Brohamer lecture tapes

[papajohn3times]

Hello all
I have the complete set of a workshop conducted by Tom Brohamer in 1990. a 12 set tape set that came in a blue box from O'henry house. Does anyone know where I can find the workbook that was compiled by Dick Scmidt. I would be of course,willing to buy a copy as listening to the tapes without the workbook is kinda hard to decipher
Thanks to all!
Papa John:)

[mick]

Hello all
I have the complete set of a workshop conducted by Tom Brohamer in 1990. a 12 set tape set that came in a blue box from O'henry house. Does anyone know where I can find the workbook that was compiled by Dick Scmidt. I would be of course,willing to buy a copy as listening to the tapes without the workbook is kinda hard to decipher
Thanks to all!
Papa John:)

I agree. I've listened to hours of those tapes and a copy of the workbook would be very helpful. If you find one, I'll split the cost with you.

[papajohn3times]

Thanks Mick!
If I ever find one,I will copy it and send it to you NO CHARGE OF COURSE!
While I'm at it,this may not be the correct forum but I have been back and forth trying to justify some pacelines
Ever since Ted explained Perceptor to us all, I have been looking at lines a little differently
What I am confused a little is for example,when Bill V does a race(and others also) he says that "i will use his last race because it was a plus line" now sometimes that line although current of course,is way off of the horses's perceptor total,sometimes even 50.00 or more? I can see if it's a off track,wrong suface but if it is within range of today's race distance,would you or others go back to find a line with a much smaller perceptor total?
Although I habe been doing well,it still bothers me to use those last lines with the bigger perceptor totals
Any ideas from you or other's?
Thanks again to all,member's of the finest "chat" room ever!
Papa John

[dlivery]

I have not used the Perceptor for anything other than how the horse ran the race.
Win Lose the last line has what we can determinate if the horse was ready to race.
But this is new twist to look further into and regards to keeping records
The bank account has all the records I need to know if I m doing well or snoozing
Thanks for all of your help in bringing this subject up as there more ways to win we just have to follow what works

[Bill V.]

Papa
I use certain tools and follow certain guidelines within the methodology.
The best preceptor is one of many DIFFERENT options we can employ
It's not that I don't think you will do great with the preceptor totals
I just choose not to pay attention to them.

Some of the best users focus on the preceptor. Others use speed ratings, or total energy, or
TPR or Med energy. I know a couple of excellent handicappers that only use the visual Match Up. I also know a few men who don't use RDSS at all. They are happy and get solid results using old Dos methodology programs like ENERGY.

When you say,"when Bill V does a race(and others also) he says that "I will use his last race because it was a plus line"


I am not selecting that line solely on the fact that it is a plus paceline.
I am looking for + or maybe (+) pacelines of course but that includes
other factors.
I focus on the last paceline first, If I feel the last line is not a representative line of what the horse does when in form, at today's distance surface or class\ total energy, I move to the next line and ask the same questions again. Till I find a plus paceline in a recent form cycle window, that is the line
I use to *calculate my phase 1 numbers. I follow the lessons and examples from the original pace line manual and The original Pace Makes the Race
I do very well, but I also do very well using the best speed rating of the last 3 at a comparable distance/ surface, The way I worked races with Doc many times. The key is to believe in what you feel is best.

* RDSS calculates

The very best advice I can ever pass to other Methodology users is.
Settle on one set of criteria for picking pacelines, and focus on readouts you feel give you the best chance to win.


I will show 3 horses I bet today 2 of them won and the other placed
The #2 horse from Evangeline and the 8 and 7 from This.

All 3 times I used a recent plus pace line at a comparable distance and
surface starting with line 1
I paid absolutely no attention to the preceptor. Did this hurt me of help me?
that is not important, what helped me is I looked for things that I know work for me.
any questions I will be glad to help
Hope you find you comfort zone


43651


43650


43649

[Jeebs]

Bill gives some sound advice. Also, make sure whatever approach you choose to go with, that you are consistent with it. Mixing this with that, etc will simply lead to confusion. Keep records so that you can play to your strengths. If you tend to show profitability and a high yield of winners with your contenders in certain types of races, exploit that strength. Knowing when to take a drive to "El Paso" as Bill sometimes will say can save you from making bad decisions.

