[str]

Am I hearing you right?

Let's say that there's hot-medium-cold as a measuring scale. Are you saying that a barn, when it cools off after a hot period, is likely to go straight to cold? I don't mean to oversimplify, and it's to be looked into barn-by-barn, but would you say that the same barns will tend to repeat the same patterns each year?

Q. Are you saying that a barn, when it cools off after a hot period, is likely to go straight to cold?

A. It can but a lot of factors have to come into play. And I don't think it really helps the player that much other than to understand it for what it is, which many do not. The horses getting beat are not 4-5 shots in most cases. I think it's more of an understanding as to why.

Q. would you say that the same barns will tend to repeat the same patterns each year?

A. It totally depends on each barn and how the stock is made up. And not each year on the button but every 12-18 months probably.

But... I would almost guarantee you that if you went back and looked at the May- June early July Belmont before Saratoga results there would be plenty of barn patterns as that speaks to the trainers management prior to specific dates instead of conditions running out. But again, those probably are not favorites getting beat. They are horses that are waiting to be put in a more suitable situation to run well. That... is placing the horse via the condition book and that is a choice, so in that case, sure. And it only makes sense that a hot trainer at Saratoga will be out of bullets by the time Belmont fall rolls around. And aren't they in plenty of cases looking towards Gulfstream by then?

It really goes to the certain trainer and the patterns they create over time. But again, I'm not sure how helpful it is for the player other than understanding it.

[JBEX]

hey str.. a little before my time (wasn't handicapping in the 60's lol) but do you remember Dr Fager when he raced.. how good a horse was he? realize it's easy to Google these things but figured I'd see if you have any personal recollections.. he's part of 2 of the bigger pedigree lines going forward through unbridled

[str]

hey str.. a little before my time (wasn't handicapping in the 60's lol) but do you remember Dr Fager when he raced.. how good a horse was he? realize it's easy to Google these things but figured I'd see if you have any personal recollections.. he's part of 2 of the bigger pedigree lines going forward through unbridled

It was just a year or two before I started handicapping.

When I was a hot walker and early into my groom faze, I would be at the barn and listen to the older guys talk about him.
(heck, everybody was older than me. Lol)
They would talk about him a lot. He was a monster and I don't think I ever heard anybody question how good we was. He was one of the all time greats for sure. Certainly top 10 all time. He was a true miler. His only down fall was that he was you could not rate him. He had one gear, fast and all out. That is the only reason he isn't top 5 all time IMO.

He did win at 1 1/4 miles but I was told several times that he was best at one mile. Really wonder if he could have stayed against other greats at the mile and a quarter races.
Oh, and it didn't seem to matter about turf or dirt. He was great on everything apparently.

[JBEX]

great perspective str...to win sprinterand turf horse of the year an amazing accomplishment..here's a little clip from his trainer john nerud about him that I thought you'd like..I'll come back to the pedigree thing another time

[JBEX]

unbridled is sired by fappiano (mr prospector)..dam sire of fappiano is dr fager..unbridled the sire of empire maker
who had impeccable breeding in the female family..remember he broke his maiden in a big field at belmont at a mile first out which as you know isn't easy ..have a hunch he got his name cause they were hoping he'd be a great stallion down the road..anyway he sired "pioneer of the nile" (110k stud fee)who of course sired "american pharoah"...the other big line of unbridled is he's the dam sire of tapit (300k fee) the number one stallion in north america..unbridled won the derby off the top I'd say early 90's..that was the one where they showed carl nafzger describing the race to the elderly owner breeder frances genter

[Easy-Rider 66]

Hey STR: I read some info yesterday that stated with horses coming off a layoff they prefer more of an off the pace type rather than a speed horse. Do you agree with that assessment?

[str]

Hey STR: I read some info yesterday that stated with horses coming off a layoff they prefer more of an off the pace type rather than a speed horse. Do you agree with that assessment?

