To keep this brief, since unlike Vito\'s other point (\"Pairs\") this one does not involve figures, and so is of no interest to the vast majority of people who read this board:
Our clients are owners, not trainers. Unless trainers pass on the cost of TG it doesn\'t pay to use us, our commissions would be a significant chunk of what they make in purses. So when trainers (as opposed to owners) get the data, what they spend makes a big difference-- a guy like Pletcher is paying Jake only a tiny fraction of what he would have to pay me. Essentially, from what their horsemen \"clients\" have told me, they pay for sheets, and get everything else thrown in free-- data on their horses, the competition (stake noms), and ones they are looking at to buy, for no additional cost.
I had two tell me outright a couple of years ago they would switch if I would match the deal they were getting. One, a trainer with around 200 horses, was getting sheets for 3 tracks daily (plus anything else he wanted) for $1500 a month. The other was a major owner (and breeding operation), they were getting one track daily (and anything else they needed) for $700 a month. I said no thanks.
Vito, see if you can get Jake to say publicly what they charge trainers and owners.
By the way, we have lots of horsemen, owners, trainers and agents, who buy sheets from us for their own horses, stake noms, and ones they are looking to buy. I don\'t even count them (Baffert among them) as clients. Clients pay us a lot more than that, and get a lot more.
First,I don\'t put myself in other people\'s business.I will speak to you as a business person with a little common sense.The biggest people in this business who know much more than I will ever know are staying with Ragozin which as you have stated a thousand times is an INFERIOR product,because they are cheaper.Trainers whose very existence depends on winning races for their owners are using figures that don\'t make sense.Should I laugh now or later?.By the way look up the word INFERIOR.
One more thing ,let me lighten this up a bit.There is a Seinfeld episode where George Costanza needs his tonsils taken out.H e asks Jerry how much would that cost in a hospital,Jerry says $5000.Kramer tells George he knows a holistic healer who charges $35, a visit.George says \"oh yeah that\'s the way to go.\"You have know equated TAP,SMA and God knows who else with George Costanza.
Vito-- I\'m not going to get into a shouting match with you. See if you can get those people to tell you how much they are paying Jake. It\'s a lot closer to what they pay for the Form than what they would pay me.
Which from a business point of view creates problems for me, because it devalues \"sheets\", and makes it hard to get people to pay what they should. When you charge someone buying or managing a horse the same as someone betting on it, your model is ___ed.
You might remember that years ago those guys claimed that the reason bettors were switching to us is we charged less. And that was $10, not a difference of 5 figures a year.
You only get your tonsils out once. And your health is a little bigger deal than managing a racehorse.
But just to let you know, you\'re making the case that we do to potential clients. And some do recognize that you get what you pay for. Some do not, either because they don\'t understand the difference (yet), or just don\'t want to pay commissions. I get that all the time, from Lauffer (Rachel) to last week, where it blew up a 450k buy.
I will say this only once,it is None OF my Business who their customers are or what they charge.
Just noticed an error in my original post, now fixed. Should say our clients are owners, not trainers.
I am certainly in the minority as \"performance figures\" are very low on my list of key factors, yet I wonder how many here and elsewhere are \"married\" to them. I think many post here because of the collective info and banter.
By any measure, a horse has to be fast enough but class has always won out in the long run.
I have great respect for your product and your dedication to accuracy and your remarkably large fixed expenses, but at the end of the day boiling a performance down to an integer seems primitive on its face.
Personally, Rags, TG and Beyer are hard to separate in my opinion. Bashing Rags is fun reading though.
bbb
Not that I care, but simply making assertions (like the one about class winning out in the long run) without offering evidence is a waste of board space.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not that I care, but simply making assertions
> (like the one about class winning out in the long
> run) without offering evidence is a waste of board
> space.
The first time a \"class > speed\" aficionado even quantifies
what \"class\" is, without it simply boiling down to speed,
will be the first time.
This \"he gave his opponent a steely glance, then steadily
pulled away\" folklore used to read great in a horsey novel...
when I was 12 years old. It has no place in professional
handcapping.
I use both class and speed figures, depending on the race, but I can clearly define class by who the horse beat & ran against. When I find a key maiden race, I throw speed figures out the window for the runners coming out of it. The best value in racing is a horse who was competitive & is coming out of a maiden key race that that comes out slow on all speed figures. It doesn\'t happen all that often, but when it does the horse coming out of the key race has a distinct class edge over the faster sheet horses who come out of races where the horses who ran in them came back and did nothing. Usually the speed figure in the next race is significantly higher-not because anyone blew the key race\'s figure. It was just a race filled with classy horses who just ran slower than their capabilities, usually because of the pace.
You can\'t say class can\'t be defined without speed-I review class every time I open a race in Formulator & I usually do the class test before I even look at the speed figures.
toppled Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I find a key maiden race, I throw speed
> figures out the window for the runners coming
> out of it.
