The Pizzola window

[JimG]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

Pizzolla's Handicapping Magic has many a good ideas, but the Pizzolla turf window shines above all the rest. [/B]

I'm glad Tim started a thread about Pizzolla and Handicapping Magic. Personally, I have been spending a lot of time in study about Handicapping Magic and its principles for the last 6 months.

The conclusion I have reached is if you can get past all the cheesy hype Pizzolla and company attach to each of the products they sell, there is really no finer person today to learn from on how to approach betting the races than Pizzolla. I believe he bets and wins at the races and his approach is identical to the very few people I know that derive much of their income from betting the races. I enjoy his teaching style and I really feel the seminars he sells are worth as much, if not more, than the software he sells with them.

Jim

[Tim Y]

Turfers don't abound at Fort Erie but they certainly stand out as the top two finish one two: not great odds but stand outs with the top projected early speed finishing third.


6th race - Fort Erie - July 07, 2008
Pgm Horse Win Place Show
1 Intothewilderness 7.00 3.30 2.70
5 Ludmila 4.10 3.40
7 Braver the Smarter 4.00

$2 Triactor 1-5-7 145.50
$2 Exactor 1-5 28.00

[shipper]

The pace line selections in your Fort Erie example don't seem to be consistent with your two-step directions earlier in this thread. You've included Poly lines on the #1, 4 and 6 as well as dirt lines on the 3 and 7. Why was the #2 eliminated? Also, how was the #7 considered to be "top projected early speed"?

[Tim Y]

Woodbine poly plays like dirt and MANY of these horse simply have no turf lines. As for the 7 look for yourself.

The entire process is about energy distribution. 2 was eliminated early.

[El Santo]

Well, at least he can spell, and has a pretty good understanding of how to use the English language!

[shoeless]

Tim,Just keep on doing what you have been,cant please everybody all the time.Jeff

[Tim Y]

Fort Erie turf is not like other turf courses since there are very few true turf horses. Comparison of the best TPP's

6th race - Fort Erie - July 07, 2008
Pgm Horse Win Place Show
1 Intothewilderness 7.00 3.30 2.70
5 Ludmila 4.10 3.40
7 Braver the Smarter 4.00

$2 Triactor 1-5-7 145.50
$2 Exactor 1-5 28.00

[jms62]

Originally Posted by shipper

The pace line selections in your Fort Erie example don't seem to be consistent with your two-step directions earlier in this thread. You've included Poly lines on the #1, 4 and 6 as well as dirt lines on the 3 and 7. Why was the #2 eliminated? Also, how was the #7 considered to be "top projected early speed"?

This total lack of any sort of rule or structure has for a long time been a major source of frustration. If those that are the champions of keeping Docs methodolgy alive allow the methodolgy to be hijacked and presented this way to newcomers than who am I to raise issue. Tim continued good luck to you and also good luck to those trying to chase these results realtime.

[Tim Y]

Originally Posted by jms62

This total lack of any sort of rule or structure has for a long time been a major source of frustration. If those that are the champions of keeping Docs methodology alive allow the methodolgy to be hijacked and presented this way to newcomers than who am I to raise issue. Tim continued good luck to you and also good luck to those trying to chase these results real time.

First of all, once an idea gets into another person's mind, it then belongs to them to utilize it however THEY see fit. Doc's methodology as a definition, and the BAN on using it originally, would be like telling everyone on earth that a type of bread had to be used only one way to somehow 'honor' the original baker. Thomas Jefferson had many things to say on just this matter:"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property. Society may give an exclusive right to the profits arising from them, as an encouragement to men to pursue ideas which may produce utility, but this may or may not be done, according to the will and convenience of the society, without claim or complaint from any body. Accordingly, it is a fact, as far as I am informed, that England was, until we copied her, the only country on earth which ever, by a general law, gave a legal right to the exclusive use of an idea. In some other countries it is sometimes done, in a great case, and by a special and personal act, but, generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices."

--Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Isaac McPherson, August 13 1813.

2nd, the people who constantly quote "There are no rules!" who are once confronted with originality in a process use, scream "YOU AREN'T FOLLOWING THE RULES!!!!" What a double standard. You don't expand understanding by being static.

Pizzolla has a great comment in Pace Makes the Race on just that point. One I took to heart many years ago: (paraphrasing here) "For those of you who need rules, the best you can hope for is competence in the methodology. Lao Tze, the compiler of the great work Tao Te Ching states:"Once the great way is lost, there appears codes of conduct."

Yes we have to protect those newbies!! My gosh can't let them believe they might actually be allowed to experiment and think for themselves! How catastrophic.....but There are no rules!! You know how hollow that rings?

Years ago an object lesson in original thinking changed forever, my views. We were assigned a paper and told to support one of two opposing views on cell membrane structure. One was in a botanical system and the other in an animal system. At the outset, that gross difference did not set well. After several attempts and trying to defend one side over the other, I constructed a third model of the membrane, that fit the experimental results just as well as the other two. I received high marks for original thinking and a note "You are unaware of blah blah step in your logic as this process would alter your model, but that information was only discovered recently and has not been published." So I take risks, I experiment and expand the knowledge base because that is why I have an inquiring mind.

[jms62]

So to briefly paraphrase. You pound us day after day with these great methods and if they are a success you pound your chest BUT when they fail well then well then the user is a big boy and should know better and think on their own??? Also Tim, being a doctor I'm sure you know how clincal trials are conducted. It's all about evidence and statistics but you offer NONE and you NEVER HAVE. You simply cherry pick results that match what you are selling, no statistics to back up anything that is being presented. It would be like a Pharma firm taking a handful of patients success out of a clincal trial and presenting it to the FDA as the Sum of the entire trial ...