I don't do this very often...

[TGJB]

...but check out the analyses for today\'s Aqu and Calder, done by Alan, and the double at SA, picked 1x1 by Nick. Other races are not in yet, I\'m leaving the office to get on a plane to a golf course.

Meanwhile, would like to have heard from David Patent with a reply before doing the study. Hate to think this is a no-win situation.

[tread]

Jerry, let me start by saying that I have used your product for almost 5 years now and I think you have a far superior product (the figures) and I am fully supportive of almost all the positions you take vs. Ragozin.

That being said, you should take a much closer look at the Santa Anita analysis before patting yourself on the back.  Nick may be an exteremly intelligent individual and have tons more handicapping experience than I do, but the Santa Anita analysis so far has been MISERABLE and seems contrary to many of the basic fundamentals that need to be followed when using your figures.

The picks the first 3 days have been mostly favorites, and most of those favorites have lost.  Particularly suprising was the mention of 2yr olds Ghostzapper (OK, you didn\'t officially pick him, but why not take a stab against him?) and Ds Bertrando, who were fast, but bounce candidates based on the absolute quickness of their previous figures.  

Look thru the analysis the first 3 days and see how many favorites and second favorites were selected and how many of them actually hit.  You missed some great value chances, and I though that\'s what has always been preached, look for the value.  It seems like Nick is more concerned with the absolute number of winners he is picking vs. the ROI of his selections.  Only it isn\'t working out very well.

I never use the analysis anyway, and just happen to be looking at it because it\'s free, but it just re-inforces the fact that I don\'t need to pay $25 to have someone give me a bunch of cheap horses that don\'t even come in.  Except for your double today, congrats.

[subversive chick]

I\'ve been away for a few days or would have replied to Treadhead sooner re: Nick\'s picks.
Nick is arguebly the best handicapper in the TG office and the results prove it. Yes, the sample days haven\'t been his best but if you were to review his record since he began handicapping you would find more then 20 horses who paid $40 or more. 10 who paid $50 or more and 3 who paid $70 or more. Add on a 69-1 shot (Ten Times Nobility) who was disqualified in a $100,000 stakes race at Churchill in June. This man is the KING of the price winner.
To your complaint that he was picking to many short priced horses as well as horses off tops; As anyone who followed Hollywood\'s meeting knows the small field size made finding longshots impossible. (Don\'t take my word ask anyone of any handicapping style). Nick changed his style to try to pick winners, regardless of the price. Perhaps this had some carryover effect into Santa Anita. Yes, at Santa Anita , with greater field size Nick should be picking more longshots and  longshot winners. I think if you continue to follow the redboard room you will see that happen. As everyone knows all handicappers go through peaks and valleys. I don\'t care how good you are. Keep watching Nick\'s picks and I\'m sure you will find out what I already know. This guy is the best!
And just curious on this. While it is certainly ok to question Nick\'s picks, why no mention of what was ptobably the single best day of handicapping put out by any service this year. I\'m talking about Saturday\'s Calder picks where there 6 straight picks threes given out which included winners paying $47 and $59. In two races (including the $47 winner) you only needed to use one horse and in only one race did you need to use as many as three, and that race yielded a $59 winner. The single best day of handicapping in 2002. Wish I had bet more but oh well..Happy New Year to all!

[subversive chick]

 I did find it ironic that after my post  today Nick struck for a $10 Bplus winner at Calder (race 12) and a $24 Bplus winner at Santa Anita (race 6). And so it goes..........

[Mall]

For a variety of reasons I was unable to take advantage of the TG Xmas present until the 12/30-31 Calder cards, for which I also downloaded the TG analysis after doing my own to do a comparison, in an effort to see if I could learn something. Usually, I\'m able to get a pretty good idea of someone\'s approaches to handicapping in a fairly short time, but in this case I was, in a number of races, left scratching my head. I could not understand the thinking behind certain selections/odds restrictions and/or decisions to pass or play certain races. The only thing which seemed clear after two days is that the author of the analysis is a very accomplished handicapper. If only he had been 3/4 length wrong about the last race at Calder, on the last day & last bet of the racing year yesterday, and 17-1 Infinitely Greedy had outfinished his selection, the one you reference. I wasn\'t unhappy about the $58 late double, but a reverse in the finish would have resulted in a $134 double & one of my best yrs in some time. But all of that is ancient history as the new racing yr begins with, among other contests, The Tropical Park Oaks. I have a feeling I know who Nick & the others at TG like in the race, & offer my best wishes that her performance gets 2003 started the right way.

[subversive chick]

Thanks for making a good point I missed regarding Nick\'s picks. They have a level of sophistication that even someone like me (16 years using TG)found new and illuminating. As has always been the policy of Jerry, Alan and the rest of the TG staff, the forum door is  open to questions about why a certain pick was made. In truth, that was how I got to know more about Nick. During Del Mar this summer, I e-mailed the office to ask incredulously about how he could possibly pick a horse who was so much slower then the legit contenders and more incredibly make the horse a Bplus bet. His response which appeared on this board after the horse won and paid $60 centered around age issues and new tops. Qualities to look for  in a break- through pattern before it happens etc.It\'s a lot of sophisticated stuff what I like to refer to almost as \"grad school\" for sheet users. And I\'m not talking absolutes here as the reality is there are no absolutes in this game. Jerry and Alan disagree with some of Nick\'s methodology. That\'s why they have windows. Again the only thing that matters at the end of the day is, Are you winning? Can you win? This guy Nick wins.

[mineola]

How do you tell who did the analysis?
I think my personal points of view lean more towards Alan.
I think I would like to know before purchasing such analysis.
Im sure Nicks style would give me a good education, but for now honing my skill
with someone similar seems like better
route.
Thanks

[TGAB]

In general, I do NY and Nick does SCAL. JB does Kee and big days--KD, BC, etc. JB will probably start off with GP, but we haven\'t talked about that yet. Nick did CRC on Mon and Tue, I did it today along with NY and will do so tomorrow. We have different writing styles, Nick is more succinct than I. It\'s pretty easy to tell the difference.

Happy New Year to one and all.

[mineola]

for your reply.

KUDOS to you
on your great picks Sat Calder.

Happy New Year to all posters!