 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
It's the takeout. The juice. It's not a little, so betting into a negative playing field is quite easy in horse racing. One beautiful aspect of horse racing is that tossouts can turn the tables to where the negative playing field turns positive. So it pays to know the percentages.Originally Posted by JBEX
Last edited by Thunderground; 05-26-16 at 01:19 PM.
hey str.. you think the rail is a disadvantage in a quarter horse race ? have to think when you're going full speed the whole trip having a solid barrier inside of you would be more of a distraction ..was looking at the last 2 races at indiana grand today which is why I ask
My first thought would be yes, it would be a disadvantage. That said, I have no statistical clue and have never payed any attention to it so it is a pure guess.
Do you have any post position stats that would give me a hint?
And I don't know about track maintenance at those types of tracks and if the inside is typically a bit thinner in surface than the outside or vice versa. Certainly something to consider though.
No big deal str and not all that important to me anyway..since I started this might look into it a little more.. Guess it's also possible since there's no turn involved they may start a little further off the rail ..thanks
ok str ..a more relevant question this time...3rd race at santa anita today a 16k claimer for 3yo fillies. .the favorite at 1/2 last exited a 40k clm for 3yof and ran a big race ..dueled on the inside and finished 3rd by less than 2 lengths...on the beyer scale that race was 8-9 lengths faster than today's field. .horse won by 5 lengths with what looked like plenty left in the tank (announcers
comment not just my observation )..had a hunch the horse would get claimed exposed for that tag and sure enough she was...don't understand why they would drop a lightly raced, talented filly in for this low an amount and wonder if they regretted it when they lost her ?
Simple answer:
The horse has a problem in all likelihood that will not get better without significant time off . It is not yet full blown, but was determined that it will be soon enough in all probability. So the decision was made to drop the horse, let it win easily and if it was claimed, be satisfied with the purse and the claim price. If it isn't claimed, the race took little out of her, did not put tremendous pressure on a problem and she can do it again . A pure business decision. Only BUT, to that is if they have a starter series for 16k or less or something like that, where the horse could become eligible to be even money every time she ran, thus the gamble. That is a reach, but I don't know any details.
Could be a knee, ankle, tendon, suspensory, can't breath well, bad bleeder, whatever. No way for me to know without seeing the horse in the paddock and checking the legs visually not only that day, but from all previous paddock visits and comparing notes. A claiming trainers job, if they are really trying to cover all bases.
Complex answer:
The drop sounds like a lot but how many other prices of claiming races are there between 40k and 16k?
Where I raced, there would have been a 20k and a 25or 30k between the 40 and 16. So two other options.
Reason I ask is, when I was in Md. I would have known if the horse had been entered in ANY OTHER race prior to the 16k race. Like for instance, a race 4-5 days earlier for 25k that did not fill. That would have told me that the trainer was ok to run the horse for 25k not 16k but the race didn't go, so he opted to run for less still, because the condition book forced him to. The trainer didn't want to wait for the next 25k or the 40k didn't fill? See, all this helps solve the mystery.
I know, as a bettor, most don't have time to know all this, but do know, someone does. Heck, I did. For every horse in every race everyday. That was my job. And although many trainers never took it that far, and only a handful of customers did, you can bet I did. Stuff like that helped me be maybe just a little better once and a while.
Finding out what might be wrong:
Fronts on? That might indicate a tendon or suspensory problem in the works. OR, the horse is starting to run down in front. ( Friction burn). Never a good sign as it almost always points to a weight shift or over compensation by the horse to get off a sore area, like an ankle or knee tendon or suspensory or whatever.
Going back to what I said earlier, knowing the horse from previous races, and comparing notes taken, would give a bettor that does this, an indication of whats going on. There are players that do this at every track. But it is a tremendous commitment of time.
I as well as other trainers,used to monitor horses every race. It got to the point where I could see if a horse had been tapped simply by looking at a knee, for instance and seeing it was much cleaner looking than 3 weeks earlier.
If the groom was a bit lazy, and plenty were, I could see the hair lines on it's legs and see what therapy, if any was being used. Or rub marks behind a knee, indicating the horse wore a knee bandage everyday. Depending on the outfit, that was no big deal or a real big deal, depending on how much leg work each outfit did on a daily basis. I could go on but don't want to put you to sleep.
