[str]

Well I had fun.

I think we all did. During the triple crown, we can talk about all the side pieces all we want but if a horse can win all three, they are some kind of special. He is a helluva horse.

[JBEX]

Q. prior to yesterday justify had run on fast tracks only twice..the easy first out win at santa anita and then the big figure win in the santa anita derby in his 3rd start..his speed figures in the derby and preakness were very slow..do you think it's possible those surfaces weren't to his liking but because he's extremely gifted talent wise he overcame that and got the job done?

A. It certainly could be. Time will tell. If that is the case, he really is tons the best isn't he?

Q. another interesting point and this along the lines of what I've talked about in here prior..first off let me say I never would have picked the place horse but he's a great example of a horse who cost a bunch for his pedigree..

stallion fee 30k..
dam unraced..
this is her first foal to race..
cost $404K as a 2yo at auction in ireland

i figure this is often times due to the physicality of the horse..what do they name him GRONKOWSKI lol..have a hunch there's some chance i'm right


A. Sounds right to me. The horse was obviously well touted at the sale to bring that price and he must have had the looks to back the talk up. I think you are all over that.

absolutely among this crop..I can't just forgive the slow figures though..I do think when he gets back to a middle
distance race on a fast track and of course rested he'll
start running big figures again..I have to think it will factor into his stallion value and baffert would like him to not only win but do so convincingly..i'm guessing haskell vs jim dandy as he's done well there in the past

[str]

absolutely among this crop..I can't just forgive the slow figures though..I do think when he gets back to a middle
distance race on a fast track and of course rested he'll
start running big figures again..I have to think it will factor into his stallion value and baffert would like him to not only win but do so convincingly..i'm guessing haskell vs jim dandy as he's done well there in the past

Just keep in mind that his next race will not be the main focus. His Breeders Cup race will. I would expect to see his figures climb with the Breeders Cup being the peak if everything goes as planned.

[Thunderground]

Great to have a TC winner. Gronkowski had a dream trip. Do you think he could have gotten to Justify if he had changed leads earlier?

[JBEX]

Just keep in mind that his next race will not be the main focus. His Breeders Cup race will. I would expect to see his figures climb with the Breeders Cup being the peak if everything goes as planned.

yes I can see that..the spectacular performance in the breeders cup and just take care of business along the way..I have a hunch taking care of business bto lol at a middle distance could yield a big figure anyway..be a fun ride and make the saratoga and/or monmouth meet a little more interesting

[str]

Great to have a TC winner. Gronkowski had a dream trip. Do you think he could have gotten to Justify if he had changed leads earlier?

No. Honestly, I think Justify would have won if they had all gone around a second time.

[str]

It seems as though the crap is starting to hit the fan now with the ride from Geroux on Restoring Hope .

Here is the link.


https://nypost.com/2018/06/10/belmon...stify-victory/

[JBEX]

It seems as though the crap is starting to hit the fan now with the ride from Geroux on Restoring Hope .

Here is the link.


https://nypost.com/2018/06/10/belmon...stify-victory/

I think castellano is being unfairly criticised for not going to the lead..between restoring hope bearing out in front of him going into the turn and then bravazzo just being in the wrong place after that can understand the audible..how about you str ?

[Easy-Rider 66]

It seems as though the crap is starting to hit the fan now with the ride from Geroux on Restoring Hope .

Here is the link.


https://nypost.com/2018/06/10/belmon...stify-victory/

Good article STR. Why would Baffert run Restoring Hope here? Talk about bittersweet if he had won for Baffert. Do you think the owner of Restoring Hope overrode Baffert's call? Or was the plan to help Justify win? I guess you can not say for sure, but what is your gut feeling. And thx for good words about my pick Of Vino. Forgot to mention that earlier.

[str]

I think castellano is being unfairly criticised for not going to the lead..between restoring hope bearing out in front of him going into the turn and then bravazzo just being in the wrong place after that can understand the audible..how about you str ?

I think you are 100% correct. Castellano asked his horse to get up to the lead early. Did he send him like a cheap speed rider going 4 1/2 or 5/8ths? No. Of course he didn't. Nor would he or should he. He is a world class rider not some elbow flying moron who has no business riding in that type of race. He was still in a decent spot.
The problem is not him. And when owners start talking to the press, things can get so muddied down with false accusations that the REAL questions don't get asked.

There are two problems with this race, not 3 or 4.

1. What the hell was Geroux doing on Restoring Hope. The only thing we DO KNOW is that he was NOT trying to do what was best for HIS horse and the owner of his horse. I talked about that yesterday. My quote is below.

"Q. Restoring Hope goes wide early?

