Easy Goer - VERY tough, competitive race. You got Baffert sitting pretty with the fastest horse by 2 points, and several with very sharp patterns from Pletcher (2), Brown, Asmussen, and Tagg. Casse has an interesting 2nd time starter that\'s been training lights out. The only one that you might get a good price on that might be worth a key in the tris and supers is Tagg\'s Tale of Silence (15-1 ML). Full brother to Tale of Ekati, only four pts developed since his 2yo top, and gets that good spacing into this one after pairing up his top six weeks ago. Just needs about 2-3 pt move to put him in contention to win here.
Brooklyn - If the morning line doesn\'t change, I\'ll take Irad and Tu Brutus at 2-1 over Send It In any day. There\'s really not much else to love in this race unless you\'re a Governor Malibu fan, I\'m not sure that quick-turn back move is the best for him here. War Story has spit the bit anytime he\'s been asked to go further than 9f. The Argentinian-bred Idolo Porteno seems interesting for a clunk-up in the exotics, maybe even 2nd if Send It In reacts to that last effort.
Acorn - From what I hear Abel Tasman has looked even better since her Oaks win, and the pattern is ripe for a move forward here, a major contender but a cheap price. The one with some value to look at is Benner Island (6-1). Rebounded nicely in her last and is just 2 points improved from 2yo, should have a big one in her this summer, could be today. Salty is another one that could move forward here, if she drifts up to that 6-1 range, she\'s definitely worth a look. I\'ll let Sweet Loretta beat me at 5/2.
Ogden Phipps - Songbird looks like a beast in here and is training lights out, but if you can buy the figure from Bar Of Gold last October, you can definitely make a case for her. Third off the layoff is Kimmel\'s best move and he\'s been firing a bunch of tops/pairs lately. Gold should fire a good one today. Highway Star looks ripe for a move forward as well if you are looking for another one underneath.
Jaipur - Pure Sensation stands out for me here. Fastest figs and is coming in off the dead turf rail on Derby day to help give him a little price, should get rail trip here and the rail was plenty firm yesterday. Straight win bets for me at 5/2 or better. Hogy is a good one on the outside, but will really struggle for a fair trip here. Holding Gold is one I really like that I think is going to be good in the future and could be very competitive here.
Woody Stephens - The obvious TG overlay here is Gold For The King. If you\'re buying TG sheets, you\'re kind of silly if you don\'t use this horse. That\'s not to say he\'s the only contender here, he\'s not. But at 15-1 ML, he\'s a must use. Blessed Hero also has a big fig at a big price, but he\'s much more of a bounce candidate with the 5 pt move and shorter rest. Wild Shot is interesting for sure, but he might want that extra furlong and a 4-1 ML is pretty weak. Baffert has another one good one that\'s training well, but I think I prefer Brown\'s Long Haul Bay over that one. Lots of rest coming in and has been working awesomely. Giuseppe The Great could be another price horse worth using as well. Potential to make a nice score in this race if it all comes together.
Just A Game - So Chad Brown puts Javy on Antonoe and not Roca Rojo? Is it only because he could make the weight? Well Antonoe\'s last is definitely better than the figures that have been given. I have her as an easy 4 in that one (well back of a slow pace and murdered them). She\'s been training superb and you cannot just toss this one out I think. She\'s definitely more appealing to me than some of the others that have been running 3-4s. I almost would be shocked if we didn\'t get a Chad Brown exacta here.
Met Mile - Spread race. There\'s easily 8 horses that wouldn\'t surprise me if they won. Rally Cry, Denman\'s Call, Sharp Azteca, Economic Model, Tom\'s Ready, Mor Spirit, Tommy Macho, Awesome Slew. If you had to pin me down, I\'ll say most likely winner is Sharp Azteca. My value plays are Tom\'s Ready, who is ready to move into negative territory, and Denman\'s Call. O\'Neill doesn\'t ship unless he has the goods and this one is training well.
Woodford Reserve - Always a tough race, but I actually have a strong opinion in this one for a change. I don\'t think Time Test got the best of setups in his US debut and should run even better today. Big win bet for me if he goes off near 5-1.
Belmont - Tapwrit paired his top (with trouble) in the Derby, and Pletcher runs well in this race. A horse that I\'ll be using that hasn\'t been mentioned much: Meantime. I adjusted his last race forward to 3, based on that wicked pace he set over the slop in the Peter Pan. I love the fact that Mike Smith is getting on this one and think he could really move him up at 10f. Those are my two keys. Irish War Cry is eligible to come back to his figure here, but at 4-1 no thanks for me. Don\'t understand Motion\'s love for Rajiv Maragh, I don\'t trust him going classic distances at all.