Do you mean the bettor prefers to play horses off a lay to be that off the pace style?

As compared to a speed horse off the lay?

[Easy-Rider 66]

Do you mean the bettor prefers to play horses off a lay to be that off the pace style?

As compared to a speed horse off the lay?

I received some free info form WCHR Report and they were comparing 2 horses coming off an extended layoff. And they stated that they prefer to play a horse with an off the pace style rather than a speed horse who will needs to be into the bit early. ( I guess they liked the horse coming off the layoff and the fact that he was not a speed horses appealed to them more. The horse won at 5/1. Yesterday SA R3 #5 horse) So My question is do you agree with this sentiment or do you think it is not a valid point? Thx.

[Easy-Rider 66]

I guess in simpler terms if you were to bet a horse coming off a layoff would you rather the horse be speed or more of a closer? Or you really do not think it makes a difference? Thx again.

[str]

I guess in simpler terms if you were to bet a horse coming off a layoff would you rather the horse be speed or more of a closer? Or you really do not think it makes a difference? Thx again.

I think it has everything to do with the particular horse, the trainer, the race set up , the bias if any, etc.

I think you do yourself a disservice to favor one over the other.

I will take a speed horse, off a layoff, that I know is fit, from a solid outfit that has stats to back them up, in a race with very little pace, all day long.

I gave myself a perfect scenario but you see what I mean.

It has to do with too many things .

I would approach all styles the same way.

Would not lean one way or the other.

Just case by case.

Hope that helps Easy.

[Easy-Rider 66]

I think it has everything to do with the particular horse, the trainer, the race set up , the bias if any, etc.

I think you do yourself a disservice to favor one over the other.

I will take a speed horse, off a layoff, that I know is fit, from a solid outfit that has stats to back them up, in a race with very little pace, all day long.

I gave myself a perfect scenario but you see what I mean.

It has to do with too many things .

I would approach all styles the same way.

Would not lean one way or the other.

Just case by case.

Hope that helps Easy.

Thx for clarification.

[JBEX]

hey str..back in the 70's and 80's did atlantic city racetrack have decent racing, big stakes.. how about garden state park? ever run at either of those venues?

[str]

hey str..back in the 70's and 80's did atlantic city racetrack have decent racing, big stakes.. how about garden state park? ever run at either of those venues?

Atlantic City was way down by the 80's. It's hayday was way back in the 50's, 60's and somewhat in the 70's. They ran the United Nations Handicap there and I think it was almost always a grade 1 race. They drew the best turf horses every year. Pretty sure Dr. Fager won it at A.C. one year.

I raced a few horses there in the 70's. I remember Bud ran Spect. Bid there in the Worlds Playground which was also a fairly popular race for 2 year old boys. Bid smoked them.
I won a few races there and one Stake and have a great betting story from A.C. and I think it's in this thread but maybe not. The horses name was Carly's Mom Mom. I think you can search by name but you guys would know better than I. Lol.

As for Garden State, the same thing applies. It was a a huge venue in the 50's and maybe before. I remember Secretariat ran there and certainly other REAL big names over the years. The Jersey Derby was a huge race back in the day. It was still a pretty big deal in the 70's.

Pimlico was on strike in 1977 and I had to run some horses out of state during that time. I won an allowance race on March 24, 1977. It turned out to be exactly 3 weeks before the track burned to the ground. It took months to get our money from the horseman's bookkeepers office. What a mess. I lost a few pair of jockey silks there as well. There are incredible pictures from that sad day if you goggle them.
They rebuilt it and the new owner who went to jail for security fraud years later, pumped a lot of money into it but over time it lost momentum and finally closed around the year 2000 +/-. By then , it was a mess. It's a mall now if I am not mistaken.
At least I can say that I won races and have pictures of both places.

If I never posted the betting story about A.C. and you want to hear it or you want to see the old pics from either place, just let me know.
Thanks for the memories JBEX !