A. Restoring Hope was full of run early. He was running off. The only way to keep him off of Justify was to swing on him,( pull reigns from side to side) and take him wide to keep in out of Justifys right eye.
That is what all that was about. Is it fair? No. Is it within the rules? No. But if the owner doesn't bitch nobody else will have enough platform to do so, so I guess we'll just stop talking about it.
Could you imagine if that was Chad Browns horse and it DID rush up and get Justify all lit up into the 1st turn and ultimately cost him the race and Gronkowski won it ?
I hope they give Geroux 10% and the owners, the West's a breeding right. They both deserve something.
And what if you bet on Restoring Hope? Maybe a lovely parting gift? Unreal. "


Well, now the owner IS bitching. So we have a problem.



2. I found out yesterday that Restoring Hope ran with Blks. OFF. Apparently it was announced around 1PM Saturday, well after the betting had started.
He was NOT entered that way. I saw the official entry lineup card that is made up after the draw which is forwarded to the form , program printer and other publications. It had no mention of blks. off.
Unless something has changed since I trained, a change of equipment such as blinkers MUST be declared at time of entry. It was not. This is a rule infraction. Period, unless something has changed. The Stewards must have Ok'd it but my question is WHY? The betting had already started. What the hell is that?

Hopefully these two questions get answered. The other stuff is stupid and sour grapes as far as I am concerned.

[str]

Good article STR. Why would Baffert run Restoring Hope here? Talk about bittersweet if he had won for Baffert. Do you think the owner of Restoring Hope overrode Baffert's call? Or was the plan to help Justify win? I guess you can not say for sure, but what is your gut feeling. And thx for good words about my pick Of Vino. Forgot to mention that earlier.

Q. Why would Baffert run Restoring Hope here? Talk about bittersweet if he had won for Baffert.

A. Well , he does have an obligation to that owner as well. But yes, he could have found a softer spot. He did have every right to run him in there. But he did not have every right to use him the way it looked as though they did. It was bad optics and the backlash is bad for the sport.

Q. Do you think the owner of Restoring Hope overrode Baffert's call? Or was the plan to help Justify win?


A. No. I don't think the owner said a thing but afterwards he was upset at what he saw happen on his horse and he is right IMO. I don't think the owner knew of helping Justify which is one reason he is upset. I cannot say if Baffert and the jockey discussed doing what was seemingly done but it looks that way doesn't it?

Q. I guess you can not say for sure, but what is your gut feeling.

A. If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck.... you know the rest.


And thx for good words about my pick Of Vino.

Hey, you deserved them.

[StackinGreen]

At least have betting entries if you have same owner, or even part owner. Trainers entering two different horses to the same race should also have major stipulations, in my opinion.

Like the rabbit thing, let's get shooters with NO DOUBTS that they are in it to WIN IT.

That's why this garbage happens. And even if it didn't, no one could claim otherwise.

[mrginandtonic]

Sir STR, I was looking at tomorrow’s form at Santa Anita, trying to cap a few races and hoping to make a few bucks. I came across a horse in Race 2 and I couldn’t believe what I saw. It’s the 3-Demigoddess, she is a 4 yr old filly and yet she has 50 lifetime starts. She is trained by Charles Stutts. I think it’s the same Stutts that’s been around for a long time, not sure. Anyways, he is 0 for 33 in 2018. The form only goes back 12 starts which started January 1,2018. She has raced on average 3 times a month, sometimes she would race after 6 days and sometimes 10 days. That is a lot of races for such a short time. Her record is 50- 1-1-9. Other than breaking her maiden, she hasn’t won a race. I guess what I’m asking is at what point do you consider this animal abuse!! This just seem so f@ckin ridiculous to me. I know they use to race a lot more frequently than now, but 50 starts as a 4 yr old and we are only in mid-May. Your thoughts? This just really bothers me. Do they have regulations against these? I wish I know how to post that part of the form for you to look at.

Poor Demigoddess has to run again! Actually, since this last post, she ran 2nd on May 18, then a distant 7th on June 1 on 1 1/8 Turf. Now she is scheduled to run this Thursday 6/14 going 6 1/2 furlongs downhill turf at Santa Anita. I guess this bone head trainer is running her every two weeks till she retires or badly injured. The last published workout for her was 8/24/2016. Lol, I guess when you run every two weeks, you don’t workouts. Now her lifetime starts is 1 for 52..... and counting. Poor Demigoddess!!

[str]

At least have betting entries if you have same owner, or even part owner. Trainers entering two different horses to the same race should also have major stipulations, in my opinion.

Like the rabbit thing, let's get shooters with NO DOUBTS that they are in it to WIN IT.

That's why this garbage happens. And even if it didn't, no one could claim otherwise.

The uncoupled entry rule was changed due to the horse shortage at various times by each state.

I am not sure if this rule change is somehow being laid at the horsemens feet or not but without a doubt it was a decision by track management to do away with coupled entries in favor of more betting interests to help fill the card.

If someone has an article that states otherwise, it's bullcrap.

I know this because I was on the Board of horsemen in Md. that discussed the decoupling proposal by management and the exact situation we witnessed in the Belmont came up.

