|
Mike I am not sure I can answer your question definitively because in horse racing there are no absolutes. A lot of factors go into making the final decision but the bottom-line is do I have an advantage because of information I have that is not readily accessible to the general public? If the answer is yes then I will play the race, but if not it is a pass. My decison-making is based on years of experience, recognizing winning patterns (you have to do post mortems on your racing activity, gut instinct, and information from RDSS or Synthesis.
Some of the factors that go into my final decision is distance, running style, tandem races, the matchup of a contender's previous race(s), separating legitimate early horses from speed bumps or horses that are money burning quitters; assessing horses that will be both helped and hurt by today's matchup; asessing horses that are in the best position to close against the pace of today's race, improving horses vs. declining horses, identifying the horses that are proven closers against the pace of a race, etc., etc., etc.
It is still my contention that projecting what will happen on the front-end of a race is the key to understanding how a race will be run and finding the best horse to survive today's matchup (and hopefully pay a decent price). If more than four horses look legitimate then I will pass the race. If three horses look legitimate then (based upon odds) I will bet the two horses with the highest odds unless I can bet all three to win and still make a very profitable wager. And if two horses look legitimate I will bet both unless one is a very low odds horse and then only bet the higher odds horse. If only one looks good, then I will bet it unless once again it is a very low odds horse.
*****Below are the charts from my previous post*****
|