[mrginandtonic]

I think it has everything to do with the particular horse, the trainer, the race set up , the bias if any, etc.

I think you do yourself a disservice to favor one over the other.

I will take a speed horse, off a layoff, that I know is fit, from a solid outfit that has stats to back them up, in a race with very little pace, all day long.

I gave myself a perfect scenario but you see what I mean.

It has to do with too many things .

I would approach all styles the same way.

Would not lean one way or the other.

Just case by case.

Hope that helps Easy.

Good Morning Sir, just a continual thought on speed horse vs closes. How does a trainer decide if a particular horse is a speedster or closer? For example, Baffert's horses are mostly speed horses and Drysdale's are mostly closers. Do they go more by pedigree or style of the trainer? Thx.

(In case someone else had already asked this question, I apologize in advance. Thanks)

[str]

Good Morning Sir, just a continual thought on speed horse vs closes. How does a trainer decide if a particular horse is a speedster or closer? For example, Baffert's horses are mostly speed horses and Drysdale's are mostly closers. Do they go more by pedigree or style of the trainer? Thx.

(In case someone else had already asked this question, I apologize in advance. Thanks)

Hi Mr. G and T. It's always a pleasure to hear from you !

As to the exact question, style plays a large part but pedigree plays a roll as well.

A further explanation follows:

It is not a coincidence ( not much in horse racing is) that the same trainers have to same styles of runners. Every trainer has a certain style that emphasizes certain things. When you think of Baffert or Lukas, you think of speed. That's not to say every horse is that way but as you pointed out, many more are than not.
Baffert is a former 1/4 horse trainer. Speed is what he learned. Same with Lukas.

Drysdale is an Englishman( distance, relax, close is the name of the game in Europe ) and was Charlie Whittinghams asst. trainer when I was a groom , foreman and asst. trainer. So he learned a take his time and a develop type style that he has done wonderfully with.

Both of these trainers know their strengths and that carries backwards to who they might eye to purchase as yearlings. I think they both gravitate towards their strengths when it comes to breeding as well. I mean, who doesn't right?

I am sure that if you follow any trainers roots and where they learned their trade you will usually see that what they learned early on and who their learning influence was , is in most cases their strengths. The other ends are not necessarily weaknesses. It's just that they might not be as strong in those categories as they are in others.

Great question.

I hope this helps.

[JBEX]

Atlantic City was way down by the 80's. It's hayday was way back in the 50's, 60's and somewhat in the 70's. They ran the United Nations Handicap there and I think it was almost always a grade 1 race. They drew the best turf horses every year. Pretty sure Dr. Fager won it at A.C. one year.

I raced a few horses there in the 70's. I remember Bud ran Spect. Bid there in the Worlds Playground which was also a fairly popular race for 2 year old boys. Bid smoked them.
I won a few races there and one Stake and have a great betting story from A.C. and I think it's in this thread but maybe not. The horses name was Carly's Mom Mom. I think you can search by name but you guys would know better than I. Lol.

As for Garden State, the same thing applies. It was a a huge venue in the 50's and maybe before. I remember Secretariat ran there and certainly other REAL big names over the years. The Jersey Derby was a huge race back in the day. It was still a pretty big deal in the 70's.

Pimlico was on strike in 1977 and I had to run some horses out of state during that time. I won an allowance race on March 24, 1977. It turned out to be exactly 3 weeks before the track burned to the ground. It took months to get our money from the horseman's bookkeepers office. What a mess. I lost a few pair of jockey silks there as well. There are incredible pictures from that sad day if you goggle them.
They rebuilt it and the new owner who went to jail for security fraud years later, pumped a lot of money into it but over time it lost momentum and finally closed around the year 2000 +/-. By then , it was a mess. It's a mall now if I am not mistaken.
At least I can say that I won races and have pictures of both places.

