So often in the dark

[nobeyerspls]

We've all been there. A horse wins at long odds, we look back at the past performances to see what we missed and we can't find a thing. I've seen some so improbable that I want to bet that they'll lose the replay.

Most likely something physical took place (I don't mean drugs) that is outside our scope of knowledge. The stall walker was cured of that energy-robbing habit, a bit with double-sided electrician's tape was used to avoid displacement of the soft palate, a bone chip was found and removed and the horse was ponied back into condition. Space limitations prevent me from listing a hundred or so more.

So, when we put so much reliance on past performance that we digitize it with figures and power numbers, we ignore the reality that trainers are, on a daily basis, addressing issues of bone, blood, and muscle. We do get equipment changes but not all equipment and not all changes. Then too, faster morning workouts might signal that something new was tried and is working but these often do not show up in improved performance in the afternoon.

We're a brave bunch, relying on our cognitive abilities to predict the outcome of an equine analog event. Searching for the light of truth amid so much darkness. But that's the attraction of the handicapping puzzle that no other sport provides. And oh when we solve it, oh when we solve it.

[46zilzal]

Go to the backstretch. Hang out in a stable for a few weeks and see the tons and tons of things YOU DON'T KNOW about any group of horses.

One nag can have a allergic reaction to a vitamin injection, the next can have a mis-placed nail in his hoof, another gets cast in his stall, while another ships poorly on and on of what you do not know that will change performance....NOT to even mention the pharmaceutical experimentation that is going on back there.

[kitts]

Very elequent post on the subject many players know so well-there is such randomness in these events that I am often surprised when they go "right."

[DeanT]

Dang right we are in the dark. Animals, not machines.

Here is the database in Hong Kong about ailments after races to inform the bettors what is happening.

http://www.hkjc.com/english/racing/ove_database.asp

Here's a vet checklist on what can and does go wrong in a race with horses. I bet we've all chalked these performances up to "bouncing" at one time or another.

http://www.hkjc.com/english/racing/ove_intro.asp

When Fabricand wrote a couple of his books in the 1970's he talked about the tote singalling things we can not see, so it must be respected. When you look at the above list you get a feeling he was very correct in that assertion. I think I have chucked out many a fave I thought were not legitimate, when the inside money told you the horse scoped sick and would run big today.

[46zilzal]

Very elequent post on the subject many players know so well-there is such randomness in these events that I am often surprised when they go "right."
me too

[DanG]

The logical part of my brain agrees but my experience on the backside was I was shocked just how much “they” didn’t know. With all of the randomness associated with horseracing, good players find the game remarkably consistent from year to year.

BTW: That is not meant as a knock on the good people who works with these animals everyday.

[46zilzal]

The logical part of my brain agrees but my experience on the backside was I was shocked just how much “they” didn’t know. With all of the randomness associated with horseracing, good players find the game remarkably consistent from year to year.


Forest for the trees situation as I see it all the time: they look at their charges individually and not as a PART of a race. Skews their thinking.

Having just spent a season at the gate, I am beginning to appreciate just how random that factor can be as well.

[Tom]

And yet we win, day in, day out.
Not knowing.
Boy are we good!:cool:

[DeanT]

The logical part of my brain agrees but my experience on the backside was I was shocked just how much “they” didn’t know. With all of the randomness associated with horseracing, good players find the game remarkably consistent from year to year.

I think good players play well enough to smooth the randomness. And they tend not to get upset about it when something pops up to bite them in the butt.

I'd love to have vet notes on every horse to model. I was thinking of playing Hong Kong several years ago when it was on betfair. I thought one task would be to look at trainers with charges who had vet trouble the last start to see how they do off the vet work, whether it be sickness or lameness. I think it would make our hit rates better. Profit better is another story I guess. There was a study on Hong Kong racing not long ago which concluded that the fave-longshot bias does not exist. Faves are bet harder there than here. Perhaps this perfect information makes people less reticent to play chalk and helps eliminate some randomness, as more info tends to do(?).

Forest for the trees situation as I see it all the time: they look at their charges individually and not as a PART of a race. Skews their thinking.

Very good point. Backside info is best taken as simply a handicapping factor, not gospel, imo.

