spa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Case in point, last week\'s ROTW was the feature. I
> bought the numbers for the last race. The TG
> numbers gave me (1) the winner (2) the exacta (3)
> the tri an (4) the super...........all pounded
> straight bets,that\'s why I use the TG. It\'s the
> money.
>  


Congrats, that\'s great for you. Considering Jerry\'s ROTW results, I\'d advise him to make you his house handicapper. How did those horses look in the Form and how do you think they looked on The Sheets? I think I remember most of that, I used Mott\'s winner and Frankel\'s 4th in the multirace gimmicks, and since I don\'t play much chalk, made most of my plays around the value of the Frankel horse who was an overlaid (in my opinion) 7-1. Not too often I get 7-1 on Frankel, but I can find 5/2 on Mott anytime.

Here\'s the finish:
1st  - Mott as 5/2 favorite by 2
2nd - Proctor as 2nd choice at 3-1 by a neck
3rd - 5th Biancone, Frankel, and Asmussen, all at about 6-1
rest of the field all double digits

Congrats, Thorograph, on playing against the public, and giving spa a $6.80 winner, $24 exacta, $77 tri, and $195 super.
Honestly not trying to make a joke out of your good handicapping, spa, but surely you can see how anybody might have made a similar play out of the $5 Form?

mandown Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dave/Soup/Diamond-Joe
>
> If you\'re not one and the same then the Koreans
> are behind the curve in trying to clone humans.
> Anyone who thinks \'Hehehehehe\' or \'Hmmmmmm\' etc is
> a telling debating point obviusly lacks something
> in the grey matter department. Hard to beleive
> that there are two of you Raggies that are equally
> that mentally-challenged. On the other hand . . .
>
> And while you\'re here can you run that
> quarter-point condition move stuff by us again?
> Len\'s figures are really that accurate are they?
> Plus or minus an eighth of a point? That\'s snake
> oil and anyone with half a brain would know it.
> Your view is?
>
> I admire your loyalty but you\'re making a fool of
> yourself. That latest post on Handicapping short
> prices was absolute tosh.
>
> Regards,
>
> George
>  



I don\'t even know what half this post means, but as for the \"hmmmmm...\", I lifted it from the end of Jerry\'s post (the one I was replying to). Sorry if you missed that, and don\'t be so hard on the boss. It\'s not good politics. You seem to have some hostility issues. Maybe try turning that frown upside down.

Tosh,

Joe

spa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Joe, you miss the point. The ROTW is a race,once a
> week. Most are almost to tough to handicap! Since
> I\'ve used TG,my percentage of cashed tickets has
> gone up. I\'ve been betting for 50 years and there
> is no product to rival TG......



That\'s great for you, and I don\'t doubt it. I certainly realize that the ROTW is only one race, and like Len, we all have our share of races that don\'t pan out, but added up, the ROTW archive is littered with both poor results and plays that are no different from anything from the $5 DRF, and Jerry has his pick of any single stakes race on a given weekend, which he claims is his strongest category. I\'d expect SOMETHING to click for him above a $13 exacta, and if it doesn\'t, he would probably want to keep his mouth shut. But that\'s just one man\'s opinion. Maybe I was raised differently.

EDIT: I forgot the whole point of this reply. If you seriously think Jerry wouldn\'t want some great result from the ROTW that he could post on the site and talk about for years, you are really fooling yourself.

marcus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jerry allows many of us \"busy\" folks - and others
> like yourself dj ,  to post on the TG ask the
> experts page / forum , and subsequently on this
> thread which jerry himself started ... even on a
> dare , i wouldn\'t crash the rag board out of
> respect for everybody .
>  
> ** finally , the one thing w/ the 1-9 shot ,
> amoung others is , that it would have been
> imprudent ( unless a big price ) to use that horse
> given the \"pattern \" if one was looking at the
> race with TG #\'s , you can agree with that - right
> ?
 