The rule for entries is that if one half of an entry is ridden in such a manner to help his entrymate by hindering other horses the Stewards, at their discretion, may disqualify either or BOTH horses and place them last or next to last and last if they so choose.

And of course that rule was put in place because it was happening, as are most rules .

Most of these type rules are made to protect the public first, not the horsemen, believe it or not.

On my trainers test, it spoke about protecting the public a couple of different times.

Back in the day, they meant it. Not so sure about now.

I do not remember if that rule follows uncoupled entries or not. Sorry about that.

[str]

Poor Demigoddess has to run again! Actually, since this last post, she ran 2nd on May 18, then a distant 7th on June 1 on 1 1/8 Turf. Now she is scheduled to run this Thursday 6/14 going 6 1/2 furlongs downhill turf at Santa Anita. I guess this bone head trainer is running her every two weeks till she retires or badly injured. The last published workout for her was 8/24/2016. Lol, I guess when you run every two weeks, you don’t workouts. Now her lifetime starts is 1 for 52..... and counting. Poor Demigoddess!!

Ugh !

Well, at least she is running on turf which is usually softer on her feet and less shock on her joints.

And you are right. When you run as often as she is, you hardly have to train much less work.

Hope she is OK but I am positive that the State Vet looks at her harder than most the morning of each race.

Every state vet I ever worked with really cared about the horses that were racing. I can promise you that.

Thanks for the update Mr. G and T.

[JBEX]

Poor Demigoddess has to run again! Actually, since this last post, she ran 2nd on May 18, then a distant 7th on June 1 on 1 1/8 Turf. Now she is scheduled to run this Thursday 6/14 going 6 1/2 furlongs downhill turf at Santa Anita. I guess this bone head trainer is running her every two weeks till she retires or badly injured. The last published workout for her was 8/24/2016. Lol, I guess when you run every two weeks, you don’t workouts. Now her lifetime starts is 1 for 52..... and counting. Poor Demigoddess!!

i am not condoning what the trainer is doing by any means but the horse did earn $64k last year and is up to $38k this year..only 13 starts at santa anita and I can only see the last 10 which were at santa anita..the jockeys who rode him in his last start and starts 5-10 back are a combined 3/153 according
to equibase..tiago perreira ad you know a very solid jockey rode him starts 2-4 back and had a 2nd and 3rd..the start 3 back was in a G3 stakes and she went off 79-1 which is ridiculous ..have to think tp feels she can come in underneath here or why bother riding her..also obviously was running somewhere else last year and all but 1 start this year at santa anita..seems like under a better trainer who runs her more realistically she might be a better horse

[Easy-Rider 66]

Hey STR: I know you recently stated that you are not a fan of Beyer speed figures. Do you believe in any figures? Like Thorograph, TIme Form, Brisnet, Equibase, etc. And what about Pace figures? And if look at all figures the same then what would be the major criteria you would use to Handicap a race? Thx in advance.

[Thunderground]

Repole said he questioned Javier Castellano on Sunday morning about his failure to follow instructions with Noble Indy. The 24-1 long shot was expected to confront Justify early with the hope of softening him for Vino Rosso’s late kick. Todd Pletcher, a three-time Belmont winner, trains Noble Indy and Vino Rosso.
“All week and in the paddock, Todd and I were crystal clear to Javier to make the lead,” Repole said. “He broke good. Mike Smith broke good. We definitely saw an opportunity that Javier, being told to make the lead, could have, or at least pressured Justify.”

If they're going to allow the Belmont Stakes to be turned into the ultimate lying-in-wait type of race, then they're asking for these type of counter strategies. The solution would be simple. One horse per trainer.


It turned out that no blocking by Restoring Hope was necessary: https://www.horseracingnation.com/ne...ency_Issue_123

After the race, Repole was upset with Javier Castellano's ride, and as reported by the Daily Racing Form, said, “You get to run in this race one time in your life, you would expect to follow directions. He chose an audible. That doesn’t sit well with me. It’ll be awhile before you see Javier in the blue and orange silks.”

This begs the question of whether Noble Indy’s connections were on the same team. While Mike Repole wanted to win the Belmont for himself, WinStar had its own interest in the Triple Crown. WinStar farm is an incredibly important client for Trainer Todd Pletcher, who trains Noble Indy. And Pletcher is instrumental to the success of Castellano, one of his regular top riders.

No idea how deep this rabbit hole goes, but Repole's two horse strategy was clear, and it may have been overruled by Winstar... Go figure.

[str]

Hey STR: I know you recently stated that you are not a fan of Beyer speed figures. Do you believe in any figures? Like Thorograph, TIme Form, Brisnet, Equibase, etc. And what about Pace figures? And if look at all figures the same then what would be the major criteria you would use to Handicap a race? Thx in advance.

Yes, I do believe in speed figures. But, I do not use any of them. I do like the Timeform US. pace projections. They make perfect sense to me.
Because I just don't handicap much anymore, and because Beyers and the Rag sheets were all that were around to my knowledge back in my day, and neither were around in my early years of training and obviously not around when I was capping regularly, I did scrutinize those two. I just never saw how either of those found more winners than handicapping any other way. For me, they just never proved to be a tool I felt improved my abilities. It seemed to me to always point to the favorites. But that's just me.