[njcurveball]

The logical part of my brain agrees but my experience on the backside was I was shocked just how much “they” didn’t know. With all of the randomness associated with horseracing, good players find the game remarkably consistent from year to year.



I definitely second this Dan. I would guess less than 50% even know how to read a condition book for their own track. People here may be surprised by a day or two in the Racing Secretary's office hearing how THEY are the ones talking a trainer into a certain race.

Sometimes the horse the trainer reluctantly enters, wins and pays a big price. And after the race, some of us "sharp" handicappers make up reasons why the horse was pointed to that race.

Other races do not fill and those horses get extra time off, some need it and respond much better the next time out.

I was just shocked with my first "real" experience a long time ago. Driving to Delaware Park to play a horse trained by Michael Goswell. Waiting patiently for him to leave the paddock and following him to the $50 window. After he plunked his $500 on the horse I had drove up there for, I let my own $50 fly!

HOW could I lose? As I berated myself for not betting more! The horse promply left around 9th in a turf race and closed well to be 7th! As I ripped up my ticket, I doubted the cosmic certaintly of trainers knowing all! :faint:

My later experience of being on the AC backstretch confirmed what I had hoped was NOT true. A trainer can tell you a lot about THEIR horse, but really knows very little about the competition.

This does not rule out them cashing a bet when a horse gets their knees tapped or some throat surgery. The poor finishes and the drop in class rarely tip off the crowd.

And there are some sharpies, the Catalanos, Pletchers, Lakes, Normans, Asmussens, who seem to wield a magic wand.

But the general backstretch population would be good material for a how NOT to handicap book.

[Robert Fischer]

you have to allow for uncertainty.

Ignoring uncertainty is the reason everyone over-estimates the favorites chances when they first start to make their own oddsline.

Even once you have allowed for uncertainty, there will still be horses who show absolutely nothing, that you had to exclude from various parts of your ticket, who will win now and again. If you are an accurate handicapper these should be few and far between, but it does happen. In the long run you make more money excluding them than including.

I had one the other day. I was up that particular session by 50% of my investment. At the end of the card a great exacta opportunity presented itself, and I was happy to take advantage - until a 45-1 shot showing absolutely NOTHING ran 2nd. It happens once in a while.

[skate]

We've all been there. A horse wins at long odds, we look back at the past performances to see what we missed and we can't find a thing. I've seen some so improbable that I want to bet that they'll lose the replay.



the high odds make the play "probable".

the high ODDS are the Only Good Numbers you found. ALL other numbers are a small ( as in Small) relevant to the mater.

[Cratos]

We've all been there. A horse wins at long odds, we look back at the past performances to see what we missed and we can't find a thing. I've seen some so improbable that I want to bet that they'll lose the replay.

Most likely something physical took place (I don't mean drugs) that is outside our scope of knowledge. The stall walker was cured of that energy-robbing habit, a bit with double-sided electrician's tape was used to avoid displacement of the soft palate, a bone chip was found and removed and the horse was ponied back into condition. Space limitations prevent me from listing a hundred or so more.

So, when we put so much reliance on past performance that we digitize it with figures and power numbers, we ignore the reality that trainers are, on a daily basis, addressing issues of bone, blood, and muscle. We do get equipment changes but not all equipment and not all changes. Then too, faster morning workouts might signal that something new was tried and is working but these often do not show up in improved performance in the afternoon.

We're a brave bunch, relying on our cognitive abilities to predict the outcome of an equine analog event. Searching for the light of truth amid so much darkness. But that's the attraction of the handicapping puzzle that no other sport provides. And oh when we solve it, oh when we solve it.
One of the largest contributors to longshots is “odds bias” by the bettors. Bettors (the human side) tend too, many times have a distain or resistance in the belief that a particular horse cannot win because of its odds. Additionally, this belief is furthered by the notion that if “the horse was any good” more bettors would see it and would wager on the horse.

This phenomenon is psychological and is far beyond the scope of this thread, but “odds bias” is a concept that has confused social scientists for a long time.

[Fastracehorse]

One of the largest contributors to longshots is “odds bias” by the bettors. Bettors (the human side) tend too, many times have a distain or resistance in the belief that a particular horse cannot win because of its odds. Additionally, this belief is furthered by the notion that if “the horse was any good” more bettors would see it and would wager on the horse.

