*****Horseracing Handicappers' Free
Picks Newsletter*****
*****Saturday August 5, 2000*****
Welcome to another edition of "Horseracing
Handicappers' Free Picks Newsletter." Have you
ever thought about what makes horses win races?
How about why some win more than others? Why is
it so difficult to stay ahead of this game? The
old saying is true that there are far more ways
to lose a race than there are to win. But today
I'd like to focus on the winning aspect; what
makes horses win races.
Last week I looked at speed figures and the
benefits and limitations of same. And I touched
on other things like "key" races. Being someone
who has constantly strived to solve as many
"mysteries" about horseracing as I can, I have
always asked the question, "what makes horses win
races?" Although in my book "Calibration
Handicapping" I theorize that the term Class is
nebulous or not really clear, there is no
question that it can and does come into play
periodically.
We've all seen horses drop in class and have
a form reversal that results in an easy win.
That's why trainers are always trying to find the
right level for their horses. If a horse wins in
certain company, many trainers will move him up
to a higher level and a higher purse, hoping that
he can compete well with better.
Speed figures have made things easier in that
regard. If the average winning speed figure for
a $25K claiming sprint in New York is 88 and a
particular horse in question has never run higher
than a 68, the trainer of that horse is not
likely to enter him in such a race. He will put
that horse in with $14,000 claimers until such
time the horse improves sharply enough to compete
with better.
So speed figures do not cause horses to win;
they just measure how fast they have run. What
does causes horses to win? Class is one
"intangible." In any competitive situation there
are simply some constestants that are better than
others. Some are born with better muscular
configuration that enables them to run faster.
Therefore, we could say that one of the reasons
why horses win races is breeding. But that too is
a very imprecise intangible.
Take for example 2 Maiden Special Weight
races at Saratoga held last Friday, July 27th.
In the 4th race, there was a 1st-time starter
named La Salle Street, trained by D. Wayne Lucas
and ridden by Pat Day. This colt was going for
the first time and his purchase price was $2
million. He finished 9th in a field of 12. Two
races later a firster trained by Bill Mott who
was purchased for $1.5 million, Sluice, ran 7th
in a field of 11. Two high-priced total duds for
top trainers. At least for now; they may turn
out to be great buys, but it doesn't look that
way off their initial outings.
I've seen horses go on the grass for the
first time as near "sure things" because of their
fantastic breeding. They go off as the
prohibitive favorite and fail to run a lick. The
same for "off" track breeding. Not that they all
fail miserably, some run right to their breeding,
but you can't keep in the black as a player by
trying to figure which horse has the best
breeding for a particular circumstance.
Some people think trainers are a huge reason
why horses win races. In my opinion the majority
of trainers, as well as jockeys for that matter
are, to put it kindly, average at best. What
percentage of winners do the top trainers and
jockeys attain on a yearly basis? I would say
30% is a real good figure for a per annum rate.
The way I look at this is that the very best
jockeys and trainers LOSE 70 out of every 100
races they are involved with. And if they are
at the top of the rankings, all the players who
go by that stuff will play them down to favorite
status most of the time anyway, which in itself
makes it impossible to win by playing jockeys or
trainers. I don't think that over a period of
a year too many jockeys or trainers show a flat
bet profit and if they do, it's pretty miniscule.
As you know, I believe that there are quite
a number of reasons why horses win races, but I
focus on the 3 things I stress in my book; pace
shape, "moves-within-a-race" and internal
fraction analysis. Rather than being an
"intangible" reason, I believe pace shape and
running style match up is a "visible" reason why
horses win races. If a strong, in-form horse
with an outstanding Beyer speed figure advantage
happens to be a middle of the pack runner who
sits back 4 or 5 lengths off the pace and draws
post position 12 in a field of 12, he is
immediately at a disadvantage. Throw into the
mix a pace shape of EP-EP with only 2 early
speeds, one of which looks dominant over the
other, and you have a very likely scenario of the
8-5 favorite from the 12-hole being lucky to hit
the board, let alone win the race.
So along with class and breeding, other
reasons why horses win races are running style
and pace shape advantage, "moves" that horses
make within a last-out race, and internal
fraction advantages. As I've said often, when
horses make certain "moves" during a race, it can
and occasionally does set them up for a strong
next-out performance. The same can be said of
internal fraction advantage. As an example of
the latter, in last Saturday's newsletter I
pointed out such an advantage.
The 7th race on June 30th at Belmont featured
a final 3/8ths run in 34.3, which is unusually
fast. I also pointed out that the winner of this
NW3X race, Hap had come back to win a Grade II
race on Friday 7/28/00 paying $9.20. Two horses
I listed on top came back from that race and won,
Forbidden Apple on Saturday paying $6.70 and
Altibr on Sunday paying $3.90. Granted these two
were chalk, but often such plays pointed out by
internal fraction advantages pay double digits.
So those are the tangible or measurable
factors I focus on concerning what makes horses
win races. But there are additional strong
reasons and I've touched on a couple of these
also. The first is biases and "trips" and the
other is derived energy. There is no question in
my mind that horses win races sometimes because
of inherent track biases. And identifying
certain eventful "trips" horses may have had in
their last outing can sometimes produce great
results and be the cause of strong next-out
performances.
As a clear example of the latter, take last
Monday's feature race at Saratoga. It was a
rainy day with all the turf races switched onto a
sloppy main track with the exception of the
featured 8th race, the Grade III Lake George on a
soft turf course. I fell in love with a horse in
that race called Millie's Quest. Two of the
reasons I have been discussing about why horses
win races came into play. First of all, in her
race prior to her last, she ran a sparkling final
fraction of 22.1, although that was in April,
nearly 2 months before her last race on June
18th. And in her last race, she ran an 11.3 last
furlong.
But a final fraction of 22.1 is hard to
ignore and I thought she had a good chance at the
exacta. Unfortunately, she has an S running
style, which always puts her at a disadvantage
and since she was facing the likes of Gaviola in
that June race, it would be asking a lot of her
to win. But she seemed likely to complete the
exacta.
It turned out that Millie's Quest had a
nightmare trip. Just as she was gaining momentum
and beginning to hit her best stride, she was
bumped and checked on the far turn and then for
an entire 8th of a mile. During this portion of
the race, she lost nearly 5 lengths. After
finally getting running room and resuming her
stride, it was too late to threaten Gaviola who
had a picture-perfect trip for an easy win, but
she managed to go from 7th at the 8th pole to
gain 2 lengths in that final furlong and finish
3rd, missing the exacta that she seemed so likely
to complete.
Having witnessed the reason why my "cold"
exacta went up in smoke, I made a note to
remember the trip Millie's Quest had and to
follow up with her in her next outing. I had
seen that she would have at least gotten 2nd in
that last race and with a clear run may even have
threatened Gaviola for the win. Millie's Quest
returned last Monday in a field that originally
included Gaviola, but the latter was scratched
due to the course condition. She was void of any
trouble in this encounter and was so full of run
that she surged to the lead sooner than was her
usual style, winning with ease paying $13.00.
This is a perfect example of trip handicapping
and why that is also a very real reason why
horses win races.