So, moving forward, let's see what happens. The horse has ability, but probably not the wheels to sustain running 100% for too many more races without 6-9 months off. That is a best guess. Horses DO fool you and defy odds sometimes, but more times than not, it plays out the way you figured it might.
Can she win next out on the raise? Absolutely. A lot will depend on the trip, the pace, and the quality behind her. The harder she has to run, the less races she has left before that long break in all probability.
Hope that helps.
Wanted to answer earlier but didn't have time to elaborate on the words "business decision". I wanted to be sure you understood what I meant.
From a purely economic point of view it sounds like that 3 yr. old filly was probably worth about 30k. Maybe only 25k. This kind of depends on the category of races offered , in that, if there were plenty of 25k races available all year to straight 3 year olds only, she was worth 30k. The claiming price and the purse for 2nd place which off of getting beat 2 lengths for 40k isn't as stretch. If there were no races between 40 and 16, she's worth 25k. Just depends , and I am not familiar with the claiming structure in Calif.
So in this case, let's say 30k. That would be what they probably could have sold the horse for in a private sale. Providing of course, she was sound and xrayed and scoped clean. If she did not, the price would drop accordingly.
The decision to take the 16k and the winners purse if she won of 15k ( guessing here) minus 20% ( 10% jock and trainer), so a 12k net would be 28K to basically sell her. They would have to think she would win and if she did not, her sale price would plummet to 10 or 12k. So if she lost and was claimed, it would be a solid monetary sale right?
This was probably the money end of things thought process to make the decision they made. Just an assumption though. Using simple logic.
Another thought would be to stop her and bring her back next spring, if indeed she was developing a potential problem and again, I don't know that.
A purely business problem with that is, that she would turn 4 years old and have to race against wide open olders. A typical 3 yr. old loses value when they turn 4. Not all, but the vast majority of claimers do.
For instance, a typical 3 year old will need a class drop or two, to be able to compete against older horses. That is a rule of thumb. So giving her time off costs you a valuable asset, that being able to run against other 3 yr. olds only and not 4,5,6 year olds that are probably better than she is for the same price. So IMO it is fair to say that come January 1st of next year, if she was still worth 30k on Dec. 31st, rule of thumb says she will be worth 15-20k the next day. again, rule of thumb. That will help explain why you will see so many 3 year olds being dropped for no apparent reason in Sept., Oct. Nov. and Dec.
I used to do it all the time. Not everyone did though. Not sure why, but it was ok by me.
Last but definitely not least is the health of the horse. My assumptions were just that. I have no idea. I have seen plenty of people that don't want claimers in there barn, so if they can't win for high claiming and allowance, they drop them to lose them and put the money in another up and comer. So it might have been the beginnings of a problem, it might have been what I just said, I don't know. If I followed the circuit and knew the people involved, I would have a better idea but I don't.
Just wanted to shed a bit more light on the words I used.
Last edited by str; 06-04-16 at 11:45 AM.
hey str.. busy past few days ..so seems like most likely reasons would be future physical issues or lack of suitable races to run her in factoring in her potential worth..I went to the condition book and it appears to me,if I read it right, that the next race for a tag for 3yo fillies between the levels we discussed is on June 16 for $28-32k claimers.. It is a also a sprint like the race she just won..you'd think they would have waited a couple of more weeks if she were truly OK instead of risking losing her for almost half that amount..have a hunch as you said earlier something probably wrong that may rear it's head in the not too distant future.I'm sure the new connections must have given this consideration but ultimately felt it was worth the risk.. put her in my stable and will follow.. thanks as always
Good day STR, read an article this morning about Kent Desormeaux alcohol rehab. How much impact do you think it's gonna affect his judgement on the race? I remember reading someone saying that because The Belmont is 1 1/2, moving too soon or too late will affect the how the horse will perform. Or maybe there will be no affect on Kent since he is supposedly sober during racing hours.
Hi Mr. G and T
Q. How much impact do you think it's gonna affect his judgement on the race?
A. None whatsoever.
Q. I remember reading someone saying that because The Belmont is 1 1/2, moving too soon or too late will affect the how the horse will perform.