This phenomenon is psychological and is far beyond the scope of this thread, but “odds bias” is a concept that has confused social scientists for a long time.

Good post.

It is difficult to 'shave against the grain' :)

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

Go to the backstretch. Hang out in a stable for a few weeks and see the tons and tons of things YOU DON'T KNOW about any group of horses.

One nag can have a allergic reaction to a vitamin injection, the next can have a mis-placed nail in his hoof, another gets cast in his stall, while another ships poorly on and on of what you do not know that will change performance....NOT to even mention the pharmaceutical experimentation that is going on back there.

Physicality is more than just a small part of the game. Its drawback for some may be that it is a 'quality' not a 'quantity.'

Henceforth, it is important to know who is sharp on the track.

fffastt

[46zilzal]

Henceforth, it is important to know who is sharp on the track.

fffastt
Horses do the running. NOT their connections.

[njcurveball]

Horses do the running. NOT their connections.
Ahhh! The words of the great Doc Sartin. Brings back fond memories of when I sat with the Doc, the Hat, Brohamer, and a few others in Baltimore.

As a horse claimed by Gary Capuano won, I celebrated with Tom. The others could not find a pace-line to make the horse a contender.

If only the DRF, Equibase, and everyone other than HDW would stop supplying all of the trainer stats. What a wonderful world this would be! :ThmbUp:

Listen up PA, ignore the trainer, ignore the jockey, the HORSE runs the race!

[46zilzal]

Horses do the running. NOT their connections.
Ahhh! The words of the great Doc Sartin. Brings back fond memories of when I sat with the Doc, the Hat, Brohamer, and a few others in Baltimore.

As a horse claimed by Gary Capuano won, I celebrated with Tom. The others could not find a pace-line to make the horse a contender.

If only the DRF, Equibase, and everyone other than HDW would stop supplying all of the trainer stats. What a wonderful world this would be! :ThmbUp:

Listen up PA, ignore the trainer, ignore the jockey, the HORSE runs the race!

Wow a single exception and you negate the average.....Don't think so. No other animals touch the race track surface now do they?

I have seen many a winner picked with the guess the best name approach as well.

[Show Me the Wire]

Horses may run the race, but horses do not tap their knees, inject their hocks, administer clenbuteral to themselves, inject cobra venom into their sore legs, shod themselves, etc.

[GaryG]

The connections ARE important. Trust me. There are things in this game that can't be quantified. That is why it is an art and not a science.

[DeanT]

In this day and age you won't even find a person on the planet to debate you on that Gary G.

[njcurveball]

Wow a single exception and you negate the average.....Don't think so. No other animals touch the race track surface now do they?

I have seen many a winner picked with the guess the best name approach as well.

Before the Beyers were published many people ridiculed that you could win with them. I use to get ridiculed at the track with my copy of the Racing Times. I loved using the Beyers, not so much to bet them blind, but to use them to compute an accurate track variant.

I know you are way too smart to write what you did, but for the guy who did, one exception is not the point.

The point is that savvy handicappers, even those in the Sartin group way back when factored in the trainer and jock.

For a 4k claimer running every race at Mountaineer with Dale Baird and Deshawn Parker, connections take a back seat.

But for first time and second time, whether it be lasix, route, turf, start, claim, etc. Sharp players have been using the connections to make money for a long time before they even printed the meet stats in the program.

Your post about the horses doing the running is absolute. Many "old timers" use to tell they have never seen a jock carry a horse to the finish.

In a pari-mutuel game, it is not about who picks the most winners, but who makes the most money. So tell you what, you give me the average price of speed standouts and their associated high win% and I will gladly sit back and hit the horses speed handicappers continually overlook.

p.s. Do you know this guy.

Historically, Fernando Toro had to be considered near the top.

[46zilzal]

Lasix, don't make me start to giggle now.

[Fastracehorse]

Horses do the running. NOT their connections.

In the wake of the Biancone suspension: May I submit that horses' running can be heavily influenced by their connections.

Heavily indeed.

fffastt

[46zilzal]

In the wake of the Biancone suspension: May I submit that horses' running can be heavily influenced by their connections.

