Trainer prognoses competition

Competition for trainers - (Please dont take this too serious!)

I heard often: Don't trust the prognoses of trainers, horse racing is too unpredictable.

I wanted to know if this is right. I made a statistic. I gave from -10 to +10 points per prognose.
i recognized, that trainers, even mike bass, have very good times (up to 5 times +10 in a row) and bad (up to 5 times -10) times.

i aspected average values of 3 or 4. nope.

seems, that even for trainers it is very difficult to assess chances.
only if you have heard more then 20 or 30 comments from a trainer you can yourself make prognoses about the trainers comments.

Long time leader was D. Howell, but he had bad prognoses in the last months, so even now behind Tarry.
the winner is Gavin van Zyl.



Brillant Prognoses, bet your house (5-10)

None

Good Prognoses, you can rely on (2-5)

None

Ups and Downs, try a place bet (0-2)

1) Van Zyl: 1,5 (from 33 comments)

2) S Miller: 1 (26)

3) Bass: 0,4 (from 105 comments)

( no trainer, but anyway: Sham Racing: 0,2 (from 34 comments))

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Listen, but be careful (0 to -2)

Goodman: -0,3 (from 13)

Tarry: -0,4 (from 33)

D. Howell: -1,1 (from 26)

G. Smith: -1,3 (from 34)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Better don't listen (up to -5)

Erasmus: -5 (from 22 c)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Probably corrupt (-10)

None

my comment , this is bullshit. saldiani -50

My comment: Saldiani's got the right idea. Instead of moaning and cussing, get some data and see how that pans out. So often we only remember the bad or good events and then we think they make up the whole story ... look at all the data and we can see it doesn't. From a teacher, 10/10! (next thing you'll be into statistics, whoooohooo!)

rubbish, all trainer must say this horse have a chance even if 3 in race

hi flash harry, this is statistic. if you call statistic rubbish, maybe your brain is rubbish. we see what we want to see.

actually i made always a difference between the comments. for example, if the trainer said "he must have chance to finish in the money" and the horse was 5 th or 6th, that did not count.
but if he said:"huge chance to win" and was then 8th, that was -10
the same, if he said, "need the experience" - and then won with 10 length: -10
if said: will win - and won: - +10
will place for a favourite, which then was second gave only 4 or 5 points
and so on.
thats purely statistic. if your are not interested, don't talk rubbish, just read somethin else



Flash Harry Wrote:

---

> rubbish, all trainer must say this horse have a
> chance even if 3 in race

what i learned from this statistic is, that in fact the days of good prognoses and bad are equally.
would be interesting to see, which punter earns steadily money with his bets. i suppose, this will NOT be based on trainer comments

saldiani it is the meaningless argument. like what percent of horse with green colours win or what horse from no 3 draw win. you can make stats on anything

And again today in Vaal Erasmus failed TOTALLY with his prognose for the second race. his third horse, which he did not even mention, was second.

so he approaches slowly the worst category... "maybe corrupt". no, i would never say this and i don't think so, but it is really shocking, how bad he assesses the chances of his horses (and nevertheless seems to be a good trainer)

Donkey punch thread imo

donkey only a guy, who thinks, if a trainer fails 20 out of 22, this is not important for punters

i made a lot of work. and i don't say, you can rely on, but in some cases as in erasmus it is really quite interesting.

people here should say thank you instead of saying, that this is all nonsense.

i doubt if they know what punting means

so go on and loose your money