Wednesday, January 31, 2018

How much is too much. How much is enough?


How much love, do you need
Before you give your love to me
How much time, before it grows
How much love I want to know
What can I do
What can I say
The last thing I want
Is to drive you away
How much love, does it take
How much love for heaven sake
 

In the 70s hit How Much Love  Leo Sayer asks.."how much you love do you need. how much love does it take?"
That song is about love, but the concept of how much/too much is a question many of us ask ourselves. I certainly ask myself that question, and for good reason. How much has always been an issue for me.
 
 
When I was younger it was baseball stats. I had a notebook, more a binder than notebook, and I would record the stats in a very detailed way into that book--of every Montreal Expos player. Current, and up to date, after every game. The Montreal Expos were the passion of my youth. I would also score every game, complete. I learned all those habits from my father. He did that as well at the games. It was part of the experience. I probably wanted to be just like him, as most sons want to be like their fathers until they grow up and end up being like them. Maybe its not that I wanted to be like him, more that I am like him and I am prone to repeat the habits because of simple DNA. Maybe its a bit of both at the same time. I'm pretty close to the stage where that is a reality. I've never not been that way.
When I was a teen I took up golf. That certainly had nothing to do with my father, as he never played golf. But, I practiced like I was on the PGA tour, read every book, watched every video I could, and played every course I could get to and afford. Its certainly something that is just inside me, whether it was learned or inherited.
I recall in University, one of my professors asked me what I did to complete my paper that I turned in. I asked why she wanted to know that. She said she had never had any student do the amount of research that I did for a simple undergrad paper. I remember spending hours in the library on that one, reading all sorts of studies, experiments and newspaper articles, just so I could have as much info as I possibly could. The footnotes at the end of my paper were probably longer than the actual paper was. That is who I am and certainly who I was. The prof probably thought I paid some professional to do it for me. I was freakish about how I had to do it right.
Again, how much is too much, and how much actually results in weaker end performance? When does doing more, or too much, result in poorer results than you would otherwise get?
Just because you can buy all the candy in the store, doesn't mean you should or that its in your best interest to do so. That is a tough lesson to learn. I love candy, literally, and in this case, figuratively.
More work and study is like candy to me, like sugar to a candy freak.
 
 
Knowing your limitations is important. Realizing your maximum potential is what many strive for. I certainly strive for it. Where is the happy medium between those two seemingly polar points?
I am one of those types that wants to do as much as I can, to do it all. That is a trait I inherited from my father, who was the workaholic of all workaholics. That's not to say my father didn't take time to do things he enjoyed, like going to baseball games, watching TV, or many other things. But, when it came to work, enough was never enough. I am certainly prone to that, but, unlike him, I am aware of it early in life and try to keep it in check. Try, but, its a battle.
When it comes to horse racing, I want to master every track, every type of bet. I like a challenge, and I like to solve all the puzzles. That is what drives me. It's also what can destroy me, if I let it. Lately, I have been letting it do that.
Back in the day, that wasn't an issue because it couldn't be.There was no internet access to every track, 24/7, there was no real offtrack betting, and when that started, you had 2 tracks to bet on. Not 100.
My first real experience with it was once when I went to Pittsburgh. I went to the local offtrack shop, and that night, you had 20 screens in front of you and the ability to bet 20 tracks at once. I dabbled in that, and I probably lost every bet. That lesson never registered though. More candy was a good idea at that point. 
 
 
more, more, more,
how do you like it, how do you like it.
 
Part of the problem is that when you start down that road, you are well on the journey and don't want to turn back, even though you are running out of gas. For some tracks, I have gathered so much data, put in so much time learning everything I can and need to know about that track and its players, that I would be tossing that aside if I gave up on it. Even if that is the best thing to do...to give up on those because they don't suit me, for various reasons. It's a bitter pill to take when you know you have to take it.
 
 
 First you need, then you bleed, and when you're on your knees
(That's what you get for falling in love
You get a little but it's never enough
That what you get for falling in love)
Now, this boy's addicted 'cause your kiss is the drug
your live is like bad medicine
bad medicine is what I need.

Now, its not a total loss. Each time I've put the work in, I've learned something I can use even if I don't play that specific track anymore. It has made me better and smarter overall. The education is valuable when I take that and apply it elsewhere.
So, the happy medium part. I will still work hard, but there is only so much work I'm willing to do. I like to play also, and the play part has suffered because of the work part. I am mindful of that, and have figured out where the balance is for me. It means tossing away much of the work I've done, and only going forward with what fits into my lifestyle. I want to solve the puzzles, but I realize I cannot solve every puzzle, if it means that is all I have time for. There is more to life than just solving puzzles.
When you can do a vast majority of things well--like I can, you don't need to limit yourself to just doing one thing very well and all the time. I fell into that trap, but I have found my way to pull myself out.
 
 
 I fell into a burning ring of fire,
I went down, down, down and the flames went higher
And it burns, burns, burns,
The ring of fire, the ring of fire.
 
So, its down to 2 tracks for me, and just a few types of bets. I will live with missing scores I can make at other tracks and certain types of bets. Since I don't need the money that bad, I am giving up some money making for some time to do other things I get equal enjoyment out of.
If that goes well, and I can add a 3rd in the spring that I have always wanted to try and conquer, I will do that. But, that's it. 
 
One thing I knew early on, many years ago when I started playing the horses is that it can consume you if you let it do that. I forget that from time to time, and literally have to be exhausted before the hammer hits me on the head. That point has been reached. I also like writing. That is something else I do well and enjoy.
I have started writing more. Well, that's not true. I have been writing lots all along. I have hundreds of pretty good pieces that I just haven't finished. I love to write, but to do it well, you have to put a lot of energy into it. That also means finishing them. I just haven't finished many pieces, because by the end of the day, I was just too spent to do that. There is only so much you to go around, and the more you put into one thing, the less you have to put into others. Its a finite amount of time and energy you get to play with. That's a lesson my father didn't learn until very late in life, and something he expressed when we went out to dinner shortly before he passed away. Another older man I used to work with named Abe told me if I kept working the way I do, like I do, I would burn out. Abe told me that more than 20 years ago. My father told me what he did about 10 years ago. I didn't listen to either of them. That is my nature.
That is a valuable lesson for both horseplayers, as well as in in life. You have to decide how much goes to one thing, and how much to another. Or better said, how much less one gets if another is to get more. Horseplayers, as a general rule, are not good at taking advice of others. We always figure we are smarter and know better. I am the poster child in some ways for that.
 
 
 
Love is the drug and I need to score
Showing out, showing out,
hit and run Boy meets girl
where the beat goes on
Stitched up tight, can't shake free
Love is the drug, got a hook on me
catch that buzz
Love is the drug I'm thinking of
 
Knowing myself well, I know the temptation to stray and play more tracks will come again. It always does. Its like a very addictive drug to me. But I am very mindful of not falling back into that trap now. That is really half the battle when you are trying to beat this type of problem. Its only half though. Actually achieving it is the harder half. I'm halfway there now. I'm very mindful. This candy freak is now at least walking down the health food aisle. Not that I don't see the candy aisle in the distance. I know its there and it calls my name like the devil on my shoulder when the angel is silent.
How much is too much? How much is enough? Too much is too much when enough is enough. That's when.
 