Best Win Bets: Pure Sensation, Time Test
Best Value Bets (assuming ML): Tale of Silence, Benner Island, Bar of Gold, Gold For The King, Antonoe, Tom\'s Ready, Meantime
Good luck.
Sek,
I\'m with you on the last 2 races. Time Test and also Meantime/Tapwrit.
Met Mile a crapshoot. Economic Model is a great price and of course the duo dominating today looks good.
Spread in the Met.
Singled Time Test.
Twisted Tom,Tapwrit,IWC.
Might have to audible with World Approval after looking at these prices.
IWC\'s workmate ....ughhhh.
Can Mike get to the lead and steal this??
Nice call JB.
Wish I could say I had a great day, but Tapwrit winning salvaged a few bucks. I nearly cancelled some Meantime bets after seeing how bad he looked in the post parade, but couldn\'t pull the trigger. Oh well.
Great work on the analysis but I knew I should have kept Patch in my tri and super bets.
Sek I\'m not having a good one either. Hit that 9 horse at Santa Anita and the Belmont exacta after reading the analysis again. Still digging out of a hole.
Lets see if this 1 horse at SA can get me out. Last number fastest in the race.
Great strategy by Brian Lynch. Choke down a speed horse until he throws in the towel.
A mile and a half is a place where you actually need to be a trainer and where the other things don\'t quite get you by.
Good Luck,
Joe B
For those that saw it should the 2 horse have been taken down??
Didn\'t see Patch doing any better than 4th...feels like probably how Gormley did seeing the one-eyed wonder roll by!
Wondering if he was in the 2 and Tapwrit was in the 12 what may have been.
Irish War Cry had race handed to him when Meantime didn\'t go, and Epicharis and CE scratched .....and said no thanks, I\'m a 1 1/8th horse.
Good Luck,
Joe B
Polish Numbers on the bottom doesn\'t exactly scream 12 furlongs but IWC did wallop the rest of the field.
TAP at 5 weeks, another impressive Belmont, another notch on the belt. His were about the only two still trying at the end of the main event today.
Overall great card, great day. The \"big names\" showed out start to finish with enough prices mixed in to keep everything moving. This day continues to live up to the hype, as good as it gets really.
The payoffs are a little light.
What do you mean? To much rake overall? Or are you referring solely to the Belmont Stakes? What was short? The multi race plays?
Day started out going Baffert-Brown-TAP in the Easy goer and it still seemed to pay \"ok\" despite of that. You had War Story pay $10, Disco Partner paid $11.60,and the Woodford winner (Ascend given out in TG analysis) brought back $57 and a ~$250 exacta w the 6/5 Fav rounding it out..
The exotics in the Woody Stephens seemed more than straight considering the heavily favored AA romped. Despite Baffert winning 4 races (w 4 favs) and the top two betting choices making up the exacta in the Belmont everything seemed to come back decent?
I didn\'t notice anything that looked egregious? I\'m not great with these things though, I suck at math.
Speaking of payoffs, in the Belmont the exacta of 5-2 over 5-1 was paying $38.20, while the opposite paid $45.20, only seven dollars more. Don\'t see that very often.
(Unless, of course, I\'m completely and totally wrong about those payoffs - always a possibility.)
boardedup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What do you mean? To much rake overall? Or are
> you referring solely to the Belmont Stakes? What
> was short? The multi race plays?
>
> Day started out going Baffert-Brown-TAP in the
> Easy goer and it still seemed to pay \"ok\" despite
> of that. You had War Story pay $10, Disco Partner
> paid $11.60,and the Woodford winner(Ascend given
> out in TG analysis) brought back $57 and a ~$250
> exacta w the 6/5 Fav rounding it out..
> The exotics in the Woody Stephens seemed more
> than straight considering the heavily favored AA
> romped. Despite Baffert winning 4 races (w 4
> favs) and the top two betting choices making up
> the exacta in the Belmont everything seemed to
> come back decent?
>
> I didn\'t notice anything that looked egregious?
> I\'m not great with these things though, I suck at
> math.
Ascend was given out a part of a 4 horse box and the other 3 were the horses to double up on. I wouldn\'t say he was \"given out\" for any win wager, and of the 4 horses listed he was the slowest.