I have never tried or examined the process of those other figs. I have to assume that they are anywhere from decent to pretty darn good.

As for my major criteria, I used times, lengths off, who the rider was, replays, and in my case because I actually saw almost every race run in Md., and believe it or not, the old track variant. Apparently they have changed the variant now so I don't look at that much anymore. But back before Beyers, and even when they started, the variant was Great when used the way a buddy of mine from school and I figured out. Now that I think about it, I guess they were OUR set of figures.

You could look at days of the week at a place like Md. or C.T. and constantly find very solid price horses. How? On Tuesdays or mid week cards, the horses were almost always bottom to mid level claimers. The good horses ran on Friday and Saturday and Holidays. ( Pretty much, but not entirely).
So if you found a horse that ran a number on a Tuesday or Wed. that was real close, equal to or better than a horse that ran on a Friday or Saturday, you had a solid mid price to longshot. Not only was the track playing seemingly slow in mid week races due to the quality of the fields but the maintenance crew rarely souped the track up until weekends and especially Saturdays and Holidays. They loved fast times for good horses. It made fans happy. So you can see that a Tuesday or Wednesday horse on a slower surface and with a slower rated track due to slower horses throughout the card, that could have the same numbers as the horse that ran on a Friday or Saturday on the faster track with better horses would be a stand out. Honestly, we killed it doing that for years until biases became a household word. That was 70's and early 80's. It was almost like a dream sometimes when we could cash out on a price horse. It was really something Easy.
I do not know if that equates today or not. There is much more scrutiny towards the surface these days. There was zero scrutiny by the players back then.
Our focus was Md. but more so C.T. Sometimes it felt like we had tomorrow's paper with the results today. A dream we have all had. Lol.

Today I just look at what the form offers, rarely the comments, mostly times, post positions ,lengths back, race set up, like speeds, stalkers, closers, and who ran against whom kind of stuff. A few replays if needed for the big races. And of course, trainers tactics which is where I guess I have quite an edge. They jump right off the page for me sometimes.
That's about it. But heck, I'm a dinosaur and only play 3 or 4 times a year. I could not get away with that if I played more often. The players have gotten much better. I am pretty sure they have run right by me. And I'm ok with that because I am a casual fan these days. Heck, I get almost all my racing info day to day from you guys.
If I ever got back into handicapping daily, I would have to find something more for sure. I just don't know which one it would be.

Thanks for asking Easy. Keep up the good work !

[str]

If they're going to allow the Belmont Stakes to be turned into the ultimate lying-in-wait type of race, then they're asking for these type of counter strategies. The solution would be simple. One horse per trainer.


It turned out that no blocking by Restoring Hope was necessary: https://www.horseracingnation.com/ne...ency_Issue_123

No idea how deep this rabbit hole goes, but Repole's two horse strategy was clear, and it may have been overruled by Winstar... Go figure.

A. That is a fair point. But due to wanting more handle by having more betting interests, it won't happen. That is why they got rid of entries in the 1st place.


A. A. It wasn't necessary but it was obvious to me that it was intended, which breaks at least one rule and probably two rules that are written to protect the public.

Rabbits have gone on forever. I am not condoning them or condemning them but if they are coupled, as one betting entity, it can possibly screw the horse , owner, or trainer but it does not screw the public because they have bet on two horses, the rabbit and the closer. The public can handicap with that in mind.
The intent of these rules of racing are for the benefit of the public not the other trainers or owners. I'm not saying I agree with all that, I'm just stating the rules of racing that I learned and was expected to abide by.

Nice to see you in here Thunderground.

[Easy-Rider 66]

Yes, I do believe in speed figures. But, I do not use any of them. I do like the Timeform US. pace projections. They make perfect sense to me.
Because I just don't handicap much anymore, and because Beyers and the Rag sheets were all that were around to my knowledge back in my day, and neither were around in my early years of training and obviously not around when I was capping regularly, I did scrutinize those two. I just never saw how either of those found more winners than handicapping any other way. For me, they just never proved to be a tool I felt improved my abilities. It seemed to me to always point to the favorites. But that's just me.


I have never tried or examined the process of those other figs. I have to assume that they are anywhere from decent to pretty darn good.

As for my major criteria, I used times, lengths off, who the rider was, replays, and in my case because I actually saw almost every race run in Md., and believe it or not, the old track variant. Apparently they have changed the variant now so I don't look at that much anymore. But back before Beyers, and even when they started, the variant was Great when used the way a buddy of mine from school and I figured out. Now that I think about it, I guess they were OUR set of figures.