The last of the so-called "reasons" why
horses win races that I'll talk about is as I
said, one that I touched on last week, derived
power or energy. And this is the one theory that
would have most traditionalists look me in the
eye and say I've gone too far, that I'm nuts.
It's one thing to talk about speed figures, pace
handicapping, trip handicapping, internal
fraction comparison, class, breeding and so on.
But it's quite another to claim a phenomenon
tabbed "derived energy" as being a reason why
horses win races.
But I'm of the belief that those who traverse
the "less-traveled" road sometimes get to their
destination faster. And I'm 100% convinced that
"derived energy" is a very real phenomenon. I've
seen results and also cashed in on it. This is
not something that I will be discussing in this
forum, but suffice it to say that you have not
heard the last of this new theory of mine and
future newsletters may very well include some
prime plays from this source. They will of
course be selected in conjunction with the
standard 3-step handicapping process I utilize.
A prime example of such a "derived energy" play
is the one just shown concerning Millie's Quest.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
My review race this week is race 7 run
last Sunday, July 30th at Saratoga. If you
would like to follow along, you can view and/or
print the Daily Racing Form past performances
for this race by logging onto my website Here.
This was a 7 furlong NW3X allowance race for
3-year-olds & Up. As usual, I'll list the
entries, followed by the running style I have
labeled each, the last-out Beyer speed figure,
the last-out final fraction (raw/actual) and any
"moves-within-a-race." It was a field of 9 after
the late scratching of #'s 5 and 6.
1. American Dot Com P 93 25.0 / 24.4
2. Capsized P 95
3. Tim's Crossing E 87 23.2 / 24.2
4. Nostalgic EP 86
101 24.4/24.3
7. Sun Cat EP 88 24.4 / 25.1 WIR
8. Mint S 95 25.4 / 25.1
9. Entepreneur EP 81 25.0 / 25.0
10. Istintaj EP 101 24.2 / 24.2
11. Exciting Story EP 86 24.0 / 24.1
The pace shape of this match up was
significant. In a field of 9 there were 6 early
speed types. Normally the advantage goes to the
group with the fewest in number, either early or
late. In a case like this, however, with such a
tilt toward early speed, in order for one of the
3 closers to have an advantage, they would have
to show a significant final fraction advantage,
and none did.
The next step is to calculate which is the
strength of the early speeds. According to the
way I calculate the "speed of the speed" in my
book, "Calibration Handicapping", that title in
this group went to #10 Istintaj. Since he was
also the horse with the best last-out Beyer speed
figure and also best last-out final fraction,
Istintaj was a pretty legitimate choice in here.
Here were my thoughts on this field, from
the rail out.
1. American Dot Com - in from Churchill Downs
off a lifetime best effort. Since he had not
shown that he could win on the NY circuit, I was
a little leery of backing him, especially since
he bounced 10 points off his last high Beyer race
of 4-back. Again, as per "Calibration
Handicapping", I look for a certain move during a
race that indicates to me the likelihood of
avoiding a bounce. This horse did not show that
indicator while #10 Istinjaj did during his
last-out lifetime best race.
2. Capsized - when last seen over 7 months ago,
was route racing and I would have to see a race
or two from him before considering him a
contender.
3. Tim's Crossing - was exiting a very fast
sprint, but again, it was on the Maryland circuit
at Laurel. I gave him a shot at the 2nd or 3rd
slot in the exotics as a periphery play.
4. Nostalgic - last ran as a Wide Out play on the
turf at Belmont in June. I listed his Beyer
speed figure and final fractions from his race
prior at 7F and based on his dirt race
performances made him my second choice behind
Istintaj. Was 2 for 2 at the 7F distance.
7. Sun Cat - a textbook WIR play in his last-out
race at a mile and a sixteenth. I had to include
him and put him on my original periphery play
list.
8. Mint - last raced in a minor stakes at
Monmouth; as an S runner in a field loaded with
speed, he could have a shot at closing for a
piece. I did not include him in my periphery
plays because before my original top choice, #6
was a late scratch, I already had 5 plays listed
and don't often want to list more than that
number. With the late scratch of #6, however,
Mint was another that could have been added to
the list of horses who didn't figure to win, but
had potential to be there to complete the exacta
or trifecta.
9. Entepreneur - one of the speedier early
horses, the question was would he survive a speed
duel with Istintaj. I didn't think so and left
him out.
10. Istintaj - the logical choice as the "speed
of the speed" with the best last-out Beyer and
final fraction.
11. Exciting Story - more early speed that did
not figure to hold up with the stronger Istintaj
likely having his sights on the lead also.
Here is the way I had my selections in last
Sunday's selections issue of this newsletter.
Included is the official morning line, followed
by my value line and finally, the post-time odds.
6. Western Expression - LATE SCRATCH
10. Istintaj (5-1) (2-1) (5-2)
4. Nostalgic (3-1) (9-5) (5-2)
Periphery Plays
3. Tim's Crossing (20-1) (6-1) (27-1)
7. Sun Cat (8-1) (9-2) (8-1)
The order of finish was:
1st: #10 Istintaj - $7.90
2nd: #7 Sun Cat - 10-7 ex. $70.50
3rd: #8 Mint - tri.10-7-8 $456.50
Until next week, I wish you clear skies and
fast tracks.
Knock 'em dead!
Jim
Back to Top
*****Horseracing Handicappers' Free
Picks Newsletter*****
*****Saturday August 12, 2000*****
Welcome to another edition of "Horseracing
Handicappers' Free Picks Newsletter." One third
of the Saratoga meet has quickly transpired and
the conditions were not the best I've ever seen.
Hopefully the remaining 24 days of racing will be
more conducive to cashing tickets. Here's a
recap of the first 2 weeks of 2000 at the Spa,
excluding Steeplechase racing.
Day one began with great weather and fast and
firm conditions. As a result, form held and
there were six winning favorites. By the end of
the week, on Monday, there was a dead rail, the
main track was sloppy, and 2 of the 3 turf races
were moved to the dirt. Here's a breakdown of
the week:
Wednesday 7/26
7 sprints
1 route
1 turf
6 winning favorites - 67%
fast/firm
no bias
Thursday 7/27
5 sprints
2 routes
2 turf
2 winning favorites - 22% (44% overall)
fast/firm
main track favored early speed
Friday 7/27
5 sprints
2 routes
2 turf
2 winning favorites - 22% (37% overall)
fast/firm
main track favored early speed
Saturday 7/28
6 sprints
1 route
2 turf
1 winning favorite - 11% (31% overall)
fast/firm
bad rail on main track
Sunday 7/29
4 sprints
1 route
4 turf
2 winning favorites - 22% (29% overall)
sloppy/soft
bad rail on main track
Monday 7/30
3 sprints
5 routes
1 turf - 2 taken off
3 winning favorites - 33% (30% overall)
sloppy/soft
bad rail on main track
The weather deteriorated toward the end of
week one and didn't get much better for the
duration of week two. Excluding opening day, the
winning percentage of favorites for the remaining
5 days was 10 for 45 or 22%.
