 Superfecta 8-3-4-9 1,670.00
$2 Trifecta 8-3-4 397.00

[tom]

I think you are using random when it is more unknown.
Many of the "random" finishes you describe are completely predictable using other tools and histories. They are random to you because you do not use them. The Doc talked about this at a Baltimore seminar with Mark Cramer as a guest. He said Mark was there to show us how to get those races the methodolgy could not, those exotic underneaths that pace could not find.

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by tom

I think you are using random when it is more unknown.
Many of the "random" finishes you describe are completely predictable using other tools and histories. They are random to you because you do not use them. The Doc talked about this at a Baltimore seminar with Mark Cramer as a guest. He said Mark was there to show us how to get those races the methodology could not, those exotic underneaths that pace could not find.

Didn't read a bit of the book did you?

[tom]

Yes, as a mater of fact, I read some of it.
I do not agree with your characterization:

Realize how a slight bump at the gate, a rough trip, jockey dropping the stikck etc, can change the outcome by things one has NO ability to predict, or a horse suddenly "woke up" or was jolted (phenomenologically).

My thoughts are that what one man considers unpredictable another might consider likely. The criteria lies with the other man's assessment, not your own.
The 4 horse in your example might be random to you, but not to others.

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by tom

.
The 4 horse in your example might be random to you, but not to others.

Lets hear some logic for this one ......Morning Line 30/1 BY THE TRACK HANDICAPPER says quite a bit.

[tom]

You miss the point. The idea is to look outside your program. If it were in the readouts, you would not calling it random.

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by tom

You miss the point. The idea is to look outside your program. If it were in the readouts, you would not calling it random.

A past performance is a readout? news to me

[alydar_ David]

Originally Posted by tom

You miss the point. The idea is to look outside your program. If it were in the readouts, you would not calling it random.

Bingo.

For example, here's an email I received from a friend of the owner yesterday, "5 bar shoe off.........................Maker really likes....................."

You're not going to find that in any readouts. And it most certainly isn't random.