If I never posted the betting story about A.C. and you want to hear it or you want to see the old pics from either place, just let me know.
Thanks for the memories JBEX !

yes in that video I sent nerud said he shipped him there for a big race on the turf which he won...I think possibly within the last 10 years they had to run there for a week or so so they could continue to simulcast other tracks but not certain about that..

garden state was bob brennan if I remember correctly. .think his firm was first fidelity or something like that (used to advertise )..remember they tried to lure horses away from the preakness with a big purse for the Jersey derby if I remember correctly


yeah post the pics and share the story when you can ..sure it's a good read..never done a search on here but aware it is an option

[mrginandtonic]

Hi Mr. G and T. It's always a pleasure to hear from you !

As to the exact question, style plays a large part but pedigree plays a roll as well.

A further explanation follows:

It is not a coincidence ( not much in horse racing is) that the same trainers have to same styles of runners. Every trainer has a certain style that emphasizes certain things. When you think of Baffert or Lukas, you think of speed. That's not to say every horse is that way but as you pointed out, many more are than not.
Baffert is a former 1/4 horse trainer. Speed is what he learned. Same with Lukas.

Drysdale is an Englishman( distance, relax, close is the name of the game in Europe ) and was Charlie Whittinghams asst. trainer when I was a groom , foreman and asst. trainer. So he learned a take his time and a develop type style that he has done wonderfully with.

Both of these trainers know their strengths and that carries backwards to who they might eye to purchase as yearlings. I think they both gravitate towards their strengths when it comes to breeding as well. I mean, who doesn't right?

I am sure that if you follow any trainers roots and where they learned their trade you will usually see that what they learned early on and who their learning influence was , is in most cases their strengths. The other ends are not necessarily weaknesses. It's just that they might not be as strong in those categories as they are in others.

Great question.

I hope this helps.

Thx for your input and explanation.

[Team Taylor]

Easy suggested I ask this here. If you have a turf race and in the field you have one horse that's always ran dirt or vice versa. How do you look at or compare pace figures? That's not apples to apples is it? Appreciate your insight.

[str]

Easy suggested I ask this here. If you have a turf race and in the field you have one horse that's always ran dirt or vice versa. How do you look at or compare pace figures? That's not apples to apples is it? Appreciate your insight.

No, it is not apples to apples at all.

Because I did not use "figures" in reading the form or handicapping, I hope I answer this well enough to help you.

First of all, I did not handicap races for betting purposes much while training horses. And after the fact, when I did and do, I take into consideration the exact track I am looking at.

Understanding that exact track and what 24 or 48 splits or 22 or 46 splits really mean, and at what distances they occur, allowed me to have a good handle on how the race would set up. And of course, that was just the beginning.

When you have horses coming together from multiple tracks, with different run ups( amount of feet from the gate before the timer actually starts, a horse that ran 23 flat going 6F. at Pimlico is going to actually be faster than a horse that ran 22 2/5ths at Monmouth. This is due to the gross difference in run up length.

If you are trying to handicap Gulfstream where these different venues cross paths often, it makes it even harder unless you know all the run ups. Making things harder still is the outrageous discrepancies at Gulfstream with their own run ups that seem to change drastically from race to race at the same distance and even on the same day. IF, you are trying to handicap Gulfstream turf, between the run ups changing and the differing venues of previous raced tracks that the horses have, it is a nightmare for a new handicapper as well as many a seasoned one. Really be careful at Gulfstream. What you read does not have enough explanation to it to be able to fairly differentiate the numbers and I have no idea if any figures are accurately factoring this in or not.

I know that was not the exact question but I think you needed to know this if you don't.