Week Two:
Wednesday 8/2
6 sprints
3 routes
no turf - 2 taken off
4 winning favorites - 44% (32% overall)
muddy/no turf/last 2 sloppy
bad rail on main track
Thursday 8/3
8 sprints
1 route
no turf - 1 taken off
3 winning favorites - 33% (32% overall)
muddy/no turf/last 2 sloppy
bad rail on main track
Friday 8/4
6 sprints
3 routes
no turf - 1 taken off
4 winning favorites - 44% (33% overall)
fast/no turf
Saturday 8/5
5 sprints
2 routes
2 turf
4 winning favorites - 44% (34% overall)
fast - drying out/good
strong closer's bias on main track
Sunday 8/6
5 sprints
2 routes
3 turf
4 winning favorites - 40% (35% overall)
fast - good 8&9 - muddy 10th/ turf good
closer's bais on main track/bad rail
Monday 8/7
3 sprints
6 routes
no turf - 3 taken off
1 winning favorite - 11% (33% overall)
sloppy/no turf
no apparent bias
As can be seen, there were less than ideal
conditions for the first couple of weeks of
action at Saratoga. The main track has been off
for at least part of the card for 6 of the first
12 days of racing. And 9 turf races have been
carded on the off-going main track. The law of
averages says that we'll see more clear skies and
fast tracks ahead, but unfortuantely more rain is
forecast for the weekend.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I received the following email from Allan G.
Hi Jim,
First let me say that your book is very
informative and a fair price to boot. And, I
really enjoy reading your newsletters every
weekend. If it's not too much to ask, I (and
others, I'm sure) would really appreciate it if
your "Review Race" for this coming week would be
the Jim Dandy run at Saratoga on Sat. 5 Aug. It
was a most interesting race for many reasons.
One of those reasons is that Steven Crist in
his Saratoga Diary for 6 Aug. "Missing Out On A
Dandy Opportunity" notes that as part of his
Pick-6 play, he played four of the seven Jim
Dandy entrants and admits that "If you're going
to be wrong, it's best to be thoroughly wrong."
None of the three that hit the board...Graeme
Hall, Curule and Unshaded were part of his play.
But this is not to denigrate Steven Crist (DRF's
#1 guy) because we all make mistakes like that.
So, I feel pretty confident that many of your
loyal following would like to see your review of
the race and how you might have handicapped it.
This is especially true because the Exacta and
the Tri were such big numbers. Also, I can see a
good case being made for Graeme Hall but Curule
is not so easy to see.
By the way, it was a "Dandy Opportunity" I
missed also.
Regards,
Allan
I thank Allan for the recommendation
because my picks were so bad last weekend that
for the first time in quite a while, I couldn't
pick a review race from one of the successful
plays. While it's no consolation, if a guy like
Steve Christ, who was alive in the pick 6 Alan
mentioned, couldn't get one of his 4 horses in
the Jim Dandy to hit the winner's circle to cash
in on a nice hit, it demonstrates the overall
difficulty of handicapping thus far at the Spa.
He is by no means a bad handicapper.
Here is a sample of some negative mail I
received concerning my picks for last weekend.
This was from an unsigned disgruntled subscriber
who must be a throwback to the Hippy days of the
60's:
Yo Dude,
Your picks suck. Saturday was a bust and on
Sunday Monmouth's 1st 2 went in the toilet; shall
I say more?
It was signed Whatsopppppp.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Among many other non-hostile emails I
received this week was one from Eugene K. It
concerned playing races that have a mixture of
sprinters and routers. Eugene's home track is
Monmouth and he likes to play pick 3's. He has a
little trouble at times, however, when a sprint
race contains a few routers, and vice versa. He
wanted to know if I would advise him how I would
handle such a match up, and here was my response.
Hi Eugene,
Obviously, the best scenario is a race with
most if not all entries coming back off sprints
or routes and running at the same today. If I
come across a sprint race with more than one or
two last-out routers going, I'll often pass the
race, and the same goes for the reverse
situation.
I also like the pick 3 wager and Saratoga has
rolling pick 3's so if I really like a horse, I
may take a shot at a pick 3 singling it even if
it means I have to play a race with mixed routers
and sprinters. The way I match up final fractions
is to deduct a full second from the final
fraction of a last-out router going in a sprint
and add a full second to a last-out sprinter
going in a route today. I'll also look for
"moves."
If a last-out router ran as a WIR or a Wide
Out or both, I'll consider him in spite of his
final fraction, which probably won't be
competitive anyway due to that move. Probably
the only way I'll really like a router going at a
sprint today is if he showed speed in his last
race.
For instance, if you have today's DRF
(Thursday August 10th), look at the 10-horse in
race 10 at Saratoga. Even though his last race
was a dead-last effort at a route and today's
race was 7F, he did show good early speed before
fading out of it. He wasn't a WIR or a Wide Out,
but he did show that early lick before falling
back.
It doesn't matter that the fractions were
slow. Somehow that isn't all that important many
times, and it sure wasn't in this case. What
helped this horse's chances was the drop back
down to the claiming ranks. He had run in a
claimer only once before, 2 races back, and he
ran 3rd at a higher price. Today he waltzed in at
$30.00 and won out of the same higher-classed
race as did the strong winner of the 9th race.
I won't really like a sprinter stretching out
unless he's shown some signs that he can go the
distance. In other words, if he has won at 7F
sometime in the past, and today's race is a
one-turn mile and a sixteenth, like at Belmont,
then I don't think it would be a stretch that he
could go the extra one and a half furlongs
successfully. But if he had never won or done
well past 6F and today's race is a 2-turn mile
and an eighth race, it may be a whole lot riskier
proposition to back him.
Many people think that a horse that has
closed strongly in a last-out sprint is a great
proposition to stretch out at a distance. That is
absolutely not necessarily so. I would rather
see an early speed sprinter stretching out to a
route for the first time. Especially if he is the
clear speed. A horse on a clear lead can and does
"relax" while on that lead and keep a lot in
reserve. Many players are dumbfounded when they
see a last-out sprinter who faded at 6F (maybe a
Profile Play) come back and jog at a route,
probably because he had a nice pace shape
advantage.
So in addition to these things, for races
that are a mixture of last-out sprinters and
routers, I would take a very careful look at the
pace shape and all the running styles and try to
envision how the race will unfold. How many and
which are the first flight runners, the mid-pack,
and the closers? See if there is a pace
advantage. And of course be aware of the post
positions. If a last-out sprinter who ran pretty
well is an S horse stuck in the 10 slot in a
field of 11, he still is at a large disadvantage.
And remember, in pick 3's, it's the win and
only the win that counts. So to eliminate as
many horses as possible, including bad post
position/running style horses, can be very
beneficial.
Hope that helps some.
Regards, Jim
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
On with the way I saw the Jim Dandy Stakes
last Saturday. I did not list this race among my
selections because of the presence of #7 Albert
The Great. Here was a horse who had completely
turned things around with a simple change of
equipment. Since the addition of blinkers, he
went from a maiden to a winner of 4 straight,
including in his last, the Grade 2 Dwyer. All
were wire-to-wire wins and at no point in any
of those races was he seriously challenged for the
lead.
