1/2 - 6f - Pace and Cap

RichieP · 01-02-2010, 01:53 AM

Let's move to Philly today for this one at 6f. Race 2

Same setup as before with tandems set on the middle tab.

Good matching and again great job on the detailed posts put up before the race runs!

Race conditions and pps

RichieP · 01-02-2010, 01:55 AM

...

RichieP · 01-02-2010, 01:56 AM

..

mikesal57 · 01-02-2010, 08:12 AM

morning Richie..

ahh...my favorites..matching earlies!!

I'll look at it in a while..going to dentist...I have a feeling I need a root canal..

mike

mikesal57 · 01-02-2010, 10:41 AM

Update..Tooth had root canal..years ago..lol
he just filed it down a little to see if I'm grinding at nite..we'll see

OK back to race...

1) P
2) E..looks like he needs a 22.8 - 23.0 to get lead
3) P
4) E...looks like 22.1- 22.2 is his comfort zone
5) S
6) P
7) S
8) slow router...out
9) E/P 22.6...22.8 comfort zone
10) E/P...looks like 22.5 - 22.6 comfort zone

proj pace 22.3...45.4
I say "Early Race"

looks like the 4 will get easy lead..throw out other E and S

2 5 7 8 out

1-3-4-6-9-10

cant handle pace 1-3-9

left 4-6-10

w/p on 6 for just in case he wins
ex 4/6-10

gl
mike

mikesal57 · 01-02-2010, 01:22 PM

man...good thing no body else chimed in...I have no clue on what happened...

pls cap this race and see what you get WITHOUT looking at results..

Please explain it to me..

mike

mamojica · 01-02-2010, 05:53 PM

I worked this race prior to it running. Unfortunately, I had some unexpected company and didn't have a chance to post this earlier, but here is how I handicapped it.

The running styles:
E – 2, 4, 9, 10
P – 3
SP – 1, 6
S – 5, 7, 8

Because of the preponderance of early and sustained horses, right off the bat I felt the #3 had a good shot to win if he could run. If, due to time constraints, I had to stop handicapping at this point, I would have risked a small bet on the #3. Fortunately, I had some more time.

For the projected pace, I took the 10’s most recent line as I felt it was the most representative of how the other earlies would run, plus it was today’s distance at today’s track. The recent races of the other earlies were either at different distances or different tracks. The #4 ran at 6f in Philadelphia back in June, but at a faster pace than I thought she could run today. My projected pace was:

22.2 46.2 1:12.1

These were the horses I eliminated:

#5 – Usually runs at Mountaineer. The 08Dec09 race is good enough to compete with the projected pace, but it was run on a muddy track. The rest of the races showed she was too slow. I like to see more than one race matching the projected pace, so I threw her out.

#6 – I would have kept her as a contender, but in the two races since her three month layoff, she has not been able to handle the projected pace. Before then, her lines were competitive, but not now.

#7 – A California horse. Her California times look great, but the tracks over there tend to be faster than the east coast tracks. I disregarded them completely and judged her based on her lone race at Philly, which showed that she was much too slow to handle the projected pace.

#8 – A slow router. Today’s race was this 9 year old’s first in a year and a half. An easy elimination.

The next step in the 5 step approach is to match all of the horses’ running lines:

2 vs 4 – This is my area of greatest difficulty: track to track comparisons. With these horses, I was dealing with tracks I am not familiar with. I don’t know Canterbury (#2) or Sunland (#4). #4 looked better early when I compared #2’s Delaware and Pimlico lines with #4’s Philadelphia lines. Plus it looked like #4 would enter #2’s comfort zone. #2 needs a big lead to win and I felt #4 and the other earlies would prevent that. Finally, #4 has won when being pressed. So I threw out the #2.

4 vs 9 – Same thing – the #9 needs a fairly large lead to win, which I didn’t think she would achieve. Plus #9 is usually a router, so I thought the #4 would be too fast for her.

4 vs 10 – Both horses can win with short leads, and I thought that #4 was faster, so I threw the #10 out.

4 vs 3 – Once again, the dreaded track to track comparison. They look pretty evenly matched, but experience has shown me that Penn National is a faster track than Philadelphia. #3’s competitive Penn National times were not as good as they looked (or so I thought) when compared to #4, so I threw her out.

