A few thoughts on Santa Anita today.
R1 #2 FALLOUT 6/1- This filly had every excuse in her debut at 15/1. She was sandwiched between two horses when the gates opened and then dueled between horses through the far turn and then with the heavy chalk for the length of the long Los Al stretch. After running a number in the debut that is in the ballpark for this level, she is now protected in start number two and over half of Hoffman's second time starters improve off their first out figs.
R3 #6 AWESOME HEIGHTS 20/1- I got tipped off that this horse was a runner prior to his debut routing on turf and after betting a few bucks across, I got excited when he made a nice middle move and made up a little ground in the stretch to finish 5th. I added him to my stable mail was shocked when I saw him entered in this one turn dirt affair. Now this race appears loaded on paper however based on the clocker reports I have read, none of these are the second coming. Also, although this one was touted to prior to the debut his works have been significantly better since he got the start under his belt. Drysdale hits at close to 30% with second time starters. Bombs away.
R5 #10 MOON KITTY 4/1- I like the experienced ones best in this spot, for me the race goes through 8,9 or this filly. Although the comparison is not apples to apples, based on differences in the surfaces and distances of their debuts, I think she showed a great deal more ability finishing 6th following a wide and troubled trip sprinting on turf at Del Mar as the favorite. Based on Peter Miller's numbers with second time starters and the fact that all of this gal's siblings showed their best on dirt, I think she moves way up in this one and unless one of the firsters is a monster, it should be more than enough.
R6 #10 TOUGH SUNDAY 20/1- This is a bit of a reach however this horse definitely has some class based on pedigree and looking at his running lines he is coming out of good races in which the other horses are coming back and winning races. He has never raced on turf/hill however he is very fast, possibly even the fastest horse in the race and speed is deadly on the hill. He just may be able to clear from that outside post.
Will Navarro\'s magic powers be as effective at SA as they are in Florida and New Jersey??? He\'s only run 1 (without hitting the board) at SA according to T-G. Always the conundrum of handicapper versus super trainer at new venue--will they fall down (often) or run off the screen (sometimes)??? He\'s only winning at 16% last 90 days as well. I haven\'t been following Gulfstream lately--has he woken up recently??? These guys drive me nuts. Any ideas???
His entry in the 4th @ GP is now 1/2 and as the TG Analysis points out could bounce off the board.
Probably no bridge jumpers, probably wins for fun. Suppose one must expect his entries to run (not necessarily jump up) and let the price be your guide.
Doink!
3/5 Navarro favorite ran out but unexpected long shots ran in.
Nice pick in Fallout!
SA analysis is alive to # 4. $!2 ticket pays $1500 +. @
Paid a lot more than that. $750 for .50 or $3,000 for $2. If the Analysis had this that was a nice ticket.
Seems like over the past few years, California pick 4s, pick 5s and pick 6s seem to pay very small when a solid favorite wins the last leg, conversely if you beat the favorite in the last leg, the price goes up exponentially. I don\'t know why there is such a huge difference out there as opposed to other tracks, huge betters? big tickets??? It\'s almost not worth playing if you love the favorite in the last leg. Great picks for the analysis for sure but that\'s a horrible pay out unless you hammered it. And was the rail slowish yesterday??? Seemed like many horses that normally would not have lost at SA got run down late on the rail. How in the hell can the rail be dead on the first day of racing?? And why do they take twenty minutes for a close photo finish at So Cal tracks when every other track in the world takes like 30 seconds no matter how close. See how fast they have a photo in Australia or Hong Kong. Ridiculous nonsense from a place they should have the best cameras on planet earth. Just stupid questions from a stupid gambler.
Dana666 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seems like over the past few years, California
> pick 4s, pick 5s and pick 6s seem to pay very
> small when a solid favorite wins the last leg,
> conversely if you beat the favorite in the last
> leg, the price goes up exponentially. I don\'t know
> why there is such a huge difference out there as
> opposed to other tracks, huge betters? big
> tickets??? It\'s almost not worth playing if you
> love the favorite in the last leg. Great picks for
> the analysis for sure but that\'s a horrible pay
> out unless you hammered it. And was the rail
> slowish yesterday??? Seemed like many horses that
> normally would not have lost at SA got run down
> late on the rail. How in the hell can the rail be
> dead on the first day of racing?? And why do they
> take twenty minutes for a close photo finish at So
> Cal tracks when every other track in the world
> takes like 30 seconds no matter how close. See how
> fast they have a photo in Australia or Hong Kong.
> Ridiculous nonsense from a place they should have
> the best cameras on planet earth. Just stupid
> questions from a stupid gambler.
Congrats to the analysis on nailing this with a small ticket.
As to the payout, it paid more than the parlay would have paid.
I have had problems in California (documented on this board), where the Pick 4 paid a fraction of the parlay. Trust me, yesterday\'s payout was not \"horrible\" if you compare with others -- there are plenty of times it pays less than the parlay and sometimes a lot less.
It paid exactly that. $1 ticket analysis suggested (3x2x3x1) cost $12 and paid $1500+.
It just seems like So Cal is the worst in the country. Even Golden Gate seems always to pay more. It\'s weird to me when the have the largest pools by far. Yesterday it was like 1.7 million or something. The only explanation I can come up with is the thing about favorites in the last leg for some reason really dragging down the payments. Why would a last leg favorite have more of an impact than a first leg favorite? I\'ve seen this in NY too, but overall NY prices seem decent. I\'m thinking if I dislike a favorite in the last leg, jump in or, otherwise, like yesterday, when the favorite looked very solid, maybe pass.
Should\'ve been 3x2x2x1 after deleting one from the 8th. Forgot to correct the notation. That\'s $12 for $1500.
Ok. You had a typo. The $12 ticket for a $1 paid $1,500. I\'m not here to argue. These were not impossible selections as a matter of fact some were nearly obvious on the numbers....
Thanks Alan, after I was told I was incorrect I forgot to adjust for the scratch. The analysis called for an $18 ticket which cost $12 due to a scratch. I made no typo, as you said the $12 ticket paid $1500.
My bad, analysis called for $18 ticket when it was actually a $12 ticket. I\'d like to add I think it was a remarkable selection and certainly not nearly obvious. 4 races, 38 horses paid 15.80, 27.00, 9.40, and 5.80. My compliments.
California, is a competent handicappers dream. Extremely thin condition book, a plethora of data, (much of it free), huge pools, track bias mostly eliminated because of the weather, turf course configuration that often eliminates/flatters certain types and very talented conditioners, riders and of course owners.
Singling the back end of a sequence is how most professional\'s play. Get on the dance floor and then hedge if warranted.
As for the late pick four, each winner\'s workouts were off the page. \"Bambino\" and \"biscuits\" were exceptional and video readily available without cost. The former looped around a pair of workmates with the boy\'s feet in the dash and Biscuit under stewie was home in ten and change under wraps. Hollendorfers filly had the best work of her life and Phil\'s colt\'s work had the stable standing in line betting, even at 8-5. bbb
Is there a link to watch video workouts?
Tis the season.,.,..
Would love to meet those \"professionals\" that just single the last leg of a pick-4 regardless of their opinion.
Sometimes the things that come out of you BBB....
Happy New Year. Wishing you less assertions in 2017, especially nonsensical ones...
Jim
Silver,
I guess this is your last post. That \"nearly obvious\" pick-4 that paid 125-1 likely made you enough money to retire, considering how obvious it was.
I didn\'t have it. Instead, will pass on my kudos to TGAB or whoever did the handicapping on that analysis. 125-1 is helluva play.
Best,
Jim