I didn't want to guess whether or not he
would bounce off his last race lifetime best and
felt it would be better to leave this race out.
But once I knew there was a tremendous closer's
bias in effect on the main track at Saratoga last
Saturday, it was a completely different story.
If you would like to follow along, you can
view and/or print the Daily Racing Form past
performances for this race by logging onto my
website Here.
This was the Grade II Jim Dandy with a purse
of $400K for 3-year-olds at a mile and an eighth.
I'll list the entries, followed by the running
style I have labeled each, the last-out Beyer
speed figure, the last-out final fraction
(raw/actual) and any "moves-within-a-race." It
was a short field of 7.
1. Brave Quest EP 104 26.3 / 26.1
2. Postponed S 76 26.0
99 25.3 / 24.3
3. Graeme Hall EP 102 24.4 / 25.1
4. Curule P 92 25.0 / 25.0
5. Millencolin EP 98 24.4 / 25.1
6. Unshaded S 98 26.0 / 25.4
7. Albert The Great E 108 25.1 / 25.1
This was a fairly decent field of
3-year-olds. Some were hitting their best stride
and making names for themselves as potential new
forces in the division. And others were
returning to action off layoffs. With the $1
Million Travers looming 3 weeks later, some
players, like Shar and Xim, are always thinking
about trainer intent in a race like this and they
both were successful in coming up with the nice-
priced winner. So there certainly is something
to be said about trying to figure out trainer
intent.
Were the trainers of Postponed and Unshaded
simply using this as a nice workout in
preparation for the rich Travers stakes? Were
the new kids on the block Brave Quest, Curule (a
dud in the Derby and Belmont) and Albert The
Great able to take the next step forward? There
were questions to be answered. One thing looked
to be fairly certain. If you could figure Albert
The Great out of the top 2 slots, there was money
to be made. That's the name of the game. Beat
the favorite, but you have to have a good enough
reason to beat a legitimate favorite and once I
knew of the bias, I had good reason.
The pace shape favored closers slightly as
there were 4 early and 3 late runners. There was
no question of which was the "speed of the
speed." Albert The Great was going to the front
come Hell or highwater. Anyone who sent his
horse with Albert The Great was committing
suicide. And yet, two of the top jockeys on the
east coast, Migliore and Chavez proceeded
directly into a suicidal speed duel on a day-long
closer's biased racetrack.
It makes you wonder. I can see Nick Zito
standing firm that he was not going to change his
horse's successful style of running, but what
could have possessed Jorge Chavez or his trainer
to go head to head in 23.0 and 46.0 on such a
racetrack? Just another question the answer to
which we'll never know.
Here is the way I saw this race about 25
minutes to post time.
1. Brave Quest - ran a lifetime best when he
missed by a head in the Grade II Ohio Derby on
July 15th. That was his first blemish on a
previous 4 for 4 record and he seemed to have a
decent shot to sit back off the pace of Albert
The Great and make his run in the stretch.
Chavez had other plans, however, and ran him into
the ground. Many thought highly of this
colt, including the Daily Racing Form's Dave
Litfin, who wrote a column about why he would
win this race.
2. Postponed - came from dead last to win the
Grade 2 Peter Pan before bobbling at the break
and running a complete dud in the Belmont Stakes.
He had run against some of the top 3-year-olds in
the country but you had to decide which was the
real Postponed and was he going to be running full
out in this race, his first in 2 months.
3. Graeme Hall - a race like this is sometimes
the right spot to figure class as per the
60-20-10 method in my book. Doing the quick
calculations for each, I came up with the
following average purses run for in 2000 in post
position order: 1. $59.5K, 2. $122K, 3. $226.3K,
4. 61K, 5. $78.3K, 6. $195.8, 7. $67.4K. A quick
perusal shows that the top 2 "class" horses are
#3 Graeme Hall and #6 Unshaded. But these
figures do not always tell the whole story.
Sometimes a horse will be coming into his own and
be able to compete with more established
competition.
But it sure helped to see Graeme Hall's class
advantage and one couldn't help but notice that
he may have had a whole lot better chance to win
his last had Robbie Albarado not lost his whip
during crunch time. J.D. Bailey on his back
today wouldn't hurt. If you put a line through
his non-effort in the Kentucky Derby, what do you
see? And remember, many horses don't do well at
that first attempt at 10F so early in their
careers.
As a matter of fact, let's draw a line
through last Fall's Breeder's Cup attempt and we
see a horse who has a record of 3 wins, 4 seconds
and 1 third in 8 attempts. And since he has been
running for an average purse of $226K, he must
have been in with some pretty good horses along
the way.
4. Curule - in his last race just broke through
the NW1X level at this distance in a one-turn
event at Belmont Park. He had tried and failed
in the Grade 1 Kentucky Derby and Belmont Stakes.
Naturally, when I saw his last race, the huge G8
move caught my eye. His last-out final fraction
was solid also. He had yet to prove that he could
run with Grade 2 horses, however and would be a
tough pick for the top spot.
5. Millencolin - part of the early speed brigade,
his running style was not at an advantage on this
day. Seemed to be a cut below some of these and
as a pretty much one-dimensional early speed
type, didn't seem to have a great shot at the
first 2 slots.
6. Unshaded - had some credentials as evidenced
by his show finish in this year's Belmont Stakes.
As a confirmed closer on a speed-dead track, he
seemed destined to be in the money and had a good
shot at the top prize.
7. Albert The Great - the now horse, having
reeled off 4 straight wire-to-wire jaunts with
the addition of magical blinkers. He was never
headed in those wins and beat the Preakness and
Belmont champions in his last while averaging a
104.5 Beyer figure in those races with the hood
added. Like I said, he was the reason why I
didn't make selections for this race in last
Saturday's newsletter.
Once I saw that speed horses were having a real
tough time of it all day on the main track, I had
to take a closer look at the Jim Dandy and at
Albert The Great in particular. Although he
broke his maiden at the 2-turn distance of a mile
and an eighth at Keeneland, his next 3 were in
the sweeping one-turn route races of Belmont. If
we could envision any early pressure at all on
Albert The Great on this particular day, we could
have a very vulnerable likely favorite in our
midst.
I'd like to tell you that I had the exacta and
trifecta in the Jim Dandy, but I can't. I will
tell you, though, that I did like the strong
closer in race 9, #5 Ransom Cove and successfully
hit the D/D wager using 2-3-6/5.
The Jim Dandy unfolded with the deadly speed duel
between Albert The Great and Brave Quest
effectively eliminating both from any chance at
the money. Graeme Hall got the perfect trip by
Bailey and won quite easily as the class. Curule
was a strong 2nd, easily holding off the late
charge of Unshaded, while Postponed made a
menacing move on the turn before flattening out.
We can only wonder how much the latter 2 were
really trying. Maybe we'll find out in the
Travers. I have to be impressed with the race
Graeme Hall ran. He sat pretty close to the lead
on a day when early speed was in trouble and came
on to take this race well in hand. Off that
bias-beating effort, I would have to make him my
early choice to win the Spa's big race 2 weeks
hence.
Until next week, I wish you clear skies and
fast tracks.
