Ask The Experts

Hey Richie, I agree Vijay has a good shot this weekend at a nice price of 25-1. He does have some elbow problems and he has not performed well in the majors recently, but coming off of a good 2nd in the Canadian Open two weeks back, it looks like his game is rounding into form. He\'s won this tourney twice, and is a prime contender......

That being said, as horseplayers, let\'s go after a huge price this week. This major tends to produce longshot wins, so let\'s look at a few bombs who I think are overlays and could make some noise this week....


KJ Choi (40-1)
 Aside from Hunter Mahan, this guy is the hottest player on tour. Followed up a nice win at the AT&T (tiger\'s tourney) with a solid 8th place finish in the British Open. Last week, he just missed cracking his third straight top 10 by finishing T11 at Firestone. His game is scorching hot right now and is currently 5th on this year\'s money list....has a great shot this week.

Scott Verplank (75-1)
 Not the longest hitter on the tour, but given the heat, the ball should be flying. If anyone knows the heat and humidity, it is this Oklahoma native who played his college golf at Oklahoma State. Playing solid golf right now with five top 10\'s in his last six events. Won the Byron Nelson this year in impressive fashion. He\'s 20th on the tour in driving accuracy and 38th in putting. We\'ve been waiting for him to breakthrough at a major and given the homecooking, this could be the week at a great price.

Jonathan Byrd (150-1)
 Many of those reading this probably have never heard of him, but the guy can play. Won the John Deere two starts back and followed it up with a top 25 effort (T23) at the British Open. Has not had too many shots in majors, but if you\'re looking for a SUPER BOMB to play, look no further. Ranked 2nd on the tour in putting (putts per hole) and leads the tour in Sand Saves. More importantly, he leads the tour in birdies per round at 3.85 per round this year. At a tournament that habitually produces low scores, give me a birdie machine who can flat out putt the golf ball. Not saying he\'s got a monster chance, but christ he\'s 150-1, and has more positives than negatives coming into this week.



Seeing as how this is a horse racing board, i will throw in a horse comment.... How many of you caught Maimonides almost 12 length debut romp today at the Spa?
Ran fractions of 22, 45.3, 57.6 to finish the 5.5 furlongs in 104.4 under a hand ride by Bejerano. Just effortless!!!


Good Luck!!!


-Bull

Just thought I would chime in and add to the discussion on lasix and how it works in horses. Alm pointed out that the bladder is so close to the horse\'s lungs that the extra pressure of a full bladder causes problems on the lungs. I am not sure this is the EXACT reason why a horse bleeds.

For a horse to get administered Lasix by a vet, it has to be diagnosed with EIPH, which stands for Excercise Induced Pulmonary Hemorrhage. During strenuous activity, internal fluids inside the horse place extreme pressure on the lungs, forcing the capillaries to burst, and therefore bleed. The blood is obviously visible as it comes up through the lungs and is often exhaled out of the nose. The point of Lasix is to curb the capillary bleeding in a horse\'s lungs. This is done by reducing the amount of water/fluid found mostly in the veins and arteries. creating less stress on the capillaries and making them less likely to break.

Furosemide (the clinical name for Lasix) is considered a \"Loop Diuretic\". It works by forcing the kidneys to remove water from the blood and put it into the urine. This basically increases the amount of urine, hence the extra \"peeing\" of the horse.

Hope this helps.



-Bull

TGJB im not going to throw Len under the bus if that\'s what you want. I do however question the Derby numbers for the top few horses. As I said, the Preakness result makes more sense if you give Street Sense and Curlin a faster number. In my opinion (and you can give yours since your a pattern guy too) Street Sense\'s Ragozin pattern would have looked better heading into the Preakness had he received a 1\"-2 for the Derby. It meant he surpassed his 2yo top and was ready to move forawrd (though it was less likely than normal given the timing).

All of my speculation comes after I see the Preakness number, which may just be post race handicapping. In general, you can\'t just see the results and then fit previous numbers to make the outcome make more sense. Personally, i think the Preakness # was an out of whack result that was difficult to predict on any level. If Len had made the Derby number 3 or 4 pts faster, I would still be negative on the top 3, and it would still be hard to predict a negative number for Curlin, though not as difficult given the new pattern.