 
If you've had enough
Don't put up with his stuff
Don't you do it
If you've had your fill
Get the check pay the bill
You can do it

Tell him to just get out
Nothing left to talk about
Pack his raincoat show him out
Just look him in the eyes and simply shout

Enough is enough is enough
I can't go on, I can't go on, no more no
Enough is enough, is enough
I want him out, I want him out that door now

In this case, the him is the person I don't want to be, the one I am also prone to be.
 
Note I used many love songs out of context in this blog to emphasize the metaphor of working too hard, just like loving too hard. Its what was out there to use, so I utilized it. Working hard is very much like loving too hard, it can hurt you more than help you if you let it.
And so, just one more, without the lyrics posted, just to hammer home the point.
 

Note the title on the page...Hell To Pay.
 
The next vice might be getting rid of using so many songs and lyrics in my blogs and posts to make a point. But that is a task for another day. One day at a time.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Sunday, January 28, 2018

The day I couldn't lose..literally


The year was 1987. It was a turbulent year, and the end of 2 or 3 very turbulent years in my world.
My parents, who had issues going for about 20 years, finally had split up a year or so before. It was an ugly day when it happened, and I was in the house when it all blew up. You never forget moments like that, but really, it was for the best. My parents were both great people in their own ways, but they were oil and water together much of the time.
Splitting up is never as easy as just walking away. Money was involved, and my dad had issues that tied us to him and his issues were in ways that weren't easy to remove from our lives. One of those was his penchant, almost vocation, to get in trouble with the law and then make it worse by doing more bad and stupid things. Before they split up, he had done such a thing and because his bail was so high, we had to put our house up as collateral to get him out.
When they split up, my father eventually went to California to live and run more of his scams. Scams was his business, and he was always in business. So, when it came time to come back for the trial for the previous scams, for which we had put our house up, he wasn't coming back. The crown and judge made it clear if he didn't, they would take the house. My mother was terrified. Something she was a lot and came to her easily. We were sitting on my bed in my room, and discussing what to do about it. I hatched a plan to get us out of it, and in the end, it worked. It took some creativity, and some fudging the truth on the stand by me, although I didn't lie, just left some things out, but at the end of the day, she kept her house, which eventually she sold to me, and I now live in.
The plan was pretty simple. It was August of 1987, and I had worked all summer since University had ended. I had saved up enough money for the coming school year, so I didn't need to work the rest of that month. My father had invited me to come visit him in Los Angeles, where he was living. To be more specific, Anaheim. I accepted. Somehow, my mother got involved and she came with. By then, my parents were getting along. They did get along well...as long as they were apart. We flew together to L.A., and the plan was to try and convince him to come back and face the music in Toronto, then my mother would be off the hook for the bail money. In addition, it would be a nice visit for 3 weeks. Staying at his house meant it cost nothing, and my father being my father, he paid for the plane fare. It would end up costing nothing, and again, my father being my father, I came home 3 weeks later with a lot more money than I left with. A lot is all I will say. It wasn't small bills, suffice it to say.
Right away I knew there was going to be trouble. My mother started talking about taking him back. I told her she was crazy and had a very short memory. Just remember the plan and the goal, have fun with your trips to Disneyland and the movie studios, and try to get him to come back and save your house. She wasn't easy to convince, and my father could be very persuasive. It didn't really matter, so I just let it go while we were there. I knew when the day came, I was getting her back on the plane and then that would be that, and she would come to her senses. Which she did. Three entire weeks with my father was plenty enough to convince her that he hadn't changed one bit and that he never was going to. He was the same crazy workaholic, over eater, excessive compulsive and con man he had always been. I make him sound bad there, but he really wasn't. He was a good, stand up guy who would give you the shirt off his back and take a bullet for you, but he had major personality flaws that he could never overcome. I took him for what he was, and saw him for what he was. He was always very good to me, as you will see in this blog.
For me, it was a chance to see places I never had before. I was going to take full advantage of that. The only thing I had to do was get up very early and drive him to work. In Los Angeles, even at 4am, that is a chore. Why? Because there was traffic everywhere, all the time. L.A. traffic is not a Hollywood made up story. Its very real. But if I wanted the car all day, its what I had to do.
He had to get up that early because of the 3 hour time difference. He said he needed to be at work at 5am because that was 8am eastern time. For whatever scam he was running, that was necessary.
Luckily for us, he was able to use the 2 or more lane to drive to work. That saved time. I asked him how he was able to do that by himself when we weren't around. He said he put the dog in the backseat and when he got stopped, he pointed out to the police that it said 2 or more, not 2 or more people. As I understand it, because of his bullshit argument, he forced them to change all the signs. That was my father. He also had a stack of tickets because of it, and of course, he never paid any of those.
Every day, I would ride with him to work and then take the car for as long as I wanted, then pick him up at 5pm. That meant I could go wherever I pleased. Most days, that meant going to play golf. That is what I did most in those days, and the weather was great in L.A. Starting out as early as I did, meant I could get out before the crowds and play the entire round, finish before noon, then get some lunch, and head to the beach until he was ready to go home. One of those days I went to Redondo Beach, and it was a great place to be. Some years later, the entire area burned to the ground, so at least I got to see it first.
When we got back home, each night I would do something different. One night, I went to Dodger Stadium to see a baseball game. In my entire life, I have never seen a baseball palace like that. It was heaven. The tickets were very expensive, but it didn't matter. My father said he would get me one, and he would pay whatever it cost. On top of that, out the door, he would give me an extra 50 bucks in case I needed anything. That was a trend that continued the entire trip. Fifty bucks a day times 21 days ended up being 1000, and there was an extra envelope to go with it for the plane ride. It was more than I made the entire summer before I came. He also paid for all the golf course fees, and any food I wanted. Another night, I went to Anaheim Stadium, which was just down the street from his house, and he paid for all that as well. We also went to San Diego and Tijuana for the day, and to San Francisco for 2 nights. I wanted to play Pebble Beach, because that was a dream of mine, but on the day we went, it was raining, so I didn't. We drove around the entire course though, so at least there was that. If I had played, it would have been 250 to play it. That was a lot of money to me, being only 22 and a student, but my father said if that is what you want, play and I will pay it. For all my fathers faults, that is just who he was. He would give you anything if he thought it made you happy.
Other than the golf, the beach, the baseball games and the short trips, I had one bigger plan in mind for myself. I had a day trip of my own in the works. Towards the end of the trip, on a Saturday when my father didn't need the car, I was going to drive to San Diego to watch the T breds run at Del Mar, then come back at night and go to Los Alamitos for the standardbreds. It was a day road trip for horse betting, something some players like to do. I was one of those in those days. When that day arrived, it was a bright, perfectly sunny California day. Many of the days while we were there were very overcast and rainy. People who have never been to LA don't realize that is more the reality of the weather there, but you do get the sunnier days too, after the early morning smog lifted. In those days, the smog was horrendous. On this day, there was neither.