Knock 'em dead!
Jim
Back to Top
*****Horseracing Handicappers' Free
Picks Newsletter*****
*****Saturday August 19, 2000*****
Welcome to another edition of "Horseracing
Handicappers' Free Picks Newsletter." I'm going
to begin with an email from Daniel H. and it
reads as follows:
Hi Jim,
I understand, given the volume of mail you
must get, if you don't have time to respond, but
I'm curious about a factor you frequently discuss
in your weekly reports (which are excellent, by
the way! :)
Certain tracks have a bias, I know, an
elementary example being Keeneland, where early
speed on the "Golden Rail" is often advantageous.
I always assumed that a bias was the result of a
track's constitution, i.e., how deep it goes, the
consistency of the dirt, etc. How is it then that
tracks develop biases on particular days? For
example, on Jim Dandy day at Saratoga, was there
a closer's bias? Can't the preponderance of
late-running winners on any given day simply be a
statistical quirk? Maybe the winners from off the
pace that day were just better? I'm just
wondering how a bias can change from day to day.
Thanks,
DH
And here was my response to Daniel.
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for your kind comments about the
newsletter; they are appreciated. The subject of
track bias is one with widely differing views.
While it is a very real phenomenon, we have to be
careful that it really exists on any particular
day before we play accordingly.
Some players are always looking for a bias,
while others scoff at the idea. But at some
point in between lies the reality that they do
exist on occasion. As for what causes them, the
primary reasons are track condition and wind. The
track condition can cause a range of biases. I've
seen examples of strong closer's biases, such as
a couple of Saturdays ago at Saratoga, after a
sloppy track had dried out to become fast. And
I've seen many freshly turned sloppy tracks be
superhighways of speed that gave no chance at all
to closers.
A strong wind can cause a severe bias also.
If the prevailing strong wind happens to be
parallel to the racetrack configuration, then a
bias can and often does happen. It's always a
good idea to know the direction of the
backstretch and stretch at your track. If for
example as at New York's Aqueduct Race Track the
track runs North and South, an astute player may
learn of a strong wind on a particular day
and immediately find out which way it is blowing.
If a 25-30 MPH wind is coming from the North,
then it will be blowing in the faces of the
horses as they proceed up the backstretch and
conversely will be at their backs down the
stretch. This situation can easily hinder the
early speed and help the closers down the
stretch. A strong southerly wind will often
cause an early speed bias at Aqueduct. Of course
at that racetrack, the sharp turns also will give
an advantage to inside speed. If a strong wind
is coming out of the West, then there is a less
likely chance for a bias.
Then you have the "golden rail" you spoke of
and this situation can be caused by track
maintenance or recent rain that eroded part of
the racetrack. But like I say, many biases can be
perceived rather than real. The rule of thumb to
tell if there is a true bias in existence is to
be observant during the running of the first few
races. There is a statistic using data from all
the tracks in North America that confirms that
the race that produces the most wire-to-wire wins
is the very first race on the card.
During the first few races on the card, check
the speed horses. Is there a duel between a
couple or among a few horses with 2 of them
holding up despite a prolonged head to head
battle? Are they longshots? If the answer is yes,
you could be suspicious of an early speed bias.
But if the first 3 races are won by speedballs on
the inside who are also the favorites, then form
is holding and there is no bias.
When watching the races and also the replays,
see if the horses that make their moves on the
turn look like they are running on sand in slow
motion or gliding along as if on a hard tight
surface. Are they able to sustain a wide move
into the stretch or do they seem to hang? Does
the winner duck inside to better footing from
his wide position at the top of the stretch? Ask
the same of the horses using the rail path. Look
at the paths and trips of the winners and in-the-
money horses. But remember that it's best not to
adjust to a bias unless we're real sure that it
exists.
Let's take Saturday August 5th at Saratoga
as an example. In race 1 the winner came from 5th
at the pace call. The pace call is the 4F mark in
a sprint and the 6F mark in a route. He paid
$4.70 to win so he was a logical horse. The race
2 winner came from 6th at the pace call at 4-1.
In race 4 (the 3rd was on the grass), the winner
was 3rd at the pace call at 5-2. In race 6 the
winner was 6th at 4-1 and in race 7, the lone
wire-to-wire winner was 7-5. Then came the Jim
Dandy in which the top 3 finishers were 2nd, 6th
and 7th at the pace call with the latter 2 being
far back early.
This to me was the defining race that
indicated that there was indeed a closer's bias
in existence. And I've read that others disagree
and say there was no bias that day, including the
folks from Logic Dictates, from whom I get my
trip notes. Even with Brave Quest hounding
Albert The Great for the early part of the race
forcing quickish fractions, I don't think both
of those horses would normally collapse off 23.0,
46.0, and 110.3 fractions. Albert The Great sure
didn't in the past, but then again he wasn't
pressed so closely in his previous successes.
As I said in last week's newsletter, after
seeing what I was convinced to be a closer's bias
in existence, I keyed the closer with the best
final fraction in the last race in Daily Doubles.
Ransom Cove in the 9th didn't disappoint as he
came from 10th in a field of 10 at the pace call
to win going away at 3-1 and completed the D/D of
$63 with Graeme Hall in the Jim Dandy. The 2nd
and 3rd place finishers in race 9 came from 6th
and 8th at the pace call at odds of 17-1 and 7-1
respectively.
And keep in mind that the pace call for a
mile and an 8th race, which is 9 furlongs, is
after precisely 2 thirds of the race has been
completed. It's not as though these horses had
made their moves at any time that can be
construed as early in the race after lagging
behind. After 6 of the 9 furlongs had been
run, the winner was dead last and went by
every horse in the field during the final third
of the race.
Hopefully this has shed some light on the
mostly perceived, very tricky, but sometimes very
real phenomenon of racetrack biases.
Regards,
Jim
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Some subscribers have complained that I get
a little long-winded in these newletters, but I
want to cover another subject quickly and this
will tie in with my review race. It's paceline
selection. Many times you have heard me talk
about last-out final fractions and that is the
paceline I stress the most, the last race. But
there are times when it is necessary to go back
deeper into the past performances to choose the
proper paceline from which we gather information.
The question is when? When is it appropriate
to skip past the last outing and go back to a
previous paceline? I'll go over a few of these
situations in today's review race, which
illustrates the need for this. The main reasons
why we should go back further than the last race
are trouble and surface or distance switch.
Today I'll be reviewing the 2nd race at
Saratoga this past Monday. There was no turf
racing (as usual) and the main track was fast at
this point, before the standard heavy rainfall
came a few races later rendering it a sea of
slop, also a regular situation at this meet.
Again, I hope that we've seen the last of the
unbelieveably lousy weather of this summer and
the last few weeks of the meet will feature clear
skies and fast tracks.
If you would like to follow along, you can
view and/or print the Daily Racing Form past
performances for this race by logging onto my
website Here.