You could look at days of the week at a place like Md. or C.T. and constantly find very solid price horses. How? On Tuesdays or mid week cards, the horses were almost always bottom to mid level claimers. The good horses ran on Friday and Saturday and Holidays. ( Pretty much, but not entirely).
So if you found a horse that ran a number on a Tuesday or Wed. that was real close, equal to or better than a horse that ran on a Friday or Saturday, you had a solid mid price to longshot. Not only was the track playing seemingly slow in mid week races due to the quality of the fields but the maintenance crew rarely souped the track up until weekends and especially Saturdays and Holidays. They loved fast times for good horses. It made fans happy. So you can see that a Tuesday or Wednesday horse on a slower surface and with a slower rated track due to slower horses throughout the card, that could have the same numbers as the horse that ran on a Friday or Saturday on the faster track with better horses would be a stand out. Honestly, we killed it doing that for years until biases became a household word. That was 70's and early 80's. It was almost like a dream sometimes when we could cash out on a price horse. It was really something Easy.
I do not know if that equates today or not. There is much more scrutiny towards the surface these days. There was zero scrutiny by the players back then.
Our focus was Md. but more so C.T. Sometimes it felt like we had tomorrow's paper with the results today. A dream we have all had. Lol.

Today I just look at what the form offers, rarely the comments, mostly times, post positions ,lengths back, race set up, like speeds, stalkers, closers, and who ran against whom kind of stuff. A few replays if needed for the big races. And of course, trainers tactics which is where I guess I have quite an edge. They jump right off the page for me sometimes.
That's about it. But heck, I'm a dinosaur and only play 3 or 4 times a year. I could not get away with that if I played more often. The players have gotten much better. I am pretty sure they have run right by me. And I'm ok with that because I am a casual fan these days. Heck, I get almost all my racing info day to day from you guys.
If I ever got back into handicapping daily, I would have to find something more for sure. I just don't know which one it would be.

Thanks for asking Easy. Keep up the good work !

Interesting take on track variant. I use the Brisnets mostly and find their pace figures to be a great help. Time form like you said also offers pace figures. Thorograph has good figures but way too expensive for avg player. Timeform joined forces with DRF so now the TF pace info are included with the beyers. If you ever get into contest play keep us updated. Would be interesting to see how you fare. Have a feeling you would do just fine. Thx again.

[JBEX]

Yes, I do believe in speed figures. But, I do not use any of them. I do like the Timeform US. pace projections. They make perfect sense to me.
Because I just don't handicap much anymore, and because Beyers and the Rag sheets were all that were around to my knowledge back in my day, and neither were around in my early years of training and obviously not around when I was capping regularly, I did scrutinize those two. I just never saw how either of those found more winners than handicapping any other way. For me, they just never proved to be a tool I felt improved my abilities. It seemed to me to always point to the favorites. But that's just me.


I have never tried or examined the process of those other figs. I have to assume that they are anywhere from decent to pretty darn good.

As for my major criteria, I used times, lengths off, who the rider was, replays, and in my case because I actually saw almost every race run in Md., and believe it or not, the old track variant. Apparently they have changed the variant now so I don't look at that much anymore. But back before Beyers, and even when they started, the variant was Great when used the way a buddy of mine from school and I figured out. Now that I think about it, I guess they were OUR set of figures.

You could look at days of the week at a place like Md. or C.T. and constantly find very solid price horses. How? On Tuesdays or mid week cards, the horses were almost always bottom to mid level claimers. The good horses ran on Friday and Saturday and Holidays. ( Pretty much, but not entirely).
So if you found a horse that ran a number on a Tuesday or Wed. that was real close, equal to or better than a horse that ran on a Friday or Saturday, you had a solid mid price to longshot. Not only was the track playing seemingly slow in mid week races due to the quality of the fields but the maintenance crew rarely souped the track up until weekends and especially Saturdays and Holidays. They loved fast times for good horses. It made fans happy. So you can see that a Tuesday or Wednesday horse on a slower surface and with a slower rated track due to slower horses throughout the card, that could have the same numbers as the horse that ran on a Friday or Saturday on the faster track with better horses would be a stand out. Honestly, we killed it doing that for years until biases became a household word. That was 70's and early 80's. It was almost like a dream sometimes when we could cash out on a price horse. It was really something Easy.
I do not know if that equates today or not. There is much more scrutiny towards the surface these days. There was zero scrutiny by the players back then.
Our focus was Md. but more so C.T. Sometimes it felt like we had tomorrow's paper with the results today. A dream we have all had. Lol.

Today I just look at what the form offers, rarely the comments, mostly times, post positions ,lengths back, race set up, like speeds, stalkers, closers, and who ran against whom kind of stuff. A few replays if needed for the big races. And of course, trainers tactics which is where I guess I have quite an edge. They jump right off the page for me sometimes.
That's about it. But heck, I'm a dinosaur and only play 3 or 4 times a year. I could not get away with that if I played more often. The players have gotten much better. I am pretty sure they have run right by me. And I'm ok with that because I am a casual fan these days. Heck, I get almost all my racing info day to day from you guys.
If I ever got back into handicapping daily, I would have to find something more for sure. I just don't know which one it would be.

