Calling EC1

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BennyB

Senior Jockey
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
3,373
Location
Chew Valley
Your input is sorely missed. I haven't backed a winner on the all weather for days.

Get back on here lad, don't them get to you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
I'd like to see EC1 back too......but he needs to learn that there's a difference between disagreeing with him, and mounting a personal attack on him. Frankly, he brought the house down in himself the other day, though I hope that doesn't prevent him from contributing again.

I obviously don't read EC1's Flat/AW contributions on here (or anywhere else), but he has been a stalwart of most of the horse-racing forums I've been involved with over the years, and has always been happy to share his research freely. Internet message boards need guys like EC1 if they are to thrive, and he'll hopefully be back after a brief cooling-off period.
 
Last edited:
I disagree, Grasshopper. I only really drop in now and again to see what EC has been up to, so having seen this thread, I read the other one. There is indeed a difference between arguing and disagreeing, except there is no difference really if the disagreement is without any substance. EC had spent time (I suspect quite a while) coming up with figures and breaking the race down the way he did. Should his post have received thanks and curiosity? Damn right!

His comment 'time only matters in Jail' was merely a smug remark made out of satisfaction upon his accomplishment of breaking the race down. It would have sucked if he'd made the comment and hadn't shared his work. He did though, and as such it should only have been taken as tongue in cheek. Any disagreement of his work should have been based on sound reasoning, but there wasn't anything other than abuse. From a demand to 'quit the pish' (regarding the comment) and explain in more detail his method, to then being stupidly nasty suggesting the guy is somehow psychotic and needs help. I mean really? It was nasty but at the same time so schoolyard it was laughable to all but the recipient. Pathetically rude would be a more fitting term I guess. However, to then suggest genuine concern, takes pathetic to a whole new squirming level. Trying to drag DO into it, only highlighted the pointless bitterness.

Whoever said 'forums are like Pubs' are quite correct, but some Pubs lose their appeal if all you're after is a friendly pint and get too much grief. What's the point?

This place has always been 'cliquey', I don't know why, it's just the way it is, at least it's seen as being quite hostile after a while. Not a Pub I'd want to be a regular in. I'll drop in for a swift one and catch up with EC, but thats about it unless something takes my eye and want to make a 'public' comment. I'm a straight shooter and say it how I see it. I don't mean to cause offense and am only talking generally, but that is how the place is perceived from the outside (ironically yet quite naturally, I use the term 'outside').

As for EC, can't say I blame him really. Don't think many people would tolerate that sort of crap.
 
CPGagie said:
His comment 'time only matters in Jail' was merely a smug remark made out of satisfaction upon his accomplishment of breaking the race down.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. It was a parody of the oft made remark parrotted out by those people who can't be bothered to understand time analysis and don't put the level of hours in that Alan does. EC was merely being flippant out of frustration. If he's got any sense he'll stay away and after about 2 or 3 weeks he'll wonder why he ever bothered expending the huge amount of time he did here
 
CPGagie said:
I disagree, Grasshopper. I only really drop in now and again to see what EC has been up to, so having seen this thread, I read the other one. There is indeed a difference between arguing and disagreeing, except there is no difference really if the disagreement is without any substance. EC had spent time (I suspect quite a while) coming up with figures and breaking the race down the way he did. Should his post have received thanks and curiosity? Damn right!

His comment 'time only matters in Jail' was merely a smug remark made out of satisfaction upon his accomplishment of breaking the race down. It would have sucked if he'd made the comment and hadn't shared his work. He did though, and as such it should only have been taken as tongue in cheek. Any disagreement of his work should have been based on sound reasoning, but there wasn't anything other than abuse. From a demand to 'quit the pish' (regarding the comment) and explain in more detail his method, to then being stupidly nasty suggesting the guy is somehow psychotic and needs help. I mean really? It was nasty but at the same time so schoolyard it was laughable to all but the recipient. Pathetically rude would be a more fitting term I guess. However, to then suggest genuine concern, takes pathetic to a whole new squirming level. Trying to drag DO into it, only highlighted the pointless bitterness.