The 2nd race on Monday August 14th was a mile
and an eighth claiming event for 3-year-old
fillies with tags of $60K down to $50K. I'll
list the entries in this short field of 6 (after
the late scratch of #5 Can't Bluff Me) followed
by the running style I've labeled each, the
last-out Beyer speed figure, the last-out final
fraction (raw/actual) and any last-out
"moves-within-a-race", of which there were none
in this field. For this "paceline selection"
review race, I'll also list additional final
fraction calculations that will be more pertinent
to predicting the likely outcome of this race.
1. Win By Decision P
25.2 / 26.4
2. The Prosequtor S 26.3 / 26.3
3. Our Patty P 27.0 / 26.2
24.2 / 25.3
25.2 / 25.2
4. Sassabrass P 26.3 / 26.3
23.4 / 25.3
6. Presumed Innocent E 26.4 / 29.0
7. Hugmelikeyouloveme EP 25.0 / 27.0
25.1 / 25.2
25.3 / 25.2
As you can see, I've listed more than one
final fraction for most of these entries. And
now I'll go over each of them and my reasons for
choosing the appropriate pacelines. The first
thing that jumps out is the pace shape advantage
for the early speeds of this match up, which are
#6 Presumed Innocent and #7 Hugmelikeyouloveme.
What I'm stressing in this race is final
fractions and pace shape since there were no
"moves-within-a-race."
1. Win By Decision - here is an example of rather
than calculating her last-out final fraction run
on the turf, I went back to her previous mile
race on the dirt. Looking at any of her last 3
pacelines, however I could not find any evidence
that she would be able to compete at the
projected early pace of this race and she was
considered a non-contender.
2. The Prosequtor - had last run on a sloppy
track, but her preceeding 4 races were run on the
grass so I had no choice but to use her last-out
final fraction for comparison, making a mental
note that it was in the slop. In spite of her
2nd-place finish in that off-track race, she did
not show much overall recent talent to make her a
contender. Two down, four to go.
3. Our Patty - a prime example of when to dig
back deeper than the last race. She last ran at
this distance, but it's not really fair to use
that race as a barometer for this one. This is a
$60K claimer and her last was at least a notch
above this in terms of class; a state-bred NW2X.
If we go back to her prior, it was against even
better company, an open NW2X race.
So I decided on her 3rd race back when she was in
against approximately the same class of horse she
would be facing in this match up, state-bred
NW1X vs. open $60K claimers. So her final frac-
tion I would compare with the others was 25.2,
which was calculated by subtracting 111.4 from
137.1 and she was immediately stamped as a
prime player in this group.
4. Sassabrass - she also, like #2 whom she beat,
was exiting a last-out race on a muddy off-track.
But in her case, I would go back to her prior,
even though it was in a sprint. Sassabrass had
shown some good early presence in a number of her
races and she was stepping up off a good
wire-to-wire jaunt against lesser claimers albeit
in the mud.
Rather than use her last-out 26.3 final fraction,
I used her 2-back sprint final fraction of 24.3,
adjusted to 25.3 since she was routing today.
Since that was close to the best final fraction
so far of 25.2 from Our Patty, Sassabrass would
certainly be in the top 2 on the contender
list to this point. Since she hadn't proven
she can handle this class yet as had Our Patty
however, she would have to be rated behind that
competitor.
6. Presumed Innocent - an E runner who is
committed to the lead nearly every time she
leaves the starting gate. Since there were only
2 early speeds in this field, although I wouldn't
argue too strongly with anyone who would say #4
Sassabrass is an EP rather than a P, the question
was could she take this field all the way on top?
If you look at the fractions of her one route
race and compare it to the horse to her outside,
the answer should be obvious.
Her lone route race was in the slop. I could
have gone back to the prior race since that last
race was in higher company, but her prior was a
real clunker and I sure didn't want to go back to
February off her last 2 outings. In that last
race she collapsed after a pace call fraction of
113.3. A quick look at #7 Hugmelikeyouloveme
shows she has held up after pace call fractions
of 113.1, 111.1 and even won at 109.4. Presumed
Inocent had to be tossed from consideration.
7. Hugmelikeyouloveme - as we just saw, she is
the speed of the speed of this match up and
again, I'll show why I dug back into the p.p.
pacelines to get her final fraction to be
compared to the rest. In her last race she ran
against one level higher of competition in the
NW2X category. In that race she showed her usual
good early speed, but could not sustain it
against that company. Going to the previous
paceline, she was also in against the same
tougher company and did quite well registering a
25.2 final fraction.
But I went back one more race to the $60K
claiming level and checked to see if she had a
better final fraction in that race, which if she
did, I would use for comparison. As it happens,
she had the identical time of 25.2, which is what
I used.
This race now was pretty straightforward.
Hugmelikeyouloveme would be the public choice off
her last-3 set of Beyer speed figures and she had
the definite pace shape or running style
advantage. The other contenders were clearly Our
Patty followed by Sassabrass, who still had a
little something to prove as far as winning at
this level was concerned.
You could say that it boiled down to #'s 3
and 7 for the win and maybe even for the exacta.
Since they both had identical final fractions,
and one was 4-1 while the other 4-5, you may say
it was a no-brainer as to which to focus on for
the top spot.
While there may have been a surprise as to
the order of horses at the pace call, the finish
was as predicted. Presumed Innocent was the
surprise pacesetter and Sassabrass was in the
process of taking over the lead from her at the
pace call. The major surprise was that Our Patty
was still dead last in 6th, as she had shown a
good bit of early presence in her p.p.'s.
The problem was that she had stumbled out of
the gate and spotted the field 6 or 7 lengths
right off the bat. As Hugmelikeyouloveme made
the chalk players stand up and root by taking
over at the furlong marker, Our Patty was getting
into gear in a big way. The two 25.2 final
fractions were becoming accurate indicators that
these two would battle down to the wire and in a
gutsy effort, Our Patty prevailed by a neck at
4-1 over the 4-5 chalk. Horses have been accused
of not being the most intelligent creatures on
the planet, but I sure do marvel at their hearts
and will to win.
While this race does not illustrate a big
payoff, it's match ups like this one that can
provide the success we need to stay ahead of this
game. When we have only 2 horses that figure to
win and one other solid contender for the money,
that's a value situation, provided the prices are
there. The exacta and trifecta clicked as
predicted in this race, but since it was the 2nd
half of the early D/D, and this race featured only
two real contenders for the win, it would have
been prudent to play a few top contenders from
race one in the D/D, if there was some value
apparent.
Using the top 4 final fraction horses in race
1 last Monday with the 2 top fillies in race 2
would have produced a nice payoff in addition to
the exacta and/or trifecta. Here were the
mutuels:
3. Our Patty - $10.40
7. Hugmelikeyouloveme - 3-7 ex. $23.40
4. Sassabrass - 3-7-4 tri. $79.50
8-3 D/D: $198.50
Until next week, I wish you clear skies and
fast tracks.
Knock 'em dead!
Jim
Back to Top
*****Horseracing Handicappers' Free
Picks Newsletter*****
*****Saturday August 26, 2000*****
Welcome to another edition of "Horseracing
Handicappers' Free Picks Newsletter." The first
year has flown by since I first began this
project and the original small group of about 25
subscribers has grown to nearly 1900. Hopefully,
those that have stuck with me for a while have
become better handicappers.
