In one respect only is it better to follow a set of me chanical rules or even a public selector, always on the assumption that a particular player is not a competent handicapper. A set of mechanical rules sometimes will put one on a horse going to post at a long price that does in fact win. And any public selector will do the same thing occasionally. To say this is not to imply that one who follows system rules of selection or follows pub lic selectors will avoid loss of money. It merely amounts to saying that one who operates thus may lose less than a flounderer or stabber who is guided by nothing ex cept his own whims. A very high percentage of all systems that get to the public, whether books, articles in turf magazines or mimeographed sheets, direct the player to public selec tors. And I think I have said enough about the chances of one who follows these gentry. Nor is this the place to discuss the systems which attempt to precipitate sound handicapping principles in their rules for selection and exclusion of plays. But there is something to be said about the validity of progressive play in general as an attempt to wring success from a series of bets which would have shown a loss if wagered all in equal amounts.