A. It absolutely will at that distance.
Q. Or maybe there will be no affect on Kent since he is supposedly sober during racing hours.
A. He has apparently been tested everyday he has ridden wherever he has gone lately. And apparently passed every test.
Once I see the pp's I will comment on the race but going into it, there is no way I see me liking Exaggerator to win. He apparently had a terrible workout today or yesterday that might push my thoughts further. We will have to wait and see.
Hope all is well with you sir.
It's always a pleasure !
kent was aboard real quiet in the 1998 belmont stakes going for the triple crown and lost a heartbreaker by a nose..many thought he moved to early in that race and I'm not commenting on that..since we're talking kent and the belmont stakes figured I'd bring it up..that had to sting him for a while I'm sure
hey str.. if you don't see this before R1 belmont today like your opinion anyway..3yo filly(debut today) that costs 450k at kee sept yearling sale by elite sire malibu moon (95k stud fee) out of dam who was 6/20 for 175k and "no winning sibs to mention" as they put it in the drf..stallion fee was probably half that I'm guessing two years ago as mm has risen meteorically as a stallion past couple of years.. at that point for a yearling to bring that kind of money with obviously above average bloodlines but not what you'd say is blow me away pedigree would you say it's mostly physical conformation guiding their purchase.. wouldn't the only other thing be a fast 2f work at that point to make them want to spend that kind of dough?
I used to attend that sale often. When that sort of thing happens, it is typically a combination of superior conformation, that is, the horse looks great, and moves perfectly ( walking away and towards you), has a smart eye, and all in all, is damn near picture perfect, AND, there is hype swirling around about the horse from the consigners, who either represent the owners or own the horse themselves. They are the ones that have prepared the horse for sale for months typically and my guess is the horse came from a big named consigner that has high end trainers constantly trying to get inside info on a prospect.
This happens every year. Do remember, that yearlings have not yet been broken or learned to be under tack, so they have not been ridden much less worked out.
So the info other than seeing the horse walk around and a visual going over, is all word of mouth or hype be it positive or negative.
They are xrayed and scoped by the buyer prior to bidding unless the buyer chooses not to.
That's how it works.
very interesting.. apologize about the workout question as I should have known that's for 2yos..there's a couple of kee sept yearling sale firsters going in the opener at belmont today.. both cost a lot relative to their pedigrees and by superior debut sires
..thanks again
Have been busy for the past few days and it is always a pleasure to get your thoughts on things. Now that The Belmont is tomorrow, would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks in advance.
Yes, I do remember that race very well, it was a thriller. So close to be the next triple crown. So, who do you like tomorrow, JBex??
going to start looking at it all soon.. haven't even peeked at the belmont yet
The Belmont Stakes:
This years addition has 13 horses. Seven of those are deep closers. As a rule, that is not the best way to try and win this race. It doesn't mean they can't, it just means that most Belmonts are won by other styles. With that said, I am tossing all of them off of any win ticket.
Two horses just broke their maidens and not very impressively at that. They could be used underneath in an attempt to go bombs away. But if they win, I lose.
Gov. Malibu is a price but can't find a reason to be excited about him. Destin should get a trip and could win but looking at his pp's I just don't feel the excitement I like to get when the more you look at it the better you feel.
Gettysburg looks to be the pace setter but I don't see him being allowed to slow it down enough to be able to take them home. That leaves Stradavari. And my thoughts on the Preakness make me keep looking his way.
The Preakness was IMO a rail day. I have read soooo many opinions on the track that day and many are in direct contrast to mine. I guess that is what makes playing the horses so appealing. Everyone has an opinion and be it right, wrong or the coolest name, everybody is right sometimes.
On the Preakness card, which I spoke about in here, I saw two 1-5 shots try and rally 4-5 wide and both fail miserably. I saw inferior horses as well as solid horses get a rail trip, some on the lead and some from way back. With the exception of about 3 or 4 horses all day, the outside was terrible. That brings me to Stradavari. He was very wide for much of the race and ran well. Well enough to cost me the super on Preakness day. I needed Lani to run 4th on the ticket. I watched the rerun and said to myself, damn, he ran well with that trip.
