Result

That should be - What follows is NOT meant to knock anyones Methodology


Good Skill ALL

If you think using Trainer info will help you win in these lower end races, then use the info available like Jeff and Ibj


THe only thing that matters are your results

Pino,Wish I would have seen that yesterday.I did hit this one today in the 3rd at Tampa,trainer ran it back at 7 fur and brought back 5 days later.It only paid 2-1 but hit exacta and tri .I really love that spreadsheet of yours,I know you really worked hard on it.Jeff

What I try to avoid
 

Charlie D.

Thanks for posting and analyzing this race - like the Tampa longshot race, it illustrates the reason I avoid these races. I actually downloaded this one and knocked it out on Spec 160. I'm not great with the screenshot utility, but I'll just say the #1 appeared to have a huge edge in every way, and since it appeared to be a very solid and heavily bet favorite, I would certainly have passed this race. In fact, he just lost by a nose. I also wouldn't have bet the Tampa longshot based on the readouts that were posted. If Jeff liked the Tampa horse on the basis of a trainer move - fine - but I think we can agree that this is traditional handicapping, and doesn't involve the Sartin methodology.

Both of these are very characteristic of cheap races. It seems to me that the main problem with cheaper races is not that it's impossible to find winners, but that the few horses that clearly can run are easily spotted by the betting public and thus offer little wager value, and the horses that do often hit at a price, like those you pointed out, are relatively unpredictable form-reversal specials, as Brohamer once explained to me. There is very little hidden value (by pace figure standards) of the kind that is found in higher-class races (50 claimers work best for me) that is also relatively *reliable*.

Thanks for your comments.

Cheers,

B Jennet

I would like to say that I use Synergism 3 on all races that I do.Also what Im trying to point out is that you can use trainer intent along with the programs to get winners.

Jeff,

Thanks for your reply. No difference between what you've written here and how I play. It works great above 10k or 12k for me, but not below. As I said in another post, my experience with these races is that many if not most of horses that hit at a decent price are form reversals rather the kind of 'hidden value' horses that are more common at higher levels.

Thanks for your input.

Cheers,

B Jennet

No it isn't - but if you have a "sure thing," then why waste a wager or wagers speculating on who is going to come in second?

Or are you going to say the place horse was a sure thing to come in second?

There were 9 other horses in the race. Consider just a 2 buck wager on each, it would have netted $235 after an investment of $18.00.

Putting that same $18.00 on your "sure thing" would have netted $545.40.

Is this to say that a trainer who places his horses in the right races will win every race in which he enters them?

Sometimes you don't need a computer program
 

I only met Jim Bradshaw one time at a seminar in Saratoga many years ago. He worked up some races for our "day at the races" and gave his selections. None of these were very impressive, but no matter, I came away from this seminar knowing that this man understood the game. I don't recall his exact words, but he said something that went sort of like this.

"Horse racing is an easy game. When the gate opens one horse takes the lead. If no other horse can pass him, he wins."

In other words all he did was give you the opening line in the text book of handicapping a horse race. It is where every race starts.

The 4th race at PHA on 3/8/09 will illustrate what he meant. And I am sure he won not have needed a computer in order to get this winner.