I drove out to San Diego to go to Del Mar. I got there early, so I was able to walk around and take the place in. It was massive and a palace, much like Dodger Stadium had been. You never forget those things when you see them. In those days, there were no camera phones, so the video is just something that lives in my head. Before I left, since it was a longer day, my father wanted to make sure I had enough money to get me by the entire day, even though I had about 1000 saved from all the other allowances to that point, so he gave me 150 this time. In those days, I never bet more than 5 a race, and I didn't that day either, even though I could have. I didn't feel comfortable doing that at that point.
I bought the Daily Racing Form, but really, I didn't know much about the T breds, so, I expected to lose. Big fields of horses I didn't know, jockeys I didn't know, and a style of racing I had no real clue about. For whatever reason, on this day, that was not going to matter. For you see, on this day, I literally could not lose. We all have a day like that, and this was my day.
I stayed at Del Mar for about 6 races. I bet 4 of them. I hit them all, and not just favorites. I think I was up another 50 before I left. When you are a bettor, you think in terms of betting money and the rest of your money. So, while I had 1000 back in the room at my fathers house, and 150 from him for this day, in my mind, I now had 50 to play with at night for the Los Al card. That is the way you think when you play horses.
Off I went, on the 2 hour plus journey back to LA to Los AL. I was hungry, so I stopped for some dinner along the way, and because of that, I was late and missed the first 3 races. I think there were 10. For some reason that night, and that night only, they had a fair there in addition to the regular harness races. The fair included quarter horse racing. I knew zero about that style of racing, and to this day, I am still in that boat. All I know is that they line them up in the gate, it opens, and they run like hell for 8 to 10 seconds in a straight line and then its over. I caught the last quarter horse race just as I walked in. I bet 5 on something, and it won. Just barely, right on the line as another passed it. I just couldn't lose on this day, no matter how foolishly I played.
Then the harness races started. I had been going to the races for about 4 or 5 years by then, and I knew what I was doing. But, at this track, I knew none of the horses, the drivers, or really how they raced. But I didn't care. I was playing with free money and it was more about the experience anyway. On this night, they had the Sire Stakes also, and many of the races were those. There were many heavy cinch favorites, so I didn't have to be that smart to pick winners, if that is what I wanted to do. I did.
The first 3 were heavy chalks, they all looked good to me, I played them, and they all won. I still could not lose. The next one I didn't like as much, and a 5-1 shot looked good to me. I played him. He came out of the clouds late and picked off the favorite right on the line, which was maybe a 3 minute photo to wait on. This was crazy. I had now hit 9 in a row. 9 in a row. I've been at this now 35 years, I don't think I've ever hit 4 in a row, before or since. There were just 3 or 4 races left. I was up at least 200 on the day by now. That was a lot of money, even though I was already going home with way more than that if I had lost the entire 150 I started with on this day.
I decided to bet exactors this time. Not boxes though, just straight exactors. Something I never do, to this day. But, this day was different. I had the confidence that I was going to win. No matter what. I played two 2-1 shots in the next race, and they hit the line together, and my top horse clearly was ahead. But, there was an inquiry, on the winner. It seemed to flash forever, but when the inquiry came down, my horse stayed up. 10 in a row. Yes, 10 in a row.
By this time, it had been a very long day, and I was getting tired and a bit sleepy. But the rush of all the wins kept me going. I was going to play one more race, win or lose, and then drive home. These were the best horses they had in California at that time, the Open horses. There were only 6, but it was a very evenly matched field. All 6 looked to have a shot. I watched them parade, and I picked a 5-1 shot to win over a 6-1 for 2nd. Straight. It was paying about 100 bucks if I cashed it. I had to lose though, nobody keeps a run like this going forever. The race was contentious start to finish, and all 6 were in it as they turned for home. My 5-1 shot was hopelessly boxed and blocked from going forward. My 6-1 shot was on the outside, but he was hanging. I was pretty certain I was going to lose this one. Then, the red sea parted, the 5-1 shot shot through in an instant and got up right on the line, with 4 others noses apart beside him for 2nd. My 6-1 shot looked to be 3rd, so I was still going to lose. They put the numbers up that way. I thought the run was over. Then, they announced there was a drivers objection. The horse that finished last against the 2nd place horse. That one also took a long time too, but..he came down, my horse moved up to 2nd, and....a perfect day was complete.
I walked out with about 300 plus my 150, less dinner and gas, which my dad insisted on giving me money for when he found out I spent 30 extra on gas and food.
You would think all of those things would be the most vivid memories I have of that day, but it is not. The one thing I remember most is that there were some people standing beside me at Los Al, and they had noticed I won every bet. They looked at me by the end of the night like I was some 3 headed freak. It seemed I was that day.
Home I went.
Two days later, on Monday, we flew back to Toronto. My father gave me the extra envelope just before we took our luggage out of the trunk. He told me not to open it until I got home. I didn't. Lets just say it was enough money to buy a car if I wanted to.
On the plane, my mother told me that my father had assured her he would come back and go to court. I knew it as a lie, she knew it was a lie, even though she wanted to believe it. It was a lie, but that was okay. It was enough.
We went to court a few months later. They called him. He wasn't there. So, he was convicted, and now a felon on the run. When lunch break was over, we had to go on the stand and tell them why they shouldn't seize our house. My mother was very nervous, as she was prone to be anyway. I told her to just tell the truth. She did. The crown asked her what she did. She told them we went to California to convince him to come back, he said he would, and that she did all she could do. She said he was not living in hiding, she knew where to find him if they wanted him, and she couldn't have done anymore.
Then it was my turn. I wasn't so honest, but I did what I had to do to save my mothers house, which is all she had left at that stage. The crown asked me what I knew. I said I heard my father tell my mother that he was going to come back. That wasn't entirely true. I didn't hear him say that, but my mother told me he did then told me. I told them I was certain he would come back, but of course I knew in my heart and mind he wasn't going to. The judge said we had done enough, and he let us off the hook.
I have a theory of why they did that.
As it turns out, they didn't want him back. They were happy to let him be California's problem. It cost more to prosecute and deal with him than just let him be. In any case, they weren't even trying to extradite him and he was easily findable, and he wasn't trying to cross. They were just happy for it to be over. I told my mother she should take that as a sign and be happy herself to be done with it, and let it be. She did in the end.
On that trip, and in court, I just couldn't lose. It just went my way, for whatever reason.
My mother hated when I played the races...but she loved it when I won. She was like that. When I told her how much I won that day in California, she was so happy. Everyone likes a winner and when you are that winner, you feel like you can never lose. That is perceived by others, but all of us know that the winning wont last. It didn't. The next time at the track back home, I couldn't pick a winner to save my life, and I went on a run where I lost my next 60 or 70 bets. Karma evened up the score, as it always will. But it can't take away my stories or memories of that month in August, where I could not lose.
 
 
 
 

Saturday, January 27, 2018

How was your night? Mine really kinda sucked.


