Bombs Away --

[andicap]

Here's an idea for this board.
When people hit a longshot -- a real bomb, not just a 7-1 shot, could they explain what it was about the horse that they liked? If they don't want to give away trade secrets than even a brief explanation -- trainer. I guess I generally mean 20-1 in an 8-horse field and maybe 15-1 in a 6-horse field.

The risk of course is that people will be open to charges of "redboarding," but
who cares what other people think. I for one am always interested in what there was in that $80 horse that made a few people take notice and believe it at least had a chance.

I can start it off with a $75 horse I had on Friday, the 4th at Laurel.
Judy's Valentine was 25-1 when I bet it. The horse had the top figure for me among races in the last 90 days. So why did the crowd ignore it?
Horses that look good on paper but go off at 35-1 are generally Fool's Gold. There's got to be something about the horse the public hated for me to bet it.
For Judy's V. , it was easy. He was coming from Penn National, which the betting snobs at Laurel thought was the kiss of death. He hadn't raced in 85 days, its form was awful (6 by 7 in his last and no in the money in his last 4 races).
But it had some other things going for it. A high percentage trainer, a "90" HTR workout figure, which is considered excellent, an outstanding pace figure -- no one in the field came even close -- AND in its last race it chased a fast pace as well. (I look to add the Pace of the race figure to the horse's own final figure to get an idea of its ability to chase a particular pace. Judy's V had the highest fig in the field.)

Now if only I had bet it in the exotics. :blush:
Paid $2000 in the tri with the favorite second and a 7-2 shot third. Who says you can't make money putting chalk in the exotics?

[46zilzal]

Here's an idea for this board.
When people hit a longshot -- a real bomb, not just a 7-1 shot, could they explain what it was about the horse that they liked?

Last-race-itis....MOST don't go back more than that, and HIDDEN may be some form quality that the last few races did not express: wrong distacne, surface, troubled line, equipment disdain, OR a "spotty" performer that you hit on, or

STUPIDITY by the crowd...I had to double check on December 18th at the Fair Grounds, "You Make My Heart Sing" won at over 40/1 (im my pool) and was only one of three horse that had perfromed to any ability on the lawn thought I was mis-reading the payoff.

OVERALL, I find my best longshot winners are horses that DID NOT STOP TODAY.

[Zaf]

Good Thread, As soon as I hit my next one I will contribute. There may be a little wait :rolleyes:

ZAFONIC

[kingfin66]

Great idea Andy. How about you stipulate that the pick must have been made publicly to avoid redboarding? Just an idea. If I ever have another longshot, I'll be happy to share. Of course, I don't bet too many real bombs anyway.

[andicap]

Great idea Andy. How about you stipulate that the pick must have been made publicly to avoid redboarding? Just an idea. If I ever have another longshot, I'll be happy to share. Of course, I don't bet too many real bombs anyway.

I agree the idea gets diluted if someone didn't really pick the horse in advance. After all, we can usually pick even the longest priced winner AFTER the race. But if we insist on a public selection, we'd get about one entry a day since most people don't post their picks. I guess we'll have to --gulp -- take people at their word. Again the idea is not to give someone a forum to brag about their pick, but dispassionately spell out what attracted you to it.

Also, I'm not looking for philosophy. Don't tell me what you look for in betting longshots in general or why longshots win or some tripe about "it was an overlay." Of course it was an overlay! No one bets on a 30-1 horse because they think it has a 3% chance of winning. WHY was it an overlay?