[Lt1]

Hi John. Bill is spot on when he states that there are several different ways to select pacelines. I myself use best of the last 3 perceptor at a comparable surface and distance. I don't use off track lines on fast tracks but that's just my way of doing things. As far as how far to go back on a horse I let the class of the race determine that. I find it's advisable to stay very recent with cheaper horses but I'm more forgiving with better horses. Generally speaking I usually end up with a line in the last 3 races and not more then 5 back since you then have to wonder if the horse is the same horse now. One thing to always do is to check the last line since it is the best indication of the horses' form but not always the line to use. Even a horse that was outclassed or on the wrong surface in that race should show something in the race such as early speed, beat half the field etc. To sum up as the others here have stated you must decide which method of paceline selection you are most comfortable with and works for you.
Tim G

[mick]

Knowing when to take a drive to "El Paso" as Bill sometimes will say can save you from making bad decisions. :D

Hi, Jeebs. Good to see you posting again. Bill's quote reminds me of a favorite quip. One horseplayer says to another as they walk into the OTB, "Gosh, I hope I break even today. I need the money."

[Mitch44]

For pace lines I also use the preceptor ,the best of the last 3 at a comparable surface and distance. Where ever that takes me is where I go regardless of how far back that takes me. You have to treat all the horses equal so if that means going back to get the correct surface or distance than is where I travel to. As an ex. I have absolutely no aversion to using line 10 if it the correct one. You do find this more with turf horses because in the north because turf is seasonal. But you can also find it with poor trainers who don't place a horse at a proper distance.

With distance I attempt to stay within 1/2 F and no more than 1 F. Races generally shorter run faster and longer races generally run slower. EVEN WITHIN THE SPRINT AND ROUTE STRUCTURE!!! I.E. if you use a 1 1/16 line in a 1 1/4 race it'll make that horse too fast and distort readouts. Ditto with a 5.5 F for a 7F race. Now you have to use what you have, and if that's the case such as in these examples remember to downgrade the horse in your readouts. If the horse had significant more total energy and doesn't decelerate too fast than I don't downgrade it.

I never use muddy or sloppy lines even when today's track is off. I've found that theory to be overblown. With fast lines on off tracks the best horse still wins. There is no edge there at least for me.

I also don't consider class in picking pace line. If you do you'll never catch an improving horse stepping up in class. And they pay better prices also.

I don't use the X and O's at all. With the preceptor ratings I can see if the horse's form is improving or declining for the last race and all its races.

I don't use the Fulcrum at all and consider it a waste of valuable time as I do the X and 0's also a waste of time. For me once you pick pace lines for your contenders the fulcrum is within that, along with the match-up of the horses. Of course the caveat here is if you have the correct contenders and correct pace lines. For me that's not a problem.

Finally let me reiterate that's how I do it. There are those who have great success with the fulcrum and x and o's along with other techniques. If it works for you than keep doing it and don't change a thing.

All my best,
Mitch44

[Mark]