My night last night can best be described as disappointing. Not the first one I've ever had betting on horses, and it wont be the last. But like every one of those that came before, I still can take some positives and lessons going forward, to make the good nights even better in the future and hopefully take some of the potential bad nights and turn them into better nights.

Betting on horses. The pillars
I view betting on horses as having 3 components, all equally important parts.
1) handicapping and work. However you do that, it has to be done, and you have to be good at it. If not, the other two parts don't matter. You would just be floating in the raft outside the Titanic, but you still would have been on a sinking ship. You have to be on the right ship and sailing straight and smoothly, relatively speaking.
For me, that means I gather my data, enter it, study it, look at trends, patterns, specifics on certain variables. A lot of us do that, and I'm no different. Whether my way is better than your way, we could debate. My way is different that yours, and that is not up for debate. We all do it differently, in some small ways. As long as we get it right, and getting it right means winning money consistently while taking the losses of others who don't, that is all that really matters.
After I do that first part of the handicapping, the work is not done. I watch replays, very carefully. I am looking for any little thing I can see, something that I believe matters, and that is most likely to be missed or ignored by the vast majority who would bother to do it. I had about 3 horses I uncovered for last night, and while all were valid, a couple of things I saw were noted by the track video hosts. So, the value was gone. One was ignored and missed, and that should have gotten me a free pass no matter how the night went otherwise. I also had a past data point that was ignored off the program, and that was another where I should get the windfall. Generally, I liked the entire setup of the card and thought there would be multiple chances to make a profit. There were also some races I didn't like and had planned to sit out, unless something unusual happened or presented itself. It actually did, and I ignored that too. But more about that later.
On these two points, the data and replays, I didn't short myself at all. Fridays at Woodbine are a night where you can't. The margin between a value winner and a value loser is very slim and tight. I am aware of that. Thursday night is a night obvious chalks come in, so while I watch and do the things listed above, I know I can skimp a bit, because its unlikely I will play much in either case.
2) handicapping the entire race now that you have all the parts of the first component complete. This can be termed...finding relative value and putting the pieces together. In many cases, this involves putting a bad value horse that is being over bet against my good value horse that is being under bet, and hopefully grossly under bet. Again, more work. Its just work layered upon your skills and talent. I mostly did that, but I shorted myself on one race, and that bit me in a way that it should. I didn't act in a thorough enough way, and I got spanked for that at the end of the day. That is a lesson that never gets old. For every amount of work you skip, or don't do, or take for granted, you will lose a proportional amount of money because of that. I know it will happen to me periodically, as I am human just like everyone else, but I know I have to keep it to a minimum and try to avoid it playing out like that. When it does, I take it as punishment so that at least in the short term I will tow that line.
3) discipline and focus. The evil twins of betting failure for most of us. Dave Shwartz talks about a session, and part of that is that when you are going to play a session, you play it. You don't surf, you don't go make dinner, you don't make phone calls. You focus on the task, and you play at the highest level you can. I totally failed on this part and that, in the end, is what caused me to lose, when I should have won a lot.
Here are the specifics of how it all happened.
I had pegged a few value horses I was looking at. They were:

Dry Creek Image

In Spades
Bad At Redhot
Hurrikane Kingkong
Er Monica
Topville Chrome
 

Walk Two Moons
I will take them one by one and go over how I approached the entire card, within the framework of the 3 components I described above.
Race 1 had Dry Creek Image. I thought she had a compromised trip the race before and also raced and finished well anyway. I knew Chickie Love, the big favorite, would be overplayed and I thought she was a very suspect favorite. Again, bad value horse meets good value horse. The other player, Reys N A Rocket, was bearing out badly the week before, but she was viable. I thought I could get 6-1 or higher on Dry Creek Image and that was good relative value. I thought the play was all the way across, win place and show, because I could see Chickie Love completely missing the ticket. Because paying attention is very important, in real time, a 3rd horse called Maralika was way overbet on a trainer change via a claim, so I actually had 16-1 on Dry Creek Image. I put my bet in. But, as they were going to the gate, Dry Creek Image started to cause trouble, and they paused. I didn't like what I saw, at all, so I cancelled my bet. Chickie Love was a very suspect favorite, and was actually trapped in late in the race, but got lucky to get out at the right time and came on to win, while Reys N A Rocket got the lead and bore out sharply again, as expected and got beat. Dry Creek Image got 3rd, but was no threat to the top 2, and it was a good leave overall. I played it right and paid enough attention to stick to the discipline. No loss. On to race 2.
Didn't like anything in race 2, so I passed on the race. The favorite, who I disliked and was terrible value, won anyway, so another good pass.
Race 3 brought IN SPADES, who was on my radar. My data rated his performance very highly the start before in defeat as a big favorite, and I could see the players ditching him for that reason. I expected 4-1, and it came, so I played him. He was one of many, and I didn't like the favorite Burn Out Hanover, so I went against him. In Spades raced well, but he was too far back early and closed huge, but into a fast last half, and he couldn't get there. I'm okay with that. That will happen, and you will lose some of those. It was a good play I would make again. Nevertheless, we were 3 races in and I hadn't made anything and actually lost a small amount on Race 3.
Race 4 brought Bad At Redhot. I should preface my following statement with this comment.
I trained horses. I have had dogs all my life. I would take home sick barn cats and try to help them, even make friends with some of those in the barn that were scared of people. I am an animal lover. I hope all racehorses, good or bad, are treated well, get to live long lives after their careers are over on farms roaming pastures and eating grass to their hearts content.
But, being a realistic person and bettor, I can tell you that a rat is a rat. What is a rat?
For racing people, these are horses of limited ability that wont try very hard, and aren't consistent. For a sharp bettor, these can also be value longshots, in the right field. Bad At Redhot fit that profile.

What did I know about her, and the race last night in particular? She is a rat, facing many other rats. Good form, bad form, its not much to go on with these. Some weeks they show up, some weeks they don't. In a lot of cases, external variables come into to play. The favorite, E R Rhonda had post 10, which is such a low percentage post hindrance, that almost no horses win from it at Woodbine. E R Rhonda almost did her last start. She had it then too, actually led the entire way and crossed the line first, but was dq'd for running out sharply into the 2nd place horse. Based on that, many thought post 10 wouldn't be a problem this time. I didn't see it that way. I also didn't like any of the other horses in the race, based on what I knew about them generally. So,  I didn't really look. Big mistake. That cost me.

What did I like about Bad At Redhot? She is a very low percentage winner, but, she tries and with the right easy trip, which she could get here, she could be dangerous. Her driver, Jody Jamieson also has a history with her of getting her to perform at long odds. That wasn't on the program, but its in my memory bank. I figured her for about 25-1. As it turns out, she went off 70-1. I made a small win bet and went up to make some dinner. I lost my focus, violated the sanctity of the session concept, and the race was off before I came back downstairs. She finished 2nd, got the trip I suspected, E R Rhonda blew up, the rest were rats that raced like rats, except for one rat, Jordies Hope, who beat me.
How did I miss her? I hadn't looked and she has a significant trainer change from the last time I'd seen her. If I had noticed that, by deploying the 2nd component from above, I would have considered that and played her as well.
I also always back up a horse like Bad At Redhot to place, but I didn't here. I didn't do the work, and I lost my focus, with poor discipline, and I lost a $43 place payout on Bad At Redhot.
Four races in, my handicapping had been good, but I had serious violations of other components and I was down where I should have been way up.
​I didn't like anything either way in race 5, and it came pretty much how I expected with low value horses getting it done. I was​n't the only one, as my friend Garnet Barnsdale had the same assessment and passed as well. When you got nothing, that is when you pass.
Here were my picks, as posted in my group about 1 hour prior to first post for the first 5 races. 