Thanks for asking Easy. Keep up the good work !

wow this is great stuff..when you say the old track variant I guess your talking about the 2nd number in the racing form..the first is how many fifths off the fastest time
at that distance within the past 3 years subtracted from 100..the second is the variant which I believe was the average of the sprints and route variants separated..think i'm right or close with this..I remember before beyers that was no ordinary 86 butan 86 with a 23 variant lol but unless you spent extra money or put in a lot of extra time that's what you had to work with till around 1991 when the racing times first came out with beyer figures..even though it was short lived it got the racing form off their ass to improve the product


the stuff about early in the week times that were close or better to later in the week times on more glib surfaces ..gotta love it !! what ended that edge...people making their own or selling speed figures?? this was still well before the beyers were out

[str]

wow this is great stuff..when you say the old track variant I guess your talking about the 2nd number in the racing form..the first is how many fifths off the fastest time
at that distance within the past 3 years subtracted from 100..the second is the variant which I believe was the average of the sprints and route variants separated..think i'm right or close with this..I remember before beyers that was no ordinary 86 butan 86 with a 23 variant lol but unless you spent extra money or put in a lot of extra time that's what you had to work with till around 1991 when the racing times first came out with beyer figures..even though it was short lived it got the racing form off their ass to improve the product


the stuff about early in the week times that were close or better to later in the week times on more glib surfaces ..gotta love it !! what ended that edge...people making their own or selling speed figures?? this was still well before the beyers were out

Q.when you say the old track variant I guess your talking about the 2nd number in the racing form..the first is how many fifths off the fastest time

A. Yes. Like an 80-20 when the horse was off the track record by 4 seconds ( 20 1/5's). I think the form changed it about 5 or more years ago to reflect something that I would not care as much for. probably just stuck in my ways. Lol.


Q. the stuff about early in the week times that were close or better to later in the week times on more glib surfaces ..gotta love it !


A. It was incredible. He and I were the only two that I knew used it. I even claimed horses with it sometimes. Not just that but if I liked a horse, especially from C.T. that was in Md. I would use that. I did claim more C.T. horses in Md. in the late 70's and early 80's than anybody else and that was one of the main reasons.
Many players used a common "system" of adding up the last 3 races and the highest numbers were the horses to bet. While that made sense, all I saw it did was take the player to the favorite or close to that. We took that and added a level to it that was unbelievable.
If you can get your hands on an old form from Md. or C.T., try it.

Q. what ended that edge..


A. more than anything I think it was life. We both started having children , he moved to N.C. to work and then Virginia after that so he couldn't get to the track and really didn't have time necessary to devote to it and I grew my stable to the point where I had no time do look at anything but my 60 or 70 horses at the time along with my family. I did continue to use it for claiming purposes though. Just no time to handicap or bet.

Q. this was still well before the beyers were out

A. Oh yes, it sure was. Probably our top two handicapping feats ever. Remind me and I will tell a story about the other one later.

Thanks JBEX

[JBEX]

$9 horse

this is 22% of the win pool

16.6 -1 in 2nd

this is 5.7% of the win pool

78% remaining after taking 22% out for the winner.. divide
that 78% by 5.7% =13.7... this is the multiple to get what the exacta should pay based on the odds.. so $9 ×13.7 =$123.30

so the % of the win pool these 2 horses combined is approximately 28..so 72% remaining

3.8-1 odds in 3rd.. this is 21% (im rounding off on occasion and its good enough for what I'm doing here) of the win pool.. so 72% ÷21% =3.4 (100-22-5.7 is how I get 72%)

so multiply 3.4 by $123 (exacta price) =$418 is what triple should pay

this is the 9th race at CD yesterday and the triple actually paid $890


this formula from steve crist's book "exotic betting" which I lent out an never got back lol.. believe I've got it right and to me makes sense.. do you think as a guide post to what an exacta, triple or super should pay this formula makes sense?

if you go one step further to the super there's an 18-1 in 3rd which translates to about a multiple of 10 with the 3 above horses odds so super should pay according to formula about $4200... it paid $17,140.. not a bad overlay
if I've got this formula right

just to be straightforward ive discussed this many times earlier on in my thread

[str]

$9 horse

this is 22% of the win pool

16.6 -1 in 2nd

this is 5.7% of the win pool

78% remaining after taking 22% out for the winner.. divide
that 78% by 5.7% =13.7... this is the multiple to get what the exacta should pay based on the odds.. so $9 ×13.7 =$123.30

so the % of the win pool these 2 horses combined is approximately 28..so 72% remaining

3.8-1 odds in 3rd.. this is 21% (im rounding off on occasion and its good enough for what I'm doing here) of the win pool.. so 72% ÷21% =3.4 (100-22-5.7 is how I get 72%)

so multiply 3.4 by $123 (exacta price) =$418 is what triple should pay

this is the 9th race at CD yesterday and the triple actually paid $890


this formula from steve crist's book "exotic betting" which I lent out an never got back lol.. believe I've got it right and to me makes sense.. do you think as a guide post to what an exacta, triple or super should pay this formula makes sense?

if you go one step further to the super there's an 18-1 in 3rd which translates to about a multiple of 10 with the 3 above horses odds so super should pay according to formula about $4200... it paid $17,140.. not a bad overlay
if I've got this formula right

just to be straightforward ive discussed this many times earlier on in my thread

Q. this formula from steve crist's book "exotic betting" which I lent out an never got back lol.. believe I've got it right and to me makes sense.. do you think as a guide post to what an exacta, triple or super should pay this formula makes sense?