As to the exact question:
Because I was primarily focused on one track the vast majority of time, I knew an awful lot about THAT track. So, it was not to difficult to understand dirt vs. turf pace and speed. Having said that, too me, it was ALL about who did what and how easily did they do it. By that I mean, how easy or hard was it to be where they were in their previous race or races. A quick glance at a rerun was always available for me to assist if I was not sure. That was even before reruns were made to have easy access because I would record each rerun show at 4am back in the day and had my own rerun library at the track in my office. It made doing what you are asking fairly easy.
So if you can watch reruns of these horses and determine who is actually fastest, there it is. But that is a ton of work when dealing with multiple tracks .

Over time you will learn which tracks are easier or harder to cut early fractions and which tracks seem to have better quality horses at the same claiming price or same allowance condition. And while those can change over a few years, they usually don't change overnight and that helps with understanding who is actually better or not.

Because you are just learning and betting is secondary to gaining knowledge at this point for you, I would try and come up with an answer but not bet , and watch to see what actually happens and try and let the results help you going forward. However, as I said, with the debacle that IS Gulfstream distance races currently, I would be careful with any results you see there.

Sorry for the not so desirable answer but it's best for you to be aware of a track with flawed timing due to different and unreported run up distances now, rather than to lose money now or down the road because of a theory developed at a place like Gulfstream that favors the sharpest of players over the novice or casual players. This type of behavior is a disgrace and they should be ashamed of themselves.

Best of luck but please be careful with Gulfstream if indeed this is the track in question or if you watch any races there.

[Team Taylor]

Many thanks STR. Looking at PP's for Gulfstream is what caused me to ask. And once again by reading this thread I learned something!

[Buckandadime]

No, it is not apples to apples at all.

Because I did not use "figures" in reading the form or handicapping, I hope I answer this well enough to help you.

First of all, I did not handicap races for betting purposes much while training horses. And after the fact, when I did and do, I take into consideration the exact track I am looking at.

Understanding that exact track and what 24 or 48 splits or 22 or 46 splits really mean, and at what distances they occur, allowed me to have a good handle on how the race would set up. And of course, that was just the beginning.

When you have horses coming together from multiple tracks, with different run ups( amount of feet from the gate before the timer actually starts, a horse that ran 23 flat going 6F. at Pimlico is going to actually be faster than a horse that ran 22 2/5ths at Monmouth. This is due to the gross difference in run up length.

If you are trying to handicap Gulfstream where these different venues cross paths often, it makes it even harder unless you know all the run ups. Making things harder still is the outrageous discrepancies at Gulfstream with their own run ups that seem to change drastically from race to race at the same distance and even on the same day. IF, you are trying to handicap Gulfstream turf, between the run ups changing and the differing venues of previous raced tracks that the horses have, it is a nightmare for a new handicapper as well as many a seasoned one. Really be careful at Gulfstream. What you read does not have enough explanation to it to be able to fairly differentiate the numbers and I have no idea if any figures are accurately factoring this in or not.

I know that was not the exact question but I think you needed to know this if you don't.

As to the exact question:
Because I was primarily focused on one track the vast majority of time, I knew an awful lot about THAT track. So, it was not to difficult to understand dirt vs. turf pace and speed. Having said that, too me, it was ALL about who did what and how easily did they do it. By that I mean, how easy or hard was it to be where they were in their previous race or races. A quick glance at a rerun was always available for me to assist if I was not sure. That was even before reruns were made to have easy access because I would record each rerun show at 4am back in the day and had my own rerun library at the track in my office. It made doing what you are asking fairly easy.
So if you can watch reruns of these horses and determine who is actually fastest, there it is. But that is a ton of work when dealing with multiple tracks .

Over time you will learn which tracks are easier or harder to cut early fractions and which tracks seem to have better quality horses at the same claiming price or same allowance condition. And while those can change over a few years, they usually don't change overnight and that helps with understanding who is actually better or not.

Because you are just learning and betting is secondary to gaining knowledge at this point for you, I would try and come up with an answer but not bet , and watch to see what actually happens and try and let the results help you going forward. However, as I said, with the debacle that IS Gulfstream distance races currently, I would be careful with any results you see there.