There are only two ways to win a horse race: Set the pace or overcome the pace that has been set. To paraphrase Jim Bradshaw " One horse goes for and gets the lead and the others chase him. If they catch him he loses, if they don't he wins". Everything else being equal, the fastest horses will win the race, except when they are compromised by running "too fast too early" or the pace scenario shows multiple Early horses battling for the lead and exhausting themselves. Then slower horse win. Then horses that have demonstrated that they will pass other horses and have made quick moves, POWER MOVES against a pace similar to today's projected pace will win.
These are the kinds of pacelines you should consider when you pick pacelines. While an evenly run race can be an indication of the horse coming to hand when it occurs after horrible races, it is not the paceline to use to evaluate the horse.
Jim Bradshaw's method is to find the fastest early pace that the horse competed against and finished competitively against, it doesn't matter where in the pps that is. With these POWER LINES selected for each horse you can now compare them, MATCH THEM UP. The Hat had 3 questions he needed answered when keeping that deep POWER LINE: 1) Is the horse still a horse(or has he become a Pig, thank you Richie P.)? 2. Has the horse changed his Running Style and become a slow horse? 3. Can that Early horse still get on top of his fractions? If the horse fails these tests and you have a deep POWER LINE, throw him out!!!!
His mantra was always,"Bet the horse closest to the leader positionally (at the first call), factoring in the pace of the race". If you look at a race and figure it is going to be won by EARLY, then you only want to consider pacelines where the horse ran within 1 length at the 1st call. If you believe the race will be won OTE, then you focus on the fastest early Presser, a horse within 2 or 3 lengths at the 1st Call. If there are none of those that have demonstrated they can be successful against today's projected pace, then you look further back at the SPs and find the horse that will pass multiple horses 1c-2c or 2c-sc against today's projected pace. Ignore gains from the stretch call to the finish as they result from the interaction of the horses in the early part of the race.
Folks, this is not easy to learn. I am in my 5th year of exclusively using the Match Up. I'm just now understanding what he and through Richie P were teaching. Final Time is the result of the dynamics of the horse race and focusing on it will lead you to the attempt to make the perfect adjustment. That just doesn't exist. Final Time variants applied to the 1st fraction will lead you in the opposite direction. Think about it a fast final time is often the product of slow early fractions which produces a negative adjustment, in the attempt to slow the final time down. If you apply some of that to the 1st call you are slowing that down even further, which makes no sense. A slow final time will often be the result of fast early fractions. This will produce a final time adjustment that attempts to bring that up to par so applying that to the 1st fraction will only make them faster. That's crazy!!!
The 1st fraction is most effected by the actual speed of the horses and least effected by the track surface speed(Run-up distance excluded). Since we are looking for horses that can get the lead and set the pace, isn't that where we want to start the investigation. in the process if we can find evidence of other horses that will press the leader and force him to go "too fast too early", then we can variegate the race OTE and throw out the Earlies.
The only way to do this is to work with RAW data that is not ruined by the applications of Final time variant.
Hope that helps.

[DaveEdwards]

I was thinking about posting this example in the teaching section, not that I'm saying I'm a teacher here or anything, but I noticed something that was exactly what Tom was talking about.

He mentioned a horse that was claimed for $25k and then not raced until the horse was out of claiming jail and then entered for $9k lower at $16k level in it's next race. The horse went off at 4/1 and was deemed to be "poison" by Tom.

Please take a look at this horse that ran at Woodbine on the 9th July. I'll post the PP, result and youtube link for the replay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3BpF-CylIk

[DaveEdwards]

Interestingly, whilst the public was seduced by the class drop, nobody bothered claiming it........

[DaveEdwards]

Another point Tom makes, a horse with a fast work and dropped in class is probably for sale.

[Mitch44]

Nice example Dave. Once in awhile these types do win but the percentage is against them.
I go against these types and put the percentages on my side. Tom's advice on suspicious drop downs is sound advice.
Mitch44

[cratman]

I may be able to get a copy in the next couple of weeks. I believe I have it in my house and need to find it. If so I would like to sent it to Ted so he can post it on the site, or would be happy to send a copy if Ted is not interested.

I am interested in a book on Ultra Scan by Bridges. Please let me know if anyone has a copy of this book.

Thanks,

Mark

[Bill V.]

Here is a good example of a neg dropper / layoff horse
3 back it wins at CL10 N2-L
2 back it almost wins a OPEN 10,000 claimer
It gets claimed. Next race they up it to CL15 N3-L
A logical step up and good sign, The horse runs very wel , almost wins again, But something goes wrong and the horse goes on a 207-day layoff
It returns, but now it's entered to be claimed for $5000
Talk about a half price giveaway, This one was bet down to 3/5 and almost won
but It ran second,
The workout pattern looks odd, 12 days and then 13 days at slower than 12 seconds per furlong. Then there is a 13-day rest and then a fast workout

I like to see the workouts and times space evenly and not too fast at about 12 seconds per furlong.

43656

[Ted Craven]

I may be able to get a copy in the next couple of weeks. I believe I have it in my house and need to find it. If so I would like to sent it to Ted so he can post it on the site, or would be happy to send a copy if Ted is not interested.

I am interested in a book on Ultra Scan by Bridges. Please let me know if anyone has a copy of this book.

