HM Race Card du Jour 06/10/04

[kingfin66]

More Belmont. Let's hope it is better than yesterday.

Track: Belmont Date: 06-10-2004

Race: 2 Selection: 3 ML: 12/1

Analysis: 6.5F, C35000. Pressured pace scenario. There are 2 favorites that should take most of the action. #4 is coming off 3 wins in a row, while #1 has back class. #3 has a pressing style that fits the pace scenario, good numbers (PPF) and VALUE. Bet to WP.

Race: 6 Selection: 4 ML: 10/1

Analysis: MSW, 8.5F. The #4 has ratings just below the favorite (72/0 vs. 71/-1 PBS/PPF), fulcrum and top rated #1. The favorite is also a Lone-E horse. I will try to beat this favorite however, as my selections best is just about as good and brings much more value (9/2 to 6/1 vt to contention odds). WP.

Race: 9 Selection: 6 ML: 6/1

Analysis: This is great. My selection is called Cabo Wabo, named after a famous bar in Cabo San Lucas, Mex (owned by Sammy Hagar). Cabo is coming into this race with the 2nd highest PPF. The top choice is a 4 gap, but has the wrong (S) running style for the neutral pace race and, even better, has a Fulcrum issue. In fact several horses in the race haven’t met the fulcrum criteria. I will play Cabo with his pressing style in this race. I hate n2l claimers or allowance races but will defer to value here.

[JimL]

kingfin66,As a TMM, user I value your posts and analysis. I hope you continue.
I hope MP, is not reading this however I have found that at most eastern tracks the PBS, rating is more useful if the full variant is applied. This goes with out saying you must know fast and slow tracks. Noticed PBS, indicated a turf winner in one of your races. Still cant bring myself to use turf lines in dirt races. MP doesnt read this board does he? JimL

[kingfin66]

Thanks Jim. No, I doubt MP reads this or any other board. I have heard him say, either in person, or by watching video, that "the PPF was born at Belmont." He has also said, that if you have found that using PBS works better to use PBS. He is very big on people using his program to win and using it to their best advantage whatever that may be. One specific thing he said about using PBS is to use the variant with the Chicago tracks.

Remember with PBS, that is does cause some adjustment issues from track to track. I usually start with PBS in sprints and then divert to PPF if there are ratings from more than 3 tracks and/or distances. If the field is small, I might use PPF with 3 such adjustment issues. If there are horses with very poor PBS ratings, and relatively bad PPF ratings, and they are from different tracks, I will not count them as an adjustment issue (ex: 6f race at Belmont. There are PBS ratings from Bel, Aqu, Aqu inner dirt, Sar, and Pim. Lets say the horse from Sar and Pim have very poor ratings in relation to the rest of the field and the pace scenario doesn't fit, I will stick to PBS if it gives a better indication of the contenders. But I digress.

I find that running through a card, looking for a race with some value and price, then listing a little bit of reason why handicapping helps me in mastering TMM. The positive feedback is very much appreciated. I am doing this for myself, anybody who already uses or is familiar with TMM/HM, or anybody who wants to learn a little bit more about it. I really wish I could find a way to easily post the output page for the races I am looking at.

I caught a nice winner in the 2nd today, a near winner in the 6th and a Cabo Wabo hangover in the 9th. I loved that horse!

Feel free to post your own similar analysis or add to mine (especially if you think I've totally booted something).


Mike

p.s. - I also can't bring myself to use turf lines in dirt races. What I may start doing, however, is tracking heavy pressure races that have horses with fast internal fractions from turf races. Michael said these are deadly.