Oops! or Yikes! or Egads! or ... Disaster! ... take your pick (pun not intended) as any or all apply to my LC KD's "ability" (or should I say, lack thereof?) to pick w inners and p lacers and s howers is concerned.

It was a bad day for my picks as I lost everything I bet--which for my new institutionalized standard KD bet was $78 = $68 for the formularized exacta bet and 10 bucks on my top 5 to win plus let me add here that until and unless I come up with a KD formula for trifectas I'll add 4 deep 1 dollar trifecta boxes to this so that I lost 102 bucks this year. (It might be interesting to note for those of you who don't think things are predictable that had you only bet 2 bucks to win on every horse in the race over the last two Kentucky Derby races you would have spent 78 bucks per 2 buck bet and cashed $121 per 78 dollars bet for a 100% "win" rate with an roi = +55%. Hence, it appears as if the KD is still a good paying opportunity to bet from year to year. Notice by comparison that the Stock Market--as measured by the Dow Jones Industrial Average during this same time period encompassing two KD's--went from the low 8000's to about 11,000 for a gain of only about 33%.)

I of course could blame my bad performance on the weather as my LC program assumes a fast track (it does this of course as a matter of convience--that is, it can't do anything yet about a non-fast track because unlike human beings it isn't "smart enough" to so do--that is, it isn't infinite in its capacity to deal with new variables--that is, it doesn't have the potential to forever add one more variable to its list of variables--that is, it's a computer program) but "they" say sloppy tracks (as opposed to muddy or even good) are as fast as and sometimes faster than fast tracks.

Though I've checked this out anecdotally with there seeming to be some truth to it, I haven't checked it out scientifically so I don't know for sure if this is the case.

But here's the thing, last year if I am to believe my history files on the KD the track was sloppy also and my top pick over and under won half of two grand so this year was simply, too bad, you loose.

But here is the other thing that's kinda cool about the Kentucky Derby: there's always next year.

See you back here then?

.......................................................................

Ary Ering,
aka gAry deEring
the worlds most consistent handicapper and erratic bettor ...
5/10/2010

PS

For those of you besides me who are keeping track of my ability to predict (non-horse race outcome) things you will notice that up to and including the Friday just before this KD, my score was Reality 1, Gary 0.24 but since last year (just like this year) I predicted (am predicting) that the Kentucky Derby will be run the first Saturday in May "next year" my new score now is, Reality 2, Gary 1.24. This is an improvement for me of 24% to 62% as the KD (inspite of the threatening weather) did run this past Saturday and though this may seem a bit tic (tongue-in-cheek) to some of you non "scientist" types it remains a fact that volition in man and prediction in science are not self-canceling ideas. (Some cognitive behavioral scientist types think they are and argue that because of it a science of human psychology is not possible.)

This science still has to be developed I will agree as I am working on it albeit very slowly as I have too many other interests to pursue. Consequently, I strongly advise you to not wait around for me to come up with this science before you use it to solve all your own life problems.

Rather buy all my stuff that you can (and view it as the works-in-progress for the emerging science that will be called PsycHHology, The Science of Human Psychology) and read and use them as well as read all my free stuff online and figure out this new science for yourself. I will continue as fast as I can to contribute more to it in the future to help you along on your earthly path to happiness and self-fulfillment as you live your life day-to-day.

What more can I say, the Objectivists and Biocentric Psychology'ists have helped me along this path and I think it justice to openly acknowledge it and express it rather than hide it or cover it up.

Later,

Bye.

Gary Deering
PsycHHology Engineer
(helping phhilosophhy
build better humans)
5/10/10

No, wait.

It just dawned on me (actually it didn't but ... for the purposes of this particular writing I can use my poetic liscense to say, it did just dawn on me) that real MMQ'g is or should be about reviewing the "game" and seeing where your errors as well as your strengths and weaknesses were/are and where your opponents are too.

But who or what in horse race predicting/betting is the opponent?

The opponent has to be other bettors because all of us by the picks we choose and the bets we make determines the payout odds of the winners and hence contribute big time to whether or not eventually we come out with a positive roi (return on investment). For example, if the majority of bettors thought and bet on the worst horse in the race as if it were the best and the best in the race as if it were the worst then those who knew bettor could make a lot of return on their betting by betting the real best.

But of course which horse is the real best is the sixty-four thousand dollar question.

Since horse races involve a goodly amount of human volition--from owners choosing horses & trainers to trainers choosing work out regimens & races to run in to jockeys choosing to zig & not zag or vice versa during many multiple moments within any given race and not to forget the bettors themselves choosing which to bet--in addition to which we have all the variables inherent in individual horses qua living organisms and all of this along with physical conditions such as track condition, weather and so on to say it is a difficult game to "win" is understatement at (or near) its best.

Consequently, the one and only thing we know for sure about horse race betting is that it is not an easy game to win and like most gambling (except perhaps the Stock Market where it appears that those who have the inside track to Government bailouts ... wait ... stop ... don't go there ... ok ... but ... No. In horse race betting like most gambling) the gambler does not "win" more money than he or she wagers.

I've heard there are exceptions to this rule but since I've never met such an exception personally I don't know this to be the case. (Though that "guy" who I caught a glimpse of on TV making the $100,000 cash-in-a-briefcase win bet on Super Saver the eventual winner leads me to believe there are such successful bettors--I just am not one of them.)

So then the "reward" has to be more than just money even though money is enough by itself if your roi is positive but since in most cases (I surmise) it isn't there has to be more rewards and there is: the reward of being right and being paid for it when you do cash winning tickets.

There also is "locker room" bragging rights "rewards" and there is satisfaction rewards of having figured something out to the best degree possible-to-you qua individual figure-outter.

So ... why can't your horse race handicapping computer program not predict horse race outcomes better than it does - that is, why did we loose the Kentucky Derby game to other bettors this past Saturday?

Ans: because of enthalpy (or is that entropy?).

And now since I am on the verge of involking some theory from Thermodynamics and tieing it, through the amatuer scientist and professional Objectivist Dr. Harry Binswanger to Philosophy I have to stop.

Because I just don't have time to get into it here and so I will let this be a thing to continue in my f.u.t.u.r.e just like I still have to be motivated enough AFTER the Kentucky Derby to follow up and get as many KD race samples in my database as I can.

But right now this year again as last year at this post KD time frame this motivation has left me. So maybe next year I'll do it.

FPS

Just had a thought: I have met the (betting) oponent and he is I?

Copyright © 2010 RaIse Books, LLC. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited. RaIse Books, LLC is a for profit organization. Contributions to RaIse Books, LLC are not tax-exempt. gdeering.com, egoAerodynamics.com, theREALinconvenientTRUTH.com and certain other dot coms are owned by Gary Deering. All material on Gary's dot com websites and websides, including RaIseBooks.com is copyrighted. Reproduction in whole or part is prohibited without express permission. If you are interested in publishing any of Gary's material, please contact him at gary@raisebooks.com with the details to request permission. Thank you.