Heavily indeed.

fffastt

But still which animal in the equation goes out and sets fractions? You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The horse will tell you HOW it runs and HOW FAST it CAN run. The trainer doesn't run.

[Fastracehorse]

Horses may run the race, but horses do not tap their knees, inject their hocks, administer clenbuteral to themselves, inject cobra venom into their sore legs, shod themselves, etc.

When a friend of mine told me about the 'Cobra Venom' - I said, "Cooooll".

He laughed.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

The connections ARE important. Trust me. There are things in this game that can't be quantified. That is why it is an art and not a science.

Even in artisitic circles they discuss the melding of art and science.

I believe art and science are the same thing - just like I often argue Speed and Class are measuring the same thing.

fffastt

[46zilzal]

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=1076707&pageindex=10

Pain med, won't effect the inherent ability of the horse.

[Fastracehorse]

But still which animal in the equation goes out and sets fractions? You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. The horse will tell you HOW it runs and HOW FAST it CAN run. The trainer doesn't run.

What U say is theoretically true - but that is why this game busts balls.

Throw theory out the door. Sometimes when a guy wins one race based on specualtive theory; he will subsequently lose alot of money until he proves his own theory wrong.

Physiology plays an important part of this game - as does the human element.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=1076707&pageindex=10

Pain med, won't effect the inherent ability of the horse.

It doesn't have to affect the inherent ability to be effective.

The article says: It is very effective at alleviating pain - mimicing morphine without the addictive side-effects.

fffastt

[46zilzal]

It doesn't have to affect the inherent ability to be effective.


The very WORD inherent kind of hints that it is not able to be changed.

[njcurveball]

The very WORD inherent kind of hints that it is not able to be changed.


Hmmm, ever hear of a guy named Oscar Barrera? More recently a guy that went from selling the DRF to getting an award for being the leading trainer?


He was probably best known, though, for his remarkable talent at turning ordinary horses into instant winners. Shifty Sheik, a horse he claimed in 1984 for $35,000, won three allowance races in a row and ran second to Slew o' Gold in the prestigious Woodward Stakes.

INHERENT ability of a 35k claimer! :jump:


Better yet, ever hear of horses named Lost Code or Alysheba?

Now if you want to get into medicine, ever hear of a masking drug?

[46zilzal]

The inherent ability of all of those horses listed was right there all the time. As I recall Alsyheba lost big time when he was without his med however in Bet Twice's triumph.

With every Tom Dick and Harry now taking furosemide for spurious reasons, it's effect is more marginal than ever and the COUNTLESS articles that were noted here that phenylbutazone lessens it's effect anyway would make the most illogical of people to think for a minute.


Pharmacologically you are on thin ice here.

[46zilzal]

Hmmm, ever hear of a guy named Oscar Barrera? More recently a guy that went from selling the DRF to getting an award for being the leading trainer?


Better yet, ever hear of horses named Lost Code or Alysheba?


Now if you want to get into medicine, ever hear of a masking drug?
I used to visit a farm where many of Barrera's horses (Cedarbrook Thoroughbreds) wound up driectly off private purchases from New York.


Bark up another inexperienced person's tree friend, You are out of your depth here. Form reversal can be as simple as removing an abcessed tooth.

[njcurveball]

Bark up another inexperienced person's tree friend, You are out of your depth here. Form reversal can be as simple as removing an abcessed tooth.

Oscar was actually a Dentist. Now we know his secret? :lol:

[GaryG]

Bark up another inexperienced person's tree friend, You are out of your depth here. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[46zilzal]

Matter of fact I was one of a group who was trying to get a Cuban visa for Laz to visit his mother's grave. We were working with the Cuban consulate in Ottawa on it when he died.

Here is a photo you might recognize him in. The autographed one is packed away. I just might get it out today.

[GaryG]

Does this have something to do with Oscar and his pharmacy? He was a goldmine while he lasted. Oh I forgot...connections aren't important.

[shanta]

Does this have something to do with Oscar and his pharmacy? He was a goldmine while he lasted. Oh I forgot...connections aren't important.

G
Me and a buddy were at Aqueduct when Oscar was in his glory days. Went down and saw him on the first floor. He had a few drinks in him and when we asked him his chances he told us "nobody beats me today". Might have been Shots are Ringing not sure.