4 vs 1 – I felt that #1 was definitely competitive versus #4, plus I thought she had a better chance of winning. I thought the four earlies would burn themselves out and the race would run other than early. #1 was, in my opinion, the best OTE horse. However, since I’m a yellow-bellied, lily-livered coward, I bet both the 1 and the 4. I’ve been doing the Match-Up for only 9 months, and my confidence isn’t always the greatest. Plus, the large number of track-to-track comparisons I had to make didn’t inspire much confidence, either.

The race didn’t quite go the way I expected. The 2 and 3 were very strong and were in it to the bitter end. The #4, who I expected to run a strong race, sputtered and died after four furlongs. The #1 caught the field at the wire. Maybe I was just lucky, but at least that went right.

Regards,
Marc

mikesal57 · 01-03-2010, 08:53 AM

Marc...you did quite well...get that confidence!!

If you feel you did everything right ..go for it!!

Just remember.." its just a dawg horse race!!"

mike

I have to somehow stop looking at the track variants ..they screw me up all the time..

PeteC · 01-03-2010, 11:29 AM

Hey Mike-

I didn't get to this race in time yesterday, but I would've missed it too. I probably would've given #10 a long look as the best of early. Won his last race and looking down further I could find power lines that were better than the rest of contenders imo.

You can now look at the #1 and say he beat #10 in their tandem, but I wouldn't have gotten that before the fact, maybe someone else did, but honestly, not me.

Oh well, that's how it goes sometimes! On to the next one...

mikesal57 · 01-03-2010, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteC

Hey Mike-

I didn't get to this race in time yesterday, but I would've missed it too. I probably would've given #10 a long look as the best of early. Won his last race and looking down further I could find power lines that were better than the rest of contenders imo.

You can now look at the #1 and say he beat #10 in their tandem, but I wouldn't have gotten that before the fact, maybe someone else did, but honestly, not me.

Oh well, that's how it goes sometimes! On to the next one...

Thats whats this all about..getting back into it...Practice , practice, practce

01-02-2010, 01:53 AM	#1
RichieP Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 7,014	1/2 - 6f Let's move to Philly today for this one at 6f. Race 2 Same setup as before with tandems set on the middle tab. Good matching and again great job on the detailed posts put up before the race runs! Race conditions and pps Attached Images __________________ "Grampy I'm talking to you!"

01-02-2010, 01:55 AM	#2
RichieP Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 7,014	Philly Race 2 cont ... Attached Images __________________ "Grampy I'm talking to you!"

01-02-2010, 01:56 AM	#3
RichieP Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 7,014	Philly Race 2 cont - .. Attached Images __________________ "Grampy I'm talking to you!"

01-02-2010, 08:12 AM	#4
mikesal57 Grade 1 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Staten Island, NY Posts: 3,952	morning Richie.. ahh...my favorites..matching earlies!! I'll look at it in a while..going to dentist...I have a feeling I need a root canal.. mike __________________ Never bet a favorite doing something for the first time-Harvey Pack

01-02-2010, 10:41 AM	#5
mikesal57 Grade 1 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Staten Island, NY Posts: 3,952	Update..Tooth had root canal..years ago..lol he just filed it down a little to see if I'm grinding at nite..we'll see OK back to race... 1) P 2) E..looks like he needs a 22.8 - 23.0 to get lead 3) P 4) E...looks like 22.1- 22.2 is his comfort zone 5) S 6) P 7) S 8) slow router...out 9) E/P 22.6...22.8 comfort zone 10) E/P...looks like 22.5 - 22.6 comfort zone proj pace 22.3...45.4 I say "Early Race" looks like the 4 will get easy lead..throw out other E and S 2 5 7 8 out 1-3-4-6-9-10 cant handle pace 1-3-9 left 4-6-10 w/p on 6 for just in case he wins ex 4/6-10 gl mike __________________ Never bet a favorite doing something for the first time-Harvey Pack Last edited by mikesal57; 01-02-2010 at 10:44 AM.