Jerry, honestly I have no idea about the Bluegrass #. The point about the pace being so slow is valid. \"The horses did not do much running until the final few furlongs, so it\'s hard to imagine that some of those put forth efforts that big numbers wise\" is that what you are trying to say??? First, I want to say I did not bet Bluegrass Day, I have no access to their variant or ground loss formula information. I had no access to other final times that day to compare it to, so my opinion is not really all that informed in this spot. To answer your question directly, I would say it is possible that Street Sense\'s effort in the Derby was similar to the Bluegrass effort. From a ground loss perspective alone, Street Sense made a sustained wide run into a hot part of the race in the Bluegrass, while he skimmed the fence virtually both turns in the Derby. That being said, it is also possible that the Derby was a better effort. I do not know, I am not a figure maker. I would defer to guys like you and Len, and in this situation you differ. I have been a Ragozin user for a while, and I have made consistent money with them, so I would tend to give Len the benefit of the doubt in this case (this is not to say any figure making process is infallible).

I did not bet Bluegrass Day so I did not have access to the sheets before hand to compare the previous tops and histories of each horse. I do have the updated Sheets for the five Bluegrass participants that raced in the Derby. I am not sure which horses you are referring to running HUGE new tops. I do know Len had Teuflesberg and Dominican running at least 2 pt tops. I would say those numbers held as Dominican and Teuflesberg reacted to those big tops on short rest in the Derby and ran poorly. I do not know the other horses who ran tops, but if you are referring to Times Squared, I would say it\'s possible he had a new top. I could be wrong but he did have slower numbers going in, and in the Bluegrass he was about 7 wide, and managed to lose by only 3 lengths. He did run a nice race. Like i said, I did not see the sheet of Times Squared so I do not know how to take the context of his Bluegrass, nor do I recall where or if he ran next. Therefore it is hard for me to determine if the figure held up.

I do not want to really get into an argument Jerry, I respect you greatly. I know you think Len got the Bluegrass and the Derby wrong. I am not saying you are right or wrong, I am saying I use Len\'s numbers with the assumption they are correct, and I have been rewarded with consistent profits year after year. Are there times I question certain numbers? Yes, but that does not mean I would not question yours if I had access to them. I am a natural skeptic, it\'s what I do. Am I saying Len and crew are infallible and never make mistakes? No, but I would think the same thing about your operation as well, so my comments do nothing to validate what you are saying.

All I know is, Len\'s numbers are very accurate in most if not every race, and I have used them with great confidence and success in the past and will continue to do so in the future. This is not to say your numbers are any more or less accurate. Im sure you have a great product as well that provides value for you and your customers. Have a nice day.



Here\'s hoping we can all just get along,
-The Bull

Fkach,

That is a valid point you\'re making. You\'re referring to the opportunity cost of not running the horse in certain spots, to keep him fresh for spots down the road. It makes sense, yes it is a drawback to the \"softy\" philosophy. But to counter I would posit that if the spots you are gunning for are consistently bigger purses than the sum of the races you are skipping to stay fresh, than that could conceivably cancel your theory out....especially when considering the potential breeding windfall from winning in those \"big spots\" such as the Derby, Met Mile, BC etc.... Just playing devil\'s advocate.


-The Bull

Miff,

I agree, there are other factors necessary in the handicapping equation. The Sheets are the cornerstone of my approach yes, but they are not the whole bowl of wax. I will say that I give very little to no credence to pace. My methodology is designed to predict change. I feel that in this game, too many people think in a linear manner. When you try to predict deviations from the typical, that\'s where you get an edge. I attempt to determine the number that each horse figures to run today, based on NUMEROUS factors, some of those non sheet related, if that makes sense. For instance, at Philly Park, if Jayne Vaders claims a horse off of some low % trainer, you can give the horse credit for running at least 2-3 pts better today than what you would have predicted without the trainer change. The bets with my biggest edge come from those where my predicted number is in stark contrast with the horse\'s recent history.

My comments on the Triple Crown horses were intended to be an overall generalization, not specific to this year. I said \"some top 3yos\", not \"all top 3yos\". I agree, that Preakness went FAST.

As for your Ragozin # questions...... I did not bet the Preakness, with the exception of the Pick 4. I saw no value whatsoever. That being said, I will go on record as saying I was a little disappointed in the way the figures \"performed\" in the Preakness. Given the Ragozin #\'s, you would have to find the result of the Preakness implausible. If Street Sense is struggling to get back to his 2yo top (as Ragozin says) it\'s hard to imagine he moves forward to a 0 on 2 weeks rest. If Curlin reacted 3 pts in the Derby to his Ark effort, again it\'s hard to imagine he moves forward almost 7 pts off the Derby to a negative # off of two weeks. My analysis (as was Len\'s, I believe), that Curlin was more likely to go backward again than he was to go forward.