[Light]

Andi

I won the Pk4 contest probably based on one horse at Aqueduct paying $51,Acey Duecy, keying a $9849 Pk4. The funny thing about alot of bombs is that there is no secret. The largest payouts in my horseracing carreer have all won their last starts. Acey Deucy was no exception.This race took place 2/21, feature race,six furlongs,3yo,only 6 entries. This is why I liked this horse:

This race had a one dimensional, need the lead, blazing speed,GG shipper and the very fast locally based Megascape. This meant a closer was likely to win because the bias was also playing to closers. There was also another need the lead type who didnt have the speed of these two I just mentioned,so now I am down to 3 closers. All 3 closers had won their last race. Remember these are 3yo's. Two of the 3 closers had just ran their top speed figure. Not Acey Duecy. He ran a higher figure as a 2YO and seemed to be rounding back into form. Couple that with a 3rd best from 70 horses workout since his last race and you'll know why I thought the annoucer made a mistake when he announced his odds when he crossed the wire first.

I don't feel it required any talent to pick this horse. What it required was to put away your attraction to the big "stars" of the race and look at the race objectively rather than in a discriminatory fashion towards the "others". This is one area where you can make discrimination pay off.

[Jeff P]

Andy,

LRL R4 03-25-2005, same horse, different way of getting it.

JUDYS VALENTINE was tops in the following JCapper ratings: CPace, TPace, WFig, Workout Brilliance, and Form. Second/not first overall in JRating because of class/race strength. Saddled by a 20 pct plus trainer. AProb Odds Line of 6-1.

Anyone with a copy of JCapper can step in and verify that this horse was highlighted as an overlay selection before the race. The program's actual report for this race is viewable at the following url:

http://www.jcapper.com/LRL_032505_R4.html

I suspect that other programs/methodologies probably nailed this horse as well. One thing that might be an interesting tangent for this thread is seeing what happens if and when different methods converge on the same longshot.

Sometimes, for whatever reason, the public just ignores very logical contenders that win. IMHO, in this case, the horse was handled by very competent and capable but "under the radar" connections. I think if you look closely, a higher than expected percentage of winning longshots fall into this category: The horse is not obvious when you look at its traditional past performances- but it does have something going for it form or figure wise- and is also being handled by competent connections. As a player, these are the types of horses I'm always looking for.

I hear it all the time from other players- and you voiced it perfectly in your statement: "Horses that look good on paper but go off at 35-1 are generally Fool's Gold."

There's a lot of truth in that statement.

But I'll say this, if you know what you're doing, enough of them do win to make playing them worthwhile.

[Tote Master]

This is a curious thread and I thought some might be interested in seeing an example of my techniques. It’s a method that I’ve expressed in many previous threads on this forum. Although some might think of my post as “red-boarding”, I can safely assure the skeptics that ALL my results are completely documented and stored for future reference. They might also think this was the only highlight of the day. Wrong again! I could fill this thread with other valued results from today alone.
andicap
The risk of course is that people will be open to charges of "redboarding," but
who cares what other people think. I for one am always interested in what there was in that $80 horse that made a few people take notice and believe it at least had a chance. So andicap, you’re right I could care less what other may think. Take it for whatever it’s worth, but unfortunately you won’t find it in any traditional handicapping approach. That’s for sure!

The following is the results from my tote analysis for Race #3 at Delta Downs last night. The (2) primary tables used to present the results are shown. I realize that they might not make much sense, but basically the analysis generates a value for each Entry at each Time Interval. The value is determined by all of the money being bet in all of the betting pools. The “Par” value is determined by the totals of all the betting pools combined. Once established, only those Entry’s ranked closest to Par are displayed in the Entry Ranking Table. (I'm hoping that I managed the attached file properly? - If so SEE Attachment)

I liked this particular play because at the “key” time interval prior to post time, the analysis pointed to excellent value in the #1 entry. The overall analysis also pointed to only (4) playable entries. It took me all of 10 minutes to recognize the plays to make. Best of all there was no handicapping involved what-so-ever! I won’t bore you with the results of my wagers because that would be red-boarding.

Best of Luck whatever approach you use!

[kenwoodallpromos]

A 1/5 horse on a sealed/muddy track with Bailey away from New York and the 2nd favorite was 11/1. That is all the reason in the world to take a chance and bet the field against Proud Accolade!
With Flower Bowl I don't think any other horses were a walkover or even a solid pick this early in their careers. I figured Tex then FB as a value bet but I was wrong.
I picked Dynever in the Dubai. But what do I know, I was just picking them off the TV without a form. Glad I did not do "selections" !LOL!