Thanks,

Mark

Mark, absolutely! If you could send it to me at the address HERE (http://www.rdss2.com/subscription), I'll scan it and post it in the Manuals section of the site. Then return it to you. Thank you so much for your generosity!

Ted

[DaveEdwards]

Can't wait to see the manual. Thanks Mark.
Tom B also used a current DRF for some of his examples. I guess we are into the realms of dreamland that somebody has a copy........

I like that horse you posted Bill, it has everything! As Mitch says, sometimes these horses win, but they are always underlays.

I watched the replay and couldn't believe that Anna Regina was beaten on the line. That slight offset at Penn is a nightmare. On the head-on video it shows the photo at the end, it was quite clearly the 4.
I bet the backers of Anna Regina were shouting it in from the rafters until the last moment.
The really interesting thing I think is that this horse was able to set it's own pace and couldn't claim bad racing luck whatsoever.
If you had opposed it though, your heart would have been in your mouth right to the very end!

[Jeebs]

Saltine Warrior somewhat fit that profile in today's 4th at Belmont. Maybe Bill V. could post that race? 😊

Here is a good example of a neg dropper / layoff horse
3 back it wins at CL10 N2-L
2 back it almost wins a OPEN 10,000 claimer
It gets claimed. Next race they up it to CL15 N3-L
A logical step up and good sign, The horse runs very wel , almost wins again, But something goes wrong and the horse goes on a 207-day layoff
It returns, but now it's entered to be claimed for $5000
Talk about a half price giveaway, This one was bet down to 3/5 and almost won
but It ran second,
The workout pattern looks odd, 12 days and then 13 days at slower than 12 seconds per furlong. Then there is a 13-day rest and then a fast workout

I like to see the workouts and times space evenly and not too fast at about 12 seconds per furlong.

43656

[mowens33]

Another perfect example the 7 dropping from 32K to 12.5K (went off 8/5) finished down the track.

Mike

[Jeebs]

Knowing this, would you be able to confidently toss the horse from the contender mix? Or do you still have to include off a previous good race due to its class and pace and measure the others against it?

[Bill V.]

Saltine Warrior somewhat fit that profile in today's 4th at Belmont. Maybe Bill V. could post that race? 😊

Here you go Jeebs


43695


My thoughts
This one is scary for me, 278-day layoff after 2 bad races.
The workouts are slow and the spacing is a little erratic.
This is an older horse. That Saratoga race line 3 looks slighty overly adjusted but the EPR-LPR-TPR seem okay for him
With Saratoga coming, maybe they are looking to dump him.
Thinking some body will think he is a Saratoga special
The horse could not win for 32,000 So maybe they want to try 25000
on the comeback.Something about that Saratoga line does not seem right
Other wise the drop make sense to me.

[Mitch44]

This is one based on the information above I probably would probably keep and hope my two horse bet takes care of him.

His last race was on an off track so a throw out and he's going from state bred to open company so the drop makes sense. Additionally if low odds he be a toss as its not worth the risk, however for a DD ,P-3 etc. I probably keep it. The layoff, works and being a 7 yr. old are also a concern.

Using other information specifically on the trainer would give me other info, such as his ability off layoffs, drops etc. That would help to make a final decision. I know this trainer is good but what I don't know is his ability for this situation. That would cement my final determination.

Great seeing you posting again Jeebs.
Mitch44

[Lt1]

That Sar line appears to be a lifetime best. If so being that he is a 7yr old and coming off a long layoff I wouldn't use it. Although I don't like using a sly line on a fast trk in this case I would use line1. I do note that this horse has won off layoffs of 71 and 53 days however with a weak workout pattern I would stand against it.
Tim

[Bill V.]

Hi Mitch
Every race since the 32000 claimer when it was claimed
are state bred restricted , today's ( 6/14) race is a cl25 state bred.

Tim
I noticed the 2 positive races following layoffs too.
I would stay off line 1 . It is a off track and a 0 race
It is the race that put the horse in the barn.
Thanks
Bill

[Mitch44]

Your correct Bill as I missed that in looking at the conditions. For me this horse has one poor race which was his last. His next to last was his best effort within chart while up in class. The up in class while reaching a top at a longer distance may have undone him or it may be the last race on an off track for the layoff. As you said earlier Bill the long absent and suspicious workouts are questionable.

