are you happy with the way the format played out, not just for you, but how people play it strategywise...can you tell us your picks and strategy in this format....i was there, was looking for you on the leaderboard after trinnieberg won....anyone else feel free to give their take on this format...
i will not go to this tournament next year because it\'s in la two years in a row...had massive traffic problems getting to and from lax....
the top two finishers finished one-two again...
i went off zagora after a week of having her as my play...that caused a chain reaction where i couldn\'t make any bets on the last two races on friday, that i would have hit....then on saturday, i was out of plays so i couldn\'t bet trinnieberg and mucho......just bad play by me....
I couldn\'t get out of NY, advised Roger Neubauer, we didn\'t do any good. (15th out of 140 early day 2, took shots and tapped, like last year). On my own bets broke even for the 2 days, thanks to the South American and Mike Smith\'s Atigun ride. At least one regular poster here did a WHOLE lot better.
Meanwhile, pretty good story re the contest, which as always I\'ll point out was my idea:
Christian Hellmers, a California guy who used to be Betfair\'s rep in the U.S., is a friend of mine. He uses our data (along with a lot of trip stuff), and finished second last year, leading the whole second day until another guy bet 10k to win on Drosselmeyer.
So this year he hit a $1,000 two horse exacta box on the FM Turf, took the lead, and nursed it through the second day. In the last race he bet 2k to win on Fort Larned. (His girlfriend bet 4k on FL herself, don\'t ask, I have no idea). Only to find out...
THE SAME GUY bet 7k on FL, plus a $300 exacta over MMM.
So there Christian was, rooting his horse home, only to find out he would have been better off losing the photo (170k first prize).
Have not posted here for quite some time, but entered my FIRST contest at the BCBC and came away with complete confirmation that I quit posting on Thorograph for the right reason.
For what it is worth, anyone sitting near me at the contest heard me say on the first day that Baffert would not win a race and Game on Dude would not hit the board in his race. I can get you witnesses.
How could I make these ridiculous(?) claims? Because none of Baffert\'s horses had numbers at the top of their fields and the Dude was not even among the top five horses in the Classic in terms of his numbers.
I\'m not going to say where I got such numbers, because my approach would be so terribly ridiculed here. Let\'s just say that I was able to spot the superfecta in the Classic and keep some balance in the contest standings by hitting the tri. My side betting was pretty good, where I could go horizontal...my natural strength.
A note to someone who posted on the Dude\'s \'bad\' ride, not going to the front. According to the numbers I was viewing, this horse had NO chance of getting to the front against this field. Going into the first turn I said to the guys at my table, \'he\'s done already.\'
And to the first wise guy who asks, if you\'re so smart why didn\'t you win the contest? Answer, I got killed by Europeans over and again. No numbers. Thank you and goodbye.
1 PATRICK MCGOEY $85,341.00 Q
2 CHRISTIAN HELLMERS $74,525.00 Q
3 DUSTIN MOORE $62,400.50 Q
4 DUKE MATTIES $52,000.50
5 WENDY LONG $45,603.50 Q
6 ALICIA TERESI $41,655.00 Q
7 ALAN HOFFMAN $36,170.00 Q
8 TOMMY MASSIS $29,811.00
9 KEVIN MCFARLAND $26,745.50
10 JAMES BENES
RE: For what it is worth, anyone sitting near me at the contest heard me say on the first day that Baffert would not win a race and Game on Dude would not hit the board in his race. I can get you witnesses.
Wow... that\'s a fantastic prediction. Give me your address so I can send you a box of chocolate chip cookies to pass out to your witnesses.
Even if you don\'t post here again hopefully you will read a post I hope to be able to make later today-- have to get permission to pass on what I know. Might cast a somewhat different light on things.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even if you don\'t post here again hopefully you
> will read a post I hope to be able to make later
> today-- have to get permission to pass on what I
> know. Might cast a somewhat different light on
> things.
You have my permission. Can\'t wait to hear this.
Alm,
Your post is nonsense. There are no credible numbers anywhere where Game on Dude was not a top 5 contender. Very easy to say that after the race. But also foolish to say it after the race. The world is full of red-boarders.
There are many on this board who don\'t only look at TG numbers, but look at Beyers, pace figures, trip handicap, compression figures, etc.etc. And based on any of those measures, Game on Dude was a strong contender. You want to play him to bounce as Covello did, good call. But saying he wasn\'t fast enough on figs to be in the top 5 is just plain foolish.
Can you please log in on Wednesday and tell us who you thought was going to win the election?
I think I know where he got those numbers.
Someone bought an old Kelco Calculator off Ebay just before the Cup.
alm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I got killed by Europeans over and again.
> No numbers. Thank you and goodbye.
Sound like you used relative newcomer \"AccuRacing\",
for $5 a card.
Hey, you get what you pay for.
* I * had numbers on most Euros, excellent analysis,
strike that, damn near uncanny analysis...and I had
my most successful BC to date.
Not redboarding at all, anyone can check and see who
TG recommended.
Rick B.-
I just checked the Analysis for Saturday (Friday\'s is no longer available). I\'m not seeing where any of the recommended wagers hit. I\'m not criticizing the data, but the uncanny analysis seems like it must have been yours.
Mike, did you get that from Tim Schram?
Looks almost exactly like what he sent me
in reply to my e-mail this morning.