Anyway horse destroys the field and after crossing the wire the jock could not pull the horse up from running til halfway down the backstretch. I am dead serious. That horse that day would have run through a brick wall.

[46zilzal]

Go to any venue in any 5 year period and there is a "king".
D. Wayne, Laz, Woody, Shug, Baffert, Mott. The mantle is simply handed off to the next guy. SUPERIMPOSE what explanation one wishes upon that success. It is simply cyclical.

In our neck of the woods it is Terry Jordan. Who knows who it will be in five years? Five years ago it was someone else.

[GaryG]

Richie, A friend of mine paid for his wedding and honeymoon with a 3 horse Oscar parlay! Those were the days. Laz had a son Larry that couldn't train a dog to bark.

[njcurveball]

The autographed one is packed away. I just might get it out today.


NO NO NO! I must be totally wrong! Just hay and oats! DEFINITELY!

I cannot refute an AUTOGRAPHED picture! You must be an EXPERT! :lol:

[GaryG]

Go to any venue in any 5 year period and there is a "king".
D. Wayne, Laz, Woody, Shug, Baffert, Mott. The mantle is simply handed off to the next guy. Those big names are never profitable, they are well known to even casual fans. Uncle Oscar was like the key to the vault. No comparison whatsoever.

[dav4463]

It's still a sporting event and upsets can and do happen. Just look at college football this year.

There may be a race where the best horse is tired or just not at his best today. Another couple may be good, but get a bad trip. A weaker horse may just feel like running today......and you get an upset!

[PaceAdvantage]

Matter of fact I was one of a group who was trying to get a Cuban visa for Laz to visit his mother's grave. We were working with the Cuban consulate in Ottawa on it when he died.Damn man, you are the Zelig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zelig)of horse racing!

The film is set in the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) in the 1920s and 1930s. The title character, Leonard Zelig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Zelig) (played by Woody Allen), is a man who has the ability to change his appearance to that of the people he is surrounded by. For example, if he is among doctors, he transforms into a doctor, if around overweight people, he quickly becomes heavy himself. Zelig is called the "human chameleon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chameleon)". He is first noticed at a party by F. Scott Fitzgerald (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._Scott_Fitzgerald).

[Show Me the Wire]

Zelig, of horse racing, now that is funny :lol: :lol: :lol:

[DeanT]

Does this have something to do with Oscar and his pharmacy? He was a goldmine while he lasted. Oh I forgot...connections aren't important.

Did anyone (or he himself) ever mention what he was using back then? What was the rumour at the time? Anyone remember?

[46zilzal]

Did anyone (or he himself) ever mention what he was using back then? What was the rumour at the time? Anyone remember?
According to my friend Dr. Spohn, who had purchased several off the track for breeding purposes, it was steroids. A few took an entire season to get in foal.

Also the only reference I could find in a net search said that the one time he was caught (45 days) steroids were the positive found.

[Fastracehorse]

The inherent ability of all of those horses listed was right there all the time. As I recall Alsyheba lost big time when he was without his med however in Bet Twice's triumph.

With every Tom Dick and Harry now taking furosemide for spurious reasons, it's effect is more marginal than ever and the COUNTLESS articles that were noted here that phenylbutazone lessens it's effect anyway would make the most illogical of people to think for a minute.


Pharmacologically you are on thin ice here.

Respectfully, U are missing the point!

Lasix can also be used as an INHERENT excuse for the dramatic form reversal in a horse. The point is that U are getting too specific premising that horses improve off of the drug Lasix - Lasix is also a masking agent or an excuse for the judges.

fffastt

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

I used to visit a farm where many of Barrera's horses (Cedarbrook Thoroughbreds) wound up driectly off private purchases from New York.


Bark up another inexperienced person's tree friend, You are out of your depth here. Form reversal can be as simple as removing an abcessed tooth.

Or was the removal of the abcessed tooth the excuse for the form reversal.

Listen 46, I'm not saying that every horse that wins is getting some vitamins - but we as horse players have to realize these are professional athletes that have alot of physical problems. And, these problems are addressed.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

G
Me and a buddy were at Aqueduct when Oscar was in his glory days. Went down and saw him on the first floor. He had a few drinks in him and when we asked him his chances he told us "nobody beats me today". Might have been Shots are Ringing not sure.