 Race 6 brought Hurrikane Kingkong, who I thought would be my best bet of the night. I thought he had a very troubled trip and lacked a chance to go forward when it mattered the previous start, and while I had noted that, the track handicapper also noticed it and told the masses. I wasn't sure what kind of value I would get. But, I disliked the two probable favorites, being Artoffical Flavor, who was very lame the previous start, and Lyons William, who was a horribly overbet rat the time before who was placed last for going off the course while he was backpeddling sharply. I still thought relative value was on the table. Hurrikane Kingkong was in the 6-1 range, and while a shade low, I thought that was fair. But, Artofficial Flavor came out post parading looking like a totally different horse. He was sound and ready to race this night. I had mentioned to Garnet and my friend Ryan that if he came out a different horse, all bets were off. He was, but I left my bet up on Hurrikane Kingkong. You can guess how it played out. I made a mistake and lost the bet. Probably, because I was 6 races in, had handicapped well but made mistakes and just wanted to make my play. So I did. I violated the session concept. A session is a session. You play it properly, no matter how you are doing up to that point. Hurrikane Kingkong finished last, with no excuse. He maybe should not have won, but he should have been at least 3rd. He is a rat. I got this one wrong, for multiple reasons as I described.

Race 7 was probably my biggest procedural mistake of the night. Obviously, for various reasons, things were not going well on this card for me. So, you start to get sour, doubt yourself, and then you don't stick with the plan. That old psychology bugaboo many of us handicappers can fall into. I have worked hard to overcome that, but I'm not immune to a relapse.
Er Monica was up in race 7. I hadn't seen her, didn't have any data on her, but I know her driver is a high percentage driver who gets performance and wins lots of races with longer odds horses. She looked good enough to me, and I was only so so on many of the other contenders, who I thought were likely to be soft at the tote board. So, I was going to play her. Then, since I didn't love her that much, and didn't have anything concrete like data or replay issues to go on, I just decided to pass. Again, you can guess what happened. Her driver got her the trip she needed, found room late, and was up in time for a 10-1 score, which I had missed. Things were just not going well tonight.

​Race 8 was up next, and I just decided to play what I had intended to play. I liked Topville Chrome a bit off his replay, and he seemed a contender among many, although the data told me he was only okay his last start. In relative terms though, I really disliked the favorites in this race, not just one but two of them, so I played him win place and show, and also the same for Star Clipper, who seemed to be hinting at a good effort, but was risky. The odds were good on both, and I thought it was a good value play, which is really the point of all I do anyway. Star Clipper was 10-1, Topville Chrome was 6-1. Together, they were good value to play together. I only needed one to perform if the favorites were false as I thought they were. It was a strangely driven and hotly contested race, but while Topville Chrome got a bad shuffle, Star Clipper was in position to win but lost to one of those favorites, Gillys Boy. I still got a decent place price on Star Clipper, but he didn't win. I played the race well. But here is the takeaway at this point and this is key. 

You have to play all the races where you think you have done all the homework and you have value to play into. You can't pick where you play, where you don't, and consider how the night is going. You are going to lose some of the In Spades races due to race factors, Hurricane Kingkong races when you simply get it wrong, and the Star Clipper races when it doesn't pan out exactly how you need it to. As long as you play them all, and your skill is valid, you will win enough. Like the E R Monica and Bad At Redhot races. You can't skip races that you should play.

Race 9 I liked the favorites and didn't really like my top pick much, so I skipped the race. Favorite won, 2nd fave was 2nd, my top pick was weak late as I thought he might be. It was simply a good race to leave. ​No need to panic and play a race that wasn't playable in my view.

Race 10 I liked a few, not that much but so so. I played 3 horses to place that I thought had value. I got 2 of them, and made a small overall profit. It was an okay play. You need to make the small profit at times if its a good play. They cant all be bombs like Bad At Redhot.

Race 11 was the icing on the bad cake for me this night. I made only one mistake, but it was a very costly one. I did so many things right for this one to work, but I only had to do one thing wrong for it to not work out.

Walk Two Moons was the one I saw in the replay that I felt everyone had missed. I thought she got a terrible drive the start before, but still finished well enough, well off the screen. My data confirmed that, she was dropping in class, with a good post and likely to get the perfect trip. The favorite, Bernadette, is an old class mare, but she has terrible form, coming off a layoff, with a bad post and a history of giving up the lead late. It played out exactly as I thought it would, and while I was looking for 7-2, the favorite was wildly overbet at 3-5, and Walk Two Moons went off at 14-1.
I didn't bet. Why didn't I bet? Just as they were going to the gate, I got distracted by something, which doesn't matter, and I wont describe here. But, when I gathered myself, it was too late, the race was off, and the whole way, I knew she would beat the favorite, which she did.
In sum, I have a good system, the components are the right components, but without the execution you need, and I need, it wont matter. Component 3 is critical.
Never forget that. I wont. Discipline and focus are crucial to success playing horses. 


On the way home from the grocery store while I was writing this blog in my head, I heard this song in the car. As bettors, and just humans who have ups and downs, its good to remember the sentiment of this song

Remember, betting on horses is supposed to be fun. Its a lot more fun when you win and have a good time. That happens when you get it right. Tomorrow is another day, to enjoy and achieve, with lessons in tow.
Good luck if this helps you. Have a good time. The sun can't shine every day. But it will shine again, if you are bright enough.

Thursday, January 4, 2018

January 4, 2018. Day 1. Turned out to be an aborted test run.

The way I work is that I like to scope out any potential playable race the night before. When I say playable, i mean from a bridgejumper perspective. That means there will be significant spread in either the place or show pool, and I have some quick opinion of the favorite--or jumper horse. I either hate him, love him, or think I want to look harder and form an opinion. I also want a reasonably sized field. To go through 10 or 12 horses to find value other than the jumper horse is just not something I'm going to do and be time efficient. If I want to play a volume of jumper races, the way I want to do it, I have to be mindful of the amount of time it takes to do that. so, I forego the bigger fields. That is point 1. It's very much a part of how I exclude when I make my first pass through all the races. 


My first potential race is race 3 at Gulfstream. Right off the bat, the variables are there to make it a play.


Those are:


-7 horse field, including the jumper horse.


-a low ml (morning line) fave, 7-5, coupled with a low ml on the 2nd fave at 9-5. That tells me there will be win pressure competition for the jumper horse, if

she ends up a jumper horse. Thus, if they both race, its a lock I don't play this race on the jumper side, but find something to go against the top 2. That is a cardinal rule. Win pressure on the jumper horse is one of the best angles to beat that horse. If that horse has zero pressure. So point 2 is never play any jumper horse as a jumper when they have any legit win pressure. They are more likely to lose the ticket position in this scenario. 

