Forums

   In a previous blog I had criticized a particular forum as being very hostile for which I caught a lot of flak from the powers that be. It was said that I had unleashed an undeserved attack upon them.
   I decided to try a little experiment and posted, what I, and according to my e-mails, and others thought was a very innocuous post. The very first thing that happened was that one member, who, judging by his avatar and screen name, fancies himself as some sort of philosopher, immediately accuses me of promoting my services. The thread quickly degenerates into the normal rhubarb and the data and mathematical equations are brought into the mix. Then my blog about the site was brought up and a lot of criticism concerning my handicapping abilities, none of which, had a damned thing to do with my initial post.
   You see, what I had done was to suggest that there were people who were successful bettors, who, although not "Professional Handicappers", make some very lucrative bets. This did not sit very well with them and they basically ridiculed me for suggesting this could be done by those who were not "Pros" and didn't understand that they had to be long term losers. The fact that these bettors only bet on the big race days during the course of the year and happen to make some nice scores without running back the next day to give the money back was lost on them.
   At any rate, I'm kind of tired of the BS and don't wish to waste any more of my time with this. The point I was making, which they proved by their reaction to the post, was that the site is, I won't say totally because I heard from members who don't adhere to those tactics, hostile. As I said in my original blog, if one doesn't conform to their mathematical aspects of the game, that person is to be ridiculed and scorned. As after my first blog, I will now be accused of another attack upon them. Their argument is that I "Rail" against their theories and demean them when I discount many of their methods. There is a way around all this however; all one has to do is become a paid advertiser. Shell out your $400. a month and you become a member of the clique.
   Another point is that for all their expertise, and this was just alluded to by the resident philosopher, no one actually teaches anything there and if they try they are laughed off the board. I had been on another website for some years and did a lot of writing about racing and handicapping. I acquired a lot of friends who still contact me often and thank me for the know- how that I offered to them. I have e-mails form all over the world asking me questions which I gladly answer.
   I am approaching 80 yrs of age and had always thought about giving something back to the game I spent the better part of my life learning. There are those who welcome the advice of some one who has "Been There, Done That" and then there are those who think they know it all and reject anything that goes against their prevailing thoughts.
    So, stayed tuned because I am going to write some posts here, and only here, concerning LOGIC in handicapping. I may only write a post a week about it because I am quite busy with my pedigree work. Even if you don't agree with my blogs I think you will find my articles concerning intent, the errors of track variants and other tidbits interesting.
Backstretch

Promising 2 year old Pedigrees 2011

   It's about that time of year to start giving a look at the 2 yr olds heading for the Breeder's Cup Juvy race. I really am only interested in pedigrees that suggest to me that the horse can get the classic distances of the Triple Crown.
   Since there are usually over 400 nominated to the KY Derby it would be an enormous job to look at all of them. There are many that fall by the wayside, some sooner than others, and many that don't even make it to the races. Naturally, a pedigree doesn't mean a thing if not coupled with talent. I go on basically a race by race process to weed them out as the season progresses.
   This early in the year a lot of the baby races will be won by the precocious ones who usually fade as the late bloomers mature. What may be a world beater now may not be much by the time spring rolls around. The ones with the classic breeding that show ability are put on my list to follow through the season.
   Tomorrow is the Hopeful Stakes which is the first grade one of the year. There are some very fast youngsters in the race and 70% of them have won their last race. They are all stretching out in distance and that will seperate them some. Most of the ones that run well will probably get another race under their belt before the BC in Nov.
   Right now I have a very short list of the pedigrees that I favor. I will be adding to the list as time goes by.

Listed in alphabetical order:

Creative Cause
Currency Swap
Exfactor
Hunt Crossing
Power World
Red Duke
Union Rags

As more are added to the list I will start comparing them to each other and try to narrow things down. Of course there are usually some well bred ones that get started late and make their presence felt down the road.