> The best value in racing is a horse who was
> competitive & is coming out of a maiden key race
> that that comes> out slow on all speed figures.
> It doesn\'t happen all that often, but when it does
> the horse coming out of the key race has a distinct
> class edge over the faster sheet horses who come out
> of races where the horses who ran in them came back
> and did nothing.
What you are doing in this situation is asking the
question, \"How were the figures earned\". TG notes
races where the pace was abnormally fast or slow,
so if you spot one of the races you mention above,
you are not really \"throwing out the speed figures\"...
you have merely found a reason (excuse) for the lower
numbers. You then make allowances as you see fit,
and press on.
In your example, class is simply a sub-function of
speed and pace, certainly not a different factor.
There are times were I handicap on pure class using Formulator (mostly MD & NW1 other than races)and I completely throw out the numbers. Here\'s an example from the biggest score of my life. (The reason I\'m using this as the example is because I kept everything from that day, but there have been other examples like this over the years where the numbers had to be thrown out) It was a maiden 2yo turf race going 1 1/16. The winner had no slow pace notations from the key race-you can\'t find the winner by the speed numbers. His was a hidden race with no notations that it was. Among the reasons he stood out was the fact his last race was a key race and that race stood out vs all the other horses\'races. The 1st 2 finishers came back to run 1-2 in a grade 1 stakes race in their next race out. The TG analysis that day didn\'t mention him. They had the 2nd & 3rd place finishers 1-2 but missed him entirely. Meanwhile, with the non-sheet info I knew, I was never more confident in a single race in my life & made a huge score that no sheet alone player could have come up with. Here are the sheets of each horse (from latest race backwards)
1)op --15.25, op 17.50
2)sl_pace --15yl,op --15, tu op 22.50
3)--20, sl-pace --17.50, 27, 24.50, 39.75
4)--15 gd
5) --10.50 tu!
6) --11.25 ! op, --13.50
7) --13.50 gd, op- 42.25
8) FTS
9) --17.50
10) FTS
11) --13.50, 13, 18.25, 18.1 (last 3 sprints on polytrack)
12) FTS
Dare to tell me how the speed figures came up with the winner here? For the record the winner ran a 9.25 in this race. It was the 9 whose key race 5th was a 17.50. His Beyer went from a 59 to a 74. He paid $16. In one way I was lucky-the horse had been scratched out of a race that got taken off the turf & from a race on yielding turf, so I had over 2 months between races to get the follow up races on the horses he had run against. The horses he ran against in the key race had the following subsequent results prior to the running of his next race.
1-Won a grade 1 stake on poly
2)2nd to the 1 in G1 stk, (later went on to be a graded stakes winner)
3)4th yielding turf MSW
4)4th MSW
5)My horse-Won MSW the day I bet him.
6)2nd Del T MSW, Won NYS T MSW 1 week before this race
7)2nd MSW poly
8)Won MCL $65k, ran 5 of 7 in Pilgrim Stakes
9)-Did run back until after the race.
EDIT
PS: To be totally honest the horse had a few more things going for it that I didn\'t mention above. 1)He had a strong gallop out, going by everyone who finished ahead of him 2) His trainer was switching to his go to rider who at the time was 45% on the trainer\'s 2nd time starters. 3) He had run against a track bias in his debut 4) Had a 3f blowout 2 days before the race and had been training regularly. Also prior to his 1st race had a very good turf workout in company. All had nothing to do with speed figures.
As strictly a novice player and smaller customer that falls into the category of former purchaser of RAG products that reads this board and became sold on the fact that this is a far superior product and someone that doesn\'t have time to even call this a hobby, I can\'t say how to make money in this game consistently, but I can sure tell you how to lose it quickly, and that is to spend any time and effort in making a habit of betting against the fastest horse(s) on any sort of regular basis. Maybe there are anomalies here and there, but that\'s finding the proverbial needle. Case in point Big Brown, and I think Smarty as well, when there is a clear cut fastest horse in the race, you\'re not going to survive very long beating these kinds. I went down the tubes on BB, anyway information is always powerful, but facts are facts, and IMO the cornerstone of any successful handicapping venture has to begin with identifying the fastest horse, and breaking it down thereafter.
Gerard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can\'t say how to make money in this game
> consistently, but I can sure tell you how to
> lose it quickly, and that is to spend any
> time and effort in making a habit of betting
> against the fastest horse(s) on any sort of
> regular basis.
> Maybe there are anomalies here and
> there, but that\'s finding the proverbial needle.
> Case in point Big Brown, and I think Smarty as
> well, when there is a clear cut fastest horse in
> the race, you\'re not going to survive very long
> beating these kinds. I went down the tubes on BB,
> anyway information is always powerful, but facts
> are facts, and IMO the cornerstone of any
> successful handicapping venture has to begin with
> identifying the fastest horse, and breaking it
> down thereafter.
