Has the choice for ROTW been determined yet?
Thanks.
Saturday race 8 at Santa Anita, the San Fernando BC. It\'ll be up shortly.
Not a very interesting betting race, but should be somewhat interesting in terms of the debate regarding what numbers are given to Californians. Greeley\'s Galaxy and Unbridled Energy should dominate this race. However, all their very good numbers were earned outside of California. The rest of the field should not get close to them (although Canteen may benefit from lone speed on the rail trip). If California numbers are faulty (in other words, they should be stronger), then the race is much closer. Looks like a good race to watch and see if any debate is required afterwards.
any time a horse like unbridled energy comes off a lay,running a sprint 4 wide gets a no factor in the running line w/new trainer AND is rewarded w/a # that is competitive but not that far off his previous top which occured in his 3rd/lifetime before the first day of spring in his 3 yr old campaign.... OK I\'ll cut the crap....if I could realistically get 7/2...I\'d take it and run...on a FAST track
Why would anyone not bet is race? You\'ve got a false favorite and a live longshot for 2nd or 3rd (Swing Your Partner). I think Unbridled Energy will be 9/2 or better. Racing is alot like sex....some watch, some prefer to play.
SoCal-- I\'m curious. Do you think that Unbridled Energy\'s effort in the Malibu was as good as his one splitting Don\'t Get Mad and Real Dandy in the Northern Dancer? I gave him 3 points worse in Cal-- you think it should be better, or as good?
Attila\'s Storm ran right back to his last 2 NY figures in the Malibu, by the way.
In the case of GG, he has one big number outside Cal, and a couple much worse.
But it would be good to track a lot of these. If anyone wants to make a list of all the horses from elsewhere that have run (or do run) at SA this meet, we\'ll post them all. To be fair, for those shipping from cold weather, we should look at the first two numbers.
Nice call Jerry.
TGJB
First, I want to say good job. I think that Unbridled Energy was an excellent play, and your sheets pointed him out ahead of time as one of only two possible winners. With the $9.60 payoff, I think he represented excellent value. When I said I thought the race was not bettable, I was revealing my prejudice against short fields. Usually the mutuel take is spread out over fewer combinations and results in a stiffer burden in short fields, so I generally avoid them.
In my original message, I meant that I find a lot of times with your sheets (and with good results, I might add) I am often betting against California horses when they ship elsewhere and am often betting on shippers into Southern California when I am betting there. The reason for this seems to be (and I apologize for being vague here) that horses seem to get numbers worse than you would expect in the races run in California by looking at them on the racing form. I realize how awful that sounds, but let me try to explain it a different way.
You ask a specific question comparing two of UE\'s races. I think the number you gave UE in the Malibu was right on, but irrelevant to the point I am trying to make. Since UE was coming off a layoff in the Malibu, I was willing to forgive it. GG did run some bad races elsewhere as you point out, but his two best races were outside California. When I analyze a race, I am looking at patterns and a horse\'s overall career to determine what number the horse will run today. In a graded stakes race for very young 4 yos, you expect them to be getting close to their tops or better (unless there is an extenuating circumstance). When I did that analysis, what impressed me in this race was that the horses with the two fastest tops ran those numbers outside California. No horse in the entire race every broke a \'4\' running in California. Look at the sheets...tons of numbers run in California winning good purses, but not one quicker than a \'4\'. Then look to see if any of the horses in the race have broken through 4. GG did it twice -- in Illinois and Kentucky. UE did it twice...in Florida and Kentucky. Sort it Out did it twice ......in New York and Kentucky. Now this race may not be the best example since those numbers run outside of California were largely run in open or graded stakes company whereas the California numbers were largely run in allowance races or restricted stakes. However, a lot of times with the speed figures we are trying to bet allowance horses running against stakes horses so that we can take money from class handicappers.
In the end, I am not complaining about anything. I just note that this is something that people discuss on the board from time to time, and I thought this race was a good illustration of the principle people have discussed. I am very pleased with the numbers. I think that the money bet on Canteen and Distorted was based on peoples\' perception of the overall quality of California racing. From my read of your sheets, the quality of California racing is inferior to conventional wisdom. It is things like that which give you the edge...as long as it is correct (like it was today).