PS- I will bet a few ex in the Hopeful and hopefully nail something....2,4/1,2,4,9

Backstretch

Travers Stakes

   So far it seems like no horse can put two big races back to back. I had been high on Stay thirsty since way back and he finally showed what he can do. The question is, can he do it again? He has a classic pedigree and should have no problem with the distance.
   I was also impressed with J W Blue's breeding and after the AK Derby in which he had a bad post and wide, rough trip, I had posted that you would hear from him down the line. He's lost two tight finishes in a row but I think he will really like the added distance. Will be closing and if he doesn't run into trouble I expect him to be there at the finish.
   Coil doesn't seem to have a really classic pedigree but it looks good enough to put him up there. He actually has speed but has shown he can come off the pace.
   I don't think Thirsty or Coil and maybe someone else is going to let Shack get away with backing the pace down. He may last for a part if he can hold off Ruler but doesn't have the breeding for this distance.
   Ruler On Ice is very steady and usually throws a good race. Breeding is so-so.
   Raison D'etat is nicely bred and can probably handle the distance. Rattlesnake Bridge is another with a lot of points in his pedigree and should get the extra distance.

Going mostly on pedigree this is how I see it; I am revising my first thoughts.

Stay Thirsty........will probably stalk Shack and be in good position in stretch...only one with big win this year
Coil....................will lay off the pace but not as far back as last time
J W Blue............makes a big run ala Dialed In and Animal Kingdom...could win if pace is fast
Shackleford........may be forced to set pace again but must back it down in order to last
Raison D'etat......shouldn't be far off the pace
Rattlesnake Bridge...could move up more with an off track
Ruler On Ice.......needs to stay close


If the track comes up sloppy I will make a change to:
Stay Thirsty
Coil
Shackleford
J W Blue
Rattlesnake Bridge
Raison D'etat
Really a tough race and it all hinges on whether Thirsty shows up with his game suit on.

Backstretch

Haskell & Jim Dandy Recap

   It has dawned on me that the reason this years 3 yr old crop has been so bad is that there are no quality front runners. Early on we had Uncle Mo until whatever happened to him happened. Then there was The Factor who was extremely fast but it was decided he was distance challenged. There may have been a few who, when the lone speed, could hang in but none of any real quality.
   Shackleford just happened to be the best of a bad lot of speed horses. He has actually only held on to win one graded race and if Animal Kingdom hadn't had such a bad start Shack would have NO graded wins. This is a horse that was the front runner for 3 yr old of the year. Once again he gets caught by a horse coming from way out of it.
   So what do these 2 races tell me?
   Stay Thirsty has finally shown what he can do and this was the first graded win of the year won by open lengths and from a horse that didn't lay way back early. He is bred to run long and, if he moves forward off this race, will be mighty tough to beat in the Travers.
   Coil is also bred to run all day and having had a bad start in the Haskell, he does have a ton of speed and should be able to be placed wherever the jock wants him. He has a lot of upside and could very well win the Travers.
   I don't think Shackleford will go to the Travers for two reasons. The first is that I don't think he can handle 1 1/4 against the two mentioned above. The only way he can get that distance is if he's loose on the lead and can slow the pace way down.
   The other reason is that if the connections want the 3 yr old title they don't want to take a chance against Coil again and also the distinct possibility of Thirsty winning. If Shack were in there and Thirsty beats Coil who has beaten Shack, the 3yr old title would be up in the air.
   If a scenario develops like the one I just described then the title probably wouldn't be settled until someone wins another big race like the Jockey Gold Cup or the Breeders Classic and I don't think Shack can handle the distance of those races. I also doubt if any of these can win the BC unless Coil or Thirsty really step up to the plate.
   To me the obvious thing for Shack is to go to another race and hope that Thirsty beats Coil in the Travers. I am also not totally discounting Alternation in the Travers. I thought he would be short in the Dandy, not having had a race in 2 months.
   I'll look at the Travers when all the entries are in but it looks to be shaping up as one heluva race.
  
   I'm starting to look at the pedigrees of this years 2 yr olds who might be heading to the BC. There's an awful lot to look at and is very time consuming but those big winners that are under the radar make it worthwhile.
Backstretch

Haskell and Jim Dandy

   With the 3 yr old situation as muddled as ever we may finally see one step up and assert itself. The next step after these two races would be the Travers followed by the JCGC and then the Breeders Cup. Right now I only see one 3 yr old horse that, in my opinion, has the goods to handle the derby distance of 1 1/4 and it's not Shack.
   I am still, being as they are still 3 yr olds, sticking with pedigree handicapping coupled with their performance so far.
   Even though the Haskell looks, on paper, to be the more competitive of the two races, I think the strongest horse is in the Jim Dandy. I have drawn a line through the Belmont because of the track condition that day. I watched the whole card on Belmont day and don't recall a closer making up any ground at all except for Animal Kingdom after his terrible start. The first 4 finishers in the Belmont were all right up there in the stretch and no closer gained on any of them. If any front runner couldn't hold on in that race they never will. Shack went awfully slow early in the Derby and still faded at the end. In the Preakness he was able to back the pace way down and barely held on.
   Between both of these races I only see a couple of legit colts capable of getting the longer distances, and to go to the BC or to be 3 yr old of the year, it's going to have to be one that steps up to the plate and so far I haven't seen but one that I think has the ability to do so and that's Alternation. We have seen no where near his best yet, and if he starts to run the way I think he can, we may be looking at the 3 yr old champ.