Anyway horse destroys the field and after crossing the wire the jock could not pull the horse up from running til halfway down the backstretch. I am dead serious. That horse that day would have run through a brick wall.

Luv those stories :)

fffastt

[46zilzal]

Or was the removal of the abcessed tooth the excuse for the form reversal.


In that case the form reversal was so dramatic that the trainer kept the tooth and the vet report when the stewards called him in for an explanation.

[Fastracehorse]

Go to any venue in any 5 year period and there is a "king".
D. Wayne, Laz, Woody, Shug, Baffert, Mott. The mantle is simply handed off to the next guy. SUPERIMPOSE what explanation one wishes upon that success. It is simply cyclical.

In our neck of the woods it is Terry Jordan. Who knows who it will be in five years? Five years ago it was someone else.

In Cali, before Lukas went out East, he was a high % trainer somewhere in the 30's. He got nabbed for some illegals - and took his stable out East.

It seems to be alot quieter out West when it comes to suspensions. I could go on but I'll get to my point which is: I've seen it where a trainer has a very talented 3 yo in his barn. It seems to be worth the risk to light up a horse if it's for prestige and big $. And since the trainer went to great expense to concoct a syrum of great wonderment, why not light up the entire barn. The trainer's win % is high for a time but then he will cool off - or get suspended.

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

In that case the form reversal was so dramatic that the trainer kept the tooth and the vet report when the stewards called him in for an explanation.

One of my favorite stories:

Trainer stiffs 1:9 - judges call him in. Trainer shows him $400 win ticket - he's off the hook.

Next start, horse steps up in class and destroys - $35 to win.

fffastt

[NoDayJob]

We've all been there. A horse wins at long odds, we look back at the past performances to see what we missed and we can't find a thing. I've seen some so improbable that I want to bet that they'll lose the replay.

We're a brave bunch, relying on our cognitive abilities to predict the outcome of an equine analog event. Searching for the light of truth amid so much darkness. But that's the attraction of the handicapping puzzle that no other sport provides. And oh when we solve it, oh when we solve it.

Since most handicappers are programmed to only look at the highest numbers, ratings, et cetera, perhaps looking at the "lone" lowest number[s] might reveal something that you overlooked. What is the horse with the "lone" lowest number[s] doing in this contest. Is it because it is JOFE or has the trainer placed it there for another reason. Confusion is the trainer's ultimate weapon. JMT---

[NoDayJob]

Richie, A friend of mine paid for his wedding and honeymoon with a 3 horse Oscar parlay! Those were the days. Laz had a son Larry that couldn't train a dog to bark.

Arf! Arf! Good Sandy! Bark for Daddy Warbucks. :)

[nobeyerspls]

Since most handicappers are programmed to only look at the highest numbers, ratings, et cetera, perhaps looking at the "lone" lowest number[s] might reveal something that you overlooked. What is the horse with the "lone" lowest number[s] doing in this contest. Is it because it is JOFE or has the trainer placed it there for another reason. Confusion is the trainer's ultimate weapon. JMT---

Some winners with very high odds can be found using past performances and for those who look at beyers I remember one with two straight zero beyer races who caught an easy field off a long layoff and paid over $150. The workouts and back class pointed her out. Second lifetime start and a favorable surface change are solid angles as well. The latter is in our immediate future with Churchill opening up on Sunday. Horses training well there and then disappointing on the Kenneland poly can come back to win at decent odds on the Churchill dirt. It's the hidden ones that are outside of our scope.
Take that stall walker example I gave. A trainer at bay meadows had a filly with decent speed who would spend her morning doing circles in her stall. By race time she would be worn out. An oldtimer suggested adding a tether ball but that didn't work. Then someone suggested putting a baby goat in with her and it worked like a charm. She adopted it as her "foal" and it calmed her down. She went on to win her next three races but the reason for the improvement was not apparent to anyone reading the form. These are the type where nothing was overlooked because it was not there to see.

[Fastracehorse]

I like your last sentence:
"These are the type where nothing was overlooked because it was not there to see."

This a great game.

fffastt