So today, he gets what shapes up to be about the best potential trip a horse can ask for in the Belmont. And you get 12-1. Sitting about 4th and hopefully nobody dogging him outside.That works for me.
So Stradavari will be my win bet .
As for exactas, triples and supers, it seems tough to do more than just throw numbers on a ticket. What I mean is, that I would not be surprised if the favorite wins, or runs out. And I can see several others as possible win material, but it is either a stretch on paper, or a deep closer going a tough distance to close from left field in . So no clue as of now who might be thrown underneath. Too me, the key will be the win play. But... with 12-1 on top, you can bet I will try and find some more prices, and maybe the favorite , but mostly big numbers, to try and hit one for 20k-30k.
One other note. The Ky. Derby day races, speaking of biases, was a speed track all day. It didn't matter with inside or outside, but it heavily favored speed. So Exaggerator went from verses the bias to totally with the bias in his last 2 starts IMO. Suddenbreakingnews closed VERY well on that track as well. He ran a fine race. I hate 4-1 on him in the Belmont though. No value from where I sit. But there is plenty of value with Stradavari, who was strongly verses a rail bias last time and while playing verses a bias plays don't hit all the time,( but what does right?) they do hit often enough to make solid money on prices that would not be so high if everyone saw what I saw and they agreed with me.
So that's my take. Hope I'm right.
Hope everyone enjoys a great Belmont day card.
Good luck everybody.
Last edited by str; 06-11-16 at 12:26 PM.
As always, thank you and really appreciate your analysis. I am a little confused about which horse is your top win pick?? Is it Lani?? If so, I thought you tossed out all the closers. Looking at the two races in the states, both times he was far back. And from the comments for overseas, he is sometimes midpack and sometimes off pace. Seems to me he has trouble breaking from gate. He is definitely a horse to watch, the odds so seems to agree. ML was 20-1, now is 10-1.
On paper, Exaggerator seems like the best horse. With that said, I don't think he will win either. To me, Destin is the sleeper. ML was 6-1, now is 12-1. He did not run well in the Derby, but I think that he was out of it from the beginning for that he did not break well and did not run his usual tactical style. With a better break, he should in the thick of things when it matters. Wonder if odds reflects the poor performance in the Derby or .... The bomb that I like is the 12-Brody's Cause (ML 20-1, now 22-1). Think he might get in...
GL to you and all that play today.
As always, thank you and really appreciate your analysis. I am a little confused about which horse is your top win pick?? Is it Lani?? If so, I thought you tossed out all the closers. Looking at the two races in the states, both times he was far back. And from the comments for overseas, he is sometimes midpack and sometimes off pace. Seems to me he has trouble breaking from gate. He is definitely a horse to watch, the odds so seems to agree. ML was 20-1, now is 10-1.
On paper, Exaggerator seems like the best horse. With that said, I don't think he will win either. To me, Destin is the sleeper. ML was 6-1, now is 12-1. He did not run well in the Derby, but I think that he was out of it from the beginning for that he did not break well and did not run his usual tactical style. With a better break, he should in the thick of things when it matters. Wonder if odds reflects the poor performance in the Derby or .... The bomb that I like is the 12-Brody's Cause (ML 20-1, now 22-1). Think he might get in...
GL to you and all that play today.
Sorry if it was confusing.
My pick is Stradavari.
No, it's not Lani for the reasons I stated about deep closers.
Destin should get a fine trip set up and those odds are nice. I think he will be in just in front of Stradavari early but you never know .
Wish I could pinpoint my reasons about Destin better. His form just doesn't send me for some reason. But can he win? Heck yes he can.
Good luck Mr. GandT
Thanks for the clarification. Good luck to you too Sir STR.
str, I'm trying to solve maiden claiming races in a 'different' way, with the help of mostly pace. In order to see if I'm on the right track I'm revisiting some very basic questions.
The most basic question is: we assume that race horses run (or want to run) as fast as they can, but do they really?
If they do, then my next question is irrelevant, but if they don't, then perhaps it's possible to divide horses into two groups: type-A personalities, who want to win and will do whatever it takes, and type-B personalities who are much more inclined to let their place be determined not so much by the wire, but rather by their more or less natural place within the herd. In other words, they are more social and tuned in to a natural pecking order, and only if they understand that they're on top of that order will they take up the accompanying winning initiative... They don't start out with a winning way or will; it needs to come to them. Does that make sense?