Whoever said 'forums are like Pubs' are quite correct, but some Pubs lose their appeal if all you're after is a friendly pint and get too much grief. What's the point?

This place has always been 'cliquey', I don't know why, it's just the way it is, at least it's seen as being quite hostile after a while. Not a Pub I'd want to be a regular in. I'll drop in for a swift one and catch up with EC, but thats about it unless something takes my eye and want to make a 'public' comment. I'm a straight shooter and say it how I see it. I don't mean to cause offense and am only talking generally, but that is how the place is perceived from the outside (ironically yet quite naturally, I use the term 'outside').

As for EC, can't say I blame him really. Don't think many people would tolerate that sort of crap.
Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself, CPG, but I take issue with large tracts of the above.

I personally tried very hard to understand and assimilate the arguments being put forward, and having had my battles with EC1 in days of yore, made absolutely sure I treated him with maximum respect throughout the thread. The only 'cross words' - if you want to call them that - were those we exchanged after he complained about me not complaining about (presumably) simmo's contribution.....conveniently forgetting that I never make complaints to Mods in any way, shape or form about any posts - ever. I prefer to let people sort things out between themselves; either via ignore, or via a steady re-engagement after the red-mists have subsided, as we're mainly adults here.

More generally, though still specific to the Time/Clock discussion reflected here, it's my observation that the problems tend to start when you either a) draw a different conclusion from the numbers provided by the Clockers, b) question they way in which the Clockers have applied their numbers, or c) decide that the research offers you no insight (for whatever reason) that you can practically apply.

This, however, is dismissed by the Clockers as either malice, laziness or ignorance; something they've been vocal about it throughout the thread. If the Clockers didn't respond to any deviation from the approved script, with either misplaced paranoia, or the kind of preciousness demonstrated superbly by Warbler's contribution above, this could all have been avoided.
 
Last edited:
"No it wasn't. It was a parody of the oft made remark parrotted out by those people who can't be bothered to understand time analysis"

I didn't realise it was an often used term, and thought EC had come up with it there and then. However, why parrot it out if you don't understand it, the phrase itself is alluding to having full understanding?

He presented his finds in a very easy to comprehend format.

He may have been flippant/smug, but I feel it was justified from his satisfying finds and by the way he clearly laid it out for all to see. I agree though, he is probably frustrated as who has he got to discuss time matters in depth with on here? Those that don't understand should only be curious, not negative, and how could they be in serious disagreement with something they don't understand? Makes no sense to me.

I'm not going to defend EC any further, just wanted to say my bit, as now there's even less point me dropping by.

Have a good Christmas all. :)
 
I have to agree with Cpgagie on at least one point. if you put the time into something EC1 does and some dick hits you with a snide one liner nothing is more annoying.

If you have nothing constructive to say then keep the hell away. If the guy takes the time to write 100 words on the subject to just pop up and say he is wrong isn't good enough........you should at least give a full reason why you disagree............."not that is BS" then run for the hills.

Where I disagree completely is COG saying this place is a "clique" You want Clique go to TRF there is no Clique here and as a every day poster a late comer I have never at anytime felt unwelcome.

The tiff EC1 had on here wouldn't make the top 100 on TRF and the blame lies on EC1 own shoulders for letting it get to him.

If I fancy a horse I will say why and if it loses and someone says I told you so or tells me I am a dick because I fancied it so what? They are probably right.

Tell EC1 he's wrong and he takes the cream puff.........That's childish.

