Saturday Night Delta Stakes Sprint - Projected "E"

[Dorianmode]

Thanks. That helps. Am not trying to be obnoxious, just trying to get this "down" here, because this situation does come up frequently.

"It could have been one and an evaluation made on that one race. I would caution, the longer the horse goes without showing the expected improvement."

Can you explain what exactly the "improvement" was that you saw ? Did you see it somewhere in one of the "two" prior races, or somewhere else, (or was the race last evening "the" improvement) ?

"if this horse had not returned to form last night and ran another dull race, the next time it ran it would have been out of excuses as far as I am concerned. If a horse coming back after this injury doesn't get the job done in the 2nd or 3rd race back, I believe it is not getting back"

Does that mean you also would have avoided this race as a "wagering opportunity" ? ( or require a higher minimum odds for this situation) or do you wait until AFTER you've seen the improvement, ((to consider it a "reliable" , ("bettable") situation)) ?

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Dorianmode

Thanks. That helps. Am not trying to be obnoxious, just trying to get this "down" here, because this situation does come up frequently.

"It could have been one and an evaluation made on that one race. I would caution, the longer the horse goes without showing the expected improvement."

Can you explain what exactly the "improvement" was that you saw ? Did you see it somewhere in one of the "two" prior races, or somewhere else, (or was the race last evening "the" improvement) ?

"if this horse had not returned to form last night and ran another dull race, the next time it ran it would have been out of excuses as far as I am concerned. If a horse coming back after this injury doesn't get the job done in the 2nd or 3rd race back, I believe it is not getting back"

Does that mean you also would have avoided this race as a "wagering opportunity" ? ( or require a higher minimum odds for this situation) or do you wait until AFTER you've seen the improvement, ((to consider it a "reliable" , ("bettable") situation)) ?

No problem. You are right. I wasn't as clear as I could have been, so let me try again.

The "expected improvement" WAS last nights' race. That marked the return to the same form it showed prior to the injury and versus the same type of competition. Last nights' race stamps the horse "recovery complete".
Now let me jump ahead here for a moment. Last night WAS the wagering opportunity. Should this horse continue on as it did in the past, when is the next time you will get 6.5/1 on this horse, as long as it stays within the same class parameters?

The first thing you have to do is put yourself in the trainers shoes. You have to get inside his head. He has a horse that is coming off a very common injury. He is well aware of what the injury is and what the recovery is like. So what are you going to do? This trainers first step was to put the horse in a race that is below the level of competition where the horse competed well prior to the injury. This race is a test to see where the horse is in the recovery process. The trainer isn't "trying" to win this race, but if it does, it does! The horse can't talk, so the jockey becomes its' spokesperson. The trainer wants to know how the horse felt to the jockey. He wants to know if the horse was tentative about running or willing to run. The trainer wants to feel the horses leg(s) for heat. If he feels heat it is a bad sign. We can assume that all these things were "positive" since the trainers next move was to enter the horse in a race similar to the races it competed in prior to the injury. This, again, is a positive sign. More than likely the jockey is instructed not to "abuse" the horse in this race, but to let it run on its' own. The horse is 3rd at the first call and loses 3 positions to finish 6th. It also loses 5 lengths from the first call to the finish. Given that they may not have been "trying" to win this race, it isn't all that bad. They are still in the "testing" stage. So the horse has had two "test" races since its' return. We know that the horse passed the first test, since the trainer was confident enough to move the horse up from a lower level of competition to the level it was at before the injury. Not to "rush" the horse, they wait 56 days and enter the horse in a $100,000 Stake Race. A positive sign. We know it is a positive sign since the trainer didn't back off after its' previous race, instead, opting to go right back at them. All we need to know is whether or not the horse is sound. We already know it has the credentials. The trainer is telling us the horse is ready.

I feel the need to comment about trainers here. I couldn't care less about trainers and I would hate to give the impression that I follow them, because I DON'T! But in this narrow instance, following how the trainer is handling the horse is imperative. It is our eyes into the condition of the horse.

So, I hope this clears things up for you. If it doesn't, ask and I'll try again.

[Dorianmode]

That is precisely what I was asking. It gives me some objective criteria to look for in these situations. It is VERY clear, and I now have something to refer to in these cases, and maybe won't have to feel they all need to be passed. Also thanks for allowing me to press you on this point ! I think your detailed explanation will be very helpful to me, (and maybe others as well).
Thanks a bunch !

[RichieP]

Originally Posted by Bill Lyster

tons of speed and the speed balls need to be in first or second place at first and 2nd call. Race goes OTE

The 5 has broken as late as 5th and can win from 3rd or 5th, but even when a couple of lengths off the lead. The 8 has won from 4th but only before leading at 2nd call.

My pick is the 5 and then the 8 and box the two for exacta purposes.

Bill

and a huge omission on my part as Bill has the 15 buck winner nailed also!
Matcher chimes in with another fat overlay winner

[Dorianmode]

Me too. I THOUGHT there was another posting, I just missed it also.
Bill : also.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Dorianmode

That is precisely what I was asking. It gives me some objective criteria to look for in these situations. It is VERY clear, and I now have something to refer to in these cases, and maybe won't have to feel they all need to be passed. Also thanks for allowing me to press you on this point ! I think your detailed explanation will be very helpful to me, (and maybe others as well).
Thanks a bunch !

No problem at all. It beats the hell out of keeping track of the "color of owner's third wife's grandbaby's eyes", don't you think?

[Dorianmode]

"It beats the hell out of keeping track of the "color of owner's third wife's grandbaby's eyes", don't you think?"

Well........ I don't know if I would go THAT far. LMAO !

[ignacio todoberto bernal]

.....is just a damn horse race!
Saludos to all!

ignacio.