Just added a few more live races today, and results seem to confirm the idea that non-winners are 'looking at each other' for some kind of hierarchy. I'm calling it vertical pace, for now, because it looks at three separate numbers that make up my (horizontal) pace figures for each horse. In my normal pace ratings I use those three categories to determine a pace figure that is geared towards the running style of the horse, but in this vertical approach I just assign a best to worst number for each category. So a horse can be 1-4-1 in the three categories (first, fourth, first), combining into an overall 1st vertical pace placing in the hierarchy. Another non-winner, even though he may have the highest horizontal pace figure, may only be 4th or 5th in the vertical breakdown (and herd hierarchy). It's kind of horse-whispering stuff, because it suggests that horses are aware of each other in very subtle ways. The results so far are promising enough. For non-winners.
Last edited by Thunderground; 06-17-16 at 05:33 PM.
Just wanted to make sure that when I pick a race, maybe 4 a year, that doesn't mean forget what you are thinking because str just said whatever. I saw where Easy Rider said he almost left his pick because of what I said. Please don't ever do that. Do remember that I no longer follow circuits like I once did and buy a form 4 times a year. So I handicap 4 times a year. Some of you, Easy being one, handicap more in a week than I do in a year.
Because I do it so infrequently, I have limited knowledge of what I would normally have had back in the day. So because I realize I have limits of knowledge, and while I understand parts of this game most do not have an opportunity to know, when it comes to a certain race, I will make assumptions or take percentage stances, in order to not spend days trying to cram data into a key race. One such % stance I took was deep closers in the Belmont. That was incorrect this year. But for me, thats OK, because over time, it will workout in my favor many more times than it will not. Same with post positions or pace set up or riders or trainers, etc. or whatever I mention.
The last thing I would ever want to do is to cost anyone money. So make sure that when you see a race breakdown from me, that you know it is how I feel the race will shape up. That part will typically be fairly accurate. But for the selection, I will have assumed things that might be seen as shortcuts instead of spending more time on a race and assuming less.
Use my breakdowns as a view point of reasoning and incorporate it into yours. That is probably the best way to approach it.
Sure glad Easy stuck with his pick. It was a great call as was MrGandT's.
^One thing for certain STR. If I had your knowledge of the game, I could probably be one of the big Players on Derby Wars and make some serious $$$. Have you ever played the contest sites or thought about doing so? Derby Wars has a 250,000K game where top prize is 80K. They have a 25K game every weekend where top $$ is about 9K.
Q. The most basic question is: we assume that race horses run (or want to run) as fast as they can, but do they really?
A. No. They are bred to want to compete and with that hopefully comes wanting to win. Not necessarily running as fast as they can.
Q. if they don't, then perhaps it's possible to divide horses into two groups: type-A personalities, who want to win and will do whatever it takes, and type-B personalities who are much more inclined to let their place be determined not so much by the wire, but rather by their more or less natural place within the herd. In other words, they are more social and tuned in to a natural pecking order, and only if they understand that they're on top of that order will they take up the accompanying winning initiative... They don't start out with a winning way or will; it needs to come to them. Does that make sense?
A. Before I answer, let's stop for a second so I can point something out in regards to maidens or nw/2 types. And let's go back to thinking of them in terms of little kids playing sports when they are 8 or 10 years old. If you have had kids and gone through it, you will get it. If not, just find a little league game and watch one or two. A rec league game that has all sorts of kids in it. Not all stars or travel leagues.
You will see big kids , little kids, some that are intense, some that are picking buttercups in the outfield. Some are athletic , some aren't close. Some have no talent but a very high desire to compete, and some that have a ton of talent but lean on that so they can not focus, be the team clown, be a hot dog, etc. And this type of list goes on and on.
You will see it all. Now as these 8-10 year olds get to be 12-14 years old, some will change, some won't.
THIS, is exactly what you are seeing in these lightly raced, immature, learning as they go , inexperienced horses.
These horses have run in a race very few times in many cases. And they are evolving with each race. At least some of them. But just like kids, not all of them because some had total focus from day one while some are picking buttercups at the 3/8ths pole. See what I mean?