[BIG RED]

Yesterday I had a horse that I liked in the 4th race at Aqueduct, a mdn race. Normally I would go for a speed type horse in this situation, but this can easilly put you on low odds horses. They may win often, but not enough in the longrun. The reason I went with Shmoo was a simple one. He was a standout (over 10pts) in what I call connections and odds were very good. This entails trainer, jockey, and owner. Please don't ask how come about that figure. A lot of players use the trn/jky, especially in mdns, I throw the owner part in something added. This horse was posted in mdn contest and live in WR. He won and pd. $39.60.(Also hit $22.40 winner at SA last race with same reasonning, also posted) Doesn't happen a lot, but can land you on some very big payouts (exotics etc.). Of course, maybe 1 out of 10 mdn races this occurs with a 'standout', and you have to wait patiently for that one to win.

[headhawg]

Great idea for a thread, andicap! :ThmbUp:

BR, thanks for that explanation -- I wondered how you got Schmoo in there (I had the place horse in the contest. Natch.) As you won't be giving out your "Secret Maiden Method", I'll have to steal your picks in the War Room (as usual). :)

Jeez -- did everyone have Judy's Valentine at Laurel on Friday? How did it pay $74? :D

I was in the War Room when I posted that one (you could ask keilan, melman, and others) -- the horse had what I like to call "convergence". As Jeff P mentioned, a lot of software may have had the winner. Equisim had it 3rd in the simulator, 2nd in the profiler and 1st in comp, cj's numbers put it right in the hunt, and the trainer stats were positive for shippers and layoff. At those odds, a slam dunk bet for me.

[andicap]

Jeff P wrote

I hear it all the time from other players- and you voiced it perfectly in your statement: "Horses that look good on paper but go off at 35-1 are generally Fool's Gold."

There's a lot of truth in that statement.

But I'll say this, if you know what you're doing, enough of them do win to make playing them worthwhile.

But Jeff, that horse looked terrible on paper. The point it the horse should look bad to the general public not sophisticated analysts like yourself.
I bet a lot of people with software even disregarded it since the horse was coming from Penn National and had been off 85 days. Its running line was awful for his last few races.

You said we arrived at the same horse for different reasons. Different software, yes, but not different reasons. On HTR, the horse had a top pace, speed, trainer and workout figure.

[Tom]

Andy - look at that horse on the HTR screen - #2 HTR, #1 F1, #1EP, #1+ WO, Vodds were 7-1. No matter what paceline mode you use, the horse is ranked 1 or 2 on HTR screen.

Looking at the form, it was a basket case, but look at the Fig 2 screen - showed some old form 85 days ago - within 90 day limits.

I find most of my big hits come from looking at the screens, not the PPs.

[ElKabong]

There's an angle I like that works during the winter months quite well, and I saw (PA poster) 'Boris' do well at it also in Houston when I met him down there for a couple of weeks before he moved to Fla (maybe he hit em w/o knowing why, but he hit some nice winners at prices using physicality.. one was waynes princess at 9-1 in a very short field).

Seems this time of year many fillies 'n mares have a hard time "filling out" and go off their feed. In the paddock you can find some very vulnerable favorites as well as attractive longshots based on what you see w/ fillies now. Took me 3 years of going thru betting records to put 2+2 together on this angle, but it's true.

According to many that know horses better than me, the best months to take advantage are jan-mar, or even april. I have to trust my betting records, the majority of my better hits I've had were on f&m's since I added paddock capping to what I do. Physicality capping works on both sexes, but even on a simo feed you can toss some faves on this angle easily.

[andicap]

One interesting factor about Judy's Valentine was how her odds gradually rose in the last few minutes, from about 23-1 to 35-1.
Here's a theory and maybe Tote Master or any other veteran tote reader or anyone who knows how stables work can answer.