That would be the difference between us, I have no respect for Jerry Brown, and it\'s primarily due to threads like this one. That would also be the difference between you and Jerry, as he routinely used to crash the Ragozin board, advertising his product on their stage, until they were forced to go to a registration only board to block the spam. Considering the circumstances, I don\'t think I\'m putting him out by confining my comments to a single thread on his ROTW which he invited me to examine.


As for that big 2/5(?) chalk, even after the race has been run Jerry can\'t spin that one. He meekly waited until the race was over to venture a comment, and the horse looks like a 2/5 on his product, just like it must have looked like a 2/5 on DRF and probably Sheets. Even after the race was run, Jerry admits he would\'ve needed 10-1 on his next best pick to try and beat him. Going forward, I would encourage all you guys to beat the 2/5 horses before they run, as about 11/12 of that horse\'s last races would have won that one on Thorograph.

I think I already covered the approach I take on this kind of horse 2 or 3 times in this thread, so I\'d hate to waste more of your time. But, since you ask, I generally either play against very short ones, or try to value around them. Or pass, of course. Although, I don\'t have anyone asking me to find some kind of play on Father\'s Day.

A couple good examples that come immediately to mind would be a turf stake at CD last weekend, and the most recent Breeders Cup sprint. The CD race featured a big Biancone chalk who had one very fast race showing in this country and figured to be very tough to beat, but there was maybe some value underneath, particularly in a 20-1 Romans entry who looked pretty mediocre in the Form. He had very low Beyers, and had barely escaped the maiden ranks, so he had at least 2 strikes against him from the DRF handicapper\'s point of view, but looked good against the rest of the field on The Sheets, if a little slow vs the big chalk. He ended up a ridiculous 60-1, when he probably should have been 4 or 5-1, and ran third to that big chalk and an underlaid 2nd chalk Pletcher sporting an excellent pattern. It was a fairly pedestrian trifecta, and certainly not what I was shooting for, but I managed to squeeze a little out of the short horse who had the stick out fig(s).

The Breeders Cup sprint featured some very fast chalk who everyone told me was a lock. I think one of your regulars has some comment on him, maybe. On The Sheets, he was VERY fast, but had the unfortunate timing to run a big neg fig in his previous race, setting himself up for a reaction, and giving me some value if I picked the right ones to beat him. I didn\'t have much opinion on the exotics within the race, so I used 2 (or was it 3?) horses in this one to beat him in the middle leg of a pretty good pick 3, singling a big value Frankel in the first leg.

So, these are examples of how I try to dredge value from the gimmicks on the strong chalks, and try to find value betting aginst the weak chalks using The Sheets. You might note in this post that Len\'s getting lynched on, that he makes mention of trying to find similar value underneath, on what looked like a very strong chalk. I could also give you examples of races where I passed, or got beat, but those aren\'t as memorable to me.

 What do you call the Arkansas Derby ROTW? Again, that was the Race Of The WEEK. Frankly, if that big chalk at Mth had such a bad pattern, Jerry wouldn\'t have needed 10-1 on his best play to beat it, and it would have made a great ROTW. Like I have been saying, it would seem to me that you\'d want to show some results on your own board before ripping your competitors (to be generous to you) for having the gall of having a bad result. How far back do I have to look in the ROTW archive to find a $170 exacta, or any result that\'s better than some DRF handicapper, for that matter? Jerry embarrasses himself with these ridiculous threads, and whether they say so or not, I\'m pretty sure nearly everyone here realizes it.

That part was funny.

  Last I remember, I was having a discussion with Jerry Brown. I don\'t know how you two busybodies got involved. Are you his agents, or something like that?

  I\'m pretty sure Jerry can address any posts I make on his own, especially since he invited me to go over those ROTWs. But don\'t worry too much, Jerry seemed to make some veiled threat about banning all previous Raggies that posted here, in the past, so I\'m sure I\'ll be gone soon, one way or the other, if not just from boredom, and you\'ll be safe here in your virtual basement from the harsh light of reality.