Sorry for the not so desirable answer but it's best for you to be aware of a track with flawed timing due to different and unreported run up distances now, rather than to lose money now or down the road because of a theory developed at a place like Gulfstream that favors the sharpest of players over the novice or casual players. This type of behavior is a disgrace and they should be ashamed of themselves.

Best of luck but please be careful with Gulfstream if indeed this is the track in question or if you watch any races there.

WOW!!! I had no idea about the run ups.. In my simple mind, I just assumed that the split timing for all tracks was the same.. Thank you Sir for the valuable info.. Do you see other tracks adopting GP's SOP? Thus throwing off any edge for the speed handicapper's that play the simulcast? Again, Thank you..

[Buckandadime]

I've thrown out many little things that would work at other tracks but when it came to GP they would absolutely have no merit or bearing to the winners.. I now know why..

[str]

WOW!!! I had no idea about the run ups.. In my simple mind, I just assumed that the split timing for all tracks was the same.. Thank you Sir for the valuable info.. Do you see other tracks adopting GP's SOP? Thus throwing off any edge for the speed handicapper's that play the simulcast? Again, Thank you..

You are welcome. I hope it helps.

To figure out the runups at the tracks you play, simply watch the starts and see the space between the gate front doors and the pole that they will run by which starts the timer. Red and white poles are 1/4's, green and white poles are 1/8ths, black and white are 1/16ths.
If it is to difficult to measure the distance, use your stop watch in your cell phone and time from the moment the gates open until the first horse hits the pole . Do this for each distance at any track you play . It sounds like a lot of work but within a week you will have a ton of info. Then, if the placing of the gate seems inconsistent with where it was before, time the race to the 1st pole and then watch the replay of the race you timed previously. This will give you definitive evidence as to which tracks are moving it all over the place and which tracks are not.

Doing this fairly simple task should give you the confidence to play certain tracks or not play others. And just because they move it for one distance does not mean they will for all so make a spreadsheet or whatever you can refer to. Within 30 days, it will be a common part of what you see each race and the work will become mostly visual.

[Buckandadime]

You are welcome. I hope it helps.

To figure out the runups at the tracks you play, simply watch the starts and see the space between the gate front doors and the pole that they will run by which starts the timer. Red and white poles are 1/4's, green and white poles are 1/8ths, black and white are 1/16ths.
If it is to difficult to measure the distance, use your stop watch in your cell phone and time from the moment the gates open until the first horse hits the pole . Do this for each distance at any track you play . It sounds like a lot of work but within a week you will have a ton of info. Then, if the placing of the gate seems inconsistent with where it was before, time the race to the 1st pole and then watch the replay of the race you timed previously. This will give you definitive evidence as to which tracks are moving it all over the place and which tracks are not.

Doing this fairly simple task should give you the confidence to play certain tracks or not play others. And just because they move it for one distance does not mean they will for all so make a spreadsheet or whatever you can refer to. Within 30 days, it will be a common part of what you see each race and the work will become mostly visual.

Thank you STR..

[JBEX]

I'm really amazed at that str..how much if any extra effort could it take to put the gate in the same place..just don't get it at all..off the top of your head if you had to guess what would be the difference in placement from race to race at the same race distance and how much faster would a further back location make the race on average ?

[str]

I'm really amazed at that str..how much if any extra effort could it take to put the gate in the same place..just don't get it at all..off the top of your head if you had to guess what would be the difference in placement from race to race at the same race distance and how much faster would a further back location make the race on average ?

The reason given for this is that they are trying to preserve the turf course from more wear and tear in one spot. And while that might have some merit, any changes could and should be announced on a schedule for everyone to see.

The problem I have is Gulfstream and others (although I just don't follow the races these days well enough to tell you exactly where), are doing it on the dirt as well and that is a joke.

Until I hear of a legit excuse or reason as well as a plan going forward to give all the players advanced notice so as to level the playing field, I will call it what it is, which is a damn disgrace.