Could there have been a bit of insider money on this horse which bet early but managed to bury it so it didn't look like there was any steam there? The general public hated the horse so much it may have been a true 50-1 -- the late drift up in odds being evidence -- with the early inside money bringing it down.

Just wondering.

[traynor]

andicap wrote<When people hit a longshot -- a real bomb, not just a 7-1 shot, could they explain what it was about the horse that they liked? If they don't want to give away trade secrets than even a brief explanation -- >

That sounds like a great idea. Many of the betting methods are tweaked "depending on the final odds," which for most of us are impossible to consider. That is, I have no idea of the odds at post time, because I rarely watch races. I make selections, bet them in a bunch, and (if OTB or satellite) leave. I haven't watched a live race in quite awhile, because we bet volume, rather than spots.

Consider when Bruce Levine started his run in New York with a stable that came out full bore to win; big prices on nearly every selection. When the locals caught on, the prices dropped, and a number of "trainer systems" claimed that any horse trained by Levine that went off at more than 8 to 1 (or some such number) was a big profit bet. True, as far as it went. That kind of information is not especially useful.

As for the reason for picking longshots, my guess would be that almost anyone would pick more if he or she ignored the tote board. As far as I can tell, it only introduces a layer of complexity that should not be considered. That is, if I am going to change my bet because some bozo dumped a sack full of money on the same (or some other) horse, I should stay home and bet by phone or on the Internet.

I know that the idea of "betting value" is sacrosanct, and carved in stone. I also know that it has been carved there by people who bet mostly on paper, or "handicap" after the race is over. It can go the other way, too. The even money bet that you pass because it is not a "value bet" can jump to "acceptable odds" on the last flash because someone loaded at the last second on another entry. Paper bettors say, "I had that one!" Odds are interesting for record keeping, but if you pick enough winners, any payoff price is a good one. I dislike the idea of changing strategy based on what other people do. It works for me.
Thanks

[Misteranthropic]

Jeff,

Because of Jcapper I had that horse and it was fun to watch it come in. I also had Artemus Eagle($42.60 to win) in the 7th at Turfway on an overlay dutch with the top ranked horse Crimson Ide(which ran 7th), and several other $20-30 winners so far, as well as my share of losses, but overall when I see a horse with a J1 rating going off at 20-1 I get a little excited.


Regards,

Brian

[BillW]

I can start it off with a $75 horse I had on Friday, the 4th at Laurel.
Judy's Valentine was 25-1 when I bet it. The horse had the top figure for me among races in the last 90 days. So why did the crowd ignore it?
Horses that look good on paper but go off at 35-1 are generally Fool's Gold. There's got to be something about the horse the public hated for me to bet it.
For Judy's V. , it was easy. He was coming from Penn National, which the betting snobs at Laurel thought was the kiss of death. He hadn't raced in 85 days, its form was awful (6 by 7 in his last and no in the money in his last 4 races).
But it had some other things going for it. A high percentage trainer, a "90" HTR workout figure, which is considered excellent, an outstanding pace figure -- no one in the field came even close -- AND in its last race it chased a fast pace as well. (I look to add the Pace of the race figure to the horse's own final figure to get an idea of its ability to chase a particular pace. Judy's V had the highest fig in the field.)


She ran even to a 21.3 - 44.4 pace in last @ PEN for a new pace high (TSN Pace figs). Her running line had the pattern of a LeHane type Wide-Out move (No indication that she ran wide in last - but with fast pace, she still caught my eye). Also was the only filly in the race exhibiting any interesting/noteworthy internal move. If odds are right I'm interested. I made this analysis while sitting in the HOU Jockey Club stuffing my face with the noon-time buffet and just glancing at the races coming up. I then scanned through the channels at the table to find LRL ... and found it just in time to see the official results being displayed :bang:.