.... other handicapping tools can't?\"




 This is the kind of thing I\'m talking about.



Bottom Line—Stream Cat is vulnerable favorite. He concedes weight to several faster
horses and although he has a good pattern and could win, he is an underlay and worth
taking a shot against. Second choice Go Between is solid but shows a tendency to run
wide and could do so again from the outside post. Third choice Kid Deville is fastest, has
speed, but enters off a big top and has distance questions. Fourth choice Showing Up is
somewhat of an unknown. Frankly we have no strong convictions as to a winner, but in
this situation, where the first four all exhibit some vulnerability we're inclined to hunt for
prices. Outperformance, Can't Beat It, Roman Dynasty satisfy this pursuit and I'm going
throw in Prime Diamond for a little piece because at times I'm irrational.




  Not doing this to beat up on you, TGAB, just trying to decipher Jerry\'s comments about betting against the public. Frankly, you should post here more, and stick to this style of ROTW analysis. I think Jerry would be doing his business a favor by ceding most of the spokesperson duties to someone like yourself, but it\'s his business.

  On to the analysis of the analysis. Excluding your bomber hunch play who finished last, although, if he had run well we\'d be hearing about it forever, you gave favorable mention to 7 of 14 horses. This happened to coincide almost exactly with the half of the field that the public liked, in no particular order, and the public picking the winner. This was the Race Of The WEEK. The whole WEEK. 4 of the top 5 morning line choices ran 1-4, with the one anomaly being the unexpected ballooning up of the first Dutrow.

   Why are people supposed to buy Thorograph, again? To take big prices on 9/2 ml first Dutrow? If you\'re going to claim to produce a better product, and use it against the public, then you should step up to the plate, bet against the public, and do so successfully. I\'m pretty sure if your ROTW came up with a $170 exacta, rather than $13, it would be posted on the front page for eternity.

   Again, don\'t take this personally, TGAB. I think it was a pretty good analysis, and I hope you got the combos right on the huge first Dutrow value.

   The extensive analysis that you took the time to type up is really the only kind of analysis I\'m interested in. I don\'t look for someone else to tell me how to play races, just enjoy reading someone else\'s take on the various entries. But it\'s pretty clearly hypocritical to rip Len for doing the same thing he posts on his own site, regardless of who\'s doing the analysis. Of course, like Richie(?) said, I guess everything he posts is just his sales pitch. Which is too bad, really. I would think his product good enough to sell without the WWF routine, but maybe I\'m wrong.

   Good luck in the race, TGAB, and I hope you clean up.

QuoteBottom Line—Stream Cat is vulnerable favorite. He concedes weight to several faster
horses and although he has a good pattern and could win, he an underlay and worth
taking a shot against. Second choice Go Between is solid but shows a tendency to run
wide and could do so again from the outside post. Third cho ice Kid Deville is fastest, has
speed, but enters off a big top and has distance questions. Fourth choice Showing Up is
somewhat of an unknown. Frankly we have no strong convictions as to a winner, but in
this situation, where the first four all exhibit some vulnerability we're inclined to hunt for
prices. Outperformance, Can't Beat It, Roman Dynasty satisfy this pursuit and I'm going
throw in Prime Diamond for a little piece because at times I'm irrational.

  = I have no opinion. Top 4 may or may not run, and I\'ll use 4 others.



hmmmmmmmmm........

QuoteLen did not give out an exacta in the Preakness, or any other play, BEFORE the race. Or, to put it another way, he gave out LOTS of exactas, as he does every time he makes a list, checks it twice, and says more than half the field should be used in exotics. With each other? With just the horse listed on top? In tris? Supers? Hmmm...

QuoteBuzzards Bay - ...he is a contender...