If people are going to follow up on this issue, another worthwhile race to look at is the sprint stakes that opened up the Breeders Cup card at Belmont in 2005. I know that I threw out a Mullins\'s horse (Squire something or other) and Ghostofachance (or something like that) both because the California numbers for them looked awful (who remembers a previous rendition of the Grade 1 Ancient Title providing its competitors such slow numbers?). Both of those horses ended up exceeding what I expected of them that day.
I really do not have an agenda or an axe to grind here. I am very pleased with the product and not looking for anything different. As I said before, I am just highlighting some examples that go with discussion that has been conducted on this board previously.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Then again, the California horses ran very well didn\'t they? Canteen was clearly best. Maybe a California 5 did take it, though agreed it was a watcher. Would they finish as they did if they run it again in 3 weeks?
Brother Derek ran a good race too.
He didnt face much but Lawyer Ron was probably the day\'s most interesting horse.
SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TGJB
>
> First, I want to say good job. I think that
> Unbridled Energy was an excellent play, and your
> sheets pointed him out ahead of time as one of
> only two possible winners. With the $9.60 payoff,
> I think he represented excellent value. When I
> said I thought the race was not bettable, I was
> revealing my prejudice against short fields.
> Usually the mutuel take is spread out over fewer
> combinations and results in a stiffer burden in
> short fields, so I generally avoid them.
>
> In my original message, I meant that I find a lot
> of times with your sheets (and with good results,
> I might add) I am often betting against California
> horses when they ship elsewhere and am often
> betting on shippers into Southern California when
> I am betting there. The reason for this seems to
> be (and I apologize for being vague here) that
> horses seem to get numbers worse than you would
> expect in the races run in California by looking
> at them on the racing form. I realize how awful
> that sounds, but let me try to explain it a
> different way.
>
> You ask a specific question comparing two of UE\'s
> races. I think the number you gave UE in the
> Malibu was right on, but irrelevant to the point I
> am trying to make. Since UE was coming off a
> layoff in the Malibu, I was willing to forgive it.
> GG did run some bad races elsewhere as you point
> out, but his two best races were outside
> California. When I analyze a race, I am looking
> at patterns and a horse\'s overall career to
> determine what number the horse will run today. In
> a graded stakes race for very young 4 yos, you
> expect them to be getting close to their tops or
> better (unless there is an extenuating
> circumstance). When I did that analysis, what
> impressed me in this race was that the horses with
> the two fastest tops ran those numbers outside
> California. No horse in the entire race every
> broke a \'4\' running in California. Look at the
> sheets...tons of numbers run in California winning
> good purses, but not one quicker than a \'4\'. Then
> look to see if any of the horses in the race have
> broken through 4. GG did it twice -- in Illinois
> and Kentucky. UE did it twice...in Florida and
> Kentucky. Sort it Out did it twice ......in New
> York and Kentucky. Now this race may not be the
> best example since those numbers run outside of
> California were largely run in open or graded
> stakes company whereas the California numbers were
> largely run in allowance races or restricted
> stakes. However, a lot of times with the speed
> figures we are trying to bet allowance horses
> running against stakes horses so that we can take
> money from class handicappers.
>
> In the end, I am not complaining about anything.
> I just note that this is something that people
> discuss on the board from time to time, and I
> thought this race was a good illustration of the
> principle people have discussed. I am very
> pleased with the numbers. I think that the money
> bet on Canteen and Distorted was based on peoples\'
> perception of the overall quality of California
> racing. From my read of your sheets, the quality
> of California racing is inferior to conventional
> wisdom. It is things like that which give you the
> edge...as long as it is correct (like it was
> today).
>
> If people are going to follow up on this issue,
> another worthwhile race to look at is the sprint
> stakes that opened up the Breeders Cup card at
> Belmont in 2005. I know that I threw out a
> Mullins\'s horse (Squire something or other) and
> Ghostofachance (or something like that) both
> because the California numbers for them looked
> awful (who remembers a previous rendition of the
> Grade 1 Ancient Title providing its competitors
> such slow numbers?). Both of those horses ended
> up exceeding what I expected of them that day.
>
> I really do not have an agenda or an axe to grind
> here. I am very pleased with the product and not
> looking for anything different. As I said before,
> I am just highlighting some examples that go with
> discussion that has been conducted on this board
> previously.