The Haskell:
1- Coil............................this is about the only one I see with an upside...has a lot of speed but with blinkers off Garcia may be able to rate him....poly to dirt horses usually show big improvement in speed ratings for Baffert and he seems to own the Haskell
2- Shackleford.................probably the horse to beat but his speed has to be very carefully rationed.
3- Joe Vann.....................seems to be strictly a front runner...has a really nice pedigree and could take them a long way at big odds.
4- Ruler On Ice...............always seems to get a piece of the action...love his pedigree...
5- Astrology....................Asmussen horses almost always run their race...have to throw out last...may get a piece but doesn't seem to have the grit to win.
6- Pants On Fire.............another with nice breeding but is an in and outer...could be there on best race.

Jim Dandy:
1- Alternation.................really nicely bred....early on I had him right behind Archarcharch who I really thought would win the Derby till he broke down...had 1 bad race in the AK Derby but had a very rough trip in that one but was coming anyway...if not a bit short I think it's an easy win for him.
2- Stay Thirsty...............he may finally be close to running to his potential...great pedigree
3- Dominus...................looks to be the one to catch...lightly raced...never worse than second.
4- Scotus......................another steady lightly raced colt...sits just off the pace and may be in good position to repeat.

And that's the way I see it!
Backstretch

The Starting Gate

   It's been said that more races are lost at the starting gate than anywhere on the track and I am inclined to believe it.
   Even though I am a spot player and scan anywhere form 50 to 150 races in a day and only come up with a couple of plays per day, it's uncanny how many of these plays get off to a bad start. I notice that most of the poor beginnings are with horses in the middle post positions. A horse on either side comes out and swerves and drives the horse alongside into another horse which sometimes sets up a chain reaction. Horses down on the rail are also subject to getting squeezed and bumped at the start.
   These bad starts are all too common in my opinion. Sometimes in a route race the horse is able to recover and have time to get into the race but in sprints, especially 5f races, a bad start means the race is usually over for that horse. Also, most jocks have a tendency to try to rush the horse into contention after a slow start and the horse is finished by the time it hits the stretch.
   I watch a lot of races and it seems like in about 50% of all races run, one or more entries run into trouble at the gate. Although I am only playing a couple spots per day I think that about 10-20 % of my plays run into trouble coming out of the gate. If I'm only looking to get 20-25 % winners with my plays these additional losers that are eliminated at the start take a heavy toll on my bottom line.
   I wouldn't think there is anything that can be done about it because the starting gate and all that happens in it are beyond any handicappers control. I suppose one could concentrate on only playing horses that show they are usually first out of the gate but this would severely limit your action. The problems at the gate are a blessing in disguise to a lot of fast breaking horses because they are sometimes able to get such a jump on the field that the race is over before anyone else can get into gear.
   At any rate, the gate problems are just one of the many reasons one can never expect to attain a very high win % and is an especially good reason to NEVER plunge on any horse. When trainers are asked about the chances of their horses in any race the first thing they usually say is that they are hoping for a clean break.
   Watch carefully to see if your bet got a clean start. You may not have bet the wrong horse if it loses but may have just been a victim of the starting gate chaos