So most all of these horses are needing to learn to run in groups of 10 +/- horses. They were mostly taught in groups of 2-3 horses. That's a huge difference.
Watching a horses light bulb go on is a cool thing. And yes, it's a bitch to learn to see that, as a handicapper. But it is possible. you will never see it all the time until the horse wins and you go back and say, Damn, I should have recognized that. But, if you look long enough, you will find one. Plan on being wrong often while learning, but you will get better over time.
So, to your question.
The dominate horses will fly through maiden and nw/2, just like the dominate kid. The slow to learn will take much longer. Etc, etc. etc. with all the different types of kids on a team or horses in a race.
Do recognize that some have problems and that alters there chances for better if they are just tons the best, or worse if they have nowhere to drop but are fighting problems as well as ability.
Blinkers on carries a lot of weight because it helps make that light bulb go off plenty of time for a young horse.
It is probably rare that a horse just has no interest in wanting to win. Really slow horses that I claimed just needed a field they can be the best in, and in most cases, they will shine, or wake up .Or they need to be shown how to win, in the morning.
Some though, get discouraged by poor management or simply put, a bad trainer over a prolonged period of time. And a few of those might not ever win. But most, given the opportunity to win, will relish it and mentally change the way they think.
Hope that helps.
That does help, str. Thanks. The 'light bulb going off' can make races for non-winners a pretty lucrative field of study.
My research suggests a pattern, that could be seen as the light bulb going off. But how to explain it? One possible explanation is that there exists an innate hierarchical awareness within a herd: who is the leader? It's bred into the species. That's how things are in the wild. That's the first if. The second if, which builds on the first, is the possibility that horses, unlike humans or handicappers, are very quickly aware of this hierarchy. It's intuitive. They know it. Winners will fight over it, but non-winners? Why would they? Why not clown around without a care in the world? And the third if, which builds on the first two, is that the light bulb goes on for a non-winner when the realization sets in that 'oh shit, it's me...!' Instantly grown up! In this hypothesis, once the leadership role is accepted the horse becomes a winner. It was never about winning as such, but about accepting the leadership. I know it's just a theory. But it fits the bill for what I'm observing.
Anyway, it's exciting to have a whole new angle to study: non-winners! Will take me at least a few months to figure out.
Last edited by Thunderground; 06-18-16 at 10:32 AM.
Late responding again. Sorry Easy.
Q. Have you ever played the contest sites or thought about doing so?
A. No I have not.
I know myself well enough to not do so or the next thing you know I will be pouring over forms, replays and charts trying to be the best at it I can be. It's a habit I picked up at the track.
I just can't dedicate that much time into what I perceive to be a timely commitment.
I am so into the real estate market in the Washington D.C. and Md. suburban area currently, I want to have time for my wife, kids, grand kids, and football season when it comes around.
If there was an easy way to do it, I might but in my experience, and the way I pour myself into things, I find that nothing's easy. Except of course you, Easy Rider, Lol.
Happy to help you if you ever try it with anything I can.
Thank you for the compliment my friend and keep up the great work you do.
Hey STR: How much credence would you put into a horse that shows an improving workout pattern? Say a Horse has three 4F spins between races and goes 50, 48, and finally a 47. Would this be an indication that the horse may be live? And what about a horse at first asking that shows this pattern? Thx.
For those that have not read all my thoughts in regards to workouts, which are all in this thread , please read them before reading this answer and assuming these are my only thoughts. Be careful with workouts.
As as for this exact question, here you go Easy.
If any patterns would catch my eye in a positive way it would be this type of pattern and a quick gate work along with blinkers on especially if previous works were not so quick.
This scenario suggests that the horse, especially a Firster or horse that's only run once or twice, is getting very competitive. Chances are they were in company and doing all the running without much urging from the rider. And if indeed in company , almost a certainty if a Firster , they are doing that well in hand early , suggesting they are mentally aggressive and ready to get competitive right away. They had to have finished full of run as well to produce those times.
That horse would get a long look from me and at any decent price , even as a Firster , would be tough to not use.
