The contest idea was fun even though it was unfortunate that some of the races were compromised by either going off the turf or by major scratches.  I brought up the rear in the contest but had a good day at the track (or in my case casino).  I had a signer at Belmont - the 12th race 11-10-5 trifecta which for some reason David and Jason think was only playable on the sheets even though I only boxed 3 horses using tg to win an $1,800 plus tri.  Also had a superfecta at Lonestar that was barely a signer.  However, that does not change the fact that my picks sucked and that I was one of the worst in the contest.  No fair bragging when your picks sucked - Jerry, Len and Alan all have to pick in advance and then hear our criticism.  You need to live by the same rules.

My proposal - instead of a contest which involves way too much ego let\'s pick one racetrack each Saturday and have everyone post their 3 favorite races with an explanation of why they like their picks.  I think it will help us all and it should be interesting to see how players using Rags and TG differ.  I propose Belmont, Arlington or Lonestar for next Saturday.  What do you guys think - let\'s argue over handicapping instead of semantics!

superfreakicus: I don\'t know what I\'ve got goin\' on next weekend, yet.
but if you guys do this weekly, I\'m sure I\'ll have my entry in some time or other.

JRL: I had the same trifecta (keyed the 10 and 5), but who said it was only playable on the sheets?  I can only say that the sheets were extremely helpful.  As the tri only paid $1,800 with 2 bombs, obviously a lot of other people thought it was playable too.

I agree with you that it is a lot more interesting to post analysis than winners.