SAND SPRINGS

[jbelfior]

TGJB---

I agreed with your assessment of SAND SPRINGS in Saturday\'s Diana.

I also thought she had a big shot from the rail, assuming she would run back to her 2 prior performance ratings.

One aspect may have been overlooked and it specifically applies to turf racing, especially at the Grade 1 or 2 level.  

Perhaps just as important when evaluating a grass race are 3 critical factors:
1) late speed; 2)endurance at the distance and 3) class.

At the Grade 1 level, SAND SPRINGS did not qualify on all 3 factors.

Your thoughts on this.



Good Luck,
Joe B.

[TGJB]

I don\'t believe in class, and I don\'t think handicapping factors come into play in GI\'s that don\'t in other races, at least not the ones you mentioned. In general, stake races don\'t collapse, barring unusual circumstances (the track in this year\'s Derby, for example), but I don\'y look at pace or \"endurance\" any differently.

Speaking of the Derby, I almost forgot, because I\'ve been a little busy-- but we are of course still waiting for Friedman\'s answer to the direct question of the beaten lengths Ragozin used for that race. Seriously, I think even the diehards have figured out by now that they screwed it up, Freidman lied when he said they checked it and found no error, and they have left it uncorrected rather than admit it. But here\'s the thing, guys, especially the ones who think I\'m being a bad guy for pointing all this out:

Once I brought it up they certainly checked, so the guys in the Ragozin office know what the mistake was, and therefore know what the \"right\" figures for the horses in that race are. There are in effect two sets of Ragozin figures for the Derby-- the ones you use, and the ones they use.

[jbelfior]

TGJB---

We\'ll agree to disagree, and leave it at that. However, I respect any knowledgeable player\'s opinion.

Thanks for your response. Hopefully this gets a small discusion going.


Good Luck,
Joe B.

[jimbo66]

I will add my two cents.  I say up front that gambling is my hobby and not my profession, so I realize that JB has more of a foundation for his opinions.  But after using the T-Graph figures on and off for 6 months, and also buying the occasional T-Graph analysis, I think JB\'s answer points out what I consider a major flaw with T-Graph.  This reliance on what they perceive as infallible figures often leads them to leave out other handicapping angles, several of which you mention.  I would venture that 90% of handicappers would agree that late pace in turf races and class or \"company lines\" are important factors in handicapping.  I would even concede that T-graph\'s numbers may be the best.  But simply betting the fastest horse on their numbers without factoring pace scenario, class, track bias, \"horse for the course\", current form, etc.etc.  is a major flaw.

Being a good figure maker and a good handicapper are not the same thing.  I am not saying that JB or any other T-Graph handicapper aren\'t good, but after buying the sheets and the analsysis, I can honestly say that I personally like the figures but find the analysis product one to be avoided.  Granted, I have only bought it about 25 times, so my sample isn\'t great, but they are cashing 8% of the races I have  bought.  Whereas, using the figures have led me to include horses in my exotics and other bets that I otherwise would not have used and have helped incredibly.

Just another opinion......

[TGJB]

Everything else aside, you clearly haven\'t been looking at the analysis since Sar and Dmr opened.

[miff]

The pevious pair of figures (2) range did not seem legit from beyers, brisnet.I did not have the RAG #\'s. Not resulting,but horses with real competitive/ superior numbers rarely get away at 17-1.Were the pair of 2\'s correct?

[TGJB]

Yes. And the price was a result of the strength of the field, the fact that those two big figures were losses in seemingly weaker races, and her stinker last out before this. She went off about what I figured she would, which is why she was value. But it turned out that last race was meaningful.

By the way, if the two good ones were 2 points slower, would this result have made any more sense? She ran a stinker, for the second time in a row-- somethings wrong.

[jbelfior]

Miff--

I think we have to assume that they are correct. I did not question the #\'s when handicapping the race.

But in response to your comment....I was with a group of 10 pretty knowledgeable handicappers and they all dismissed SS because \"she didn\'t class up.\"


Good Luck,
Joe B.

[rezlegal]

Jerry- you asked me to remind you re adding 2d time turf to the tg figures. When will you be up again. rmr

[TGJB]

Forwarded your idea (along with another idea someone else had) to George, he\'s doing a whole lot of other stuff for us right now, we\'ll see when he gets to it. I\'m going up next Wed night.

[P-Dub]

How do you explain Mr.O\'Brien not having enough class to win a GR 2 on the Preakness undercard?? I don\'t have the file handy, but he ran a big figure in his last race (1.5??) which I think was an allowance race. My non-TG buddies dismissed this horse as not having anough class. A $24 mutuel and a $1500 Pick 4 later, they wanted to know how could I play that horse?? Same thing with Royal Assault in the previous race (although on dirt). I singled him in the P4, they thought I was nuts...again, not enough class they said.

Jerry, I\'ve learned over the years to trust your numbers. A friend of mine, a very casual player, piggybacks every pick I make when he knows I have TG for the day. Volponi made me a legend in his eyes ( I know, his standards aren\'t very high). One of the best things about using TG is that horses that have a great chance to win are often hidden to those that don\'t use TG. Think about this......when a horse wins his first graded stakes race, he did it with no success at that level previously (at least as far as wins).