I do love those cheap horses (especially Mdn Claimers) that make interesting internal moves in their previous outing (85 days is really pushing it - I prefer the last 30 or 40)

Bill

[how cliche]

Yes this is past posting a $44 winner. The entry post in this thread say's that's okay though. I'm taking my post I put in early this afternoon at another forum. I Hope it serves this thread well.Master Heat
April 2 2005 at 2:01 PM
He's my favorite horse. A year and a day ago he was the lock of my playing career. He jumped up and won as the 6th choice in a 7 horse field. No guessing allowed.


Today I can hope. He's shortening from a 12f OpClm try to a mile Clm race. His trainer has really gotten him busy since the marathon, working him 10 days later and two more times in 7 day intervals, the last being noticeably quick for an Abrams charge.


This is the third off a 7 month freshener and I like the pattern. Mile: closing 4th beaten 2 lengths. 12f: ran around the track. Today mile.


Drawbacks: I'll admit I'm guessing. Rider is 1 for 27 with the barn at the meet. He's gonna have to use positional speed early in an effort to save ground outta the 10 hole. Others in the field look more in form than does Master Heat.

I don't care. Double dip.

[andicap]

Thanks for posting....
That's what this thread is all about to me -- little things to look for that could mean the horse is ready, in this case: frequent works, quicker than usual; 3rd off a layoff with an obvious prep for conditioning after a decent race after 7 months (which helps the price too since the race looks so awful on paper), and the old red herring to help the price: jock is 1-27 with the trainer.

Wonder if more than a few people thought about it and said, "1-27 with the trainer? Forget it!" especially with the poor last race.

IMHO those are the kinds of things to look FOR in betting longshots because it gives you another reason why the public is ignoring this horse. (Besides his obvious bad form.)

Was there an obvious favorite in the race who looked especially vulnerable to you, How?

[how cliche]

Thanks for posting....
That's what this thread is all about to me -- little things to look for that could mean the horse is ready, in this case: frequent works, quicker than usual; 3rd off a layoff with an obvious prep for conditioning after a decent race after 7 months (which helps the price too since the race looks so awful on paper), and the old red herring to help the price: jock is 1-27 with the trainer.

Wonder if more than a few people thought about it and said, "1-27 with the trainer? Forget it!" especially with the poor last race.

IMHO those are the kinds of things to look FOR in betting longshots because it gives you another reason why the public is ignoring this horse. (Besides his obvious bad form.)

Was there an obvious favorite in the race who looked especially vulnerable to you, How?

No problem Andicap. Thanks for letting me.

One of my simultaneous strengths and faults is when I find my horse, I ignore the rest of the field. I don't even know who the favorite was today. It's all about finding the horse who's sitting on a big race. Fortunately for me it worked out this time.

[cj]

I have turned from a guy who didn't even print turf races a few years ago, to one who loves them, and this type race is the reason why.

1) I immediately tossed the 1. The horse has no turf breeding, though his last race at 1 1/2 miles was OK. Just don't see him today.

2) No recent form, tossed without a second look.

3) No turf racing, no turf breeding either. Looks like Mullins can't figure this one out. Had he tried on turf right away I'd think differently, but this is his 3rd start in the barn.

4) Decent on turf. I'm figuring a 90 on my figures is needed to win, and this horse isn't capable of that level, so out he goes.

5) A little turf breeding, but this horse runs too fast early in sprints on dirt to be considered a likely turf runner.

6) This one has some good numbers. One negative though, I have him rated a pure "S" type runner. I don't like these much, even on the sod. Numbers do make him a contender.

7) Strong contender. First in the US, ran a good 92 in a turf sprint, top last out figure in the field, but, it was earned in a sprint. I was planning on betting this horse until the actual odds dictated otherwise.

8) A very poor favorite at 5-2. I only marginally make this guy a contender. Had a 92 three races back, but that is the best in his life. Other 6 turf races in the mid 80s. Wouldn't have shocked me if he won, but at 5-2, no way I want any parts of this guy.