01-02-2010, 01:22 PM	#6
mikesal57 Grade 1 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Staten Island, NY Posts: 3,952	man...good thing no body else chimed in...I have no clue on what happened... pls cap this race and see what you get WITHOUT looking at results.. Please explain it to me.. mike __________________ Never bet a favorite doing something for the first time-Harvey Pack

01-02-2010, 05:53 PM	#7
mamojica MC 4000 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Bronx NY Posts: 31	I worked this race prior to it running. Unfortunately, I had some unexpected company and didn't have a chance to post this earlier, but here is how I handicapped it. The running styles: E – 2, 4, 9, 10 P – 3 SP – 1, 6 S – 5, 7, 8 Because of the preponderance of early and sustained horses, right off the bat I felt the #3 had a good shot to win if he could run. If, due to time constraints, I had to stop handicapping at this point, I would have risked a small bet on the #3. Fortunately, I had some more time. For the projected pace, I took the 10’s most recent line as I felt it was the most representative of how the other earlies would run, plus it was today’s distance at today’s track. The recent races of the other earlies were either at different distances or different tracks. The #4 ran at 6f in Philadelphia back in June, but at a faster pace than I thought she could run today. My projected pace was: 22.2 46.2 1:12.1 These were the horses I eliminated: #5 – Usually runs at Mountaineer. The 08Dec09 race is good enough to compete with the projected pace, but it was run on a muddy track. The rest of the races showed she was too slow. I like to see more than one race matching the projected pace, so I threw her out. #6 – I would have kept her as a contender, but in the two races since her three month layoff, she has not been able to handle the projected pace. Before then, her lines were competitive, but not now. #7 – A California horse. Her California times look great, but the tracks over there tend to be faster than the east coast tracks. I disregarded them completely and judged her based on her lone race at Philly, which showed that she was much too slow to handle the projected pace. #8 – A slow router. Today’s race was this 9 year old’s first in a year and a half. An easy elimination. The next step in the 5 step approach is to match all of the horses’ running lines: 2 vs 4 – This is my area of greatest difficulty: track to track comparisons. With these horses, I was dealing with tracks I am not familiar with. I don’t know Canterbury (#2) or Sunland (#4). #4 looked better early when I compared #2’s Delaware and Pimlico lines with #4’s Philadelphia lines. Plus it looked like #4 would enter #2’s comfort zone. #2 needs a big lead to win and I felt #4 and the other earlies would prevent that. Finally, #4 has won when being pressed. So I threw out the #2. 4 vs 9 – Same thing – the #9 needs a fairly large lead to win, which I didn’t think she would achieve. Plus #9 is usually a router, so I thought the #4 would be too fast for her. 4 vs 10 – Both horses can win with short leads, and I thought that #4 was faster, so I threw the #10 out. 4 vs 3 – Once again, the dreaded track to track comparison. They look pretty evenly matched, but experience has shown me that Penn National is a faster track than Philadelphia. #3’s competitive Penn National times were not as good as they looked (or so I thought) when compared to #4, so I threw her out. 4 vs 1 – I felt that #1 was definitely competitive versus #4, plus I thought she had a better chance of winning. I thought the four earlies would burn themselves out and the race would run other than early. #1 was, in my opinion, the best OTE horse. However, since I’m a yellow-bellied, lily-livered coward, I bet both the 1 and the 4. I’ve been doing the Match-Up for only 9 months, and my confidence isn’t always the greatest. Plus, the large number of track-to-track comparisons I had to make didn’t inspire much confidence, either. The race didn’t quite go the way I expected. The 2 and 3 were very strong and were in it to the bitter end. The #4, who I expected to run a strong race, sputtered and died after four furlongs. The #1 caught the field at the wire. Maybe I was just lucky, but at least that went right. Regards, Marc

01-03-2010, 08:53 AM	#8
mikesal57 Grade 1 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Staten Island, NY Posts: 3,952	Marc...you did quite well...get that confidence!! If you feel you did everything right ..go for it!! Just remember.." its just a dawg horse race!!" mike I have to somehow stop looking at the track variants ..they screw me up all the time.. __________________ Never bet a favorite doing something for the first time-Harvey Pack

01-03-2010, 11:29 AM	#9
PeteC Grade 1 Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 611	Hey Mike- I didn't get to this race in time yesterday, but I would've missed it too. I probably would've given #10 a long look as the best of early. Won his last race and looking down further I could find power lines that were better than the rest of contenders imo. You can now look at the #1 and say he beat #10 in their tandem, but I wouldn't have gotten that before the fact, maybe someone else did, but honestly, not me. Oh well, that's how it goes sometimes! On to the next one...