Now, based on the tote if you wanted to bet the longest price you were rewarded.
As Terry Bjork of The Derby List was fond of noting: \"After every race some guy jumps up and says \'The sheets had it!\'\"
And this article explains part of the reason why.
https://www.paulickreport.com/horseplayers-category/thoroughbred-owner-faron-mccubbins-nails-belmont-stakes-challenge/
That\'s fair, the horse was listed below the other 3 in the analysis, I guess it\'s all how you interpret information. Like you said, if a horse is mentioned as playable in tri boxes and you see him at 27-1, it\'s up to your individual handicapping as to whether you take the leap of faith and bet him individually or not.
I can say for me personally I doubt he would have been high on my radar otherwise, but you\'re totally correct, the analysis did not say to bet him to win or across the board or anything like that.
My tickets are basically never a carbon copy of the analysis given though, it helps confirm or dismiss possible plays and more so acts as a starting point for betting a race. I\'d have to think that\'s pretty much par for the course around here though.
boardedup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That\'s fair, the horse was listed below the other
> 3 in the analysis, I guess it\'s all how you
> interpret information. Like you said, if a horse
> is mentioned as playable in tri boxes and you see
> him at 27-1, it\'s up to your individual
> handicapping as to whether you take the leap of
> faith and bet him individually or not.
>
> I can say for me personally I doubt he would have
> been high on my radar otherwise, but you\'re
> totally correct, the analysis did not say to bet
> him to win or across the board or anything like
> that.
>
> My tickets are basically never a carbon copy of
> the analysis given though, it helps confirm or
> dismiss possible plays and more so acts as a
> starting point for betting a race. I\'d have to
> think that\'s pretty much par for the course around
> here though.
If the analysis has 4 horses listed in a box, basically saying none stand out, no problem with someone taking the longest price for a win wager.
Something I like to do regularly honestly. It happens more on big days when so many entered in any given stakes race can win (or appear so before the race). When they\'re \"bunched\" together like this as a default I tend to bet the longest odds to Win or WP, and then mix in the others in exactas.
I\'m not sure if this is the \"best\" way to go about it or not? The other side would say that if you don\'t have a strong enough opinion to distinguish between them, you should pass the race. I look at it exactly opposite, if one\'s roughly just as likely to win as the others under consideration, but at higher odds, I\'m pressing this kind of spot pretty much every time.
What do others think about this in general? Where do you draw the line between \"value\" and \"pissing in the wind?\"
(I have read the section on this site about why you bet a race)
Value has nothing to do with price, only price relative to chances. You can find value in a 1.01 shot. There are people making a living from betting those 1.01 shots on Betfair, in-play betting, but of course they too get burned once in a while.
I think it was in Barry Meadows very mediocre book \"Money Secrets At The Racetrack\" I read a study suggesting something along the lines that the bigger the price, the less value one would get in average, suggesting that the general tendency in the betting public is to underestimate the favorites chances and overestimate the outsiders chances. Or maybe they\'re just greedy, I don\'t know.
This study was pretty old though and I don\'t know if it would hold up anymore, it feels like \"the sharks and syndicates\" are betting these favorites down more aggresively than before. Maybe Mathcapper have something on this?
Point is that there are no such rules and a suggested \"box\" in an analysis doesn\'t say anything about the chances they ascribe and certainly not anything about the \"real chances\" a horse would have to win, finish 2nd, etc. I think it\'s more likely that they \"throw\" a horse like Ascend in there not because they give him as big a chance as the others mentioned, but because they know he\'ll be a price and because they think his chances are better than that price suggest, i.e the \"value\"-concept is already built in to the analysis.
Now from there you could go on to make the point that you think one of the things TG does best is to identify those live longshots, and you could trust them to be able to identify value for you, but you won\'t know until you run a decent study on it and I really, really doub\'t that could beat the takeout. You have to identify the good spots from the bad spots, no matter which way you look at it.
And where\'s the fun in betting on another mans opinion, anyway?
Furious Pete Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think it was in Barry Meadows very mediocre book
> \"Money Secrets At The Racetrack\" I read a study
> suggesting something along the lines that the
> bigger the price, the less value one would get in
> average, suggesting that the general tendency in
> the betting public is to underestimate the
> favorites chances and overestimate the outsiders
> chances. Or maybe they\'re just greedy, I don\'t
> know.