9) Shows one turf race of 91 way back. It was a long time ago, and the races he's been running on dirt are not up to the level he was running on dirt at the time of his turf race, so I don't expect another 91. out he went.

10) Obvious contender. Last of 81 on yielding turf at 1 1/2 miles can be ignored, and ran a good solid 90 before that.

11) Mostly negative on this guy. Claimed away from top barn in last, and this while running horribly at 7-5. Good back figures, but recent form not good at all. Also an S type.

12) Another S type. OK numbers, but seems on the decline. First time in a claimer last out resulted in his lowest figure showing in last 10. Out.

So, I have 6, 7, and 10 as possible bets. When I first looked at this race, I was planning on betting the 7, but when I saw him at 6-1, that plan went out the window. This race was way too wide open to take a stab at 6-1 when my other contenders were 17-1 and 21-1. I decided on the 10 for two reasons, higher odds and more tactical speed than the 6. I bet him to win and place.

Result: 10 Master Heat 44.00 18.60 10.40
I didn't realize until writing this out that my top 3 ran 1-2-3, I feel a little queasy!

[cj]

I hadn't even looked back to see How Cliche had this one as well, that's funny. I didn't even know about the 1-27 stat, all I look is that the jock isn't horrible and the trainer isn't horrible. (horrible = < 5%)

[how cliche]

I hadn't even looked back to see How Cliche had this one as well, that's funny. I didn't even know about the 1-27 stat, all I look is that the jock isn't horrible and the trainer isn't horrible. (horrible = < 5%)

Looks like Master Heat is where intuition and figures collide. Great call cj.:)

[toetoe]

I love Onebadshark at SA today. Why? They're all Grade II pretenders, and his morning line is at 30/1(!), while Saint Afleet, for ex., is at 7/2. Why? He won the last watered-down Grade II after finishing behind Onebadshark at GGF at fairly even odds.

[Light]

ToeToe

Good analysis,wrong style. BTW Castro's agent (tall Dave) told me Koriner(Onebadshark's trainer) hit that $500,000 SA Pk6.

[toetoe]

If I knew Onebadshark and Perfectfrigginmoon were going to lead it in 43 and change, I'd play Rushin To Altar with the non-broken-down closers. I prayed for Slim Chance Rollins to not arrive for the mount, but he couldn't misride worse than No Chance Baze did. Sheesh.

Good for Brian (Call The) Koriner. E-mail him for proof to ascertain that he's telling the truth. Curious discussers want to know.

[Light]

Geez Louize,if you knew?

At 42-1 apparently everybody knew but you. :D

[Kreed]

For yet another brilliant anaylses? At first I thought, 'Is this BoxCar typing?'
but then I realized that he only quotes long-windeds ... and thanks again,
you're 1badMinnow to me. ur pal, D.

[kenwoodallpromos]

If you are talking about today's pick 6, trainers are not allowed to bet against their own horses to win, FYI.

[cj]

Just hit the 10 in the 5th at Aqueduct, and honestly, my hands are shaking as I type this. He had my top sprint pace number, and his final time was very competive with those that had run before. Not saying I thought he wa a cinch, but at 35-1 when I bet, why not?

37788739-1
1http://www8.pinnaclesports.com/images/ps_plus_sign.jpg 11:45am
9-Apr-05 0:00am
9-Apr-05 Horses
Win Aqueduct, Race #5
10.Lively Up Yourself
30.00 N/A

[shanta]

[QUOTE=cj]Just hit the 10 in the 5th at Aqueduct, and honestly, my hands are shaking as I type this. He had my top sprint pace number, and his final time was very competive with those that had run before. Not saying I thought he wa a cinch, but at 35-1 when I bet, why not?

Nice one CJ! My buddy "trickey" who posts here once in a blue moon had the horse also using TMM. I wish I had him :bang:

Richie

[kingfin66]

Yep. TMM had the 10 and the 4. 10 was the choice because of the pace advantage, but the 4 was right there too. Great call CJ.