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.
Got a call from Brooklyn Steve around 2 in the afternoon telling me the 11 in the 6th at Gulf was a go. Wasn\'t playing today but had my weekly Sat DRF in hand with 2 minutes to post when I noticed he was 20-1. Unfortunately there was no phone in the other hand or motivation to go find it. Horse romps
Read the race of the week and see where TG like Unbridled Energy..........after the race.
Kudos to those who scored today......
I didn\'t see the race yet but according to official chart Canteen saved ground most of the way until being steadied and coming wide to close. While UE was 2W until spliting horses 3W to win the race. How bad was Canteen stopped?
Tom
Chuckles_the_Clown2 wrote
>
>Then again, the California horses ran very >well didn\'t they? Canteen was clearly best. Maybe a California 5 did take it, though agreed it was a watcher. Would they finish as they did if they run it again in 3 weeks?
Brother Derek ran a good race too.
He didnt face much but Lawyer Ron was probably the day\'s most interesting horse.
Well done on the ROTW ! I\'d be curious to see what the winner ran ...
Canteen was checked pretty good and I was surprised he came back again so strong. Then again, it helped that the horses he ran down or were tiring from the fast pace that he layed off of.
A more subtle factor was that after being checked he swung out quickly and came out into Swing Your Partner and Distorted who then seemed to lose their momentum in their late moves, esp SYP. They might have done better as well.
Lawyer Ron really did look good in the Risen Star.
Bob
This conversation about the CA figures is missing the point of the race.
You couldn\'t tell a thing about the CA figures based on the result of yesterday\'s race.
The Malibu Stakes was contested on one of the most speed favoring racetracks you will ever find. Horses like Greeley\'s Galaxy and Unbridled Energy had no chance that day. The issue was how close to their best form they might be and had they made any developmental progress from their early 3YO form to now. You couldn\'t tell a thing about that from the Malibu because of the bias and layoffs.
With any of the typical development it was pretty obvious that fairly solid 3YO stakes horses like UE and GG would be far past the limited allowance runners they were facing yesterday using anybody\'s figures or no figures at all.
The result didn\'t tell us a thing about the numbers. If anything, the fact that they didn\'t dominate the field given some of the trips tells us the CA horses are not all that bad or that UE and GG are not all that good yet.
The prices in the race reflected the uncertainty about their condition, not any doubts about speed figures or who would be best if these lightly race 3YOs showed up in top shape.
Could the Palos Verdes over this weekend at Santa Anita be another example? With Distinction and Atilla\'s Storm appear to be better horses earning the best figures outside of California (only negative figures in the race) and then losing to two California horses who ran inferior figures in California (the Jet West and Major Success). Again, I could be wrong here, but just highlighting another example for discussion. I suspect that the Sunshine Millions will give us a lot of examples to look at as well.
So Cal,
The Breeders Cup results and Borrego\'s Cal figs are already being watched by Jerry with a view of \"confirming\" TG Cal figs. There has been no update to my knowledge.
You can\'t really go by With Distinction since he just went horibly off form in the Palos Verdes. I wasn\'t so much surprised by Major Success\'s win over Attila\'s Storm, but by the fact that he did it going 3 wide while AS got the rail trip. I didn\'t see the rest of the days races - did anyone detect a possible dead rail bias?
Bob
First of all, Attila\'s Storm broke a leg in the race. Second of all, there already have been several examples of shippers in to California running big-- the $48 horse in the grass sprint in the contest was the fastest horse, based on numbers from LRL, etc., and the $%*# Biancone horse last week that lost the photo at 14-1 in the race before Unbridled Energy won was another. That one cost me a VERY big pick 3. And keep in mind, these were horses that had shipped from cold to warm, and didn\'t have to run the first time.
Yes, the Millions will probably be a good test, as long as the horses have been stabled in warm weather. This discussion came up last year, and if you do a search you can see how the horses (especially Hot Storm) ran in last year\'s edition.
That answers my question of why Attila\'s Storm got beat. With With Distinction going off form, that left Major Success and Jet West as the top 2 and that\'s how they finished. Looks like the figures held up for the horses that didn\'t get hurt.
Bob