A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 101,518
- 155,044
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Agree on both fronts.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Spring Racing
- Thread starter Jugada
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Agree on both fronts.
- Banned
- #802
Lol at "ratings are just a fancy opinion"...
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 101,518
- 155,044
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Then why the hell do all these ratings gods have their own systems?
They are an opinion. Anyone could come up with their own system or use someone else's and say by 'my ratings' . Just because they use the term ratings or have ratings, doesn't mean they are a better punter than Joe Blow down at the local pub TAB.
Sky Ratings, case in point.
- Thread starter
- #804
Lol at "Lol at "ratings are just a fancy opinion"..."
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Speed ratings are not opinion based.
- Thread starter
- #806
The notion of actually using "speed ratings" as fact is opinion based
There is no opinion involved with speed ratings, whether or not you think they are relevant or not is another thing.
I hope throwing darts at a board works well for you though.
- Thread starter
- #808
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 101,518
- 155,044
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
And as you can see above, children, this is your typical ratings fig jam.
They get defensive at the slightest notion that their ratings system could be flawed in some shape or form.
God, you type of people make me laugh.
Last edited:
- Banned
- #810
Lol at "Lol at "Lol at "ratings are just a fancy opinion"..."..."
And as you can see above, children, this is your typical ratings figjam.
God, you type of people make me laugh.
This post has a bit of FIGJAM about it, you're clearly the type that thinks they know it all, clocked the art of punting have we?
- Banned
- #812
Then why the hell do all these ratings gods have their own systems?
They are an opinion. Anyone could come up with their own system or use someone else's and say by 'my ratings' . Just because they use the term ratings or have ratings, doesn't mean they are a better punter than Joe Blow down at the local pub TAB.
Sky Ratings, case in point.
I am not talking about SKY ratings. I am talking about proper ratings.
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 101,518
- 155,044
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 101,518
- 155,044
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
But they are a form of ratings. Why is any other form of ratings any better than the sky ratings system (profit/strike rate % aside) ?
In reality its exactly as Jugada said, a fancy system used to create an opinion.
- Thread starter
- #815
LOLCEPTION
If they are not opinion based, perhaps you could explain in laymans terms what you're talking about. Presumably you're talking about using sectionals, overall times on the day and other Vince Accardi jargon to produce a figure?
That's fine by me, but I still don't understand how one person couldn't simply interpret the raw data differently to someone else, hence producing a different rating?
Not suggesting I have but there is no opinion involved with my raw ratings, the only speculative aspect of my overall ratings is the impact of weight carried, you cannot be definitive with that.
Do these ratings mean I win every single time I have a bet, no, do these ratings help me win over the course of a year, yes.
So, your opinion on this matter means absolutely nothing to me.
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 101,518
- 155,044
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
Once again, I don't expect you to break down your entire rating system for me, but in a nutshell what elements of your ratings are cold hard facts that can't be misinterpreted? Are you talking purely how fast a horse can run? Help me out here.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Banned
- #820
Their time turned into a rating figure isn't an opinion, it's a measurement. The opinion comes in when you attempt to predict what they'll do tomorrow. But the rating itself is a measure, not an opinion.
Exactly, just because a horse runs a high rating one day doesn't mean he will replicate it the next, they give you an insight into a horses ability and help you asses their chances in a given race.
They are the basis of my analysis as I will not back horses that have not run high ratings but they are a starting point more than anything.
- Banned
- #822
They're a tool. Worked out correctly they're a very good tool, but still more is needed over and above, ie form.
Example: on my ratings The Cleaner's recent wins were 3L inferior to Fawkner's Turnbull win, and same to Adelaide's, about 2.5L inferior to Sacred Falls figure, ditto Criterion, Royal Descent. Therefore, he really wasn't much chance. Beaten 3.5L I think? Pretty accurate measurement, IMO.
A11dAtP0w3R
Dumpster Fire Diver
- Oct 18, 2013
- 101,518
- 155,044
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Carolina Panthers
And if a horse is three or four deep without cover but is beaten by 4 or 5 lengths in the same race as one who blitzes the clock when having a gun run?
Time ratings can be flawed. A race pattern/shape can suit one horse one week but another the next. Using speed ratings as a be all and end all or saying 'run to Black Caviar standard' is insane. How often was Black Caviar extended to the line for one?
Sometimes it can be just as simple as using your peepers.
Im not saying Chatauqua can't or won't win, but I sure won't be diving into a short price on a horse based on times run against inferior opposition to what he will meet at his next start.
Last edited:
Yes, what I'm asking is how do you arrive at the measurement?
If it is a measurement and not opinion, does that mean you two, Racetrack Ralphy and every other person who does speed ratings come up with the same numerical figure every time, say when Deep Field wins??
Because if you don't, I'm really not following how it is not just an opinion.
Clearly I'm missing the point here, because there is no way in hell every single person doing speed ratings is working on the same page in regards to how much they factor in headwinds, track bias or whatever.
Similar threads