Let me continue by saying this is a game of %\'s and my analysis given the Derby numbers, was that it was unlikely that both Street Sense and Curlin would improve to that level. It was certainly possible, but given the patterns, I would say the % would be low, and given the odds, made neither one a bet. I don\'t want to put words into Len\'s mouth, but I would assume he would echo that.

I believe in the Ragozin numbers, I believe in Len\'s ability to get the right number. However, I do question if the read on the horses would have been different had he had the Derby a few pts faster for the top horses. Personally, I would still be a bit negative on Street Sense and Curlin in the Preakness if he gave Street Sense a 2 or 1\" and Curlin maybe a 3-4, but I would not have been nearly as surprised by the result, particularly Street Sense. I am not trying to say the numbers were wrong in any spot. Im just saying from a % standpoint, I would give Street Sense a greater % chance to get to a 0, had his Derby been given a faster number. If Curlin had been given a number in the Derby which was slightly faster than his Ark Derby, the case could be made that he had another forward move in him (though on two weeks rest, that would be tough), as opposed to the 6 which he got, which could be viewed as the signal that he had no more forward moves in him for the time being given his races and spacing. That being said, I believe had Curlin skipped the Preakness, given his 6 in the Derby, you could play him to move forward, maybe even past the 3 top when Belmont Day came around.

I will finish by saying that I am not as good at reading patterns as Len, so I will not dismiss his reads. I may disagree at times, but I always have respect for his opinion and always understand where he comes from with his argument. Actually our reads were similar on the Preakness. We were both negative on the top 3. Some people will say the numbers were right, but it was just a crazy, outlier type result that occured in the Preakness. Others will say that the Derby (and maybe Bluegrass) figures were wrong in the first place, which explains many Sheet users being fooled by the resulting Preakness figures. I will tend to side with the first reason, but I understand where you\'re coming from if you want to side with the second reason.


Licking my chops for the Belmont Day pick 4,
-The Bull

Ok I just got done vomitting, and here are my thoughts....

Who the hell is William Nack, some horse racing fan with a journalism degree? What is this guy an expert because he wrote a biography on Secretariat, or he used to work for Sports Illustrated? I guess that makes you qualified to criticize something you obviously know nothing about (sheet related horse management questions). The guy has probably never looked at a sheet in his life, let alone seek out sheet experts for help correctly identifying the methodology. As stated here earlier by a previous poster, he inaccurately simplifies the whole sheet reading process required to handle horses.

Being a young man, I really do not mean to bash old people, but this is a perfect example of what is wrong with way too many people when they hit their “golden years”. They become venomous and bitter towards anything remotely younger, fresher, and contrary to their ancient, time honored ideologies. I am sure I am not the only victim of this, but it’s disgusting.

Notice how Nack did not rip the older horsemen who use sheets (Frankel comes to mind); his specific attack was directed at the younger horsemen, which is why Todd Pletcher gets thrown under the bus. Pletcher’s sheet methodology seems to be working quite fine when he’s winning multiple Eclipse Awards, multiple Breeder’s Cup races, two Kentucky Oaks, and setting numerous records for stakes wins and purse earnings. I like Baffert, but how is the Baffert/Lukas methodology doing in the classics the last few years? That style has left them without starters able to even compete, because the strenuous over-extending of their young horses leaves them with little come Derby time. Remember it took Lukas a while to finally get the Derby. Leave Todd alone for a few years. If I want to have a top level horse compete effectively into his late 3yo and 4yo campaigns, Id much rather have a Sheet trainer. Where are all those top older horses in the Lukas and Baffert barns?

I don’t see Nack criticizing Michael Matz for his handling of Barbaro. Couldn’t he be considered a “softy” for his well spaced campaign of Barbaro including a five week layoff heading into Louisville? Did Barbaro have to win by 10 to make Nack a believer?

The old timers spend too much reminiscing about the “good old days” to ever see the present day clear enough to comment intelligently on it. The whole “I’m older so I know more than you” attitude speaks volumes about a person. I found Nack’s article inaccurate, poorly researched and unprofessionally biased. I would think an old timer, who has done this for so long, such as Mr. Nack, would know better.


Yours never afraid of change,
- The Bull

Wait, so you guys are saying there are big races going on in Dubai right now??? Those of us with TVG have no idea. But in TVG\'s defense, they did give us extensive coverage of the Tampa Bay Race 2 post parade, and a rousing interview with John Lee at Aqueduct to talk about Inner Track racing. Give me a break!!! If anyone has TVG through Direct TV, please write them and ask them to put HRTV on the pacakge instead or in addition to TVG. I need real racing, real coverage and real insight. This is a joke.



-Bull