That makes the drop basically only 1 level and not that suspicious to me. The layoff and workouts are suspicious through, as Tim pointed out the horse has performed well after a layoff twice prior.

Again I would consult the trainer stats, perhaps this trainer is new for this horse which doesn't show here and may be poor with layoffs and the odds for a final decision on this one, things I normally do.
Mitch44

[Lt1]

Bill I did note the off track and zero line but if anyone though this horse should go in the program what line would you give. Line 2 has the 2nd best perceptor number but the horse never was involved in the race so I would not use it. Line 3 I already ruled out so now we are back to line 4 a yr ago at FL. where again it just plodded around as the fav. to finish 3rd. The trainer is good with layoffs and is one of the leading trainers at FL but to me there are too many negatives to support the horse. As Tom Brohamer always said go with the percentages. If it beats you so be it.
Tim

[Bill V.]

Sure Tim , I understand your perspective.
I would have used line 4 , This is an older horse so
he ran those figures as a six year old gelding. They are very consistent for the most part. Yes the race was at Fl. But the public get it heavy to 1.4 to 1 and made it the favorite.
The race that day was race 7 so it probably was one of the feature races on that card. I would use line 4 to rate the total look / shape of the race

Good Skill
Bill

[Lt1]

Wonder where it would have come up using line 4. Using the Marion Jones, Vic Palermo and Bruce Jorgenson approach that if you are going to make a horse a contender then you must give it every chance to win then I agree line 4 would be it. Also as a reminder Marion also said don't put a horse in the computer that you won't put your money on if it comes up. Interesting choice in this case.
Tim

[Bill V.]

Wonder where it would have come up using line 4. Using the Marion Jones, Vic Palermo and Bruce Jorgenson approach that if you are going to make a horse a contender then you must give it every chance to win then I agree line 4 would be it. Also as a reminder Marion also said don't put a horse in the computer that you won't put your money on if it comes up. Interesting choice in this case.
Tim

Here you go, Tim
I entered a line for every horse. Horse 5 was scratched I marked all 4 line for horse 1
Line 3 rates horse 1 best followed closely by line 2.
Line 1 is a bad line, Line 4 is rated very badly, so the danger of using a good line here is justified based on the results.

43700

43701

43704

43703

[Lt1]

Thanks Bill for the working this out. If nothing else it opened up an interesting exchange and hopefully helped all of us to keep an open mind and not to be afraid to enter more than 1 paceline or don't be too quick to accept a line. See you at the Spa.
Tim

[Mitch44]

Myself I would have used line # 3 . Not sure if I would have bet this race or not, as any other unknowns in the race I'm unaware of. However with what information I had here and his odds he'd be one of my two horse bets. Can't say if I would have had the winner or not, not enough info.

Now that everyone is totally confused with us picking different pace line etc. The lesson here guys is to have a consistent procedure for pace lines, drop downs and layoffs and stick to it. Switching constantly or in-decision will cost you more that a consistent application. Its a law of gambling. No hap hazard approach will outperform a consistent one .

Great post Bill, enjoyed the give & take. One has to formulate their own approach based on their experience etc. No one gets them all, and that included the Doc, Hat and Brohammer.

Mitch44

[DaveEdwards]

I think Saltine Warrior could do with a little more distance, perhaps all the way back to FL!!!!

Sorry I stole that joke from one of the seminar tapes! Saratoga '86?

The big thing that crossed my mind was that perhaps they entered it here hoping for it to be claimed & cut connections losses.
I think this is one of the trickiest areas in horse racing. Horse has good races followed by bad then a long lay off. Which horse is returning?

[DaveEdwards]

I'm posting this one pre-race so here's hoping this example holds up!

Race 1 Monmouth today, #3 Don't Tell Vanessa.
This horse won it's last race convincingly and is now entered again today at the same class level. Perhaps there could be a bit of hair splitting with today's NW2 6M, but we'll see.
Tom says this should be a warning. If the horse is running so well, why isn't it stepped up so as not to risk the horse being claimed?

Two checks here, whether or not the horse wins and whether or not the horse is claimed.

