agreed....delayed post is really annoying.....i now make for myself my own expected post times rather than rely on the MTP.  

When I first got into racing, this was a major issue at Narragansett which had fallen mightily onto hard times and in that case you felt them trying to squeeze every last single out of the crowd.

I have no dog in last nights horizontals, but I have previously complained about Santa Anita late Pick 4 payouts. I have numerous times cashed the late Pick 4 there and have had it pay less than what the parlay would have paid.  The explanation normally given to me is that a long horse in my sequence was much shorter in the ML and was probably played more in the horizontals due to lower ML than would have been expected based on actual off odds.

sorry guys, I think I jinxed us.  I covered with 5 on top and 7 in all the other places....figures when I do not get the 7 is when the boxcars fill out the super.  If the 7 had been there, you better believe the rest of the spots would have been the chalk.

I like him, think he is a definite use.

SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> skitimber Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Was I the only one that thought 11-1 (12-1 with
> a
> > couple minutes to close) on Good Magic was a
> great
> > price?  Curious how other bet this.  I bet him
> to
> > win and under  a few in saver exactas plus an
> > exacta box with Bolt d\'ora in case he
> progresses
> > or even runs back to his -1.
>
> Solomini

In the last pool, McKinzie was paying $27 and Solomini $46.40.  Notwithstanding comical DQ today in the Cash Call Futurity, Solomini reinforces that he was mispriced in that pool (still a long way to go and one would probably want better odds if they had a choice outside the pool).  Have to say, that DQ today was truly peculiar to me.  One thing I have noticed in California is that Los Alamitos tends to produce the most headscratching stewards\' decisions.  Whoever the guys are there, there is something wrong going on (although, n.b., today\'s decision was a 2-1 vote, so one of them got it right -- too bad only one).

skitimber Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Was I the only one that thought 11-1 (12-1 with a
> couple minutes to close) on Good Magic was a great
> price?  Curious how other bet this.  I bet him to
> win and under  a few in saver exactas plus an
> exacta box with Bolt d\'ora in case he progresses
> or even runs back to his -1.

Solomini

dsipes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Anything about Battle of Midway\'s TG pattern
> anyone wishes to discuss that is educational for
> future use?


This horse utterly defeated me.  Three times i took positions against him and he burned me with seemingly inexplicable efforts.  Twice i bet on him and he fired duds.  I was 0-5 with him.  I, too, agree with you.......anybody have an explanation for this horse? His sheet is an enigma to me.  Only thing I can ever come up with is Hollendorfer can often surprise you and you should be prepared for that -- especially when he enters a horse who seemingly doesn\'t belong.

SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Remember that old angle? Wonder Gadot and Ami\'s
> Mesa both figure to figure


by the way, I should have elucidated further when I posted this originally.....back in the days when synthetic first started showing up....there was a tendency for horses to explode first time dirt after running on synthetic a lot.  That is what I was referring to when I said remember that old angle.  First dirt.  Anyway, I was right about Ami\'s Mesa, but got nothing to show for it.

dsipes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I began a thread on Stellar Wind on here before
> Breeders Cup suggesting her TG figs of \"all 0\'s\"
> this year suggested she had peaked last year.
> Looks as if that pattern theory was correct albeit
> she had a bad post on the inside.  Nevertheless,
> SW ran an awful last place finish.  Can I assume
> TG will use her pattern in the future as a sign of
> their suggestion in the seminar: \"if it looks like
> a horse is tailing off, they probably are.\"

I stand by the same comment I made to you earlier.  You need to consider in certain situations (this being one of them) the sex of the horse you are analyzing.  Fillies and Mares are much more prone to \"be a different\" horse after time off.  My read of Stellar Wind was she was a different horse. The same sheet with a colt or horse could have easily rendered a different interpretation.

Again, as I did in my earlier response to you, I hold out Lady Aurelia.  Her sheet looked very vulnerable to me.  3yo fillies just do not string together so many top efforts without a bounce (either on a number power basis or pattern basis).  She had already bounced before and the mathematics for her were not good.  If that same sheet were a colt, I would have read it totally differently.  Of course, tossing her did me no good as I did not have Stormy Liberal.  Nothing I hate more than correctly tossing an odds on favorite and then not being able to cash because the wrong long shot wins.  