Gotta call a spade a spade and if it comes down to a vote ""should he come back Yes of No I would say Yes....If you had a vote can he be an asshole? Yes or No I would say Yes but he's our asshole

Either way a massive yes he should come back
 
Grasshopper said:
This, however, is dismissed by the Clockers as either malice, laziness or ignorance; something they've been vocal about it throughout the thread. If the Clockers didn't respond to any deviation from the approved script, with either misplaced paranoia, or the kind of preciousness demonstrated superbly by Warbler's contribution above, this could all have been avoided.
Click to expand...

To be honest, can you not see why EC might have drawn the conclusion that you were feigning interest... when your own final conclusion was

"I gave it my best shot, EC......but your assessment is correct.

I don't have the time, the patience, the inclination or the numeracy skills needed to make this type of analysis work for me."

I have to say, it's little wonder he drew the view you were wasting his time, when you basically say you can't be arsed, but were happy to lay him a creeping barrage of one line questions that would require lengthy replies. The simple fact is you do have the numeracy skills and intelligence to learn how to compile a speed rating if you so chose to. In this case I think the words "patience" (the lacking of used by yourself) and "laziness" (used to describe the attitude of a speed rater towards yourself) are very, very close
 
CPGagie said:
I didn't realise it was an often used term, and thought EC had come up with it there and then. However, why parrot it out if you don't understand it, the phrase itself is alluding to having full understanding?
Click to expand...

No

The people who use the phrase will normally have next to no understanding and parrot it out to demean the person who does because they place no value in the analysis (for a host of reasons). EC was merely repeating it out of parody. I don't think he was being smug about it. I think the word "frustration" would be a better descriptor
 
Warbler, I prefer to go with the evidence of about 6 pages of questions, checking and re-checking, as more demonstrable evidence of whether I was 'feigning interest' or not.

EC1 did not reckon I was wasting his time, as we exchanged PMs during the dialogue on this thread, so please don't try to put words in his mouth. I may have infuriated or exasperated him, but he knew I was making a genuine attempt to get this to work for me. That I couldn't find a practical way to apply the Time factor in my betting, makes me guilty of precisely nothing - no matter how many quotes you want to throw at me.

My real issue with Clockers is the self-righteousness and arrogance (you amply demonstrate here), and their belief that they hold an intellectual advantage over everyone else. The problem is, you don't find too many of them logging onto TH from their yacht in Monte Carlo harbour, and I'm therefore disinclined yo think they're correct on this matter.
 
Last edited:
That's just the point though.

Page after page which resulted in a final summary which said words to the effect I can't be bothered.

Did EC ever provide you with a step by step guide that would allow you to have a go at calculating a rating? If so, did you ever sit down and try to teach yourself?

FWIW, I don't regard it has the high point of academic accomplishment. If I did I'd have told you not to bother trying because it's beyond you, rather than telling you, you could do it if wanted to. Having said that, it is more complicated than looking at Racing UK but it's hardly unfathomable either if you had the will to apply yourself. It's somewhere in between, and there are of course grains of complexity within speed rating (some of it can become complex) but there are plenty of pretty solid and reasonably accessible methods

Phil Waters did the same to me once. As it happened I had 20 page guide written out, so copy and attach didn't waste any more than a minute of my time
 
Last edited:
Didn't notice you post, Grasshopper. What came first though? The often used comment of "Time only matters in jail" from those that don't understand, or clockers defending their work, which for some reason are happy to share on a public forum?

I'm a member of a semi private forum, where there is a wide range of form students coming from all angles, yet there's never anything more than alternative views expressed. Calling it a disagreement would be stretching it, as people just tend to ponder a little more, rather than get into debates, arguments certainly never happen. Maybe it's to do with respect and appreciation, regardless of ones own opinion?

If you think I'm wrong about EC, fair enough, but I'll stand by what I've said.

I'm going, as Wolves has started, but there is also the looming fear of becoming involved in an argument myself.

For the record, Grasshopper, you've always come across as being a nice, sensible, often witty guy on here. I've enjoyed many of your posts, but NH and car racing isn't my bag, so never had much to say to you.