My experience is that most jumper horses that get beat but don't fall down somewhere simply run very hard to win, and fade late when that doesn't work out, and completely cave. Of course caving is relative, and you need to pick the ones that can do something about that. If the balance are total no talents that wont take advantage, it becomes a no play race. That is rare, but it happens. Out of the 5 left to run, if they all run, there has to be at least one with some talent to be there if the fave coughs it up. Relative strength of "the rest" is another very important factor or point when you think about making a play. 


The other thing I like about this race--at first glance, is that there are two very low ml horses. That means if one scratches out, but the other stays, its a lock that horse is a jumper horse in the show pool if there are still enough left to leave that pool up. I wont get to know that until the early scratches come out. I have to handicap based on the likelihood they both run. So, I do that.

I start out just rating the horses, so I'm prepared either way. It's an earlier race so I want to get it out of the way. Some of the later ones, I might exclude early, but wont go over them thoroughly until later, so I don't waste time on horses that wont run, or if it changes to a clear no play race. I have 18 on tap to start with, so I don't want to waste any time I can avoid wasting.

There are other variables I noticed early, but I will go over them in my assessment of the field. They are somewhat constants anyway that I use repeatedly, but they aren't things I use early as exclusionary factors on the first pass through.


Gulfstream race 3 is my first race to potentially play as mentioned above. It might be cold out and tracks are cancelling, but Gulfstream is fairly safe from that chance, Being almost as far south as you can get on the map. post time is 1:30, so, I want to be ready early for this one.


Here is the field, top to bottom, by ml odds. 


7  SIERRA LEONA

is the 7-5 ml fave. 3yo chestnut filly by Point Given. Its not a hard and fast rule, but I like to go against chestnuts, against fillies and against inexperienced horses that have shown early, but not terribly impressive results. As for the chestnut part, its a horse person thing. Generally, chestnut's bleed more from their lungs, and they have bad feet and legs, and thus, are prone to lameness, especially the more they run. Its a weak angle, but it is something to think about when you are making plays. Everything matters. I wrote a blog about that a year ago, and its valid. Every little angle matters. That is one of them. For me anyway. 

 I can tell you when I trained, just about every chestnut I had or was stabled with was a bleeder and had suspect or terrible legs. Watching the actual horse run in replays can give me some insight to the particular horse, as does looking at the breeding and noticing anything about their ancestors. That info is out there. Who bled, who was lame, specific problems a dam or sire or their ancestors had. Its just more info. more things that COULD matter. Or not matter at all in this case. That is my job as the handicapper to figure out. I cant see the horse up close, and certainly not one at Gulfstream, so, I have to work with what I have to work with. I can watch them in the walking ring, and as they gallop on the track, etc,,,pre race. You work with the tools you have race to race.


She goes for trainer Chad Summers, who I dont know of at all. I am a standardbred guy by trade and experience, and while I know of many trainers in T- breds, I don't know them all. So, that is one strike against my skill set. Its not a variable I get to work with here. A quick look tells me he has had the filly for all of her starts, of which there were 3 to date. 

He started her out in a maiden claimer, which tells me he is somewhat realistic in how he approaches racing them. Many start in a MSW no matter where they think the horse fits. That race was Oct. 20th, at 6f, and it was a short 5 horse field, with no real long odds horses. She was the 2-1 2nd choice. The lukewarm 8-5 fave sat 5th and last, made a mild bid, never went forward and was a well beaten dead last. So, it was a short and weak field. She did run well, stalked early, made a run at the leader and ground her down, then held off another, but she was all out and the 2nd place finisher was coming to her and passes her if they go another half furlong. That is not the type of bridgejumper horse you lean on, but go against as they race on and try better. You will note if you watch closely that the jock used the right handed whip to get her to go forward, but switched to left handed when he needed to pass the leader, as this filly was running in. When she got by, he went back to right handed. That is a strike against her. If she is already running in her first start, against a short field of maiden claimers, she is likely to not wear well. Not for sure, but its more probable than not.

She came back 20 days later, on November 9th, same distance, but tougher company in an optional 50k claimer, a much tougher bunch. She didn't take the tag, but she was a 29-1 longshot. It was a 7 horse field, and she was the 2nd longest shot. She broke near the back, stayed near there, was out of run at the top of the stretch, under heavy whipping, and beat one horse who was basically eased up. A no factor 6th and she looked bad doing it. Her first two starts were Gulfstream Park West, which used to be called Calder for ages. She shifts to what is now Gulfstream and always has been. I don't see that as significant in this case, although I'm not an expert on these tracks.

5 weeks later, December 14th, back to Gulfstream, this time back in a claimer. She was 10-1 ml, but as can happen, a short priced likely fave was scratched, and she went off a clear 9-5 2nd choice. She won the race, and it was a field of 6 with the scratch of the likely fave, going longer this time at a full mile. Once again, she ran midpack, stalked but sat patient, made a move on the turn, cleared the tired leader who was the chalk, then drew off to win easy, but didn't look like she was running much or had much left herself. As well, the rider switched hands with the whip in exactly the manner he did in her maiden breaking score. The racetrack announcer certainly called her right. She runs at a grind away pace, but once asked, she has very little run if you have to move her earlier as he did in the first start she made. Behind her, there were some very poor runners who likely will be taking big class drops.

Today she runs right back to that tag, that distance, and basically its the same conditions as last time. I feel her win was deceptive to the bettors, and she is vulnerable to go backwards. That is how I intend to play it. So, I move forward with the balance of the field, to see what I have to work with against her. If I'm wrong and she beats me so be it. If this is a jumper race, which I'm not sure it is, I am on the other side and not jumping off her bridge. 7-5 ml suggests the line maker thinks the public are going to jump on her big time, even without a scratch of the 2nd ml fave. I will go with that assessment.


5 DRINKS ON ME 

is the 9-5 2nd ml choice. She is trained by Larry Rivelli, and him I do know of. In watching other tracks, it has been mentioned he races where they fit, where they can win, and he wins a very high rate. If he shows up, he is there to make money. My experience is that is exactly the case in races I've seen his horses run in. As with any trainer, even the most successful, they don't win them all and not every horse runs huge. They are all beatable and you have to keep that in mind. She is a 3yo bay filly by Stay Thirsty, bred by Ken Ramsey and wife, but owned by another person. She is making her 3rd lifetime start, at her 3rd different track as is her trainers MO of finding a spot where the horse can win the most money, and comes off a maiden win her last start, not in a claimer. Clearly at first glance, she looks better on paper than the likely fave. Paper doesn't win races, so, I start there. Her first lifetime start was in a 40k maiden claimer at Keeneland, for the Ramseys and noted trainer Mike Maker. She went off a lukewarm 5-2 fave in an 8 horse field, and ran 4th. And changed hands after the race via a 40k claim.