I received an email from a full-time
professional handicapper from Las Vegas, Bernard
D. He asked me to mention a website for those
who are interested in breeding info. Dan Serra
is regarded as the most knowledgeable expert on
ratings/breeding in America and he has a site
on which his FREE turf and wet numbers are given.
He advises that trainers should have a 10%
or higher win record. 10,000 sires are listed
and Dan upgrades them daily. Click here to visit his site.
What's the best way to stay ahead of this
game? It's pretty simple. Unearth and play
winning horses that the general public to a large
degree ignores. Not necessarily easy, but simple.
As we all know, John Q. Public is mesmerized
and captivated by speed figures.
There are speed figures everywhere. In the
online Daily Racing Form and Handicapper's Daily,
in track programs, in computer software handi-
capping programs, you name it. If it has to
do with handicapping the thoroughbreds, speed
figures are the name of the game. But the name
of the game of making money on the thoroughbreds
is finding horses that will beat the horses with
the top speed figures.
I'm not saying that speed figures are
useless; quite the contrary. One of my favorite
plays is a last-out best Beyer speed figure/final
fraction horse, providing it has betting value,
as did the winner of today's review race. And
often when such a horse is moving up in company
or meeting winners for the first time, there is
an abundance of value.
It helps to understand the competition's
mindset. The masses of handicappers have long
held the belief that horses will not win under
certain circumstances, such as a maiden taking on
winners. I know if I spot a horse with a pace
shape advantage that has made a last-out
"move-within-a-race" and also has the best or
near-best final fraction, I'll consider him a
strong play regardless of what level of company
he's running against. And the competition as I
say has accepted speed figures as the easy way to
handicap.
Let's take a look at last Saturday's card at
Saratoga and compare the winner's and 2nd place
finisher's last-out Beyer speed figures with the
best such last-out figure in the field. If there
is a surface switch, I'll use the last same
surface figure on a dry track or turf course.
Race 1 - Best: 71
Winner: 60 ($7.20)
2nd: 59
(ex. $65.00)
Race 2 - 1st-time starter race
Race 3 - Best: 78
Winner: 68 ($9.60)
2nd: 71
(ex. $34.60)
Race 4 - Best: 87
Winner: 59 ($79.00)
2nd: 80
(ex. $707.00) - ouch!
I had the 2nd and 3rd
finishers in an ex. bx. and got crushed by this
longshot.
Race 5 - Best: 95
Winner: 71 ($3.80)
2nd: 74
(ex. $16.00)
Race 6 - Best: 64
Winner: 47 ($12.80)
3rd: 41
(ex. $127.00)
Race 7 - Best: 93
Winner: 89 ($13.20)
2nd: 85
(ex. $140.50)
Race 8 - Best: 102
Winner: 96 ($9.50)
2nd: 91
(ex. $19.00)
Race 9 - Best: 105
Winner: 97 ($16.40)
2nd: 98
(ex. $53.50)
Race 10 - Best: 81
Winner: 81 ($8.10)
2nd: 72
(ex. $76.50)
We have to go all the way to the 10th and
final race to find a winner with the best
last-out Beyer speed figure. This should tell us
something about using speed figures as the be all
and end all of handicapping. It also should be
obvious that to uncover some of these plays we
have to dig a little deeper or utlize techniques
other than what the typical player focuses on.
In race 1 All Net Joe was a Wide Out/WIR play
in addition to being a dropdown. The public made
him the choice off the drop in claiming price.
In race 3 Diplomatical was an SRE play and the
runnerup was a Profile play. In race 4 Dad's Gun
won for reasons that would have to be explained
to me as in 3 races this year he showed only a
short burst of early speed in his last before
collapsing to lose by 18 lengths as he had in his
race prior.
In race 5 Deed I Do was dropping out of a
couple of Grade I races and had strong speed
figures before that so he went off as the 4-5
chalk. In race 6 Mongoose made a 2-length move
on the turn in a better-than-looks effort. He
was steadied twice in the stretch and brushed
against the rail before tiring in the final
furlong and with a cleaner trip projected, could
have been considered to have a decent shot.
In race 7 A Little Luck dropped back to the
level at which he ran a competitive race in his
2nd back and had to be placed among 3 or 4
contenders. In race 8 Jostle had just won the
Grade I Coaching Club Oaks. In race 9 Gritty
Sandie has just gained 12 lengths from the pace
call to the finish in his last outing. And in
the finale, the top speed figure horse Newspeak
was a best last-out speed figure/final fraction
play, but somehow managed to pay $8.10 as the
public also played to near co-favoritism the
1-horse, who had a speed figure of only 2 less
but finished off the board.
As I touched on last week, one of the ways
we can come up with plays that our competition
will not consider is by going back as deeply as
possible into the past performance lines to find
the appropriate paceline from which to compare
data.
A prime example can be found in last
Saturday's race 7 at Saratoga. I made no
selections in this race as I thought it may be
too contentious with too many horses with a shot
at the win. But #9 Come On Now Sean is a good
example of going back past the last outing in the
p.p.'s. Although his last was a good 4th-place
finish in slightly lower claiming company, I also
looked at his only other effort this year, which
was run on June 9th, 20 days earlier than his
last on June 29th.
This horse also serves as an example of a
layoff play that for many would very much dis-
courage them from making him a contender. As I
said, he had run only twice in 2000, the first
a win at the $40K claiming level. He came back
after 20 days with a good effort, which includ-
ed a nice last-furlong move to finish 4th. Then
he had a 51 day layoff before this race.
This kind of a layoff with only 2 works on
7/12 and 8/11 would make many players avoid Come
On Now Sean. Knowing that the bad weather at
Saratoga has forced many races off the turf, and
seeing the good form this horse was in, I saw no
problem whatsoever with that kind of layoff and
worktab. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I like
to stress actual competitve performances more
than trying to read between the lines as to a
horse's conditioning.
Come On Now Sean was in my mind a solid bet
at odds of nearly 14-1. I say this in spite of
him coming up a little short to A Little Luck to
complete the exacta of $140.50 while paying $12
to place. I'm sure some pretty savvy
handicappers were turned off by his trainer's
zero for 19 record at the meet and 10% win record
for the year. But like I say, to come up with
what we consider to be logical horses, we
sometimes have to ignore what others focus
strongly on. I saw the horse had run well in his
only two outs this year with final fractions of
23.3 and 23.1 and saw a value play; period.
Nevermind the other stuff that I can get dizzy
from analyzing. Maybe the best way to look at
handicapping is to keep it simple. That's what I
try to do in my 3-step approach in "Calibration
Handicapping."
Another value play was there for the taking
at Saratoga in this past Monday's 9th race. It
was a 7F claiming race with tags of $25K down to
$22.5K. #1 First Rodeo was taking a drop after
being claimed for $35K and kept in jail. What I
mean by kept in jail is this. In New York, when
a horse is claimed he must be moved up in company
or else be kept out of competition ("in jail")
for 30 days.