Below is an excerpt from the guy that does the figures for timeform US figs who explains how Gulfstream did this and the true difference from what you would see in the form.

I would hope that he would be ok with me showing this to help all players be aware of whats going on.



"Sunday (the 12th) at Gulfstream races 9 and 12 were both run on the turf course with the temporary rail set at 36 feet. Race 9 had a run up of 89 feet and race 12 had a run up of 147 feet. I verified these via video and they are accurate.

The official time of race 9 was 1:28.85 and the official time for race 12 was 1:28.69. It appears race 12 was faster by about a length.

I timed the races from the gate. Race 9 went in 92.43 and race 12 was timed in 93.56. But keep in mind, race 12 was at a distance 58 feet longer. I then equalized the races to exactly 7.5f. Race 9 was now rated at 1:30.79; race 12 1:30.86.

The official times credit race 12 with being 0.16 seconds faster, but in reality race 9 was about 0.07 seconds faster. This is a difference of 0.23 seconds, roughly the equivalent of a length and a half in distance. While this isn't huge, I don't think any bettor would say it is trivial either. This is a good example of how run up can distort final times. It also isn't rare. There are many examples where the difference is much greater. "

[JBEX]

I certainly agree that this process is wrong..handicappers have a right to accurate information and tracks should have an obligation to provide this to its patrons.personally one length or about 1 point (brisnet figures) would almost never affect a handicapping decision I make..when you start getting to 2-4 lengths though I'm not good with that and sounds like that happens on occasion from what he wrote..to me it shows they really don't take their fan base seriously as handicappers and they assume we wouldn't even think about such things..if they did things like this wouldn't occur at all

[str]

I certainly agree that this process is wrong..handicappers have a right to accurate information and tracks should have an obligation to provide this to its patrons.personally one length or about 1 point (brisnet figures) would almost never affect a handicapping decision I make..when you start getting to 2-4 lengths though I'm not good with that and sounds like that happens on occasion from what he wrote..to me it shows they really don't take their fan base seriously as handicappers and they assume we wouldn't even think about such things..if they did things like this wouldn't occur at all

I think he used this as a comparison because it was 3 races apart on the same card. He said it is worse at times so with that I think the best thing to do is keep an eye on it knowing the information you have, and consider factoring in where and when it seems appropriate.

It is not a deal breaker or a reason to quit or anything like that. It's more or a " know the game you are playing as well or better than most others" approach. Because it's parimutuel, it does matter over time if you know more than the next guy. Understanding this puts those that do ahead of many.
Hope it helps.

[JBEX]

hey str..commented the other day about a horse david jacobson claimed from lukas. thought you might like this article on his dad from sports illustrated in 1964..can see he learned from the master..good read

http://www.si.com/vault/1964/06/08/6...its-a-business

[JBEX]

hey str..commented the other day about a horse david jacobson claimed from lukas. thought you might like this article on his dad from sports illustrated in 1964..can see he learned from the master..good read

http://www.si.com/vault/1964/06/08/6...its-a-business

btw if you click on the cover below the first paragraph you can view the whole issue (ads and all) in which there was a special on horse racing

[str]

btw if you click on the cover below the first paragraph you can view the whole issue (ads and all) in which there was a special on horse racing

Wow. Look how young Mr. Hartack looks. Most said he was a tough guy to get along with . He was ALWAYS nice and outgoing to me. Knew him when I was a hot walker and starting out as a groom. So I guess I didn't know him very much at all but when he got on whoever the horse was that I was rubbing, I think I know which one, he was always saying how you doing and being very accepting of me being a novice.
Thanks for that JBEX.