A. Yes. I think it is about as good as any. Steve Crist is pretty sharp .

The tough part is smaller pools.

And we all know that a 10-1 with the 12 post will typically pay more in an exotic than a 10-1 shot with the 1 post.

Usually, if you are scrambling to figure it out, you have a live ticket. That is a nice problem to have. Lol.

[JBEX]

Q. this formula from steve crist's book "exotic betting" which I lent out an never got back lol.. believe I've got it right and to me makes sense.. do you think as a guide post to what an exacta, triple or super should pay this formula makes sense?

A. Yes. I think it is about as good as any. Steve Crist is pretty sharp .

The tough part is smaller pools.

And we all know that a 10-1 with the 12 post will typically pay more in an exotic than a 10-1 shot with the 1 post.

Usually, if you are scrambling to figure it out, you have a live ticket. That is a nice problem to have. Lol.

the other part of the question and i should have emphasized this before.. it isn't really the ability to estimate a payoff before it becomes official on the board but to gage if there is real value in these bets and in my opinion they pay way more than they should a majority of the the time.. above bet is a perfect example as it is about a 400% overlay...if I remember and if it wasn't crist it was another author suggested that the public as a whole doesn't bet these correctly.. too many 3rd- 5th choices in the 3rd slot so when a big odds horse gets 3rd you get overlay payoffs..

the point I'm trying to make is that in a game with such usurpious take it's nice to get overlays in these types of bets.. they easily make up for the extra 5% you pay in takeout

[str]

the other part of the question and i should have emphasized this before.. it isn't really the ability to estimate a payoff before it becomes official on the board but to gage if there is real value in these bets and in my opinion they pay way more than they should a majority of the the time.. above bet is a perfect example as it is about a 400% overlay...if I remember and if it wasn't crist it was another author suggested that the public as a whole doesn't bet these correctly.. too many 3rd- 5th choices in the 3rd slot so when a big odds horse gets 3rd you get overlay payoffs..

the point I'm trying to make is that in a game with such usurpious take it's nice to get overlays in these types of bets.. they easily make up for the extra 5% you pay in takeout

I think if you play in terms of not just trying to hit it, but hit it for a large, but not necessarily crazy amount, you would tend to use higher priced horses. Doing this IMO would be worth looking into. Sub out in the 2nd maybe but the 3rd spot for sure horses will are 4-1 through 8-1 if you are using well bet horses on top.
One way to find that longshot running 3rd is to follow the riders and you will almost always find a rider at each track that typically gets longer priced mounts, has a low win % but finishes 3rd much more than winning. Like 8 wins and 22 thirds.
Maybe not the best rider in the room ability wise, but a rider that tries really hard . Md. had one for 10 years at least. He is now the clerk of scales. He had a ton of longshots that ran 3rd. This is due to him trying as hard as he can so maybe he gets better mounts as well as riding for any money the horse can earn for smaller stables and him appreciating how important any money is and leading riders that fold up and end up 5th or whatever. The rider I spoke about never folded up on a horse in his life. Look for that at a track . If you find it, and you will, it will help this exact play in triples quite a bit. I promise it works. Let me know when it does.

[JBEX]

I think if you play in terms of not just trying to hit it, but hit it for a large, but not necessarily crazy amount, you would tend to use higher priced horses. Doing this IMO would be worth looking into. Sub out in the 2nd maybe but the 3rd spot for sure horses will are 4-1 through 8-1 if you are using well bet horses on top.
One way to find that longshot running 3rd is to follow the riders and you will almost always find a rider at each track that typically gets longer priced mounts, has a low win % but finishes 3rd much more than winning. Like 8 wins and 22 thirds.
Maybe not the best rider in the room ability wise, but a rider that tries really hard . Md. had one for 10 years at least. He is now the clerk of scales. He had a ton of longshots that ran 3rd. This is due to him trying as hard as he can so maybe he gets better mounts as well as riding for any money the horse can earn for smaller stables and him appreciating how important any money is and leading riders that fold up and end up 5th or whatever. The rider I spoke about never folded up on a horse in his life. Look for that at a track . If you find it, and you will, it will help this exact play in triples quite a bit. I promise it works. Let me know when it does.