>
> This study was pretty old though and I don\'t know
> if it would hold up anymore, it feels like \"the
> sharks and syndicates\" are betting these favorites
> down more aggresively than before. Maybe
> Mathcapper have something on this?
Pete â€"
The favorite-longshot bias (public tends to underbet favorites and overbet longshots) has been a well-known phenomenon for quite some time, perhaps not so much so in traditional handicapping literature (although I’m sure Barry Meadow was aware of it, whether or not he mentioned it in Money Secrets), but certainly in academia. There are a whole slew of papers on the subject collected in the 1994 anthology, Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets (re-released in 2008 to make It more accessible to laymen after Wall Street hedge funds quants bid the book up to over $1,000 a copy on Amazon). There are close to a dozen great papers on it in Part IV: Efficiency of Win Markets and the Favorite-Longshot Bias:
Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets (2008 Ed.) (https://www.amazon.com/Efficiency-Racetrack-Scientific-Financial-Economics/dp/9812819185)
As far as studies go, Steve Klein did the definitive study on the subject in The Power of Early Speed (2005), which I’ve posted about on a couple of occasions:
Re: Place Betting (https://www.thorograph.com/phorum/read.php?1,99648,99685#msg-99685)
On Line Travers Day Seminar (https://www.thorograph.com/phorum/read.php?1,97334,97368#msg-97368)
As I mentioned in those posts, you’re right, the computer guys have, for some time now, arbed most of that favorite bias away. Not only are favorites now paying less overall, but they’re winning at a higher rate as well.
How they’ve managed to do so is also detailed in the aforementioned EofRBM anthology. Essentially, guys like Bill Benter (see his report entitled, “Computer Based Horse Race Handicapping and Wagering Systemsâ€, p. 183) have written extravagant computer programs that create their own probability lines (fair odds line) that have proven to reliably identify overlays, many of which were found among the top favorites due to the pronounced favorite-longshot bias that had been in existence.
They determine the extent of their overlays (“valueâ€) just as you imply, by comparing their own probability lines (from their fair odds) to the public’s probability lines (tote odds), using the formula for expected value, which I’ve posted about before:
Is Kelly Dead? (https://www.thorograph.com/phorum/read.php?1,82455,82455#msg-82455)
Btw, for those that aren’t familiar with Barry Meadow’s Money Secrets at the Racetrack, the concept of creating a fair odds line to help ascertain one’s perceived value is the main focus of the book, along with tons of charts on the exotics showing the payoff you should expect for any given combination. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion, but for my money, my dogged-eared copy of Money Secrets is one of the most important handicapping books I own, and one of the few that isn’t currently collecting dust. My only gripe is with the title itself, which sounds like something a shylark might have written to hock his latest can’t miss get-rich-quick scheme.
> Now from there you could go on to make the point
> that you think one of the things TG does best is
> to identify those live longshots, and you could
> trust them to be able to identify value for you,
> but you won\'t know until you run a decent study on
> it and I really, really doubt that could beat the
> takeout. You have to identify the good spots from
> the bad spots, no matter which way you look at it.
I\'ll have a lot more to say on this later, not so much on \"live longshots\", but on the concept of identifying value in general (\"good spots from bad spots\"), which is what the TG analyses (and of every handicapper who\'s worth his salt) is all about. I\'m working on just such a study now from the ROTW archives - hope to have something to share sometime before the opening of the spaaaa..
Rocky R
Thank you Rocky, excellent and very informative post as always. I will re-visit those posts of yours and sources mentioned, and I might also give a 2nd look to Barry Meadows book. I think I might\'ve been a bit unfair on him there to call his book \"very mediocre\". There are some interesting parts for sure, all though I remember it now mostly as \"The Definitive Handbook on How To Be a Scrooge\".
Looking forward to read about your study!
Not saying anything smelled bad. Just saying overall, the day was a little boring. Other than the 10th, there weren\'t any obvious overlays. 2-1 shots in 1 & 2. The 3rd wasn\'t an automatic. 2-1 and even if the 4th and 5th. The 6th wasn\'t a big surprise but others in the same race wouldn\'t have been either. 2-1, 3-1 and 5-2 in the next three. The 10th was a moneymaker. Win and exacta both off TG. Wasn\'t about to take the two favs in the Belmont. Not at a mile and half. All in all, it was a tough day to come out ahead. I was glad I played golf.
Can\'t wait to read what you come up with, it is what it\'s all about. Anything to help along the never ending quest for value!