You are making way too much sense. You will have to
depart this discussion immediately. :) ;)
(enough winks and smilies?)
I think what has been ascribed to \"class\" in this thread
(so far) is really just the old Key Race angle, which I
use myself...but if I waited around for these plays
alone I would hardly ever bet.
Are there other angles that transcend \"the number\" -- the
fastest horse? Sure, plenty. My favorite is the \"Claim,
Rest, Class Rise\" move employed by a trainer you trust
(very important!). If the trainer waited out the jail time
and STILL gave the horse a class rise, screw the figs, you
found a VERY live animal, usually at a fat price.
This is a subset of Trainer Intent, a far more powerful and
productive concept than searching for three or four so-called
\"class\" plays per year.
I\'m sure the subset of trainer intent within an arsenal of data that would make the trainer live is a very useful tool. I\'m speaking more to the novice reader here that may only play a few races a year where horses are pointed to a race and as such, class moves will take on far less importance than in the throws of everyday racing. In these few big races, you\'re single most important factor in handicapping is who\'s the fastest, and when there is a clear cut standout, and yes the odds will probably be short, you\'ve a far superior chance of being right than with any other handicapping tool. As to the old key race angle, I look for big fields to most likely produce key races, which is why I went with the Bluegrass as a potential key to this years race(surface and time between aside), as it was the only race with a full field. And what did it get me, another knock on the head for wondering where the odds on CC(37-1) would be come post time and leaving him off because I though he\'d be less than 20-1, even though numbers and pattern still had him playable at less than 20-1. so far all the work and tape watching and analyzing of this yeas race, the seminar had a live long shot come in to fill out a nice exacta and other exotics who had it. Sure there were other ways to come up with CC, but this was the shortest clearest path.
Gerard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...the seminar had a live long shot come in to
> fill out a nice exacta and other exotics who had it.
> Sure there were other ways to come up with CC, but
> this was the shortest clearest path.
Exactly.
This is where just clearing your head of tons and tons
of (sometimes conflicting) handicapping information can
pay off.
Once you have your key and minor slots horses identified,
stop handicapping and spend more time on structuring your
bets; even if you are only spending a C-note, map it out
so you don\'t have smack yourself in the head later.
I lost a lot of drinking time on this years race, not going to let that happen again.
No offense Rick but this may be the first time!
Using the Derby as an example is dicey at best, although the best horse often wins, like this year.
I am going to use your selection, or key, Chitu to explain class but realize class is not anything you can put a number on. A famous trainer years ago could not define class but said \"put one horse with it and one without it and gallop them together... very shortly the one without class will look like he has flat tire\".
Chitu is likewise a poor example as the colt had serious shortcomings on pedigree and form which are vital handicapping tools by themselves. Genetically, Chitu had zero chance to stay ten panels under scale weight in the spring and on form he was worse. He had broken bad his last four and could not keep a spider shoe on his badly deteriorating foot, in his gate work derby week and was a box seat horse at best.
Betting/playing this one was a dart in the dark or a man crush on the trainer.
With that written Chitu was a simple toss on class. Factually, Chitu had run against 24 horses prior to the Derby. Backing out the maiden wins by these horses, and the only \"two timer\" (his stablemate Midnight Hawk), these horses showed a collective total of 121 starts.
The average purse for the 121 starts I am going to estimate was $40K as most were one x\'s, many at second class circuits. Out of those 121 starts Chitu\'s running mates were only able to win SIX of those races.
In a race with five grade one winners, and five other multiple graded stakes winners Chitu obviously did not measure up. bbb
In other words, when Chitu\'s foot heals he\'ll have more \"class\".
You quoted a trainer-- I\'m guessing that was said at least 20 years ago. Trainers have gotten a lot smarter since then. The top trainers all use figures now, even if they\'re Beyers, as the primary basis of their analysis.
bellsbendboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With that written Chitu was a simple toss on
> class. Factually, Chitu had run against 24
> horses prior to the Derby. Backing out the maiden
> wins by these horses, and the only \"two timer\"
> (his stablemate Midnight Hawk), these horses
> showed a collective total of 121 starts.
>
> The average purse for the 121 starts I am going to
> estimate was $40K as most were one x\'s, many at
> second class circuits. Out of those 121 starts
> Chitu\'s running mates were only able to win SIX of
> those races.
>
> In a race with five grade one winners, and five
> other multiple graded stakes winners Chitu
> obviously did not measure up. bbb
So, Chitu and his running mates weren\'t collectively
fast enough to earn as much money as horses that
ran faster and earned more money.
This \"class\" thing is kind of slippery, but I think
I am getting it; it seems to be summarized smartly
by what the trainer supposedly told the jock in the
movie Let It Ride:
\"Go fast and WIN.\"