I like the ROTW analysis and the horses it ends up on.  However, I was wondering how the analysis might be changed if the big rains come and the track is OFF on Saturday.

I know the sample sizes are small, but the TGI for the top two ML favorites (CC, SI) are among the worst differentials from DIRT to OFF...like 5 pts worse.  I can dream, but might it be possible neither one hits the board on an off track?

I guess the question for TGJB:  any feel for whether an off track is a big negative for either CC or SI based on TG data?  Or the samples just too small?

Thanks.  That is an interesting story.  I guess mathematically we can express your roots as a function of (opportunity + observation + questioning the status quo) times (a little common sense)--maybe (common sense) squared???

You must have known SOMETHING to have argued with them/him over methodology.

Don\'t answer if it\'s going to open a can of worms, but How did you learn your method of figure making?

And even KNOWING the results I would not bet the 8...I just don\'t get it.  Somebody, please explain.

Not really.  I was right about the 4.  I was right about the 5.  I was WRONG about the 8, and that was the key to my play.  Alas, I did not cash.

Ha!  In Texas, this is as good as it gets!  Great night for races, though.  Really just want to play this one race and try to make a little money.

The favorite looks tough to deny in this race.  I will be looking for Vertical Value by tossing the likely 2nd ML choice.  The 3rd ML choice also looks vulnerable.

1  Internet Success (5-1):  forward moving pattern.  competitive number, but at sprints.  TGI suggests might not like a mile.  I will use underneath, small protective bets.

2  Jmac\'s Bling (30-1):  too slow

3  Circustown Flyer (10-1):  a little slow.  Sprints.  TGI suggests might not appreciate the mile.  

4  Ibaka (7-5):  good numbers.  proven at the distance.  looks tough.

5  Ring Necked (6-1):  I like this horse to hit the board.  A little slow number-wise, but forward moving pattern, most likely to improve, and proven at the distance.  Must use.  I really do not see as a threat to Ibaka, but 2nd not unlikely.

6  Early Hot Water (15-1):  Not sure what to do with him.  TGI indicates might not appreciate the distance, but only 3rd lifetime race with somewhat of a chance for improvement.  At 15-1, I\'ll use.

7  Dutch Hohn (20-1):  slow.

8  FJ Uncle Vic (5/2):  in 11 races, only 1 decent number at a sprint.  The other 10 are too slow to hit the board in this.  Have to play against.

My opinion on this race is that Ibaka will win for fun.  I believe Ring Necked has the best chance of running 2nd with his anticipated improvement.  I will play that exacta ice cold and heavy--which is betting my opinion of the race. I will also play small trifectas Keying Ibaka on top, Ring Necked in 2nd and 3rd spots, with Internet Success and Early Hot Water in case they defy their breeding/TGI.  I\'d like Early Hot Water to be the one to come in 3rd.

Anybody have any thoughts on the analysis or betting strategy?  Especially, TGJB???

Sorry, Bob,

I do not post often.  My response was more directed to the bigbeaz posts.  I will try to take more care in the future.

tommy

You could develop a program like this, but the end result would be a fair odds line of YOUR OPINION OF THE RACE.  The odds line that the program spits out is a direct function of the data you input, and the data to input is not always clear cut.  Too often (like on every single horse), you have to make a decision as to what \"top\" to use--recent or lifetime, turf or dirt-- or which probability distribution to use (%top, %pair, %off, %x).  Those decisions reflect your opinion.

I have toyed with this (more like \"obsessed over this\") for about 20 years now.  I speak from experience.  For a short period, a friend and I bet using the same simulation program.  9 times out of 10 we would land on a different set of key horses.  The reason for the differences always boiled down to how we \"read\" the horses in question.  Do you use the Turf top on a Turf race?  Always?  Do you use the 90+ trainer thoro-pattern for a layoff horse?  What if it\'s a late 2yo and you feel the horse is ripe to explode off the layoff but the thoro-pattern for 90+ (which includes ALL AGES) does not really indicate that?

At the end of the day, whoever read the race right (OPINION) ended up cashing.

My point is that even with a magic black box, there will always be a human element to the handicapping game.

Good luck to you.

After reading Covelj70\'s post, I bought the TG data and also came up with Vicar\'s In Trouble.