 That is important. It was 7f, her first start, also a maiden claimer, but she didn't run well. She sat around 6th, behind a bunch of 5 who ran hard and with each other. When asked on the turn, she picked it up a bit, then fanned very wide, was under very heavy left handed urging, but never really went forward, and in fact, went left sharply when tired and almost ran into another. She was not impressive. But she changed hands to Rivelli, and you have to give her a chance to learn and also improve in his care.

Rivelli took her to Hawthorne 22 days later on November 10th, a track he races at a lot. She was in a MSW this time, and was going longer at 1 mile and 70 yards. She went off the 4-1 3rd choice, in a 7 horse field, with a clear even money favorite, and still on lasix. In the race, DRINKS ON ME ran right out of the gate, on the outside of the leader the entire way, but in a grinding style that appears to be her way of racing. That leader was the 5-2 2nd choice, who carried her all the way to the end, and was also another Rivelli runner. Both seemed well spotted. Rivelli got the win and 2nd money, and a nice quick return on the 40k claim. Once again though, she showed a tendancy to both hang in the stretch, and run in badly, which she did worse this time. The even money fave was 3rd, but was never involved and not close to the top 2. It was a relatively weak MSW field by Gulfstream standards. She appears to be a claimer, and Rivelli has figured that out. He took the win for MSW, but once a winner, she is a claimer either way on the move up.

Today she runs off 7 weeks, back in a claimer but this time in for 25k, and shortens up a tad from her winning effort, which seems like a good idea. I can see her, but I can also see her being vulnerable. I wouldn't use her as an option underneath the fave who I will go against. That leaves me with 5 others to choose from for 3 show spots if it plays out that way.


4 SAVANNAH ROXANNA 

is the 6-1 3rd ml choice. She ran against the likely fave in their last race, and was a well beaten, but decent enough 2nd in that one. She ran 8 times at 2, which is to many in my view, and is still going. That has got to take its toll eventually on a very young filly. She won start 6 in a maiden claimer at Woodbine for her current connections, going a mile and sixteenth in a maiden claimer. She is also a chestnut filly, by Shackleford, who seemed to want a shorter distance when he was on the Triple Crown trail and later. But he was a high class and game runner, and did well at Gulfstream as I recall also. She started very early, in mid May in a MSW, and was well beaten, as she was in her other MSW try. As she ran more, and in maiden claimers, she gradually improved with experience and distance added and got it done on October 4th at woodbine. 

A mile in a claimer seems about right for her if she gets the right trip. Gunning at the leader like she did last time isn't that trip. The question of how tired she may be getting is an issue, but I'm expecting odds here and that mitigates the risk she is raced out. I like that she ran hard last time, stayed running well right to the wire, and she is good at this distance. She is a contender for the win, and a decent play against a jumper horse as one of a few who could pick up pieces. She loses the top rider from last time to DRINKS ON ME.


1 CASUAL CARO

 is the 8-1 4th ml choice, a brown filly by UNITED STATES, who I have never heard of. I will look him up closer to post time. She comes out of the same race as the ml fave and 3rd choices, and had dead aim on a tired 

SAVANNAH ROXANNA but could not go by her. That was start 8 for a filly who started out in maiden claimers, has run only in claimers, and took the lone win there in start 5. She has been a bit player in 3 tries since that one, but a decent bit player type who we are looking for if the premise is to go against the top 2 choices. She has a 2nd and 3rd at this distance in those 3 starts, and ran on only 8 days rest last time, but gets the full 3 weeks here. She is playable as an option. Note her 2 worst efforts were on turf and she doesn't race on that here. Otherwise, when in for the right price and distance, and raced properly, she competes and contends, but might take time to get another win.


6 MISS LOTUS FLOWER,

 is a 3yo filly by Haynesfield. She won the maiden claimer on October 4th as the 30-1 longest shot on the board , but has been in deep since. To date, that is her only on the board finish in 7 starts. They have tried distances, different surfaces, and she even tried better horses. Nothing helped.  She raced this bunch on December 14th and was a well whipped 5th as the 40-1 longest shot on the board. She is hard to like in this spot. Nevertheless, I've learned not to discount this type when I don't like the faves a lot, so, I take a closer 2nd look at how she ran. She broke slowly, was well back last, in a gapped out field, never made any move, looked to have no run, and couldn't even pass a very spent front end horse who was walking home. She looks like a 5 claimer at Mountaineer, and I have to pass on her. She has limited ability and doesn't look to be improving. She is 12-1 ml, I'd expect to see 50-1 plus.


2 SHEZ A GREAT ONE 

is a 15-1 outsider with the same trainer as MISS LOTUS FLOWER. I guess the theory is two longshots with some chance to get some money somehow. This type of trainer just runs them and hopes the heavens are on his side that day. She makes her 3rd lifetime start, and her first was a maiden claimer at a mile on the turf, which she won. She moved up the ladder last time, and shortened slightly to 7.5 furlongs, but she stayed on turf and was 8th of 11 at 35-1. It was a bigger, and tougher field, she looked to have some run and try in the stretch. She goes back to a claimer here, switches to dirt, and gets a bit more distance in a shorter field where her stalking style can lay her close to a few who might want to stop in time for her to be viable. In her maiden win, she rocketed out to the lead, cut the entire mile and beat off the fave who challenged her much of the way, and won at 11-1. It was a solid effort. Her sire, TIZ THE ONE, ran only twice in his career, winning both early at 3, both at Gulfstream for trainer Chad Brown. He was a 375k yearling. This filly has some potential at this level and only 2 starts in.


5 BEAUTIFUL WIFE

 is a 2nd time starter in the US, but ran 4 times at Camarero in Puerto Rico. She won a MSW there and was not placed in a stakes race as well. She ran December 9th in a stakes race at 60-1 at this distance. Here she comes back dropped directly into a claimer, although she is still a maiden in this country. She is in a tough spot under those variables. She ran near the back, off the screen most of the way, and was never contentious, although it was her first start here and the track was super sloppy. She has to be considered viable with the unknowns in play. These types are dangerous.


Post script.


I had the two top faves pegged accurately. One was no good at all, while the other was lucky to hold 3rd. They both showed the lameness or soreness I thought I would see, and were grinders whose grinding didn't work with a slightly better class of horses. My viable contender for the win did win, as she did get the trip I thought she needed, while my unknown Puerto Rican horse ran well, and actually had the lead by taking a bold move mid race and finished well. My wild longshot acted up at the gate, and then had to be checked sharply mid race, and she gave up. She is on my radar for a future play, while the others were not good enough or good at all. I had most of it right here, but the odds and math wasn't in my favor, so, I made no play. Discipline is important, and I didn't get the value I was looking for. Such is life. 

----------------------------------------------------------------

Gulfstream race 9 is my next race to play if...the fave races. At a 4-5 ml, its a certain bridgejump horse if it races. I will handicap it now, but not do the rest of the field until I see the changes and know this one is going to dance the dance. Without her, its a no play race, as the rest don't stand out in any way. Nevertheless, if she is 4-5 ml with these, she is short odds whenever she races next, so I have her scoped out whenever that is. Time still well spent and invested.


