Hope some of you took the Keeneland analysis-- 8th race. Had it myself, check the RBR tomorrow-- not that tough.
Nice Score.
I will be interested to see the TGs in the RBR.
A neat result. In an 11 horse field, 4 of the runners had never won synthetic.
Three of those four combined for a tri which paid 2K+ ... for 50 cents. And to
be fair, the top 3 only had 7 combined synthetic starts, so it is not like they
had established any disdain for the surface.
I\'ve already overanalyzed a race I didn\'t even bet.
Richie - I , too, am suffering from \"overanalyzing syndrome\"...not sure of a surefire cure, but perhaps a TG refresher audio/video will help. that, and a 15 yr old Macallan on the rocks!
Nice hit TGJB...and thanks again for allowing the RBR to be free and educational.
Your spelling looks about right JB, but you'd have to add 10 or more exclamation points at the end to approximate the volume of the sound I made at Kee yesterday when Thief stole the feature. His win gave Maddyfine a 3rd of 287 finish in yesterday's contest which, in addition to cash, earned her a spot in Kee's end of the season "Tournament of Champions" competition. Coming as it did off her 1st of 300 finish in Sat's nhconline competition, some are saying that she should change her nickname to the circus moniker "bearded lady."
If you recall our conversation at the Spa, you already know the identity of the "other prominent off-shore ADW unrelated to Youbet and IRG" mentioned in Ryan Conley's B-H article about the search warrant the feds served on Youbet. In his Tbred Times article today, Frank Angst confirms what Ryan wrote, namely that what the feds are looking at are the wagering records of a number of customers of IRG, the offshore rebate shop which Youbet owns and operates. The word I'm hearing is that most of the customers in question are more than willing to drop dimes in exchange for deals, as the feds continue their typical march up the food chain. It's impossible to predict how a scandal like this will play out, so the exercise of caution regarding the location of one's betting bankroll might make more than a little sense given the current circumstances.
I\'m more interested in the thought process of whoever provided the analysis.
Start with a horse that was racing for the 7th time in ~13 weeks, coming off an \"X\" in his last, and moving way up in class for a trainer that just doesn\'t win much at Kee. Thoro-Pattern had this one at 66% to run \"off\" or \"X\". His lone start at Keeneland in the spring was unimpressive, so nothing there.
There were more than a few others in here with better looking sheets -- how were acceptable odds of \"5-1 or more\" arrived at for this horse, as indicated in the analysis? This was a horse that I would have dismissed for the win, and only maybe would I have used him underneath.
Sure, he wasn\'t impossible, but it seems like the prospect of getting around the 30-1 ML odds was the only thing that made this one so attractive. If that\'s not it...what am I missing?
Hi Rick B.,
You\'re right, 30-1 morning line made this horse attractive; however, what keyed me to this horse was its pattern. I don\'t look at odds until after I identify the contenders. Five Star Thief was one of two contenders in the race. He has the best number based on recent form. Getting back to the 2.5 in July and then returning to that number quickly made this a new horse in my thinking. The bounce was reasonable; I often play this pattern to bounce back to its previous number, or at least within a point or two. Again, note that I was looking for the horse to win the race, based on recent form. 5-1 worked in an acceptable overlay since I considered 2-1 a fair bet in this case. Other than City Number, the rest of the field looked to me to be too slow, off form, or ready to bounce off tops.
I have bought the analysis before. I\'m not knocking the analysis you give in the race but is it possible to expand on the reason why you like a particular horse in the analysis. It is usually a one liner like \"...should bounce back\", is it possible to write about why he should bounce back or anything more...
Frankly, we\'re constrained by time since we also put this up on our phone line--1-900-656-5454--and if we don\'t synthesize it, the people putting it on the phone will. We\'ll try to write another sentence but the majority of analysis purchasers want the selections, our perceived wisdom, if you will, based on our experience. Often plays are made based on our experience, rightly or wrongly, so it\'s difficult to explain in the limited forum available.
We advocate people learn to use the data and make their own selections. In this way they\'ll be able to make decisions based on their ever increasing experience looking at lines given the particular prevailing conditions.
TGAB wrote,
\"We advocate people learn to use the data and make their own selections. In this way they\'ll be able to make decisions based on their ever increasing experience looking at lines given the particular prevailing conditions.\"
Are you suggesting the people who purchase the selctions are not intelligent enough to read the TGsheets and make the selections themselves?
Or is it perhaps they have confidence when it come to longshots and other plays you (TG) can do it better?
Easy answer. The horse fit with the 2\'s, no other reason. If he wins their a genious, if not just another analysis.
Silver Charm I\'m not suggesting or implying anything.
I don\'t know people\'s motivations. I do know that some people don\'t want to read the data. They want us to make selections for them. (They\'ve told me.) So we do. We like to think we\'re pretty good, and we give an earnest effort.
What I\'m also saying is that we make the selections the night before based on the morning lines. Conditions can change--scratches, weather, odds. People that buy the data can adapt to these changes and make more informed, BETTER, decisions than we can.
And even if conditions don\'t change substantively, frankly, we get some right and more wrong. Customers out there, such as you, may have a better feel for a horse, line, trainer, etc. based on your experience reading the TG data.
And you may also have a different threshold as to what constitutes value and a legitimate bet.
This isn\'t rocket science but it does require work and study.
Bordercollie is partly right. The horse fit and the odds were generous. But Nick also thought, based on his experience, the horse had a good shot of rebounding. Now maybe he could have wrote more, but he\'s looking at a lot of races and often his and my decisions come down to experience and a feel for what works and what doesn\'t.
This was obviously a terrific selection because except for the hard campaign this horse fit.
Would it be possible to identify the Analysis selector before purchase?
I don\'t buy analysis often but I have for contests to try to shortcut 5/6 tracks and can say that some have been really well done; making you rethink or even select the Thoro odds horse.
Other times it seems that the selections are made in the taxi on the way to work. Play at 5/2 or more and the horse goes off 6/5. Or a hopeless 1 figure horse play 8-1 rounding to form.
And in my limited analysis purchase experiences it seems that there are 4/5 \"live\" plays or the selections are a washout. So I don\'t buy unless in a contest.
If I could identify someone who finds horses similar to my selection style it could mean more business from customers who don\'t always have time to review all the graphs.
Lcfjr3
I couldn\'t even tell you the
I, Alan, do NYRA tracks about 90% of the time. Nick does the other tracks--Kee, Sa and Haw now. Jerry does big days.
I think I can speak for Nick--we make selections on virtually every race. In the past we were chided often for passing races which we found either too confounding or offered no legitimately good bets. So we changed and offered selections on virtually all races. But the fact that we make selections for all doesn\'t mean the problems we found don\'t exist. They do and as a matter of course we eschew favorites. So yeah, there are going to be some selections which are stabs. We go by the morning line and that can be wrong in which case maybe the selection odds are way off.
By the way, no one number horse is hopeless. That is by far the most volatile condition a handicapper faces. There\'s no established form.
Thanks for the feedback TGAB