[shanahan]

Jimbo- totally agree with your view and opinion on this thread.  I have requested JB let us know when he authors the analysis as I have repeatedly had \"mucho problemo\" understanding the analysis based on the product explanation of the figures...JB - despite your response, and as you always correctly point out - one week does not an expert make!
ONe more request to TG - please make the author of the analysis known prior to purchase.   You really do get what you pay for , in MHO.

[TGJB]

A couple of quick points, I\'m going home--

Volponi-- curious to know if anyone has read the new Joe McGinness (sp?) book about P.G. and Volponi that just came out. Horse racing may hit the mainstream yet.

Analysis-- we\'ll think about listing who does it, which would involve some programming, but I gotta tell you, Alan\'s been killing them, as those in California listening to Jason Levin\'s radio show know. Last week he gave out (among other things) a 3 horse box at DMR that ran 1-2-3, with the tri paying over a thousand.

Festival Express-- if you have a pulse, and like 60\'s/70\'s music, go see it. Janis, Buddy Guy, the Dead, The Band, and others, on a train and doing shows in 1970.

[jimbo66]

Yes JB, I have been buying the T-Graph analysis product for Saratoga and Delmar.  Not every day, as I can\'t play the ponies every day.  So I realize my selected sample could just reflect my own bad luck in choosing the wrong days to purchase.  However, since you brought up Delmar and Saratoga, I would like to use yesterday\'s Delmar analysis to make my point about T-Graph not using other angles to make selections, which IMHO hurts the product (the analysis product).

Race 3:  Off of some excellent figures from last year, T-Graph recommends taking Hurricane Smoke at 3-1 or better.  I won\'t address the fact that looking for 3-1 or better on the 2-1 morning line favorite is a bit unrealistic.  Here are the \"handicapping\" angles that the analysis ignored when making the selection (in my opinion).  First, the horse was running in allowance races and 60k claimers last summer, giving FJ Pace and Mighty Beau all they could handle.  Now off of the 9 month layoff, the horse is entered for 16k.  Not a \"positive\" from the perspective that the connections are willing to give the horse away for that kind of money.  Second, how does he win the race with the pace scenario?  He figures to have to win from the lead, and Beyond our Wildest is definitely as quick and Rapidough is possibly as quick.  Conventional handicapping tells me that there is a guaranteed speed duel.  To conclude, how do I take 2-1 odds on a horse that the connections are giving up on and is expected to be part of a 3 horse duel for the lead.

Race 5 - T-Graph recommends taking It\'s a Perfect Day off of some good figures running sprints on the dirt.  Good figures on the dirt sprinting don\'t necessarily equate to good figures on the turf going long.  So here is the \"bet\".  We are hoping that the horse likes the turf, hoping that he likes two turns and hoping that he likes the distance.  Even if all those hopes are true, there are two more OBVIOUS problems.  Anybody watching the Delmar races this year knows that not a single turf race at the 1 1/16 distance has been won by a frontrunner.  The track is tremendously biased towards closers.  Perfect Day figures to be a frontrunner.  To make it worse, the race figures to have a contested pace.  So our bet is to take a horse going long for the first time, two turns for the first time, grass for the first time, against the track bias and fighting for a contested lead.  All because he had some good figures on dirt sprinting?

Race 6 -  In a non-appealing five horse race, T-Graph recommends using Genie Magic with La Perfecta.  Handicapping 101 tells me that loose on the lead speed is extremely dangerous.  On top of that, those watching Delmar will know that speed in sprints has been playing very very well. Nichole\'s Delight is the only horse with a hint of early speed.  Yes, her T-Graph figures don\'t quite match up, but as the clear speed in a 5 horse race, on a speed favoring strip, she is a must use at 7-2.  La Perfecta was claimed for 32k by a good trainer and is entered for 16k.  Not a positive sign.  Another \"angle\" that is ignored by just using pure T-Graph numbers without any thought to other angles.

Race 7- We played the speed on the turf course again with Gene de Campaeo.  Ran a good race, but couldn\'t overcome the bias.

I realize it is easy to \"redboard\" and criticize selections after the fact.  But I can honestly say that I couldn\'t play any of these horses that T-Graph recommended above because the picks ignored the \"handicapping 101\" angles I mentioned. (I did play Gene de Campaeo, because I didn\'t expect him on the lead)

Obviously, I can\'t say I \"hate\" the product, because I did buy it.  And it helped me hit with Touchdown USA in the 8th, a horse I would not have played on my own.  I just think that the product could be better if the handicappers didn\'t blindly play the figures and did some handicapping as well.

Jimbo

[Florida Phil]

I am not even sure what it means to \"...blindly play the figures...\"  

Does that mean key the lowest number and play the next two or three behind?  

I thought TG Sheets were just a tool to use as support for your own handicapping of each race, and to identify value you might otherwise overlook.