4 FLY SO HIGH

 is a bay 3yo filly by Malibu Moon, who her trainer Shug McGaughey is very familiar with, as he trained ORB, who is by that sire, and I'm sure others by him as well. She is owned by The Phipps Stable, who are his main clients and high end owners to say the least. She ships in from New York, where she ran 3rd at Aquaduct in her first lifetime start, then won a MSW at Belmont at today's distance on November 16th. In that race, she broke from the inside, ran up and took the lead before the quarter, was on an easy lead with no challengers, opened up at will on the turn, then coasted well ahead, widening out all the way to gap the entire field, while coasting. On paper and just on how she ran, she looks very tough for the bunch she will meet today, which is why she is 4-5 ml. However, that is why you watch the replays. She carries her head funny, and wants to run into the rail very noticably. I need to watch her first start to see if that is just how she runs, or else there is a problem I can take advantage of.

 In that October 9th race, there was a lot of stuff going on. First, she had the outside 12 post, loaded last, then backed out of the gate, went back in without much fuss, but while she did all that, another got ancy, laid down in the gate, got twisted around and then had to be scratched along with another beside her she probably kicked while she was thrashing around. When they all reloaded 5 minutes later, she left out, ran near the back, came along willingly along the outside, ducked between horses and finished a going forward 3rd at 6 furlongs. No surprise they ran her longer her next start and she started better. But, she also showed that tendency to run in, but not as bad as she did in her 2nd start. I see a progression of soreness. That leads me to make her a no play as a jumper play, but I will have to see if she runs and then look at the rest to find the value if it happens to go that way. She will draw a monster jumper if she races, no doubt about it. Probably 1-9 on the win also, and she can be played against in a double if you play that type of play. A quick glance tells me its a deep and talented field, so she can't be ordinary or have an off day and beat this bunch.


Post mortem.


She ran as expected,but her talent was too much for this bunch. The spread I expected for the show pool wasn't even close to being there, so it was a no play for me. I have followed Gulfstream in the past, and there were many jumpers, but today, none. Even on horses that normally justify that. I have to be more careful putting that much time into races that won't be playable in the end. However, I also make other bets, and gaining info on any types like this is worthwhile because I do that. I can see her flaws, and I will get the money payout for my time today in her next few starts. She was just too much for this bunch as it turns out. 


----------------------------------

I had scoped out a whole bunch of races at Freehold which I thought I could get 4 or 5 plays out of, but I didn't do more than list those races. When I got started today, Freehold, along with many other tracks where I had a play or two was cancelled because of cold weather. So, my day was basically done with Gulfstream, which meant no plays period.


I did completely handicap race 1 at Monticello the night before, as I thought that was very playable, but they also cancelled. I had races 8 and 9 listed as playable races there, but didn't do any work and that paid off as there was no races to play. Below is my work on Race 1 that I can use when they recard those horses. I make some handicapping points within these comments, if you are interested in that.  


1 IDEAL CANDIDATE is an old campaigner at age 12. That is not uncommon, and they do very well at places like Monticello, where there are many just like them, the speeds are not as fast as they were once used to, and they can get softer trips to favor them against mostly weaker and inferior or even washed up horses who are being raced for the smallest purse cheques by others who don't even have to or attempt to make a living racing horses. In that vein, the guys who do race these types race them hard and often and make a good buck off them while they last.


One thing you notice about Monticello in particular is that the ml is not well done. Almost all faves are 5-2, some go off 1-9, some don't even go off as the favorite. So, you have to start with it, but quickly look at the horses pp's and connections to see if you think the bettors will hammer it or ignore it. That is strictly based on experience in watching it for long enough. IDEAL CANDIDATE has a high profile and successful trainer, he won his last start--at this level, draws the rail, and has won 5 of his last 6--all at this level, with the only other being from post 7, where he still got 3rd. He will draw a jumper of some kind. Because of the nature of the fields at Monticello, and how the track plays, its not as easy to beat a jumper horse, so you have to find significant flaws to go against. That is where the work begins here.


There wasnt much to see in his last start. He used rail control to leave out, put the chalk in his pocket, got a breather 2nd quarter, sped up the 3rd  quarter and beat off the fave who pulled the pocket very early, in spite of a passing lane, then accelerated away for a very easy win. He looks cinchy today at probably 3-5.

He appears still very sound, and willing. He likes control, and from a good post can leave and get it. The only thing that could get him beat is someone running at him the entire way and taking away his best friend, which is a 2nd quarter breather. So, the task is to look at the rest of the field and see if that is likely, and then make a call. He raced 42 times last year and won 15 of them. He isnt easy to beat.


2 Wink and Nod barely earns his way at this point. He draws well and will be looking to tuck and get a soft trip for a piece of the pie at the end. That is what is to be expected of him.


3 Brett Mcfavrelous is the wildcard in this bunch. You just never know with Staulbaum. He is very aggressive at times, and would park out his grandmother if that meant he would win the race. This horse shipped to Monticello last time, as Buffalo is closed for a while, and its a place Staulbaum knows well, as he used to race here steady for years. He dropped class last time, but while he had the rail, he was outleft, then stayed in 3rd, and backed up the entire way. So, he drops to the bottom claimer here. He is hard to like, but I could see Staulbaum blasting him out and trying to get the lead and hoping for a retake by the fave so he can sit a 2 hole. If that happens, and he gets hung, it could be a rodeo.


4 Oncoming Storm has lousy form and has had not done well at Monticello overall anyway. His last 3 have been bad, and he takes a further drop in class here. He had post 7 last time, went to the back, did nothing, and closed with the pack but passed none of them. He is hard to like or think he will be any factor in the pace. He has missed the ticket in his last 10 starts.


5 Lynyrd is by a sire I hate, and most of them are non triers and bad finishers. He fits that profile to a T. He has the longest ml odds, and for good reason. He had a bad post last time, went to the back and did zero to make you think he can do much better here. He is in deep to make the ticket or have any effect on this field.


6 Celtic Art comes off two wins but moves up. Moves up is relative. he isn't meeting Cam fella here. Post will hurt, but good form goes a long way when you meet many with bad form. Last time, he left well from the inside, stacked up the only other contenders, controlled the race and outfinished the pocket sitter. That might have worked here too, if he could get that type of trip. He wont. Two starts back, he blasted out from the 6 hole, cut very hot fractions and took them all the way as the longest shot on the board, but he bottomed out the field and came home in 32. If he blasts here, and doesn't get the lead or a hole, and pushed the pace with his overall good speed, he could set it up for others and wipe out the favorite with him. That is the key to the race.


7 Terrorize the Moon has decent form, but draws post 7 in a race with inside speed in front of him and likely a bunch of hangers who will block the road mid race. He can blast, as he did last time from the rail, but he doesn't have a second move. He was 2nd last time, but well back and outstaggered ratty hangers. He is likely to take back and come late. In that scenario, he is viable for the ticket if others battle.


As mentioned above, this race never came to be. So, who knows if I was right on not. But they will meet again, and I have a pretty good read on most of them from doing this. I will make it pay off under the right circumstances.


Knowledge is power. That is always my view.