The first thing I noticed about this horse
was that he ran his last race at that higher
level at 6 furlongs as a Profile Play. He had
finished 5th in a field of 9 in that race. In
his prior, he had run a good 2nd while 3-wide at
the $20K level at a mile and a sixteenth. While
many handicappers questioned why a trainer would
claim a horse for $35K and then run him back at
$25K, I went back to his previous race as the
paceline to compare.
In that prior effort at 81/2 F, he ran a 4th
quarter fraction of 24.1, which when adjusted to
this sprint race was 23.1. After comparing that
23.1 to the remaining 8 horses, I saw that this
was a standout final fraction edge. Had I looked
only at the last race, his final fraction would
not compare, but since he ran as a Profile play,
that effort was strengthened anyway.
The point is that while others may have
focused on the last race or the questionable drop
in company, I saw a standout value play at 13-1
due to the final fraction advantage in his race
2-back. He paid $28.80 to win and topped an
exacta with a double drop-down horse of $134.00
and completed a D/D with the 4-5 chalk in race 8
of $66.50. Another example of the value that is
there for us each and every week if we will look
in places others don't visit.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
This week's review race is the 10th from
last Saturday, August 19th. If you would like
to follow along, you can view and/or print the
Daily Racing Form past performances for this
race by logging onto my website Here
This was a turf race at a mile and three
sixteenths for a full field of 12 Maiden Special
Weights 3-years-old and upward. As per usual,
I'll list the entries and then list the running
styles I've labeled each, followed by the
last-out Beyer speed figures, the last-out final
fractions (raw/actual) and any last-out
"moves-within-a-race", of which this group had
none.
1. Swamp Wolf P 79 25.0 / 24.2
2. Devilishly P 52
58 27.1 / 27.2
(Dirt)
3. Miner's Son P 27
68 24.0 / 25.0
4. Inveterate S 33
66 24.0 / 24.0
5. Leady S 66 24.0 / 24.3
55 23.4 / 24.0
6. Golden Honors P 74 27.0 / 27.1 -
(Dirt)
72 24.0 / 24.0
7. Newspeak P 81 23.3 / 23.1
8. Victory Parker S 46
68 23.3 / 24.2
9. Kadhaaf P 70 24.0 / 24.4
10. Papa's Boy P 60
72 23.4 / 24.2
11. Man From Wicklow P 55
12. Turkish Corner P
Here were my thoughts while handicapping this
race.
1. Swamp Wolf - an obvious contender in this
mostly lackluster field of non-winners off his
last couple of turf starts, in which he got the
place money on each occasion. His last-out 24.2
final fraction came during a 3-length gain from
the pace call to the finish. The only knock on
him was that he had not shown he could run in New
York and as such could not possibly compare with
my top choice for the top slot.
2. Devilishly - had not run on the grass in
either of his 2 lifetime outings and didn't show
much to get excited about in either effort.
3. Miner's Son - showed brief speed in his last
in the mud before completely collapsing and in
his prior on the turf was bumped on the first
turn and showed nothing. His try before that on
the grass was also a non-performance.
4. Inveterate - a non-contender.
5. Leady - in 2 lifetime starts, both of which
were on the turf, he showed nothing. Added lasix
for this encounter. In hitting the board, he
illustrated a couple of things. First, the
trifecta wager can be tough to hit at times due
to a clunker like this suddenly coming alive
enough to be in the money. Secondly, that
non-performance-enhancing drug lasix can and
often does enhance performance.
6. Golden Honors - showed good early zip and held
well in his last in the mud and finished evenly
in his prior on the weeds. Deserved to be on the
contender list.
7. Newspeak - not only was he a triple Beyer
advantage horse, which would normally make him a
prohibitive favorite, but he had a big final
fraction advantage with a sterling 23.1, which
included a gain of 2 lengths from the pace call
and a final 3/16ths in 29.1; unbelieveable for a
maiden. He was off a month and a half, but
showed a couple of good works and had #1
contender stamped all over him. The problem was
the potential value or lack thereof.
8. Victory Parker - another going with lasix for
the first time, he had a fairly decent try on the
turf in his 2nd race back and I put him on my
periphery play list.
9. Kadhaaf - dull was the descriptive word for
his career thus far. He could have possibly been
considered to have a chance at the 3rd slot in
the trifecta, but I eliminated him.
10. Papa's Boy - the key to him was his only race
on the grass, which was 2-back. In that race he
gained nearly 2 lengths in the final furlong,
which only the 1-horse and the 7-horse had done
in their last turf tries. He belonged on the
list of contenders and I put him in as a
periphery play, which is one that I think has a
decent shot at the exotics, but not necessarily
for the win.
11. Man From Wicklow - dull and out.
12. Turkish Corner - been steeplechasing lately
and as such I couldn't guess that he had a shot
in here.
Every once in a while, just when you think
you've seen just about everything in this game,
you come across a race like this. Everything I
can think of that players may use to handicap
pointed directly to #7 Newspeak as the most
likely candidate to win this affair. Yet the
public let him go off at overlay odds of 3-1.
While he didn't win by a furlong, he did cross
the finishline first and paid a shocking $8.10.
That's not an overwhelming longshot by any
means, but it is a big price for such an
advantage horse and a week later I still can't
understand how the 1-horse could have been played
almost equally, also at 3-1. But we should
always be thankful for overlay payoffs because
we'll get our share of tough beats along the way
also. Here are the order of finish and mutuel
payoffs.
7. Newspeak - Won; $8.10
10. Papa's Boy - 2nd; 7-10 ex. $76.50
5. Leady - 3rd; 7-10-5 tri. $1,437.00
1. Swamp Wolf - 4th; 7-10-5-1 $3,899.00
Until next week, I wish you clear skies and
fast tracks.
Knock 'em dead!
Jim
Back to Top
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are interested in an alternative
wagering option, please check out the great new
Website of Grand Central Race & Sports Book, a
click-thru banner for which can be found at the
top of my website or Click here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested in having a presence on the internet?
Whether you have a product idea or simply a desire
to get in on the greatest technological advancement
in history, you can learn how to make money on the
web. I did and believe me, so can you. You'll be
amazed at how inexpensive it is to learn everything,
and I mean everything there is to know about how
ANYONE can make money on the 'net! This is the only
book on the entire internet I recommend and it's
about 1/10th the cost of most other "courses".
Would you believe $17.06 for over 800 pages of
"gold?" It's called "Make Your Site Sell" and you
can instantly download it or a 100-page sample,
which by itself is better than most complete books.
If you've ever had an inkling of a desire to make
money on the 'net, whether or not you have your own
site, you owe it to yourself to take a few seconds
to log onto:
MYSS or MYKS
If you're not impressed and pumped up after reading
the free download sample, I'll have to come and check
your pulse| :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To get an additional unique and valuable slant on handicapping the
thoroughbreds, see what my friend the "Guru" has to say in
A1 Handicapping & The ProPace Handicapper
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
**Horseracing Handicappers' Website**
Wagering on a horse race without knowing which are the true
contenders is like running under water...you will get nowhere
fast. Order "Calibration Handicapping" TODAY... increase your
ROI (Return On Investment) TOMORROW!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web site:
Email: [email protected] fax: (603) 676-1216
Back to Top Home