Seek Gold - Non-contender. (winner)

West Virginia is competitive.

there a lot of reasons to think Cosmonaut may run well. (ran last)

Wiggins - ... makes him a contender.

M B Sea - Non-contender.

Perfect Drift may get a minor piece of this

Brass Hat - Contender.

Love of Money - At the weights his top would make him competitive.

hmmmmmmmm...........

  Jerry wrote,
 

Quote\"As for looking like a walkover on TG, as I said before, a little more price and I was betting the winner, so no. But that\'s not even the point.

For the fourth time-- it\'s not just that the horse lost. It\'s that Len gave out, as a lock, a horse that every public handicapper and everybody with a DRF could have come up with, without sheets.

Keep looking through those ROTW\'s. When you get one where we said a horse was an overlay at 1-9-- or even that a horse was the right play at odds-on-- let me know. We intentionally pick races where we are pointing out something DIFFERENT than the public sees-- you won\'t find one. \"

(Can I use HTML code here?)
test

   This is what it sounds like to me, based on this quote and your previous posts:    after the race, the winner was your pick out of the rest of the field, as far as finding a horse to beat the chalk, but you would have needed 10-1 to play this pick to beat that chalk. Have I understood you? Frankly, no offense, but you\'d have a little more credibility on all this if you had posted your criticism of the post and analysis of the race prior to it\'s running rather than jumping on after they hit the wire, especially if you claim it\'s not about the horse losing. Also, it doesn\'t sound like you gave that chalk much chance at being beat.

   Was that invitation to go over the ROTW\'s legit, or simply hyperbole, because as a guest here, I think this has already digressed a little too far into Rikki Lake territory, and maybe we should just end it here? In case it was an actual invite, I saw you remind someone here about your successes in the ROTW, and you mentioned the Arkansas Derby, so I\'ll start with that one:

Overview – Lawyer Ron (paid $3) is the most likely winner, but Steppenwolfer (3rd choice) is the value, and solid for the exotics. Exacta paid $13.80.

    Out of all the races that weekend, you chose this one. Not only is this exactly what you accuse Len of doing, giving out plays that every public handicapper has without Thorograph, but you even felt so good about the $13 exacta that you wanted to remind someone about it.

    However, in the Honeymoon ROTW at Hollywood, you delivered the promise which you made earlier by playing AGAINST the public. You played against the 2 favorites (who ran 1-2) and your most likely winner was up the track.


    Don\'t get me wrong on this, I\'m not trying to beat you up for a bunch of bad picks, or poor results, I just find it odd that someone with this kind of record would stick his neck out on a post lambasting someone else for not cashing a race. Hope you\'re enjoying The Boss, and maybe you can address some of this when you get back on Monday.

......I don\'t play horses of this price unless I can hook them up w/some serious value, which seems to be the approach Len also advised. I read Len\'s post, as well as going through a few of the previous week\'s ROTW\'s, and frankly, I don\'t see that you have much room to criticize, but I understand you have a competing product to sell. Looked to me like a fun stab Len took for Father\'s Day that looked like a walkover on Thorograph. After all, you can afford a few misses when you give out a $170(?) Preakness exacta. I hope nobody will lynch me when I pick my first loser.
     Have fun at the golf course, and hope it isn\'t inappropriate to discuss a competing product on your board. Thanks again for posting the race.

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DJ-- so you would have (or did) go down with
> Friedman on the horse at 2/5?
>


   I\'m sorry, I\'m sure you\'re talking to me but I don\'t know what you\'re responding to. I didn\'t play that day at all. I don\'t know what he looked like on The Sheets, but he looks like a freak on Thorograph, if you were looking for my opinion. I don\'t play horses at those prices unless I think I\'ve got a bomb to hook them up with, but based on the race posted here, I probably wouldn\'t have expected him to be beat by 15. What was your opinion of him before the race?

   Looks like 6 of his last 12 races were 0 or better. How often has anyone seen a horse like this?