I would also say it is not a universal thing that you need to read all filly and mare sheets suspiciously......I am just talking about specific circumstances (the two here are good examples -- (a) a filly or mare coming back after time off as a \"different horse\" and (b) 3yo fillies\' abilities to string together a number of very strong/top efforts on absolute or pattern terms without a reaction somewhere in there).

slewzapper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Love the pattern on Ami\'s Mesa as well; if she can
> jump up on first time dirt the projected number
> makes her live at a price to hit the board. Should
> have ample time to launch a stretch run. Other
> than Finley\'s the others have been taking turns
> beating each other.


I did not see the running of this race until just now.  That nose photo cost me an insane amount of money (a nice sized win bet and the difference in horizontals).  What really struck me was there was a moment on the turn where Bar of Gold looked like she was running on pavement and all of the other horses were in deep sand.  I am wondering if the bad rail wasnt just a bad rail, but was like bad paths 1-5 and path 6 was golden.  Ami\'s Mesa was my best bet of the day and I didn\'t have a penny on Bar of Gold.  Looks like you should have been hurt by the result too.

Remember that old angle? Wonder Gadot and Ami\'s Mesa both figure to figure

Hope you all are safe and sound

dsipes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wouldn\'t most of you agree these turf sprint races
> are chaotic plain and simple?  Not sure the impact
> or post position winning percentages for 5f turf
> races at Del Mar, which I think would be critical
> to any analysis.  
>
> I\'ll likely spread in the horizontal wagers and
> use all horses that ran between a 0.3 up to a 2 in
> their final prep as A horses and my B horses will
> consist of those that ran 2.1 to 3.3 in final
> prep.  Just too chaotic not to spread heavy in
> horizontals and box the A horses in verticals.
> Just my novice opinion.  Subject to change and top
> choice to be made after I listen to JB\'s seminar.

There is a fairly long run from the gate to the first turn.  Although post positions are not irrelevant, I would think they are less impactful in this configuration compared to some others.  Do agree that these sort of matches tend to be chaotic, but I think part of it is how closely matched they tend to be anyway and how impactful trip can be on the outcome (but post position not as helpful for predicting trip as it could be)

This horse was just moved up from second to first on a DQ of the first place finisher in the Robert Byrd Memorial at Mountaineer.

Horse enters the BC Turf Sprint on a 3 race win streak.

Horse and Fernando De La Cruz are 5 for 5 together all in Stakes (1 grass sprint, 2 dirt sprints, 2 dirt routes - the routes and one of the dirt sprints were stakes restricted to Indiana Breds).  

If you watch any of their races together, this jockey just fits this horse like a glove.

In my experience, it is mighty rare for 3yo fillies (that already have an established base as a 2yo) to run a series of figures that are absolutely fast without having a bounce or a reaction thrown in.  I find 3yo fillies of this type are more prone than other types of horses to throwing in a poor effort every other or every several races (this doesnt necessary apply where the filly is slow; the numbers need to be of a certainly quality in the context to justify the expectation I am talking about).

Now, judging by her sheet, it would appear that Wesley Ward is quite aware of this phenomenon and is trying to counteract it by extraordinary spacing.  Her figs this year are exceptionally fast for a 3yo filly and she just keeps firing them.  They are a fairly large step up from her two year old reaction point.  Every other race or every couple of races, I would definitely be expecting a reaction race for a 3yo filly firing off numbers like this.  The reason I am confused and cautious here is that Ward is an extremely sharp horseman, and from what I can see....he seems to be aware of this issue and is trying to counteract it.

Also, if you would say that applying this same logic to Stellar Wind\'s 3 yo year would have failed, my reply would be that Stellar Wind as a 3yo was different from Lady Aurelia as a three year old for several reasons (1) Lady Aurelia had a 2yo reaction point and Stellar Wind did not, (2) Lady Aurelia\'s 3yo improvement and figures in the months we are comparing were faster numbers in absolute terms AND also represented a bigger jump up in the context, (3) the argument can be made that Stellar Wind never had a first reaction point until she was a 4yo.....her line from her 2yo year and through her 3yo year can be said to be all development progression (Stellar Wind having never had a bounce would be harder to forecast one whereas Lady Aurelia has in fact clearly bounced already in her career -- the argument would run that Stellar Wind was a slower developing horse than Lady Aurelia was).