Here is the PP.

[DaveEdwards]

Perhaps not the best example...........

[DaveEdwards]

Here is one that was just turned over at Woodbine......
Sorry for redboarding as you guys might call this.

[Bill V.]

Hi. I will take a closer look once I pull over for a break.
From what I see this horse is not running at the same class
The last line is an open 5 claimed. Today's race looks like a restricted 5 claimer for horse that have not one 2 races in a time period .
These races can be tough .

[Bill V.]

Sorry for the typos I am using my phone

[Bill V.]

Last race is a open 5000 claimer

[Bill V.]

Yes ultraflame is a neg

[DaveEdwards]

Thanks for the clarification Bill.

Perhaps I need a little more work on my understanding of the claiming ladders.
I do own, but have never read both James Quinn's class books. Both have been recommended in the manuals/follow ups. More homework required I think.

Thanks again Bill.

[DaveEdwards]

Monmouth R1 result.

[DaveEdwards]

Woodbine R1

[For The Lead]

From Dave Edwards:
This horse won it's last race convincingly and is now entered again today at the same class level. Perhaps there could be a bit of hair splitting with today's NW2 6M, but we'll see.

From Bill V:
From what I see this horse is not running at the same class
The last line is an open 5 claimed. Today's race looks like a restricted 5 claimer for horse that have not one 2 races in a time period .
These races can be tough .

From Dave Edwards:
Thanks for the clarification Bill.

Perhaps I need a little more work on my understanding of the claiming ladders.

Here is some help.

A $5,000 “OPEN” claiming race is the highest class level there is for a $5,000 claiming race.
ALL other $5,000 claiming races WITH a condition are of a lower level.

Is it possible to manufacture a scenario where a $5,000 OPEN claiming race has the worst horses known to man and a $5,000 claiming race with a non winners of 2 races in 6 months condition has very competitive horses? Damned right it is, but that is NOT the question here nor is it the lesson to be learned.

Here is the hierarchy of the most common “conditions” in the order of class level

NW26M = None winners of 2 race in 6 months
NW16M = None winners of a race in 6 months
NW2Y = None winners of 2 races in a year
NW1Y = None winners of a race in a year
NW4L = Non winners of 4 races lifetime
NW3L = Non winners of 3 races lifetime
NW2L = Non winners of 2 races lifetime
MAIDENS

Naturally “State Bred” races at each level of condition are of lesser class

These same condition levels apply to other claiming prices as well and are not limited to just $5,000 claiming races.

Hope this helps!

[Bill V.]

I had the chance to look this over more closely
The tip off is the 70 Race class and today is a 75
I knew something was wrong.

The horse is moving up in class today, RDSS is not showing the full conditions
of the line 1 race, It is NOT a 5000 open claimer
It is a CL 5000 N1-6m or Non-winners of 3 life
Today is the next step up
a CL5000 N2-6m OR non-winners of 4 Life


Here is the chart from the line 1 race


43748

and today's condition

43749

[For The Lead]

Good job, Bill. That makes a lot more sense.

As it turns out this was probably a good time for a "refresher" anyway.

[DaveEdwards]

Gentlemen,
Thank you so much for the explanations on this issue. I'm so grateful that you both took the time to help.
Funny, I was rather embarrassed to watch the Monmouth horse win after my posting, but every cloud has a silver lining. I've come out of this far stronger now and hopefully others will learn from this lesson too.

As it happens, this horse was comfortably the best in RDSS prior to my assumption that this was a sidestep that shouldn't have happened.

Quick check, the racing class & ladder.

Thanks again.

[Bill V.]

Dave Edwards, Yes Ultraflame failed and was claimed

Let's return to Vanessa again, Because your original question was / Is this a negative dropper. I guess If we are going to really master this question we need accurate data, Tom Brohamer used the DRF and charts and his own incredible memory. Plus back when He was making his tapes there were not so many restrictions in each claiming level.

We have established that Vanessa is not dropping in class. from the actual charts of line 1

FTL
Let's suppose line 1 was, in fact, a open 5000 claimer
In the context of Dave Edwards question, is this a negative dropper, to go from an open 5000 to a CL5000 N2-6M. Yes it is a drop on the class ladder
But in this case why not take the eligibility?