Good luck.
 
How could anyone find something like this boring: The speed the calculation gives voice to the end result. You calculate the action and their stride pattern at point C which will calculate their pace. If the figure falls outside 0-30 on the way to the start add 1 second to any horse wearing blue,. Add to this amount to a horses Gait calculation which will give you the ETA of each horse. Their burn the pace and the calories they absorb must also be taken into consideration for this use the formula Zb x 5= yb -1. Once done you can be confident you are on the right track

I use this formula on a regular basis and yesterday I did all my calculation using the above.


Conclusion: Sprinter Sacre will win the Clarence House:cool:
 
Last edited:
I'm fairly sure EC's issue wasn't with you Grassy, but with the individual who decided to become very personal and was deliberately baiting him. I'd missed the history but it clearly ran deeper than the thread itself.

It's a shame he's not here because his contributions were usually good ones. A better option would have been to hit the ignore button as soon as the personal comments were made. If it were me I'd have had a good old fashioned dust up first though. :whistle:
 
Natch, it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you had 20 pages written-out, Warbler.

My lack of 'patience' is down to me having rather more going on in my life, than the search for racing's Holy Grail.....or finding the cure for dandruff.
 
Last edited:
Maruco said:
I'm fairly sure EC's issue wasn't with you Grassy, but with the individual who decided to become very personal and was deliberately baiting him. I'd missed the history but it clearly ran deeper than the thread itself.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's true

In fairness Grassy did say originally "I can only speak for myself" and in doing so has probably become the temporary focus when he'd be a long way from being the primary issue
 
Grasshopper said:
My lack of 'patience' is down to me having rather more going on in my life, than the search for racing's Holy Grail.....or finding the cure for dandruff.
Click to expand...

Trying to win next years BDO from your garden shed presumably. :blink:
 
By the way, I'm up your way towards the end of the month so I'll give you boys a shout, and Dave can pour you into a wheelbarrow again and take you home!

Actually that sounds a bit cliquey! :p
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
Natch, it doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you had 20 pages written-out, Warbler.

My lack of 'patience' is down to me having rather more going on in my life, than the search for racing's Holy Grail.....or finding the cure for dandruff.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind whole books have been written on it

It stemmed from the Rail Link Arc when after the fourth or fifth request I decided it was easier to write a step by step guide (the Longchamp standards have changed since) and I'm not sure I've got the original still anyway after a hard drive crash. I think about 30 copies got sent out eventually

It's a long way from being complicated, and the class/ par method has been left behind to a large extent as other contributors have built on the original work in the last decade, but it still serves as a basic start point (that's all it is). It's far better though I find to provide a full and simple to follow instruction in manageable bits than it is to try and skim something or make it overly technical, which will always have the reader coming back to you within 15 mins (have you ever tried any of these IT support manuals? or their less than helpful 'helplines'?)

To some extent though, that is a part of the issue. Asking a question takes 1 minute. Writing a reply (as EC would then have beholden to do) takes about 20-30 mins. Personally I'd have supplied you with a guide as to how to set about it, and if you weren't prepared to meet me halfway and attempt to learn, I wouldn't have wasted my time trying to assist you

I actually agree with you regarding not being hung up on racing though. It's the primary reason I chose never to further my own understanding of speed rating. The marginal gains I'd have made didn't justify the effort I figured (I could be wrong - but that's the decision I took).
 
Maruco said:
I'm fairly sure EC's issue wasn't with you Grassy, but with the individual who decided to become very personal and was deliberately baiting him. I'd missed the history but it clearly ran deeper than the thread itself.
Click to expand...

I should be the last on here to defend Simmo (and with good reason), but it was a fairly innocuous question he asked of EC, and the position escalated as a direct result of the response he garnered.
EC's a interesting poster, and unquestionably good for the forum, but perspective isn't always his forte, nor - it would seem - those who cannot recognise his own part in his recent departure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top