Is handicapping for real or is it just a crock of doggy doo?
I happened to look at my bookshelf yesterday and noticed all the books I have on handicapping. I have read many of them several times, books by Ainslie, Christ, Beyer, Davidowitz, etc., and asked myself if I had learned anything from them. I have been reading and studying handicapping for over fifty years and have come to the conclusion that they are all full of sh*t.                                                                                         I was looking at Modern Pace Handicapping by Brohamer. One must be an MIT graduate to understand what he's talking about. Speed and pace handicappers, and I would bet that 90% of handicappers use that method, go through all those contortions to do what? Come up with the favorite? I can look at a race and in two minutes tell you the horses that figure to win and do it without a computer, calculator, or a pencil.
   They can do all the figures they want but they are still losers, just about every last one of them. Stop and think a moment about what they are doing. There's a guy with a pair of binoculars watching a race while it's running and he's making an eyeball guesstimate as to where each horse is on the track and how many lengths ahead or behind they are. Now this fact in itself tells us that every thing that is derived from these rough estimates can only be another set of rough estimates. And yet, these handicappers are trying to split hairs in hundredths of a second to find a perfect number that doesn't exist and never will.
   When thought about in a logical manner any reasonable person can see that to chase a fart in a windstorm is an exercise in futility and that's what handicapping is. Far from being an exact science, it doesn't even resemble science. No scientist in the world would place his faith in a foundation as shaky as the word of a chart caller.
   There are ways to make money playing horses but it damn sure isn't by handicapping numbers. Anybody that tells me they are a success at making money with horse racing by speed and pace handicapping may be fooling themselves but not me.
   Further proof lies in what one can see everyday on the internet, in newspapers and other media. There are dozens of "Handicappers" out there giving selections, some paid and some free. A lot of them sell ratings to guide the suckers to the best horses. A bunch of numbers that your supposed to decipher and apply to the horses.
   I have subscribed to some of these just to see what goes on with them. One guy gave me 15-20 horses a day and hit for a good percentage but always ended up losing money. Why would anyone pay to have someone give them a bunch of odds on horses when all you have to do is look at the tote board.
Then you have the guys that give you 4 horses in every race at 5-6 different tracks. They advise you to box these at a cost of better than a hundred bucks a race. I don't know about you but I'm not putting up 5 grand a day to bet when these same handicappers have no idea of which horses might win what races.

   The above thoughts are something I had posted on another website. Almost every day I am reminded of how true my words were.
   Let's just stop and use a little common sense and logic. We know that the public favorites win about 30% of the races. These horses are, for the most part, horses that "Figure" on paper. That is; they are the fastest or classiest or the most consistent. We also know that to play these horses is a losing proposition. You may lose a little slower, but lose you must. So, what really is handicapping? I would suppose it's the art of comparing one horse to another and trying to decide who will beat who. When one undertakes this task decisions must be made as to which of a multitude of factors is going to carry the most weight. When looking back at races that have been run you will find that factor "A" carried the most weight and in the next race factor "A" didn't mean a damned thing but factor "B" did and on down the line it goes.
   If one looks at the entries in a race with an experienced eye, most handicappers will come up with virtually the same horses. Oh, they may be a little different in the ranking order but they will be basically the same. The contenders are known and there are a whole bunch of reasons why one of these should win and one of them usually does but I'm only interested in the races they don't win.
   So if it's a losing proposition to bet the figures, what is one to do? If you know that a certain percentage of figure horses, (favorites) are going to win, but at much deflated prices, then it's logical to assume that there are other methods that will give a certain % of winners and if they are not the favorites then one can expect to turn a decent profit.
   I have devoted the better part of 60 yrs to finding horses that are well meant but have yet to show the form that would cause them to be hammered at the windows. One must learn to ANTICIPATE  a big effort from a horse, that is, before it tips it's hand that it's actually in form. Many horses I bet run second or third at big odds but I seldom bet them back because they are usually low odds after the good effort. The only question I ask myself is, "Who's going to run good today?". If your always on horses that are going to try today, although a try doesn't mean they can win, your going to get a certain % that will win. I am constantly getting on horses at 20/1 or more, and even if they run second, I usually pick up a nice exacta.
   Horse racing is far from being an exact science but there are so many handicappers out there, and I'm so glad there are for obvious reasons, that are looking for the magic number or the "Holy Grail" which does not exist. I have gotten into it many times with figure players who have the attitude that anything other than figures is totally false. What they don't understand is that I've been there and done that but they have never been where I am. It's sort of like talking to a kid where they can't understand that being near 80 yrs old, I have been where they are, but they can only hope to get where I am now.
   In order to beat the races the first thing one must keep in mind is my signature; "People run horse racing, horses just run!". There are so many intrinsic things involved in horse racing, things that have no logical explanation, at least to humans, but may make perfect sense to the horse.
   I'm hoping to find time in the near future to expand on this so stay tuned.
Backstretch