My reasoning is, The horse was claimed down at GP (line 6 ) for $6250 .

It failed two times, So a drop to $5000 looks okay.
In its first 2 attempts at the 5000 level, it runs plus races
It belongs at this level It finally wins in line 1
If line 1 was an open 5 claimer and they were willing to
risk it to be claimed for $5000 in the last 3 races,
Why not keep it at the $5000 level and take the non-winner of 2 races in 6 months eligibility condition?

I look at it this way.This is not a negative dropper The horse has not shown
any ability to win over the $5000 limit

Thanks
Bill

[For The Lead]

Long before the internet, simulcasting and on line betting, I had the opportunity to speak with Tom Brohamer. One of the things he mentioned was that he wished he could bet east coast racing. When I asked him “why”, his answer was enlightening. On the west coast, where he was based, he said racing was “pure vanilla”, especially in claiming races and he was tired of it. On the other hand, east coast racing presented opportunities not present on the west coast. Those opportunities were the in the form of the various race conditions available in east coast racing. In other words, he was of the opinion that handicappers on the east coast probably did not have a handle on the various condition races and therefore there would be opportunities for those who did understand them. This was a point well taken!

I am not saying he thought east coast handicappers were stupid and I certainly don’t want to put words in his mouth, so there is something everyone should understand, especially younger handicappers. Although I don’t recall the exact year, there was a time when the racing form did not show previous race conditions, among the many other things that were not published at the time. Claiming races showed the claiming price of the race and that was it. Of course, there were those like myself, that either kept what was called a “golden notebook” or just saved old racing forms. In doing so you could look back at the racing form and get the conditions from there.

The point to all this is, learning about negative class drops was based on claiming price only. Race conditions do not indicate a negative class drop. In those situations, such as the hypothetical Bill V presented, it would just indicate a smart move. A taking advantage of the rules, so to speak. It was a good assessment by Bill V.

[DaveEdwards]

I looked up the conditions for this race, courtesy of Equib, please see the attached.

Interestingly it looks very similar in description to the line 1 conditions, but the Racing Class has them at 70 & 71 respectively. I wonder why this is so. Not a big difference, but different none the less.

Bill, as you pointed out in your first posting, the RC was the quick clue here, it was up to 75 from 70 and so it clearly wasn't the easy throw out I had initially thought.
I guess it comes down to the NW3 Lifetime (line 1) move to NW4 Lifetime(current race) making it essentially a harder race and therefore a class rise even though the claiming value and prize money were exactly the same. A lesson in thoroughly reading the conditions if ever there was one.

Now the rosey hint to my cheeks has subsided I'm definitely adding that quick check to my work up, thanks. It's not something I've ever paid attention to if I'm being be honest, but there are clearly classes within classes as I've now learned.
A very interesting post by FLT thanks about Tom's thoughts on the east coast class structure.
Plenty of food for thought there. I'm quite sure that the negative class drop situation is open to much further investigation to the curious mind.

On a very rare foray for me to PA I read a post where someone was talking about Tom's negative class drop being no longer valid, or words to that effect.
I think it's still very much alive & kicking.

Thanks both, I've learned a lot this week. Where else would you find this sort of support? Awesome.

[DaveEdwards]

Just for completeness in case anyone in the future is reading this, here is the conditions for the current race showing the NW4 L.

[For The Lead]

Just for completeness in case anyone in the future is reading this, here is the conditions for the current race showing the NW4 L.

Don't confuse yourself. The PRIMARY condition comes before the word "OR". What comes after the "OR" is a "filler". In other words, if the race doesn't fill with horses that fit the "PRIMARY" condition then the race is extended to horses that would qualify using the secondary condition which comes AFTER the "OR".

Hope that helps.

[dlivery]

Thanks for the Info and Tip
I have found reading the conditions up to the words "OR" are like saying stop looking further

[For The Lead]

Thanks for the Info and Tip
I have found reading the conditions up to the words "OR" are like saying stop looking further


That's pretty much it, although it is nice to be able to understand the reason why certain horses are in the race. In most cases those "filler" horses are at a disadvantage.