Hey, industry rags and scribes, where\'s the
story and final standings on this contest?
These contests have simply blown up in
popularity -- why is the reporting on them
so slow and slipshod?
I should have said \"Audio Seminar\".
Sorry for the confusion.
Rick,
I have to say, I paid for the seminar and the TG #\'s. The TG #\'s and analysis were great but i still, lost. Didn\'t play the pick 3 or 4\'s and keyed the wrong horse on top for the wins and for the most part my major exacta plays. I boxed exactas and tri\'s for the most part per TG analysis and it was great on Friday but I didn\'t hit anything on Saturday. Don\'t take this the wrong way, the losses were not because of the #\'s or the analysis but the way I played it. The #\'s were great. But don\'t expect everyone to be a winner due to the TG #\'s. even Jerry broke even.I learned some more this weekend, especially handicapping the ouchy horses.Great work by TG regardless of my stupidity.
George
Basically, the ones who used the data, seminar and analysis for multiple race bets did very well, the ones who played within the races (which is how I did the analysis and to a large extent bet myself) not so much. Almost all my multiple race bets were pick 6\'s,and the 5 of 6\'s the first day kept me from losing overall.
We were way behind on doing days around here so no idea when we will get the BC sheets up. But I can\'t resist-- I really, really wish Friedman would post full sheets for all the BC races. There were several really important differences, and they all were in our favor.
Rick B,
Yes to contest results>
Game we support is run so amateurishly, it\'s almost funny.Would think DRF et al would be all over reporting about the contest, the big money, the winners
/runner up strategy etc.
It\'s mainly about fking lasix and the lots of other bullshit.
Mike
First of all, I would only be redboarding if I didn\'t make this statement about 20 times during the 2 days of the contest...to the guys sitting around me who were betting real money. Many of whom were using Thorograph numbers.
As for where the figures come from....Equibase numbers for the contenders adjusted for groundloss. Game on Dude wasn\'t even close to the top 5 using this approach. The top 5 included Flat Out, Fort Larned, Mucho Macho Man, Ron the Greek and To Honor and Serve. Do a little homework and you\'ll see what I mean.
By the way, the same approach would have given you a Ky Derby exacta of I\'ll Have Another and Bodemeister. Which is why I stopped posting here.
You can believe whatever you want about whatever figures you want. I could care less at this point.
Pal, I use ME for my analysis.
In fairness,different interpretation is the issue.Some Rag and TG friends got killed,some won.A Rag friend lost $55k,over the two days, playing these horses to bounce:
Game On Dude, Groupie Doll, Wise Dan,Royal Delta,Beholder($8k against)
I used every one of the above in some form of vertical/horizontal. My biggest play did not involve any of them(Unbridles Note)
...interpretation!
Mike
justwin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But don\'t expect everyone to be a winner due
> to the TG #\'s.
For the record, I no longer blindly follow the TG
suggestions in the seminar.
One adjustment I\'ve learned to make from trial
and error is to include short-priced horses in
my exotics even if TG is thumbs down on them.
I love the aggresive stance of tossing such horses
when they have knocks on them, but they crash the
ticket often enough to screw me out of a nice score.
As an example, TG was fairly negative on Point of
Entry in the BC Turf, but they had Little Mike,
St. Nicholas Abbey and Trailblazer as either
contenders or \"must use\"; if I leave Point of
Entry out, I miss everything. I don\'t have the
stomach for that anymore; I\'d rather bet a little
too much and lose that way instead of making \"the
perfect ticket\" and missing out on decent scores
that keep me alive.
(I am reminded of Barry Meadow\'s comments about
exotics wagering, and the need to spread out in the
lesser spots: \"...even Living Filth can stumble home
for 3rd\". Well, so can a despised favorite.)
The bottom line, though is that without TG, there
is almost NFW I have Little Mike on top, and THAT
is the power of TG, in my opinion: having the data
(and the courage) to support these $30 and $40
horses the average handicapper can\'t find more than
once a month.
alm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pal, I use ME for my analysis.
I see.
Let us know when you have tons of customers,
and are advising clients on multimillion dollar
horseflesh purchases, will you?
Until then, well...you\'ve had the right idea, up
to about now.
I tossed 2 of TG recommendations during the BC. Little Mike & Trinniberg. That tells you what type of Saturday I had. Can someone please post why to use Little Mike. i included Point of Entry and had the 2nd, 3rd & 4th in the race keying St Nick. Little Mike seemed about a point too slow plus going a distance which i thought was not his best. i really appreciate the posts as I am always trying to learn.
Mike-- interpretation is a factor in lots of situations. But when they have Groupie going back, not forward; no dead rail notation for Little Mike last time; the Euros laying over the Mile field, AND Wise Dan both going backward and his last two not fast even relative to the California horses (let alone the Euros)-- those aren\'t questions of interpretation.
Interpretation coupled with price is why we didn\'t like Point Of Entry-- but his last on TG put him in the picture with an inside trip, and two back was a huge figure in the race, as well as anyone had ever run. On ex-Ragozin he was 3-4 points slower than the Euros on the best figure of his life, compared to their repeated figures-- he was absolutely hopelessly slow, forget about price.
JB
Very rare for a horse to get a big Rag fig when the horse is inside all the way, regardless of how the race comes vs other races at same distance that day.Noted this flaw way back when I began to convert Beyer/TG/Rags and it is fairly consistent.
Mike