Let me know how it did if you will. Very positive work pattern. If a Firster, is it wearing blks first time? If so, and if the trainer does well with firsters , that only helps the cause that this horse is primed to run well.
^ Thx Str. I see this pattern at times and thought it was a positive one. It was not for a specific horse though. One follow up question. If a Horse is putting the shades on for the first time can one assume the use shades on the recent spins?
Absolutely. They will typically train with them daily in gallops going the proper direction, not when jogging the wrong way. They must break from the gate with them on in order to get a blks. ON card from the starter. Most seasoned horses will only be asked to work an 1/8th or a 1/4 mile or so and back off the work when going from the gate and trying to get their card. My reason for that was that I did not want to have the horse put in a lengthy work and if the horse did not break well, still have to do more work to obtain the card. I did not want to count on the gate stuff for fitness, only for the gate card . So, for me, and most trainers I guess, it's fitness and practice daily with the blks. on while doing so, and then gate card, then run. That's why if you see a quick gate work from an older or seasoned horse getting blks. on the 1st time, and slower works previously, it shows that the horse has awakened with the blks. on and you can anticipate a solid effort upcoming. Doesn't mean if it is not there it's a negative, it's a HUGE positive if it is there instead of a positive, which blks. on almost always is. Especially with horses that have been running Z patterns or hanging late.
hey str
know it's a shockerbut pletcher has a horse in the schuylerville tomorrow.. 750k weanling purchase who broke her maiden by 7 lengths in hand at monmouth 6/18 in her debut ..you think the reason he went for mth vs bel for the debut might be to get her some experience without draining her ?? Have to think an average mth msw is at least 3 lengths slower than one at bel ..if you had a 2yo like that would you rather go the easier route through mth for the debut or have her more battle tested vs tougher company at belmont?
Last edited by JBEX; 07-21-16 at 06:36 PM.
Q. you think the reason he went for mth vs bel for the debut might be to get her some experience without draining her ??hey str
know it's a shocker
A. No.
Each year about this time, Todd has on a chart or whatever he might use, a mapped out version of what he hopes for and in wishful thinking, wants to occur. Not all of his babies will be on it as of June 18th. It is a moving target that changes with each babies performance or setback. Some fall off the chart while new ones emerge that weren't ready in June. There are only so many races for these babies in the stakes races and he needs to plan a course for all of them as he goes along.
So, there must have a been a baby race at Belmont within 5 or 6 days of this one at Monmouth. Did the race fill? And did he have one or two in that race? Those answers will help you see into his thought process.
Draining her: I don't think I ever worried about that in a maiden race. Everyone has high hopes with babies as firsters and I can't believe that Todd was worried about draining this horse. Now he might have felt this horse was not good enough or as good as others that he chose to run in that MSW at Belmont within the same week if there was one. I would look at that Belmont race and see what he did in that.
My other thought is that if this is my best or one of my best babies, I am running it in N.Y. not Monmouth.
Although he works with horse flesh that I never had quality wise, when I had multiple horses for certain races , and I had a ton of that when I had 60-80 horses, I don't think I ever shipped my best chance of winning at my home track out of town to run. In most cases, it would have been my 3rd or 4th best one for a category because of what you stated. The race will be a bit weaker and my horse will become better out of town than staying at home.
If that was my horse, it would be placed to win. Whatever that took. If I knew it could not beat a stable mate that was going to run at Belmont , I would look to avoid that confrontation and Monmouth is just down the road from Belmont.
Hope that helps.
Wow you trained 60-80 horses at the same time..That's gotta be some undertaking!!
I believe I asked a very similar question at some point along the way and for that I apologize.. As you said with the sheer volume of 2yo's he has, shipping to mth no big surprise.. to avoid bumping heads with another of his or just a timing thing.. when you spend 750k on a horse you're probably not as concerned with a 30k difference in purse anyway.. Horse has a nice middle post and sat slightly off the pace in her debut win at mth ..we'll see how she fares ..thanks again
The one thing that I don't think people realize is that a trainer is a horse trainer and a horse manager. Both equally important. You can train them like Ben Jones but if you don't place them in races they can win, you are not doing the horse, owner, or anyone any good.
Winning is a matter of placement in most cases. Put them where they can win, and they will often enough to make you look really smart.
Reply With Quote