[DaveEdwards]

This has clarified something else for me. The "or" horse in a race that was for NW2 6M and yet had won it's last two starts recently.

Thanks again. Time to read the conditions much more thoroughly I think.

[Bill V.]

Dave Edwards, when you see that look also at the claiming price for the winning races. A horse could have got into the race by winning races in the time period but the claiming price was lower. In this race example
Less than $4000.

Horses with recent wins ..

This horse got into the race Sunday at Monmouth
It only has 2 wins but both wins were after Jan 23rd

this is a "or" candidate


43766

[DaveEdwards]

Thanks Bill, this was exactly the sort of thing I was thinking about.
I'll keep an eye out for the claiming price of those winning races. Thanks.

[Mitch44]

The lesson here is no one can beat this game without starting at the conditions of the race. Not only to determine the surface or distance for picking pace lines but also the other conditions to determine if a horse is a suspicious drop down etc. This whole thread is of the upmost of importance to success in this game, ignore it at your own peril.

Great thread Bill!

Mitch44

[DaveEdwards]

Number 6, negative class dropper of the poisonous variety.
Number 9, the type I feel for last time!
My bets here 7 - 40% & 9 60%

Just in time before the off!

[DaveEdwards]

OK, hasty bets didn't pay off, rushing. The 6 was bang on though. Never a factor

[Bill V.]

Yes that looks like a dump

And the 6 was claimed. She went off as the 1.20/1 fav

43848

[Bill V.]

Also was claimed

But wins at a nice price
I think when I retire I'm just going to look for this pattern

43850

[DaveEdwards]

Thanks for posting the result Bill. Interesting point on the class move.

Further to the class move factor, it also raced too close to a pace it just wasn't comfortable with in line 1. Line 9 (admittedly in the slop) shows a similar performance against such a fast 1st 2 furlongs.
Coupled with the easy throw out of the E types and a too generous view of the 7, this horse was actually a solid bet.

Still that's the benefit of regression analysis. An easy area to neglect for me, but there's something to learn from every losing bet & that's for sure.

[DaveEdwards]

I'll bet the claimers of the 6 are now scratching their heads wondering what on earth they've bought into.

[DaveEdwards]

There has just been another in R6 at FL. You won't believe the price of the fav. Will post the PP & result once Equipbase have posted.
Tom Brohamer thank you!

[DaveEdwards]

Check the price on the number 3. As Tom says, some of these do win, but they are always underplayed.
I admit my posts on this point are getting a bit boring now. I think the case is proven here. Interestingly the point Bill made to me previously about the RC of the race. With this horse it is clearly a massive drop.

Not claimed either.

Time for a celebratory cup of tea!

[DaveEdwards]

Underlayed, not underplayed!! Overplayed of anything!
Sorry, my typing is all over the shop today

[DaveEdwards]

Just to sum up. This 3 doesn't jump of the page as having had a strong run in it's last race against the competition it faced, but it was definitely stronger than the horses it was due to face today.
Negative for me.
From a minor FL stakes race to a 3.5k claimer in 5 races with a big layoff. I think the only person making money with this horse was the Vet.

[Ted Craven]

Mark, absolutely! If you could send it to me at the address HERE (http://www.rdss2.com/subscription), I'll scan it and post it in the Manuals section of the site. Then return it to you. Thank you so much for your generosity!

Ted

Quote:
<table width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="6" border="0"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset"> Originally Posted by cratman http://paceandcap.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=110649#post110649)
I may be able to get a copy in the next couple of weeks. I believe I have it in my house and need to find it. If so I would like to sent it to Ted so he can post it on the site, or would be happy to send a copy if Ted is not interested.

I am interested in a book on Ultra Scan by Bridges. Please let me know if anyone has a copy of this book.

Thanks,

Mark
</td></tr></tbody></table>
Thanks to Cratman (Mark), we now have the Brohamer Lecture Series Manualincluded in the Sartin Library to compliment the audio series.

Here is the Manual: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11313

And here are the Audios: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6095

Enjoy, and thanks Mark!

Ted

[DaveEdwards]

Thank you Mark and Ted.
Forever grateful.

Lectures tapes on in the car for today's commute to work!