[JBEX]

Wow. Look how young Mr. Hartack looks. Most said he was a tough guy to get along with . He was ALWAYS nice and outgoing to me. Knew him when I was a hot walker and starting out as a groom. So I guess I didn't know him very much at all but when he got on whoever the horse was that I was rubbing, I think I know which one, he was always saying how you doing and being very accepting of me being a novice.
Thanks for that JBEX.

np..glad to bring back a few good memories for you..I know he was one of the best back in the day but before my time..maybe not in the best taste to bring up the jacobson story considering what he did later on in his life. .I apologize if that offended you and understand if you'd rather not comment

[str]

np..glad to bring back a few good memories for you..I know he was one of the best back in the day but before my time..maybe not in the best taste to bring up the jacobson story considering what he did later on in his life. .I apologize if that offended you and understand if you'd rather not comment

Mr. Hartack was kind of before my time as well. I was just getting started when he was on the back nine of his career.

As for the article, NO WAY did you offend me or anything close to that.

I just didn't have much to comment on. It was a 50+ year old story and man were things different back then. Things I saw as a kid were so different. It's really apples and oranges.
Him saying he treated it like a business was not acceptable then but is today. Not to the harsh extent he took the story but it is acceptable.

His comment about training Kangaroos if that was the game , I get that. It was the game he liked. But just because you run a stable with a high turn over ratio doesn't mean you don't come to appreciate the individual horse, it's personality, characteristics, and sacrifice to compete that many make. A trainer can have the highest regard for the horse and still run it where the probability of getting claimed is high. I did that countless times. Out of respect to the horse, owner and the process. And, I wanted to win. Some of my favorite horses ran for less than 10k.
So while I understood the premise of most of what he was saying, I was not on board with his delivery. If that was his true feelings, I'm glad I never met him.
That said, so many things were crazy different back then. And many in a not very good way. It was a different world.
Thanks JBEX. I had forgotten about those few times I talked to Mr. Hartack. Really appreciate that !

[Buckandadime]

Str, I have a question and was hoping you could shed a light and help a little.. When it comes to race class, how much of a difference is each restriction worth? Say I rate $20, claiming ( no conditions ) race at a 80 par.. How much less would a N1x be worth? Would it be the same amount all down the tier of races? I hope I'm explaining this correctly.. Say for instance,

1) $20,
2) $20, n1x
3) $20, n2l
4) $20, n1y
5) $20, n$y
6) $20, n1m
7) $20, n$my
8) b

If I give (1) a par of 80, and say you think a (2) should be 2-4 pts less, would I go down the line subtracting 3 for each until I reached the b race which would then be a 56? I honestly don't know how to adjust.. I realize that a lot of it depends on the track and that is (so far) a fairly easy adjustment.. Thank you

[JBEX]

Mr. Hartack was kind of before my time as well. I was just getting started when he was on the back nine of his career.

As for the article, NO WAY did you offend me or anything close to that.

I just didn't have much to comment on. It was a 50+ year old story and man were things different back then. Things I saw as a kid were so different. It's really apples and oranges.
Him saying he treated it like a business was not acceptable then but is today. Not to the harsh extent he took the story but it is acceptable.

His comment about training Kangaroos if that was the game , I get that. It was the game he liked. But just because you run a stable with a high turn over ratio doesn't mean you don't come to appreciate the individual horse, it's personality, characteristics, and sacrifice to compete that many make. A trainer can have the highest regard for the horse and still run it where the probability of getting claimed is high. I did that countless times. Out of respect to the horse, owner and the process. And, I wanted to win. Some of my favorite horses ran for less than 10k.
So while I understood the premise of most of what he was saying, I was not on board with his delivery. If that was his true feelings, I'm glad I never met him.
That said, so many things were crazy different back then. And many in a not very good way. It was a different world.
Thanks JBEX. I had forgotten about those few times I talked to Mr. Hartack. Really appreciate that !

I kind of felt that way also..no humanity at all in himtowards the horses..got to be a little more balanced than that and if that's the way you really feel tone it down a bit for the interview..outside of being a bit cold and callous get the feeling on the business side he knew what he was doing