ok str another angle to get 3rd or 4th place horses.. I think it's human nature that when a longshot runs well players
want to have it top two because there's little to brag about 3rd..but the latter is where they'll land more times than not
and surrounded by logical horses in the top 2 spots will often get you payoffs above and beyond what they should be.. I don't know if you've ever heard but they've done research at tracks all over the world including the US.. It covers many decades and I believe millions of races and ultimately proves that as the the odds get higher horses
win less often than they should relative to their odds.. so if you blindly bet 5-1's you'd lose less than if you blindly bet 10-1's and this is true all the way up the odds ladder.. so if you just focus on the lowest odds horses in the top 2 or 3 spots (supers) than you just concern yourself with the bomb in 3rd or 4th.. or maybe 3rd - 5th or 6th horse odds in 2nd with logicals on top and in 3rd and maybe go a little deeper just in 3rd..guess what I'm saying in general is try to shake things up a bit odds wise in the 2-4 hole with your key horse singled in any of those 3 underneath spots.. with dime supers and 50 cent triples and no withholding on the exotics like there used to be think it's not a bad way to go

[Easy-Rider 66]

Hey STR: What is your opinion on the jump from MCL to MSW? Do you look upon it as a positive? Did you make that move back in your day? Thx.

[str]

ok str another angle to get 3rd or 4th place horses.. I think it's human nature that when a longshot runs well players
want to have it top two because there's little to brag about 3rd..but the latter is where they'll land more times than not
and surrounded by logical horses in the top 2 spots will often get you payoffs above and beyond what they should be.. I don't know if you've ever heard but they've done research at tracks all over the world including the US.. It covers many decades and I believe millions of races and ultimately proves that as the the odds get higher horses
win less often than they should relative to their odds.. so if you blindly bet 5-1's you'd lose less than if you blindly bet 10-1's and this is true all the way up the odds ladder.. so if you just focus on the lowest odds horses in the top 2 or 3 spots (supers) than you just concern yourself with the bomb in 3rd or 4th.. or maybe 3rd - 5th or 6th horse odds in 2nd with logicals on top and in 3rd and maybe go a little deeper just in 3rd..guess what I'm saying in general is try to shake things up a bit odds wise in the 2-4 hole with your key horse singled in any of those 3 underneath spots.. with dime supers and 50 cent triples and no withholding on the exotics like there used to be think it's not a bad way to go

I agree with all of this JBEX. I hope you find time to start a triple and/or super thread. Along the way, there might be some slight variations but the overall concept is sound IMO.

[str]

Hey STR: What is your opinion on the jump from MCL to MSW? Do you look upon it as a positive? Did you make that move back in your day? Thx.

If it is from track to track, the difference in actual value of the horse or speed figs is vast as you know. It would be a positive from the soundness angle but if we are talking about a horse that does this at the same track, I have my reservations about it. The average difference from MSW and the highest claimer at most major or mid major tracks is about 8 lengths +/- as far as ability is concerned. But, it depends on the track. If a horse loses by 3 lengths in a md. 30k and lets say that is the highest claiming price for maidens, the horse is expected to improve about 11 lengths , all things being equal in it's next start in MSW. That is alot for me to expect from a horse. I never cared for it unless the horse seemed to really show huge potential in its last race.

If I see a homebred do it, it is more times than not a sentimental thing where the owner thinks it might get claimed. Most of those types get crushed at the higher level. If it is from md. claiming to a state bred MSW, that is a different story as you know. A state bred MSW can be the same or easier than a non state bred highest offered claimer.

I rarely did the MCL to MSW jump. But the majority of babies I trained were home breds or horses that were only bred to be worth about 20k. Back then that was not as low a number as it seems today. But few were well bred enough to have to protect to that extent without showing some ability in the AM. I was not a win 1st start guy for the most part. I was always fine if they won in 2,3, starts.

As you know, trainers can be a 1st time starter trainer or not. I never was. Some of mine won as FTS'ers but I rarely put the pressure on them to do so. My plan was typically to hopefully win 3 or 4 races with them over maybe 12 or 14 starts with some 2nds or 3rds along the way. I ran almost all of them right where I thought they belonged. I protected some, but I needed a good reason to do so. I never had the luxury of a horse earning no money for months at a time while running.

[Easy-Rider 66]

I did not realize the difference between Highest claimer and MSW is about 8 lengths. That is a major factor to consider on the jump. Thx for the opinion STR.

[str]

I did not realize the difference between Highest claimer and MSW is about 8 lengths. That is a major factor to consider on the jump. Thx for the opinion STR.

That is typical but I have seen it be 10 lengths before as well. Just depends on the track.

[StackinGreen]

Anyone play pick 6 here? Or just carryovers? Just pick 4 or 5?

[str]

Anyone play pick 6 here? Or just carryovers? Just pick 4 or 5?

Used to do some of that but not much anymore.

I just don't look often enough.

Used to love pk 3's and 4's. I usually played all mandatory payouts though.